Click to get your own widget

Saturday, June 09, 2007


"Hundreds of millions of people will soon perish in smog disasters in New York and Los Angeles...the oceans will die of DDT poisoning by 1979...the U.S. life expectancy will drop to 42 years by 1980 due to cancer epidemics."
- Paul Ehrlich, 1969 in Ramparts.

Perhaps one of the more extreme example of "environmentalist" lunacy. In fact not only is pollution not getting worse we actually far less of it. This is not surprising both because a richer society can afford to spend more on cleaning up & because improving technology is, by definition, going to produce less pollution. If it doesn't produce a given amount using fewer inputs & thus less waste, then by definition it isn't high tech. By economic common sense nobody is going to replace current technology with it - except when, as with making people use paper bags instead of plastic ones, the "environmentalists insist on it).

Since there is less pollution if "environmentalists" really believed in what they say then the would be very happy & singing the praises of new technology. On the other hand if they are actually Luddites flying false flags then they will have invented new "pollutants" like CO2 to scare us with.

I have previously asked the Green Party & various commentators, online & elsewhere, to name a single "environmentalist" catastrophe story which has, over time, turned out to be fully true. NOBODY has yet produced one. When you have a 100% record of dishonesty it unsurprising that we have this from the Times on pollution in Britain today:
Levels of a group of toxic chemicals polluting gardens and fields have fallen to their lowest point for more than 100 years, a nationwide survey has revealed.

Emissions of dioxins from factories and power plants have been stemmed so effectively by bans and caps that contamination levels in soil have fallen for the first time since the Industrial Revolution.

The most comprehensive survey of toxic chemicals polluting Britain’s towns and countryside has revealed that carcinogenic dioxin levels have fallen by 70 per cent since the late 1980s.

"Emissions ... have been stemmed so effectively by bans and caps": I wonder whether that's true. Lomborg (The Skeptical Environmentalist) says that the claim that the Clean Air Act did wonders for Britain may well be false, since that rate of decline of airborne filth did not alter when the Act came in. Has anyone checked whether these more recent 'bans and caps' have had any effect on rates of decline? Just wondering.
Check out this US Carbon Footprint Map, an interactive United States Carbon Footprint Map, illustrating Greenest States. This site has all sorts of stats on individual State energy consumptions, demographics and State energy offices.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

British Blogs.