Eliminate fossil fuel use in 17 years?

         

This was one of the methods of transport and commercial delivery in t he 1860s

We don't do it that way anymore because it was slow, hard on horses and people, and much more cost efficient with an internal combustion engine.

Logging - a very big log - with International Truck in the 1950s

Now we have few logs this large and trucks much larger and with 6 times the power. And far more environmentally friendly.

I am tired of groups destroying advancement or progress and not being held accountable for their actions.

          I’m sure some will remember the attack made on the emotions of world population regarding seal hunting in the North Atlantic. Pictures designed to create the maximum sympathy from humans and yes, horrific sights. No scientific figures or environmental information was presented, just unsupported, heart-stabbing pictures. By purposely omitting pertinent information it was easy for a small group to create world wide support and thus power for themselves. Some members of the instigating groups involved went on to live very comfortable life styles and some even enjoyed excellent tax-payer funded incomes.

          The end of the North Atlantic seal hunt, along with the Canadian Coast Guard failing to halt pouching caused the North Atlantic fishery to collapse.

          The innocent bystanders – the fishermen from many countries – paid the price. Those who caused the destruction did not pay but moved on to new “causes” which increased their profile and thus their power.

          One of those “causes” was nuclear power. With pictures of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to show the destruction possible attempts where made – at the cost of lives – to stop the proliferation of the most environmentally friendly power production possible. No one made attempts to explain that nuclear bombs and nuclear power have very little to do with each other. The nuclear waste produced by power plants was blown all out of proportion giving many the idea that we could not dispose of it or store it safely. Yes, perhaps we will need to find a way to store it or shoot it into space … in a thousand years.

          The destruction caused by this unsupported bad attitude toward nuclear power in this case was two-fold. First the world used coal powered electrical production for twenty years longer than necessary. (Some areas still use it.) Second, two nuclear plants where built either without proper safety procedures or on a very poor site. A third, in Northern Ontario was producing twenty years after it should have been shut down.

          Meanwhile, quietly, hundreds of nuclear plants produce power world wide without any environmental damage. And while it becomes increasingly difficult for those who actually produce … those who make the world work and improve … to pay for that improvement (including electric bills) the drones continue to increase their power and income on the backs of those producers. Groups such as the World Wildlife Fund and Greenpeace continue to look good in the short term, destroy everything in the long term and never pay for their actions.

Bulley Glacier, one of those disappearing due to climate change which is also amplified by a cyclic upturn in temperature.

          Now we have a new group, (Undoubtedly full of some of the same people who populated earlier destructive groups.) called the “Food & Water Action.”

          Has a nice sound, doesn’t it? Gives one the idea that if you don’t listen to their message you won’t have anything to eat or drink. However, if you actually read some of their propaganda and exercise a little logic you will see that if you DO listen to their message you WON’T have food or drink.

          They are advocating the elimination of fossil fuels in seventeen years. That is, by 2035. That is far more destructive than anything I’ve had to put up with in my lifetime. Due to my age I won’t have to put up with the resultant destruction, but some of you will.

          Yes, if anyone is paying even the slightest attention to world events it is obvious (as my father used to say, “To anyone with half an eye and an as….”) that climate change is a fact. Yes, we need to make some changes to the way we operate if we expect that our decedents be able to live on this planet.

Banff, Alberta

          Here is the bad news; there is very little we can do about it. Paying more taxes (on carbon emissions, for example) will change nothing except give politicians more money to throw around (and look good in the short term) to, again, change nothing. It has taken more than a hundred years to create this mess and we certainly won’t change it back to the environment of 1800 in the next seventeen, or even fifty years.

          The first logical step is to change along with the climate. Move crop and livestock production north with the climate for example. We still need to eat.

Gimili goats, Valhalla Provincial Park

          Yes we can reduce and eventually eliminate our dependence of fossil fuels. We have already reduced coal consumption by a great deal. We could eliminate coal use in a very few years by switching completely to natural gas. Other than nuclear, natural gas is by far the cleanest means of production with existing technology. With natural gas we can continue to improve nuclear production and increase wind and solar power.

          Those two production methods have already improved dramatically and it appears as if they will be the way of the future. Today one can hook an electric car to a solar panel and be ready to drive again in eight or ten hours. Ten years ago that would have taken a week. There have been marked improvements in electric autos, but the biggest change has been in the efficiency of the solar panel. I expect they will be even more efficient in another ten years and hope to see it if I live that long.

          Wind turbines are also vastly improved. Those produced ten years ago where just efficient enough to warrant their purchase and installation economically when comparing their life expectancy against life production. Their service and maintenance costs where, of course a consideration in that calculation. Today’s turbine efficiency is much better and improving almost daily with maintenance costs much lower.

wind farm near Dawson Creek, BC

          Transportation is another area that has improved greatly in ten years. Available electric and hybrid autos are still too expensive for most, and their efficiency is still a question but they do prove it is possible. Commercial transport, the movement of goods (such as food and water) is still not economically viable. From what I have read about attempts to produce electric powered trucks we in the North might expect garden produce to reach us in the next ten years at roughly five times the present price.

          We don’t make that kind of money and we all like to eat.

          Can we eliminate fossil fuel use in 17 years? Absolutely not! A pleasant dream certainly but one that is physically impossible. Attempting to realize that dream in such a short time will be destructive mentally for the individual and economically for the world.

          “Food & Water Action’s” campaign will destroy the lives of billions. Supporting the group means supporting the destruction much as supporting WWF and Greenpeace supported destruction.

          Here is a quote from one of F&WA’s publications: “And yet, science tells us that we'll see the worst of climate chaos if we do not act now.”

          Says who? I don’t see such information from any scientific body nor do I see any information that states we can make big changes.

          In another publication they mention “dangerous fossil fuel projects”. By what criteria are they sited as dangerous? All production of any type contains danger and requires adherence to safety protocols. Traversing two hundred miles of highway traffic is undoubtedly more dangers than eight hours on a “fossil fuel” production site.

          F&WA condemns out of hand pipeline construction and use. Does that mean they would rather have crude oil, produced water (containing H2S), condensate, Diesel fuel, gasoline, and natural gas transported by truck or train? Perhaps they haven’t seen the destruction caused by derailments or truck roll-overs? Perhaps they haven’t had an opportunity to compare those spills against the miniscule amounts in pipeline leaks?

          On the other hand, supporting the US Federal ministers and other countries governing bodies who are presently attempting to destroy the environment also supports destruction.

          Can we manage it in fifty years? Probably, but only with the use of fossil fuels (hopefully mostly natural gas and nuclear) to create those items – electric automobiles, solar panels and wind and wave turbines – that we need to realize that dream.

          We can not eliminate the use of fossil fuels without the use of fossil fuels!

          Even with these moves away from fossil fuels we can not reverse climate change! Can we stop climate change? Not a snowballs chance in hell! Can we slow climate change? Probably to a point where we don’t even notice it.

          In the mean time, let’s learn a better way to live with it.