THE SET-UP: No, the Newsvandal Media Empire has not been purchased by The Onion. So, yes, the first story on today’s TRIFECTA is *real* … at least insofar as it was not intended to be satire. It is not *real* if you are looking for hard, peer-reviewed science that proves the “greening effect” of elevated CO2 isn’t just a welcomed trade-off for superheating the planet, but it is something we should actively accelerate by doubling carbon emissions.
I could link a bunch of articles here. But, after the last three years of record heat and extreme weather, do I really have to? - jp
TITLE: Let’s Make CO2 Great Again
https://amgreatness.com/2024/11/15/lets-make-co2-great-again/
EXCERPTS: As the love affair with so-called green energy cools and “net zero” commitments to eliminate “carbon emissions” wane, we see glimmers of acknowledgment for the benefits of carbon dioxide. That’s right: More people are beginning to understand that the gas—widely demonized as a pollutant endangering Earth with excessive heat—is a life-giving substance needed in greater amounts.
U.S. voters know that President-elect Donald Trump has declared the Green New Deal a “scam” and promises to return common sense to environmental regulations and energy development. His return to office rests partly on that pledge.
Less frequently reported is the story of carbon dioxide emissions greening the Earth and boosting crop production. Educating the public on the benefits of carbon dioxide is the mission of the CO2 Coalition, which I lead. We sponsor speakers and publish scientifically based materials for adults and children. Much of the information is about the role of CO2 as a beneficial greenhouse gas in moderating the extremes between daytime and nighttime temperatures and as a photosynthetic plant food.
“Fossil Fuels Are the Greenest Energy Sources” by Dr. Indur Goklany is an example of our work. Did you know that up to 50% of the globe has experienced an increase in vegetation and that 70% of the greening is attributed to plant fertilization by carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels? Or that nearly 200,000 square kilometers of the southern Sahara have been converted to a lush grassland from desert?
Few have heard that doubling atmospheric CO2 from its current concentration of 420 ppm would significantly increase agricultural productivity and have little effect on the climate.
It appears that some of this knowledge has reached Canada because Alberta’s ruling Unified Conservative Party (UCP) recently approved a resolution that promotes the salutary effects of CO2 and endorses an outright rejection of the national government’s net zero policy.
“The problem is net zero has become a shorthand for ‘leave it in the ground,’” says Alberta Premier Danielle Smith. She plans to fight “the federal government and a coalition of extreme environmentalists who want to stop the production of oil and gas altogether.”
It is a good day when we find ourselves on the side of people fighting for the freedom to prosper as they contribute to the atmospheric store of carbon dioxide that enriches ecosystems and engenders life.
To paraphrase Donald Trump: Let’s make CO2 great again.
TITLE: Only Trump Could Come Up With A Climate Plan So Terrible, Even Exxon's CEO Thinks It's A Bad Idea
https://jalopnik.com/only-trump-could-come-up-with-a-climate-plan-so-terribl-1851699265
EXCERPTS: [I]f you need a clue where things are headed, look no further than the fact that the New York Times reports Trump has already lost Exxon Mobile’s CEO Darren Woods with his climate plan.
Trump has already promised to pull out of the Paris climate agreement again, increase drilling and undo any progress that we’ve seen under the Biden administration. Typically, you’d think oil executives would be completely on board with the incoming Trump administration making it easier for them to destroy the environment while making record profits, but it sounds like even Woods understands the downsides of pretending human-caused climate change is nothing more than something the hippies made up. And that means not pulling out of the Paris climate agreement.
“We need a global system for managing global emissions,” he told the Times in an interview. “Trump and his administrations have talked about coming back into government and bringing common sense back into government. I think he could take the same approach in this space.” Woods also claimed governments need to do more to incentivize oil and gas companies to invest more in sustainable energy, saying, “The government role is extremely important and one that they haven’t been successfully fulfilling, quite frankly.”
Speaking to the Wall Street Journal, Woods went a little deeper, saying he’s against pulling out of the Paris agreement again because it isn’t good “...to have the pendulum swing back and forth as administrations change. I don’t think the stops and starts are the right thing for businesses. It is extremely inefficient. It creates a lot of uncertainty.”
Now, we’re talking about the CEO of an oil company here, so it’s not like he’s some saint when it comes to the climate. He’s not on our side, and he never will be. Still, you have to marvel at the fact that a Republican president-elect could go too far even for a company as evil as Exxon.
“It’s ironic that the major oil companies are not supportive of the ‘drill, baby, drill,’ strategy, nor are their shareholders,” Paul Sankey, an independent analyst, told the WSJ. “They’ve been working very hard to lower their emissions, and the last thing they want is for all the rules and regulations to change again.”
TITLE: Trump’s climate fix: colonise Mars
https://www.ft.com/content/278d5e13-cec2-4630-aedc-fa7307005908
EXCERPT: It has come full circle. The nation that put a man on the Moon and gave us Star Trek has a cure for the biggest problem facing our species: settle another planet. Here I should pause to complain about Donald Trump and his reckless disregard of climate change. But Swampians know what I think and most of you probably agree. Let’s just take that as read.
What you might feel less comfortable in admitting is that Trump is giving utterance to America’s soul. The US is driven by the spirit of limitless resources and surmountable frontiers. Its mission is “To explore strange new worlds . . . to boldly go where no man has gone before”, as James T Kirk put it. On Tuesday Trump promoted Elon Musk, his own Captain Kirk, to Starfleet Admiral. Musk’s USS Enterprise is the department of government efficiency (Doge). He will share command of that bridge with Vivek Ramaswamy. Some of you might think that an outfit devoted to efficiency that starts with two heads is cursed to fail. In practice, Musk will surely be primus inter pares and Ramaswamy will be his Spock.
The crucial point is that Musk believes that Doge will give him the power to clear the Washington regulatory hurdles blocking his path to Mars. His main bugbear is the Federal Aviation Administration, which has allegedly been slow-walking approval for testing of the unmanned Starship that Musk plans to launch to Mars in 2026. His goal is to send humans there by 2030, thus commencing his dream of making us “an interplanetary species”. The eventual plan is for a city of a million people on Mars to provide a bridgehead for humanity’s escape from its earthly mess.
Lest you think all this is pie-in-the-sky, Trump is on board. When Musk joined him on stage for his rally in Butler, Pennsylvania last month, he was wearing a T-shirt that said: “Occupy Mars!” You and I might joke about Musk’s infinite self-belief, but the world’s most powerful man is taking it seriously. “A star is born,” said Trump of Musk after his election victory.
What does this mean for climate action? Trump plans a repeat of what he did in his first term when he pulled out from the Paris agreement and ceased most global climate co-operation. He also plans to “drill, baby, drill” in the Arctic Circle, off America’s coastal seaboards and for onshore fracking. If you want to see American leadership on climate change in the next four years you should abandon all hope.
America believes it has made more than enough sacrifice on fossil fuels. The fact that the average American emits 14 tonnes of carbon a year, compared with about half that in Europe and China, and less than a seventh in India is irrelevant. America plans to boldly go where it has been many times before.