Gimmee Them Ole Time Nukes
March 10th 2011 20:30
About ten days ago, there was an article on the Current TV website, “Small Nuclear War Could Reverse Global Warming for Years!,” touting the supposed benefits of low yield nuclear weapons in reversing global warming.
Current TV is owned by Current Media, Inc., a corporation partially controlled by former Vice President Al Gore. This is the same Al Gore, environmental activist, who was jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2007. Gore and his partner at Current Media, Inc., Joe Hyatt (and the Comcast Corp., which owns 10% of Current Media, Inc.), started a network that “would not have political leanings, but would serve as an "independent voice" for a target audience of people between 18 and 34 "who want to learn about the world in a voice they recognize and a view they recognize as their own."” (“Current TV,” Wikipedia, History). Strangely, for a media outlet that “would not have political leanings,” they have hired Keith Olbermann, formerly of “Countdown With Keith Olbermann” on CNBC, to be their Chief News Officer and host a one hour prime time news program at 8 pm. Keith was dismissed from his show on CNBC for contributing $2,400 to the campaigns of Kentucky Democratic Senate candidate Jack Conway, and Arizona Democratic Representatives Raul Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords (the same Gabrielle who is recovering from a head wound). This is also the same Keith who feuded constantly with Bill O’Reilly on Fox.
So, getting back to using nukes to end global warming, imagine my surprise to find this suggestion, or an article even hinting at it, on this liberal website. The article talks about the effects a regional nuclear war, say between India and Pakistan, involving 100 Hiroshima size (15 kiloton) nuclear weapons, would have on climate change. As the article points out, this would involve “just” (their use of the word, not mine) .03% of the world’s nuclear arsenal. A NASA climate model predicts a cloud containing 5 million tons of black carbon would be lifted into the atmosphere above the troposphere, causing average global temperatures to drop by 2.25 degrees F for two to three years. Places like the tropics, Alaska, northern Europe, and Asia might cool by 5.4 to 7.2 degrees F while the Arctic and Antarctic might actually warm due to changes in ocean currents. After ten years, average global temperatures would still be .9 degrees F cooler. This scenario resembles the “nuclear winter” that was predicted as a result of a nuclear war between the United States and the old Soviet Union, which would have resulted in the near annihilation of the human species through nuclear explosion, radiation, starvation and disease. Eliminating hundreds of millions of Asians might mitigate insatiable demand for food, petroleum, decent housing, decent medical care, cars and US foreign aid. That’s got to reduce global warming, right Al?
I don’t think this article was posted on the Current TV website to be acted upon. At least I hope not. This should go the way of other hair brained schemes to mitigate climate change like seeding the oceans with iron in the hope of causing algae blooms that will consume carbon dioxide (and further warm up the oceans), or substituting ethanol for gasoline in cars. This scheme benefits farmers in states like Missouri (where I live) which produce a lot of corn. Corn production requires a lot of chemical fertilizer and a lot of pesticides, all of which are manufactured from petroleum. It also requires a lot of water, which is pumped from underground aquifers. When corn is removed from the food chain to produce ethanol, the price of food is driven up, as is the base price of corn, especially when the federal government allows, because of corn lobby pressures, an increase in the amount of ethanol in fuel. Interestingly, the ethanol distilleries are owned by corn farmer co-ops, so not only are they controlling the price of corn by controlling the amount of the corn going to market, they are also controlling the price of ethanol. When all the petroleum used to produce and transport corn and ethanol is totaled, there is little if any savings in the importation and use of petroleum.
As for the use of low yield nukes to mitigate climate change, please Al, don’t give any country an excuse to use them. I don’t want to see on legitimate TV news, or even Current TV news, that North Korea nuked South Korea, and the reason they gave was that they were experimenting with mitigating climate change.
Current TV is owned by Current Media, Inc., a corporation partially controlled by former Vice President Al Gore. This is the same Al Gore, environmental activist, who was jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2007. Gore and his partner at Current Media, Inc., Joe Hyatt (and the Comcast Corp., which owns 10% of Current Media, Inc.), started a network that “would not have political leanings, but would serve as an "independent voice" for a target audience of people between 18 and 34 "who want to learn about the world in a voice they recognize and a view they recognize as their own."” (“Current TV,” Wikipedia, History). Strangely, for a media outlet that “would not have political leanings,” they have hired Keith Olbermann, formerly of “Countdown With Keith Olbermann” on CNBC, to be their Chief News Officer and host a one hour prime time news program at 8 pm. Keith was dismissed from his show on CNBC for contributing $2,400 to the campaigns of Kentucky Democratic Senate candidate Jack Conway, and Arizona Democratic Representatives Raul Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords (the same Gabrielle who is recovering from a head wound). This is also the same Keith who feuded constantly with Bill O’Reilly on Fox.
So, getting back to using nukes to end global warming, imagine my surprise to find this suggestion, or an article even hinting at it, on this liberal website. The article talks about the effects a regional nuclear war, say between India and Pakistan, involving 100 Hiroshima size (15 kiloton) nuclear weapons, would have on climate change. As the article points out, this would involve “just” (their use of the word, not mine) .03% of the world’s nuclear arsenal. A NASA climate model predicts a cloud containing 5 million tons of black carbon would be lifted into the atmosphere above the troposphere, causing average global temperatures to drop by 2.25 degrees F for two to three years. Places like the tropics, Alaska, northern Europe, and Asia might cool by 5.4 to 7.2 degrees F while the Arctic and Antarctic might actually warm due to changes in ocean currents. After ten years, average global temperatures would still be .9 degrees F cooler. This scenario resembles the “nuclear winter” that was predicted as a result of a nuclear war between the United States and the old Soviet Union, which would have resulted in the near annihilation of the human species through nuclear explosion, radiation, starvation and disease. Eliminating hundreds of millions of Asians might mitigate insatiable demand for food, petroleum, decent housing, decent medical care, cars and US foreign aid. That’s got to reduce global warming, right Al?
I don’t think this article was posted on the Current TV website to be acted upon. At least I hope not. This should go the way of other hair brained schemes to mitigate climate change like seeding the oceans with iron in the hope of causing algae blooms that will consume carbon dioxide (and further warm up the oceans), or substituting ethanol for gasoline in cars. This scheme benefits farmers in states like Missouri (where I live) which produce a lot of corn. Corn production requires a lot of chemical fertilizer and a lot of pesticides, all of which are manufactured from petroleum. It also requires a lot of water, which is pumped from underground aquifers. When corn is removed from the food chain to produce ethanol, the price of food is driven up, as is the base price of corn, especially when the federal government allows, because of corn lobby pressures, an increase in the amount of ethanol in fuel. Interestingly, the ethanol distilleries are owned by corn farmer co-ops, so not only are they controlling the price of corn by controlling the amount of the corn going to market, they are also controlling the price of ethanol. When all the petroleum used to produce and transport corn and ethanol is totaled, there is little if any savings in the importation and use of petroleum.
As for the use of low yield nukes to mitigate climate change, please Al, don’t give any country an excuse to use them. I don’t want to see on legitimate TV news, or even Current TV news, that North Korea nuked South Korea, and the reason they gave was that they were experimenting with mitigating climate change.
| 30 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
