EU Will Be Razing Whole Forests to Save Them Or Something

The EU will be razing whole forests and burning them to produce lots of CO2 … all in the name of saving the planet from global warming.

Today’s European Parliament vote, like yesterday’s marine vote, delivers yet another dramatic death blow to our living planet. Razing whole forests to the ground to feed our energy use releases vastly increased carbon into our atmosphere; carbon which would otherwise be naturally stored in the forest. Converting land into biofuel plantations means wiping out nature and evicting local communities. This is a crime when well-located wind and solar power offer viable alternatives. Energy from biomass should be limited to waste and residues, not whole trees, forests and food. Such perverted outcomes do not help in the fight against climate change.”

I don’t believe the part about solar and wind offering viable alternatives.

And I don’t necessarily believe more CO2 is a bad thing.

But I do belive that burning whole forests is stupid and amazingly hypocitical when the AGW cult keeps telling  us CO2 is bad and fossil fuels are evil.

Coal is cheap. Natural gas is cheap and cleaner than coal. And produces less CO2 than coal and forests.

 

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “EU Will Be Razing Whole Forests to Save Them Or Something

  1. Absolute insanity indeed. Why bother with burning trees when the alternative of nuclear, whether conventional or Gen 5 liquid molten salt reactors (LMSR’s), provides far greater return with ZERO greenhouse gas emissions and with steady baseload capacity? The wind doesn’t always blow, the sun doesn’t always shine, and we currently have no good means of storing excess RE generated with these sources.

    Then again, why is anyone surprised? AGW fanatics embody the epitome of hypocrisy—they will burn down entire forests to save on CO2 emissions while arguing forests need to be saved for the flora and fauna which calls them home. Forests grow faster with higher levels of CO2 are are vital to providing habitat for the natural world to thrive in. We, on the other hand, should be doing higher density living which requires less energy to keep operating nominally.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s