What to Do About Co2: And All Those Other Ghastly Gases

By Pat Palmer

What is the Green New Deal, where did it come from, and does it make sense?

Pat Palmer, a proud U.S. citizen, voter, and human being, seeks to answer those questions and many more in this book that explores various efforts to save our environment using renewable energy.

Get answers to questions such as:
• What is contributing to the rise in global temperatures?
• Are we really experiencing climate change—and is it such a big deal?
• What are the goals of the Green New Deal?
• How does politics play into efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions?

The author emphasizes that the Green New Deal is not just about rising temperatures—it’s also linked to purely social issues that its proponents want to link to climate change.

All over the world, political groups have convinced billions of people we are in an apocalyptic state and massive extinction is only a matter of time. Find out the truth in What to Do about CO2.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Archway Publishing
• Release date: Aug 12, 2022
• ISBN: 9781665724470

Pat Palmer

Pat Palmer has spent the better part of her working life in the field of science. She earned a degree in chemistry and worked for more than thirty years. She wrote this book in retirement.

Book preview

Copyright © 2022 Pat Palmer.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced by any means, graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or by any information storage retrieval system without the written permission of the author except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.

This book is a work of non-fiction. Unless otherwise noted, the author and the publisher make no explicit guarantees as to the accuracy of the information contained in this book and in some cases, names of people and places have been altered to protect their privacy.

Archway Publishing

1663 Liberty Drive

Bloomington, IN 47403

www.archwaypublishing.com

844-669-3957

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are

models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

ISBN: 978-1-6657-2448-7 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-6657-2446-3 (hc)

ISBN: 978-1-6657-2447-0 (e)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2022909995

Archway Publishing rev. date: 08/11/2022

Contents

Preface

Introduction

Chapter 1What the Blazes Is Going On?

Chapter 2Truth over Lies

Chapter 3More of the GND

Chapter 4Whereas and the Longest Sentence in the World

Chapter 5Renewables, Anyone?

Chapter 6Truth about Renewables

Chapter 7What Sort of World Are We Headed For? (And Is All Hope Lost?)

Chapter 8Why Is This happening?

Appendix IWind Turbines

Appendix IICalculations for Wind Turbines

Appendix IIIMW a Turbine Produces per Year

Appendix IVForests

Appendix VEnergy Production

Appendix VIPopulation, Number of households, CO2, Methane, SF6

FIGURES and GRAPHS

Endnotes

To all those people who believe in climate change and the Green New Deal. To those who don’t believe in our pending apocalypse. Temperature rise is happening but is very small. Ice ages, global droughts, and planetary changes have been going on since the planet began—most of it before the use of fossil fuels. This book is for all the people who want to protect our environment and are willing to take that hard look at what we are doing in the name of climate change.

Preface

Why this particular book? Why now? Now I have the time. Why? I’ve noticed over the last several years the hate that has erupted over climate change and so much money being spent on climate change issues. I can’t believe how people blindly follow political groups and truly think we are ten years away from destruction. All over the world, these political groups have convinced billions of people we are in an apocalyptic state. Massive extinction is at hand.

I felt there was a need to present the facts of my research. There are many calculations to prove my data. I spent over a year collecting information to back up my data. It is time I present it to you, the reader. With a little humor, I try to explain as simply as possible what all my research means. Have a pleasant read.

Thank you for taking the time to read this book.

Introduction

What is the Green New Deal? What is it really trying to accomplish? For years, there has been a push to save our environment using renewable energy. Now there is a politically motivated resolution that appears to have coalesced around these ideas. Many people believe that getting rid of fossil fuels will save us.

I recommend that everyone read the Green New Deal. You will find that it’s not only about climate change. There are two agendas. Who’d a thunk? One agenda is the rising temperatures, which we are led to believe are sending us into oblivion. The second agenda includes purely social issues, which the proponents of this resolution are trying to link to climate change. I will define climate change.

I will be dealing with the climate issue in the Green New Deal and speaking about the social issues only as they pertain to climate change. The book goes down each point of the resolution, section by section, so the reader can follow along as I discuss them. The readers can find the Green New Deal on the internet. Happy reading.

1

What the Blazes Is Going On?

A ll this hoopla over climate change started in the twentieth century when scientists began warning ever louder that the planet was in trouble. Politicians soon felt the pressure to do something about it. The result of that pressure became the Green New Deal, and it is nothing less than a revolution in how we tackle climate change and our economy.

What the blazes is this Green New Deal and what is it really trying to accomplish? For years, there has been a push, off and on, to save our environment by using renewable energy. And now there is a politically motivated resolution that appears to have coalesced around these ideas. But where did the idea for this Green New Deal come from, and who wrote it? We will be looking into its origins and its contents as we journey through this swamp.

We’ll break down how the Green New Deal (GND) blames human activity (fossil fuels) for temperature rise and climate change and investigate its demands. They include a demand that 100 percent of our power must come from clean, renewable sources by 2030. What? That’s not even feasible as long as we need fossil fuels to build our renewables. Unfortunately, renewables aren’t the savior of humankind. Fossil fuels aren’t the only things that spew out CO2 and other ghastly gases.

What is the Green New Deal? Have you read it? I suggest you do read it to follow along with this book. When you do, you might be surprised that a lot of it has nothing to do with climate change. A lot of it covers social issues that have nothing to do with climate change at all. We’ll talk about all this in the coming chapters, but right now, let’s see how the Green New Deal was born.

On February 7, 2019, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (Democrat, New York) and Senator Edward Markey (Democrat, Massachusetts) presented the world with the Green New Deal, otherwise known as Resolution 109.

How exactly can we define the GND? This definition comes straight from the Green Party. The GND will create a new, sustainable economy that is environmentally sound, economically viable and socially responsible. For them clean energy doesn’t include clean coal, natural gas, biomass, or nuclear power.

So what’s up with this Green New Deal? Where did it come from, and what does it actually do? It seems it all started one day when more than one hundred young adults marched into the office of Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the US House of Representatives, to protest about political action on climate. The group was called the Sunrise Movement, and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez led the march. They were presenting a message that a Green New Deal was needed, and around 140 people were arrested. (And they say January 6, 2021, was bad!)

As time went by, a tight-knit group of progressives worked on this idea but didn’t put any details in this GND. A think tank called the New Consensus was then put in charge of making the GND into a policy proposal but had written almost nothing about the subject matter. It was a fairly new think tank, and they knew very little about environmental policy. ¹ They wanted to combine ideas from all over the place and create one huge domestic agenda, which they did. Their main source of information came from the International Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) and the Fourth National Climate Assessment.

When released, the GND was very broad with no real specifics. Supposedly, the New Consensus is going to add the details at a later date. We’re still waiting. These were the people behind the plan:

• Justice Democrats (PAC)—took care of election strategy

• Sunrise Movement—youth campaign

• Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez—works inside Congress

When they had their first meeting on the GND, there were many problems and lots of arguments. One issue was Representative Ocasio-Cortez’s push for 100 percent renewable energy. This became a hot topic for discussion because the push for renewable energy did not include nuclear power. Many people believed this plan, if implemented, would be way too expensive and create many brownouts across the country. The more moderate liberals suggested a 100 percent clean-energy statement. That would leave the door open to include nuclear power. To make it more palatable, the GND statement ended up being meeting 100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources.

Before continuing, do you know what net zero really means? It doesn’t mean getting rid of all fossil fuels. It doesn’t mean getting our CO2e levels down to zero. (CO2e is the carbon dioxide equivalent, or the carbon footprint, not just of carbon dioxide but all greenhouse gases.) It does mean that however much CO2e we spew out, we must remove an equal amount. What goes in must come out. It’s important to mention that, because the problem with this issue is that the far, Far Left wants to get rid of all fossil fuels entirely to reach net zero. Moderate liberals feel that we can reach net zero by using brand-new technology to help get rid of our CO2e without disrupting our entire system of living, and this includes the possible use of nuclear power.

I recommend that everyone read the GND. Once you’ve read it, you will see that it’s not only about climate change. There are two agendas here. Who’d a thunk? One agenda is rising temperatures with climate change, and the second agenda speaks to social issues. We are only dealing with their climate agenda, not the social issues, although they are trying to link all the social issues to climate change. It’s their way of passing legislation for these social issues. Link it to climate change. Phooey!

Let’s start with the first important statement of the GND. It states they are only looking at observable climate change within the last hundred years. That’s what it says, folks. If we take them at their word, then it’s not looking at anything prior to about 1919. They say observable changes in our climate. Only the more primitive observed measurements and visual changes. But that’s not what they are describing. They are describing the effects of temperature rise. And we are looking at only the last hundred years. Maybe.

So why do they bring up preindustrial temperatures? Real preindustrial is the time period before about 1750. Here is the problem. We all recognize that as a fact. However, many scientists suggest we take 1880 as preindustrial because that’s when more accurate temperature measurements started to be recorded. We’ll be asking questions about this as we go along, as to which date they are talking about. This can be a problem when discussing global warming and climate change. What’s the difference between the two? you ask. Global warming is just that. It measures the global surface temperature change. Climate change is a measurable and observable shift and alteration in weather patterns over a long period of time. ² How long? Maybe 150 years, or maybe three hundred years? Scientists are very vague about this. Some people are even trying to say that climate change could take place in thirty years. I hope they don’t think we’re that stupid. If they can’t define what they think climate change is, then they can’t say we have it. Even the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report can only say that weather creates climate from several months to millions of years. Climate is a very complex science and if you can’t define it properly, how are countries going to discuss it, and make sensible climate change policy.

There’s confusion over climate and weather, and a lot of people sometimes mistake climate for weather and vice versa. Climate is long-term, permanent change, whereas weather is a day-to-day or year-to-year pattern that doesn’t repeat itself. There might be a huge flood somewhere, but there may not be another one for five hundred years, and the last one was seven hundred years earlier. That does not make for climate change just because it happens in 2022. Throughout Earth’s history, the climate has always been changing. You’d think that it’s normally a slow process that takes thousands of years, but I’m sure there have been fluctuations on the rate that climate has changed. Today, scientists think that humans and their fossil fuels have influenced an apocalyptic change in our climate, and it is moving at a much faster rate. We’ll be discussing this idea throughout the book, according to what the data shows. As an example, glacier melts are a result of warming temperatures. They have been melting for about ten thousand years since the last great Ice Age. But while they may be melting a little faster, this is not climate change. This is an effect of warming. And warming is not an effect of climate change. Everyone seems to yell, Climate change! every time there’s a flood, sandstorm, or forest fire. That is not climate change. Now if these rains that caused the floods happen every year or two for the next fifty or one hundred years, maybe even two hundred years, that might be called a localized climate change. What we are looking for is a global climate change. Let’s forge on. The swamp wind is beginning to blow.

Are governments really trying to save the planet? In the last few years, groups have been pushing the agenda that humankind must change its way of life right now or perish because we only have nine years left to do it (John Kerry, 2020)! That’s the point of no return. Well, I’ll be jiggered. I think I’m getting the vapors! The question is this: do they really care about the planet, or is there a hidden corporate agenda to make a lot of money? Only asking. We have corporate America, Wall Street, and capitalism. I’m not saying making money is bad. Everyone has a right to make money and become very rich but not off the backs of hardworking Americans or anyone else for that matter. By making people believe there is an imminent apocalypse, they can keep everyone terrified, and big money can just keep making money. However, we also have to deal with several other issues that influence weather and climate.

Have you noticed that the population is exploding, consuming more and more resources? As this continues, the world will consume more space, leaving less and less for agriculture and energy production and destroying more of our environment. No one really talks about that. This is one of those facts that politicians and scientists leave out of their speechifying when selling us on renewables. I guess talking about population growth is a real no-no.

The world’s population is expected to reach 9.7 billion people by 2050, from our current number of 7.7 billion. This comes from the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. ³ Its study also showed that the world’s population could reach eleven billion by the end of the century. The US population is expected to double sometime in the 2060s, and by 2100, we will have one billion people. That’s not counting the number of illegal, undocumented people pouring over our borders, or whatever the Left is calling them now. Anyway, that’s a different subject.

The UN has something called the SDG (sustainable development goals). What is it? It’s the globally agreed targets for improving economic prosperity and social well-being while protecting the environment. To understand population growth, the SDG has to look at population changes in terms of births, deaths, fertility, population in different regions, migration, and more. Migration is now a major issue in population change from country to country. All this data is critical for the SDG to monitor global progress toward achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. ³ These are good things to study so we can see what can be done for the future of our planet.

It’s really not in the best interests of climate change discussion when unnamed writers put out statements like, Most of the current warming trend is extremely likely … the result of human activity since the 1950’s and is proceeding at an unprecedented rate over decades and millennia. ² This is just meant to terrify us so it stops any further discussion. It means we have to go straight to renewables or die.

Do environmentalists even know what’s going on other than Save the environment!? There are a lot of people with degrees in some kind of environmental science. Most of us don’t have these degrees but are environmentalists in one way or another. Most of us are not radical environmentalists who chain ourselves to trees. We all want to save our ecosystems, rain forests, lakes, and rivers. Personally, I don’t think most environmentalists have the scientific knowledge to discuss renewable energy, except the ones with degrees in science. That’s one of the negative critiques that the GND has received. Those who wrote it weren’t scientifically inclined.

Give us money, give us your vote, and we will take care of all your planetary needs. We’ll save the world. Buy the Green New Deal, but we’ll need your tax dollars to subsidize all the renewables to keep them working and to line the pockets of our friends. What a bunch of road apples. Bake a few pies and serve them up. Here is how it goes.

After scientists complete their work on climate, global temperatures, and climate change, they report to their masters at the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The GND was set up