Latest posts by James H. Rust (see all)
- Concerned About Water Shortages? Then You Need to Oppose Ethanol - April 21, 2017
- The Golden Isles at War - March 15, 2017
- How the Word Resistance Has Sunk in Meaning - February 11, 2017
The global warming scare defined is: The burning of fossil fuels produces a greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, that causes human-caused global warming with catastrophic climate events. This is labeled catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW).
By this definition, these climate events produce economic loss, medical problems, and deaths when involving large populations. No provision is allowed for benefits of burning fossil fuels.
The adherents to CAGW say the United States must immediately start programs to reduce fossil fuel use and by 2050, carbon dioxide emissions must be less than 13 percent the level of the year 1990. Per capita carbon dioxide emissions will be at the level after the Civil War.
After World War II, it was noticed a certain arbitrary level (“A”) of exposure per person to nuclear radiation would kill half of a group of 100 people or fifty. It was then theorized any exposure to nuclear radiation was dangerous, and exposure of one-hundredth “A” to ten thousand people would still kill fifty people. This the same as to say that if one gram of arsenic would kill one person, one-thousandth of a gram fed to one thousand people would still kill one person. This is what is called the Linear No-Threshold hypothesis or LNT.
LNT claims any additional radiation exposures above background is dangerous and causes health problems and deaths when involving large populations. Using terminology for global warming, human-caused radiation exposure is called catastrophic anthropogenic radiation exposure or “CARE.”
Adopting the attitude medical problems or deaths should be prevented without regard to benefits, CARE should be immediately reduced and made zero. And many say the United States should embark on programs to eliminate radiation medical diagnosis and treatments, isotope use, nuclear weapons, and nuclear power.
CAGW is under attack in the United States by large groups of politicians, environmental organizations, government agencies, the media, and industrial groups who desire recognition, power, and wealth by exploiting this issue. Cost to taxpayers in government dollars spent probably exceed $100 billion annually. Other costs to the United States economy are huge; but not quantified.
CARE is exploited by some environmental groups seeking to eliminate use of nuclear power. The reasons for exploiting CARE are the same as CAGW. These groups also exploit CAGW. Economic costs of CARE are not quantified; but are annually in the multi-billions.
If CAGW is successfully stopped; CARE will be next in line.