Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US leads the world in ...carbon reductions? (Without relying on government green energy initiatives)
American Thinker ^ | 11/23/2012 | Rick Moran

Posted on 11/23/2012 7:07:00 AM PST by SeekAndFind

You read that correctly. And it's not because of Obama's green energy initiatives. Nor is it the result of any UN mandated program of carbon trading. It is certainly not because the US has religiously followed the Kyoto Protocols.

It's because greedy capitalists find it easier to make money selling natural gas:

Over the past six years, the United States has reduced its carbon emissions more than any other nation in the world.

Efforts to curb so-called man-made climate change had little or nothing to do with it. Government mandated "green" energy didn't cause the reductions. Neither did environmentalist pressure. And the U.S. did not go along with the Kyoto Protocol to radically cut CO2 emissions. Instead, the drop came about through market forces and technological advances, according to a report from the International Energy Agency.

Breakthroughs in how natural gas is extracted from underground shale formations were the key factors that led to the reductions, the report said. Natural gas has a low carbon footprint and is widely available in the United States. As a result, entrepreneurs are flocking to extract it from new areas.

"It's good news and good news doesn't get reported as much," John Griffin, executive director of Associated Petroleum Industries of Michigan, said of the lack of reporting about the CO2 reductions. "The mainstream media doesn't want to report these kinds of things."

Rep. Chuck Moss, R-Birmingham, chair of the House Appropriations Committee, said he was unaware of the extent of the fall-off in carbon emissions.

"You know when I found out we've reduced our carbon emissions more than any other country?" Rep. Moss said. "It was when you just told me. So, maybe that says something about how many people even know about it."

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: carbonemissions; environmentalism; greenenergy

1 posted on 11/23/2012 7:07:10 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: steelyourfaith
AGW ping?
Carbon reduction = a fool's errand.
2 posted on 11/23/2012 7:11:03 AM PST by Amagi (Chief Justice John Roberts is a traitorous weasel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Another.

Shhh, U.S. Leads World In Carbon Emissions Reductions
3 posted on 11/23/2012 7:11:59 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This is the work of government intervention as Obama has waged wars on coal and prosperity. A stagnant economy also keeps CO2 emissions from climbing.

How could one not blame our lack of CO2 emission increases on the government?


4 posted on 11/23/2012 7:19:25 AM PST by impimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The greatest amount of CO2 emissions is said to be in the rain forests,wha twill they do?.
Some scams just don’t work,see Algore.


5 posted on 11/23/2012 7:29:49 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: impimp
This is the work of government intervention as Obama has waged wars on coal and prosperity

Exactly right. The Energy Dept also subsidized a gas pipeline through Ohio to convert plants in eastern Ohio from coal to gas. But we all need to keep in mind Obama's promise from 2008: Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I'm capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it - whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. (emphasis added).

Obama has no more elections to worry about so he is free to go about implementing Agenda 21 and whatever else it takes to push the masses into poorly heated apartments in dimly lit cities.

6 posted on 11/23/2012 7:39:53 AM PST by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: palmer

“Under my plan of full unemployment through elimination of energy production, we will have the dual benefits of skyrocketing prices for electricity as well as a major decrease in CO2 production. In fulfilling these campaign promises to the American people, we can be assured that I can continue to do what I want.”


7 posted on 11/23/2012 7:49:22 AM PST by Right Wing Assault (Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Now it is time those third world countries did their fare share.


8 posted on 11/23/2012 7:54:57 AM PST by ully2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaduz
The greatest amount of CO2 emissions is said to be in the rain forests

?????

Plants take in CO2, keep the carbon and release oxygen.

9 posted on 11/23/2012 2:48:43 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: thackney

What about all the dead plants on the ground?.


10 posted on 11/24/2012 7:55:06 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Vaduz

That is only releasing carbon it previously captured.

If it is a steady state of new growth versus dead/decaying material, it is carbon neutral.

If you harvest lumber but let new growth take its place, you are capturing carbon overall.


11 posted on 11/24/2012 8:14:22 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Just try to harvest lumber in the rain forest and see what happens.You may want to check out the carbon maps.


12 posted on 11/24/2012 8:35:37 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Vaduz

A forest cannot release any more carbon than it previously captured.

Some people can claim it a source of carbon, but they are being dishonest since that carbon was previously captured by the same source.

You cannot count the amount released unless you are willing to count the amount captured. Unless they are trying to deceive.


13 posted on 11/24/2012 10:07:34 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson