Prince Charles of England has a new ad out featuring a forest frog with several celeberties, including Kermit the Frog, calling to save our tropical rain forests. The prince states that destruction of “our” rain forests releases more CO2 into the atmosphere each year than that released by all the autos, trucks, trains, planes and other means of transport.
I am glad to see some other culprit being named for global warming. We could also talk about livestock releasing methane gas into the atmosphere by their evacuation of waste product. So why not call for killing off all these creatures?
The point is to strike a balance between the economy satisfying the needs of the people and taking care of the enviornment that surrounds us. Those who argue for saving our rain forests, reducing transportation, and getting rid of livestock tend to forget that these resources are important to many people.
The rain forests are cut for two main reasons, to clear land for agriculture and to harvest tropical wood. Should we stop mainly peasant farmers from using new land? Should we reduce the production of vegetable foods while reducing our consumption of meat? Should we resign people to living close to home and not seeing the world? Should we end efficient production of goods by ending the ability to transport those goods across great distances? The destructive practices demonized by environmentalists at the same time serve useful purposes enjoyed by the great majority of people.
Not only do environmentalists’ calls for “action” impinge on the desires of most, but they don’t seem to work. We are making the sacrifices but not getting results. An illustrative case here is the famous Kyoto Protocol, the litmus test for being environmentally correct. It should come as no surprise that Japan, home of the Protocol, has not met its goal to reduce harmful emmissions by this time, in fact, since the Protocol went into effect, Japan’s harmful emmissions have increased by something like 9%.
Again, the UN Conference on Climate Change to take place in Copenhagen in December must look at the facts, not fiction. It should look at reality and avoid fanciful notions. As I have stated before, it should look at adapting to climate change, and not seek to stop change. Remember, the only immutable law in nature is the self contradictory axiom, “the only constant is change.”