The Dow may be tanking and we could be heading into a global recession in the near future, but there's a green lining to it all, according to Reuters. Mother Earth might get a breather from those dastardly carbon emissions, what with shuttered factories and all.
Here's how the financial news wire teased a story on the afternoon of October 7, a day after the Dow closed below 10,000 for the first time since October 2004:
Economic silver lining? The slowdown in the world economy may give the planet a breather from high carbon dioxide emissions, a leading scientist says.
The October 7 story by Reuters staffer Michele Kambas focused on the recent remarks by Nobel winner Paul Crutzen:
Story Continues Below Ad ↓NICOSIA (Reuters) - A slowdown in the world economy may give the planet a breather from the excessively high carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions responsible for climate change, a Nobel Prize winning scientist said on Tuesday.
Atmospheric scientist Paul J Crutzen, who has in the past floated the possibility of blitzing the stratosphere with sulfur particles to cool the earth, said clouds gathering over the world economy could ease the earth's environmental burden.
Slower economic growth worldwide could help slow growth of carbon dioxide emissions and trigger more careful use of energy resources, though the global economic turmoil may also divert focus from efforts to counter climate change, said Crutzen, winner of the 1995 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his work on the depletion of the ozone layer.
"It's a cruel thing to say ... but if we are looking at a slowdown in the economy, there will be less fossil fuels burning, so for the climate it could be an advantage," Crutzen told Reuters in an interview.
Yes, it is a cruel thing to say, particularly since a global economic slowdown would doubtless harm the world's poorest hardest, what with lost jobs and wages and a lower standard of living. So Kambas was sure to find an economist or business leader to say Crutzen is all wet, right?
Wrong.
Kambas continued by noting Crutzen's nutty idea for fixing global warming: spewing sulfur into the atmosphere. Yes, sulfur:
He caused a stir with the publication of a paper in 2006 suggesting that injecting the common pollutant sulfur into the stratosphere some 10 miles above the earth could snuff out the greenhouse effect.
He believes that dispersing 1 million tons of sulfur into the stratosphere each year, either on balloons or in rockets, would deflect sunlight and cool the planet.
[...]
It would be an extreme endeavor, but for extreme circumstances, he said.
In a 2007 report, the U.N. climate change panel said such geo-engineering options were largely speculative and unproven, with the risk of unknown side effects. Reliable cost estimates had not been published, it said.
"The price is not a major factor... it's peanuts," said Crutzen. "The cost has been estimated by some at 10, 20 million U.S. dollars a year."
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Al Gore responds
October 7, 2008 - 16:23 ET by Mica the MagnificentAhahahahahaha - choo choo choo choo - - - ahahahahaha - - - choo choo choo choo - - - Al Gore expressing his agreement between pacifier sucks
No need to widen the roads, less cars..
October 7, 2008 - 16:27 ET by upcountrywaterless people going to work.
all these screens (tv computer etc.) going black..
no running water...
carbon will spike as the entitlement folk burn down the HOOD.
wrong again.
Nobel wiener... wiener... wiener...
CLIMATE CRISIS
IranianUranium
How's that bail-out bill working for everybody?
October 7, 2008 - 16:28 ET by c5thenI can't help but notice that the stock markets aren't that impressed nor seem to be all that optimistic about this being a short term issue.
»→ Not 2 bad c5then
October 7, 2008 - 16:36 ET by Cool ArrowStill treading even water on the 401k, but I pity those who have less hands-on control than I.
What really burns my britches is that McCain could be on stage tonight after refusing to vote for the honey glazed ham butt burrito, having truly distanced himself from both George Bush and Barack Obama.
But no, tonight he's just another porker still trying to say he's not four more years.
Let's hope Palin drags him along and he realizes he owes her big time.
"We cannot win with eggheads and African-Americans." - Paul Begala, Democrat racebaiter
The really bad part hasn't even hit yet (IMO)
October 7, 2008 - 16:54 ET by c5thenThe FED has to both inject capital into the system (more $$$$) and keep the interest rates low. That means that inflation will start to accelerate like back in the 70's. We could be looking at a recession, high oil prices,flat home prices and run away inflation.
Ahem, aren't the Chinese
October 7, 2008 - 16:46 ET by dscottAhem, aren't the Chinese spewing sulfur into the air for free now? So now I suppose we should thank the Chinese since the GAT trend has been negative since 1998, i.e. no global warming since obviously the temp has to INCREASE more than before to quote, to make it warmer. See problem solved, so why are we being asked to spend trillions when the Chinese are doing it for free????
What is really going on is a trial balloon to see if the public buys into the myth. No, libs, using less energy because of an economic downturn is not conservation but incompetence. The reason should be obvious, but since the average lib doesn't get it but waits for the talking points, I will spell it out for you: Lower economic activity (GDP) means lower a standard of living. Using less energy doing the same amount of work is called efficiency. Using less energy doing less work is less money for the same amount of workers.
btw-the reason why the US uses 25% of the world's oil is because they produce 25% of the world's GDP. In this sense it is absolutely selfish of us to not drill domestically thus denying the rest of world oil at a lower price. But what the hey, libs are a selfish bunch when it comes down to it, they want everyone else to pay but themselves. Europe uses a similar proportion, YET there are 100 million more Europeans in population and that means they are 25% poorer than US citizens. The AGW cultists frequently point to the Europeans as the standard of energy use, what they don't tell you is they are poorer, hence they can't afford it. That in a nutshell is the AGW cultist plan for the world, make them poorer.
Don't expect Al Gore to be giving up any of his mansions, houseboat or private jets, he is exempt because he takes money from his right pocket and puts it in his left pocket, called carbon credits in his own company - Generation Investment Management.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
This is such B.S. First,
October 7, 2008 - 16:47 ET by mostlymoderateThis is such B.S. First, it isn't the U.S. that is the problem; China, South America, India and parts of Asia and Africa are raping the planet with their dense populations and their socialist-third-world mentalities.
Second, the people that are spewing this "green" crap are the mega-millionaires in the media that own multiple 10,000 square foot houses and globe-trot on private jets. (e.g. Al Gore and the rest of the celebrities)
I am so sick of "green" lies.
CO2??????
October 7, 2008 - 16:50 ET by krendlerThe slowdown in the world economy may give the planet a breather from high carbon dioxide emissions, a leading scientist says.
Anybody ever come across a SINGLE piece of evidence linking CO2 to global warming (past/present)? Al Gore's famous (now infamous) CO2-temperature correlation graph that he presented in Inconvenient Truth has been completely debunked (Sorry, Al. Your ice core data shows that CO2 LAGS temps by centuries, not the other way around as you contended). The AGW crazies don't even dispute that his conclusion was completely wrong (nor does Gore).
Add to that the fact that CO2 accounts for something like 0.04 percent (4 hundreths of 1 percent) of the atmosphere and mankind's very small contribution to that number (don't remember the exact figure) and you can't help but be completely flabbergasted by all the "stop carbon emissions" screeching .
I'm all for protecting the planet and the environment. Let's just spend the money, though, on something that will actually matter. CO2 isn't the problem.
»→ My Silver Lining
October 7, 2008 - 17:01 ET by Cool ArrowLet the unemployment rate get up beyond 10% and see if suddenly a bunch of Bleedin' Heart Liberals don't start chasing their kitchen help, chicken pluckers, tomato pickers, gardeners, etc back to Mexico.
Maybe we can learn to be a little less lazy. Cook at home once in a while, mow our own grass, paint our own house.
I feel like I'm gonna puke. So does my country.
"We cannot win with eggheads and African-Americans." - Paul Begala, Democrat racebaiter
Amen to that !!!!
October 7, 2008 - 17:03 ET by mostlymoderateAmen to that !!!!
Another great liberal Democratic Idea
October 7, 2008 - 17:08 ET by VinncyGDoes anybody out there have any memory of the reason given for the
> establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY during the Carter Administration?
> Anybody? Anything? No? Didn't think so.
>
> Bottom line . . we've spent several hundred billion dollars in support
> of an agency the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember.
>
>
> Ready? It was very simple, and at the time everybody thought it
> very appropriate.
>
>
> The Department of Energy was instituted 8-04-1977 TO LESSEN OUR
> DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL. HEY, PRETTY EFFICIENT, HUH?
>
> AND NOW IT'S 2008, 31 YEARS LATER, AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS NECESSARY
> DEPARTMENT IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR, THEY HAVE 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, AND
> APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES AND LOOK AT THE JO B THEY HAVE DONE!
> THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY 'WHAT WAS I THINKING?'
>
"...could ease the earth's environmental burden..."
October 7, 2008 - 17:11 ET by RackieNow if we could just get every other person on the plant to die.
»→ Rackie
October 7, 2008 - 17:16 ET by Cool ArrowLet's all buy ethanol, keep DDT off the shelves, and that will take care of itself.
Sounds like a Truthmonger mantra.
"We cannot win with eggheads and African-Americans." - Paul Begala, Democrat racebaiter
Really? We had an
October 7, 2008 - 18:08 ET by danboReally?
We had an economic downturn in the 30's. The use of fossil fuels plateaued. Was there a decrease in tempertures? No temps went up.
Seems mother nature tossed a bunch of sulfur into the air when Tambora erupted. What followed was the year without summer. How many starved?
Limited Disclosure: I used to belong to the Sierra Club untill they went crazier. Worse of all, I was bribed by Exxon with free New Orleans Saints glasses with fill ups in the 70's.