To The Daily Sun,

What the Democrats and left-leaning media have done is absolutely brilliant. They have convinced millions of voters that, unless they vote for climate change “alarmists,” the world is doomed. They flood the news with stories filled with opinions and withhold the data so readers can’t make an informed decision. Jim Veverka is a dedicated contributor of these scare tactics. Here is an earlier letter.

As a climate “realist,” I read all of Jim’s references, looking for where and when our ultimate demise is coming, and never find it.

I’m concerned about the environment as much as Jim and stated so in a previous letter. I asked Jim the following questions which he chose to ignore: Explain why the global temperature has decreased over the last two years, and how much would the global temperature increase if CO2 levels doubled over the next 100 years? These questions are at the heart of this debate, yet he ignores them completely.

Here is an article by NASA saying the northern hemisphere is getting greener as a result of global warming; That sounds like an upside. Consider also that vegetation is the earth’s natural way of recycling CO2 gases. So, what do the climate “alarmists” do? They cut down forests to build wind and solar farms. It makes no sense.

Giving trillions of dollars to our federal government to combat a “perceived” problem is not the solution. Also, the USA is not the primary source of CO2 in the world. It’s China! Here is a link with the data. China currently produces 29% of the world’s CO2 emissions. The USA is second at 14%.

So, here is the key point I want to make. This link shows historical data from 1990 and 2017, and over the last 27 years, the USA total CO2 emissions have remained flat while China’s has increase by 354%. If activists want to address this problem, they need to focus on the worst offender. How about staging demonstrations in Beijing?

By the way, “alarmists” created this problem back in 1979 when they waged a war on nuclear power. The U.S. nuclear industry was growing and we could have been energy-independent in 2000 with 50% less CO2 emissions, had the “alarmists” not interfered. Nuclear power produces less CO2 per kilowatt-hour (12 grams) than solar (45 grams), according to Wikipedia. Compare that to coal at (820 grams) and oil at (778 grams). Had the U.S. continued to build more nuclear plants instead of coal and oil plants, our CO2 emissions could have been half what they are today!

I’ll ask Jim again, how can the global temperature increase be “accelerating” when the temperature has dropped .1C over the last two years? And, how much will the global temperature increase if CO2 levels double over the next 100 years? Please provide source data! Again, a 1C rise in global temperature over the last 100 years is not reason to panic.

Bruce Jenket


Recommended for you

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.