Friday, July 12, 2013

Professor Plimer versus the Prius


...and Professor Plimer wins with this compelling summation on Carbon Dioxide's presence in our atmosphere.

Plimer:  "...here's the bombshell.  The volcanic eruption in Iceland.  Since its first spewing of volcanic ash has, in just four days, negated every single effort you have made in the past 5 years to control CO2 emissions on our planet...all of you.

Of course, you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress -- it's that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life.

I know...it's very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kids "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of abroad, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cent light bulbs with $10 light bulbs...well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tube in just four days.

The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in just four days -- yes, FOUR DAYS -- by that volcano in Iceland (Eyjafjallajökull) has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon.  And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud at any one time -- every day.

I don't really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt. Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.

Yes folks, Mt. Pinatubo was active for over one year -- think about it.

Of course, I shouldn't spoil this 'touchy-feely tree-hugging' moment and mention the effect of solar and cosmic activity and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which keeps happening despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change.  

And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud, but the fact of the matter is that the bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years.  And it happens every year.

Just remember that your government just tried to (or has) impose(d) a whopping carbon tax on you, on the basis of the bogus 'human-caused' climate-change scenario.

Hey, isn't it interesting how they sometimes don't mention 'Global Warming' anymore, but just 'Climate Change' - you know why?  

It's because the planet has cooled by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming bull artists got caught with their pants down.

And, just keep in mind that you might yet have an Emissions Trading Scheme -- that whopping new tax -- imposed on you that will achieve absolutely NOTHING except make you poorer.  

It won't stop any volcanoes from erupting, that's for sure.
And your 'leaders' and 'experts' will NOT care for you to tell them any of this."

Ian Rutherford Plimer is an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, professor of mining technology at the University of Adelaide, and the director of multiple mineral exploration and mining companies.  He has published 130 scientific papers, six books and edited the Encyclopedia of Geology.  Notable awards:  Eureka Prize (1995, 2002); Centenary Medal (2003), Clarke Medal (2004).

"He didn't even mention Mt. St. Helens," offers Kia, "or the Kelowna fires."

...wonder what the BC Government is doing with the Carbon Tax payments.  Never mind...we know...just more gouging of residents.  And wasting the money.  




7 comments:

  1. A bit absurd. Obviously, we can not change the acts of nature, we can only change what we can change.
    Just because there are multiple forces acting against us - it doesn't mean that we should do nothing.

    If you want to look at really serious issues, affecting us right now, that we have the possibility to affect - why not focus the attention of this article on the fact that radiation levels at Fukushima were determined last week, to be 18 times worse than previously understood, because the instrument they were using to test, had a maximum limit of 1,000 millisievert.


    http://www.democracynow.org/2013/9/4/headlines#947

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't think Plimer actually wrote this; though you cite him as the source. Plimer is most likely a source from some of the claims about carbon dioxide and volcanos, particularly from his book in 2009 (before the Icelandic eruption); the comments specifically on Iceland seem to be by someone else who is, I think, confused about the distinction between carbon dioxide and volcanic ash.

    If you have an actual reference to Plimer or where he published these remarks, I'd appreciate it! Or indeed a reference to ANYWHERE this appears in its original form. The text has been around for quite a while, but it seems to have started life somewhere as an email circular... and I am pretty sure it was written by someone else using Plimer as a source of some of the information.

    Regardless, the specifics are wildly incorrect. Human carbon dioxide emissions are about 30 billion tons annually. Pinatubo in 1991 (an enormous eruption far larger than Eyjafjallajökull in 2010) released about 50 million tons total.

    The eruption in Iceland in 2010 (Eyjafjallajökull) released as much as 150 to 300 thousand tons per day for a few days in the peak of its eruption; though I don't have a figure for the total. It was certainly much much smaller than Pinatubo, which in turn was a couple of hundred times smaller than one years human carbon dioxide emission.

    The major impact of Eyjafjallajökull was not carbon dioxide, but volcanic ash; and this impact was exceptionally large because of the conditions in the jet stream at the time.

    Bottom line; human carbon dioxide are many many times greater than even huge eruptions like Pinatubo.

    A useful and highly reputable basic reference is the US geological survey pages: http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/climate.php

    For anything to be "compelling" it needs to be sourced. You've been mislead by the text. It sounds impressive, but it quotes no numbers, gives no references, and has no publication detail. That ought to raise huge red flags. When you actually check the specifics, it turns out to be wildly incorrect; not even close.

    Sorry for the late comment. My dad sent me a copy of the same text you have repeated, and asked me to check it out. I came across your cite as part of my (futile) attempt to get a proper reference for how this got started. I had no trouble check the facts themselves from basic information on volcanoes by reputable geological sources.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "One example of these sceptic's claims is the 2009 book, Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, the Missing Science by Professor Ian Plimer of the University of Adelaide," from story here: http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2011/06/28/3255476.htm

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks Kia; that reference and others with known publication details are why I am pretty sure that the actual text here was written by persons unknown, using Plimer for some of the information; but that it was not written by Plimer himself. I'm a harsh critic of Plimer; but I don't think he ever said this bit (for example)

    "The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in just four days -- yes, FOUR DAYS -- by that volcano in Iceland (Eyjafjallajökull) has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon."

    Plimer did make statements about Pinatubo in his 2009 book; and those were also wildly incorrect. That appears to have been used by the unknown writer as the basis for the claims about Pinatubo -- though the truth is that Pinatubo emitted something less than a days worth of human carbon dioxide emissions.

    The statement about Eyjafjallajökull -- which erupted in 2010 -- is even sillier in a couple of respects. It appears to mix up ash and carbon; volcanic ash is basically pulverized rock and carbon is not a significant constituent. Added to which Eyjafjallajökull was much smaller; and it erupted substantially after Plimer's remarks on volcanos had been thoroughly debunked. The remarks with respect to Eyjafjallajökull use "emission controls" as the comparison, rather than "total human emission" -- but it doesn't save the claim. It's still incorrect by several orders of magnitude.

    If you could find a source for Plimer making this kind of claim about Eyjafjallajökull I'd be very grateful. But I honestly don't think Plimer is likely to have repeated the error given the pounding he got from working scientists in 2009 over his Pinatubo howlers. He still makes lots of nonsense claims, but not this one I think.

    Here's an early example of the text used in this blog:
    http://www.protectionist.net/2010/05/16/the-carbon-footprint-of-icelands-eyjafjallajokull-volcano/
    In that article, the blogger declares the author as "unknown", and indicates that the earliest instance they have found was 30 April 2010, which was about 2 weeks after the large eruption that closed European airspace and brought Eyjafjallajökullto to public notice.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sorry but the emailed source--if it provided a source--material was deleted after posting. Like many internet documents, cut-n-paste was likely used, combining several sources (if they can be called that).
    The nearest I can dig up is: http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2889174.htm.


    Dissenting views--on almost every topic--are of interest and often published here, especially because the mainstream media have their own agenda (owned by the "one per centers").

    Poor Plimer was done when people discovered he was a mining geologist. It appears scientists have merit only if they're unfunded.
    At least then, no-one can show a hidden agenda.

    Thank you for caring enough to wish to correct quotes unattributable to Plimer.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oops, I provided the wrong link; sorry.
    This may be what you're looking for: http://bravenewclimate.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/plimer2a0.pdf

    ReplyDelete

Share YOUR thoughts here...