Environmental Villian(s)

British Petroleum has been publishing CO2 emission data since 1965.  Their most reason charts through 2011 reveal. . .  well take a look at them yourself.

The first graph shows the growth in CO2 emissions.  Note that China now exceeds the USA and every other country in the world in the growth of carbon emissions.  Note also that China is excluded from the Kyoto accords and, like many developing countries, view carbon emissions as a by product of sustained and robust economic growth.

A second graph shows the amount of CO2 produced in 2011 alone.  The US ranks 2nd to China and, when seen in an historical context in the chart above, is likely to decline (or remain steady) as China continues to increase.

A few observations:

1) CO2 emissions are mainly a measure of economic growth.

2) US emissions are lower today than they were 15 years ago (the decline is due to increased use of natural gas).

3) The Kyoto Protocol, which environmentalists have berated the US for not signing, excluded China and India, along with other developing countries. Without them - certainly China - all attempts of emission reduction are doomed to failure.

Can we agree that the Senate was correct when it voted 95-0 for a resolution rejecting Kyoto?  That was the Senate, mind you, where environmentally concerned politicians hold sway.  Sanity prevailed.  Let's hope it continues!

A final observation: if the enviromentalists' concern is saving the planet and the US is declining in carbon emissions relative to the rest of the world, why then should US taxpayers pick up the tab for reducing such emissions?  Whether or not you believe that global warming is caused primarily by human activity (I don't), if the planet is to be saved, it will take a lot more than US feelings of guilt and consequent taxes (we'll leave the costs of renewable energy for another post). 

Oh - and by the way, human caused CO2 emissions are dwarfed by naturally occurring emissions.

You can view more charts at Watts Up With That? - a blog by Anthony Watts. 

While you're there, take a look at a draft paper concerning the doubling of US warming estimates by NOAA due to erroneous "adjustments" from the agency's land surface climate stations.  The paper is long and academically dense, so to cut to the conclusion:

The new analysis demonstrates that reported 1979-2008 U.S. temperature trends are spuriously doubled, with 92% of that over-estimation resulting from erroneous NOAA adjustments of well-sited stations upward. The paper is the first to use the updated siting system which addresses USHCN siting issues and data adjustments.

The new improved assessment, for the years 1979 to 2008, yields a trend of +0.155C per decade from the high quality sites, a +0.248 C per decade trend for poorly sited locations, and a trend of +0.309 C per decade after NOAA adjusts the data.