Environmentalist: Let’m freeze in the dark

Russ Steele

Climate activist who are promoting the dangers of global warming created by CO2 emissions are protesting the development of a pipe line from Canada’s oil sands to the US gulf coast. The latest protest was out side the White House, where 65 people were arrested.

The story is in The Hill:

Police arrested 65 environmentalists outside the White House Saturday as they staged a demonstration urging President Obama to block a proposed pipeline that would bring oil from Canada’s oil sands projects to Gulf Coast refineries.

 The civil disobedience launched two-weeks of White House demonstrations – with more arrests to come – as activists seek to increase political pressure on Obama over the proposed Keystone XL pipeline.

 The Obama administration is weighing TransCanada Corp.’s proposed $7 billion, 1,700-mile line to bring crude from Alberta’s massive oil sands projects to the Texas Gulf Coast.

 The pipeline needs State Department approval to proceed, and the Obama administration plans to make a decision by the end of the year.

 People arrested include Bill McKibben, the prominent climate activist and founder of 350.org; Jane Hamsher, who founded the popular liberal blog Firedoglake; and Gus Speth, whose career includes co-founding the Natural Resources Defense Council and chairing the White House Council on Environmental Quality in the Carter Administration.

You can read the rest of the article here. It is clear these protester are focused on the near term. If we are truly on the cusp of the next grand minimum, then we will need that Canadian oils to heat our homes and keep the lights on.  If we do not buy the oil, Canada has is threatening to build the pipe line to the west coast and sell the oil to China. This will not stop the environmental damage claimed by the protestors, and US customers will not have the oil. These protestors need to step back and take a larger view of the world.

Here are some links to detail on what is really happening in the Canadian Oil Sands from Ron Bailey at Reason Magazine:


Author: Russ Steele

Freelance writer and climate change blogger. Russ spent twenty years in the Air Force as a navigator specializing in electronics warfare and digital systems. After his service he was employed for sixteen years as concept developer for TRW, an aerospace and automotive company, and then was CEO of a non-profit Internet provider for 18 months. Russ's articles have appeared in Comstock's Business, Capitol Journal, Trailer Life, Monitoring Times, and Idaho Magazine.

16 thoughts on “Environmentalist: Let’m freeze in the dark”

  1. I guess the protestors did not get the memo that Obama is on vacation. Perhaps they ought to rent a sailboat with their protest message written on the sails. Perhaps BO could see it from the golf course.

  2. I wonder if the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has any effect on the ability to think straight. Mankind could “survive” as a species under conditions of much higher CO2, but would he be as clear headed? What research has been done on this aspect of CO2 increases? Would you live in a house with quadruple our current CO2, just so we could see how that works out for you?

    In short, there may well be reasons beyond global warming, global climate change, etc., for wanting to restrict the amount of CO2 in our air. Will we breathe our way into idiocracy?

    1. Douglas,

      Earth’s atmosphere currently has about 391 parts per million of CO2, In Navy’s subs, the danger level for carbon dioxide isn’t reached until the air has 8,000 parts per million of CO2. I certainly home that high CO2 levels do not affect ability to think on the Navy’s nuclear subs. What do you think, would the Navy allow high CO2 levels if it impact the ability of sailors to think?

      If you want to see the impact of increased CO2 on plant growth, I suggest that your watch this YouTube Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2qVNK6zFgE&feature=player_embedded

  3. Doug,
    “Will we breathe our way into idiocracy?” Well, you may have already breathed enough CO2 to develop your own idiotic symptoms. You certainly didn’t waste any time inserting some CO2 into Russ’s new blog. LOL.

  4. So just where does the Navy normally keep the CO2 levels? 4000? I rather doubt that.

    I am well aware of the effects on plants. You might want to examine the kid who placed solar cells in the same Fibonacci orientation sequence as an oak tree, and got 20% more output from the cells.

    1. A little more research into the lit reveals:

      Toxicol Rev. 2005;24(4):229-35.
      Carbon dioxide poisoning.
      Langford NJ.

      West Midlands Poisons Unit, City Hospital, Birmingham, UK.

      Carbon dioxide is a physiologically important gas, produced by the body as a result of cellular metabolism. It is widely used in the food industry in the carbonation of beverages, in fire extinguishers as an ‘inerting’ agent and in the chemical industry. Its main mode of action is as an asphyxiant, although it also exerts toxic effects at cellular level. At low concentrations, gaseous carbon dioxide appears to have little toxicological effect. At higher concentrations it leads to an increased respiratory rate, tachycardia, cardiac arrhythmias and impaired consciousness. Concentrations >10% may cause convulsions, coma and death.

      So having the alarms go off on a Navy sub at 8000 ppm is having them going off at 10% of the level that kills you for sure. As the sensors may not be right at the highest concentration points, and as one must allow for errors, this seems to me like they are cutting it a little close.

  5. Bob H,

    Russ Steele brought it up, not me.

    “Russ Steele

    Climate activist who are promoting the dangers of global warming created by CO2 emissions are protesting the development of a pipe line from Canada’s oil sands to the US gulf coast. The latest protest was out side the White House, where 65 people were arrested.”


    You should know, that as a skier and a person living here, I would truly hope that the deniers are right. I have no desire to watch the Mt Lyell glacier shrivel up, but so far, that’s what’s happening.

  6. Ah, you missed my point. My fault.

    “In short, there may well be reasons beyond global warming, global climate change, etc., for wanting to restrict the amount of CO2 in our air”.

    There’s the tell – if CO2 is a non-factor in AGW there will be plenty other reasons conjured up to curtail the world’s energy supply and thereby reduce its living standard. The goal is way beyond pretending to affect climate change.

    1. Bob,

      You are right. The communist left just used climate changes as tool to farther it’s goal of creating a one world community of universal misery.

    2. Have no desire to have hand cranked chairlifts, merely wish to go to the source, and bypass the middleman, oilcos. If the USA offered say a 1 to 10 billion dollar prize for 1/2 the patent rights to any system that was twice as efficient at half the cost as current systems, we’d have Virgin Spacelines back in the race overnight, along with a host of others. NATIONALLY, WE’D MAKE THE CASH BACK IN MONTHS.

      Did you read about the 13 year old who built an array using the Fibonacci pattern of an oak tree, and got 20% more power out of a stationary array?

  7. Douglas,

    Yes did read about the 13 year old very ingenious. The problem will be the cost to build the tree structure so they are safe in high winds and heavy snow. The tree costs will out weigh the gains from the solar panels. I think the visual blight from wind turbines is enough, we do not need the additional blight from solar trees.

  8. Auto bodies seem to handle winds in excess of 70 mph with ease. I the structures are mass produced, I suspect the costs would not be that much of a problem. DIY versions using pressure treated 4×4’s would make sense. Solar panels themselves are very light weight. Snow is not a problem in many parts of this country.

    On CO2, there are many unanswered questions, including the one I asked of you about the normal CO2 levels in a nuke sub.


  9. Douglas,

    Here are some study results:

    Submarine crew are reported to be the major source of CO2 on board submarines (Crawl 2003). Data collected on nine nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines indicate an average CO2 concentration of 3,500 ppm with a range of 0-10,600 ppm, and data collected on 10 nuclear-powered attack submarines indicate an average CO2 concentration of 4,100 ppm with a range of 300-11,300 ppm (Hagar 2003).

  10. Let’s make it easier for Keachie: numbers he’s been led to before.

    CO2 was over 1900ppm when our most distant mammalian ancestors were scampering about in the Triassic Park. There is no way we can extract enough fossil fuels to get close to the atmospheres we evolved in, let alone the 10000ppm that existed near the start of the Phanerozoic and, not coincidentally, about the maximum you’d want a submariner or astronaut exposed to.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s