Global WARming

Washington's Blog

As I have previously pointed out:

Continuing the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will more than wipe out any reduction in carbon from the government's proposed climate measures ...

The continuance of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars completely and thoroughly undermines the government's claims that there is a global warming emergency and that reducing carbon output through cap and trade is needed to save the planet.

I can't take anything the government says about carbon footprints seriously until the government ends the unnecessary wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I now have some figures to back this up.

Professor Michael Klare noted in 2007:

Sixteen gallons of oil. That's how much the average American soldier in Iraq and Afghanistan consumes on a daily basis -- either directly, through the use of Humvees, tanks, trucks, and helicopters, or indirectly, by calling in air strikes. Multiply this figure by 162,000 soldiers in Iraq, 24,000 in Afghanistan, and 30,000 in the surrounding region (including sailors aboard U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf) and you arrive at approximately 3.5 million gallons of oil: the daily petroleum tab for U.S. combat operations in the Middle East war zone.

And in 2008, Oil Change International released a report showing that:

*
The war is responsible for at least 141 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) since March 2003. To put this in perspective, CO2 released by the war to date equals the emissions from putting 25 million more cars on the road in the US this year.

*
Between March 2003 and October 2007 the US military in Iraq purchased more than 4 billion gallons of fuel from the Defense Energy Support Center, the agency responsible for procuring and supplying petroleum products to the Department of Defense. Burning these fuels has directly produced nearly 39 million metric tons of CO2 Just transporting 4 billion gallons of fuel to the military in Iraq consumed at least as much fuel as was delivered nearly doubling overall fuel-related emissions.

*
Emissions from the Iraq War to date are nearly two and a half times greater than what would be avoided between 2009 and 2016 were California to implement the auto emission regulations it has proposed (but that the Bush Administration struck down).

*
If the war were ranked as a country in terms of annual emissions, it would emit more CO2 each year than 139 of the world’s nations do, more than 60% of all countries on the planet.

The report also notes:

The emissions associated with the war in Iraq are literally unreported. Military emissions abroad are not captured in the national greenhouse gas inventories that all industrialized nations, including the United States, report under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. It’s a loophole big enough to drive a tank through.

Of course, the escalation of the war in Afghanistan will lead to a huge surge in greenhouse gas emissions as well.

Favorite

0 members favorited this

Comment

You need to be a member of 12160 Social Network to add comments!

Join 12160 Social Network

Comment by Jeff on December 18, 2009 at 2:55pm: Yes, I agree with all of you. I believe the globe has been warming. Other evidence suggests it's now cooling. Whatever the case may be, the earth warms and cools and we're currently experiencing noticeable climate change here in North America and we can see the effect elsewhere across the globe. That these changes are caused by man are still debatable. I'm still uncertain as to whether man-made pollutants effect the environment, or rather the weather as a whole.

We know how easily our pollutants effect smaller rivers and streams. They are devastating. They also recover easily with time if the pollution is stopped. We know some of the effects pollution has on the oceans. We've seen the effects pollution has on the air in our cities. Undoubtedly they are cleaner than they were 50 years, or even 100 years ago. I'm not ready to say unequivocally that man does not effect the weather. It seems that science is undecided on this issue also.

Other evidence, like the factual data within this post makes a clear and definitive argument for war and its obvious contribution to carbon emissions and that's the dilemma posed by war versus the Copenhagen initiatives desired by the global leaders of the world. They are, without question, contradictory in nature.

Neither makes sense when compared to the other.

Therefore, the conclusion that Copenhagen and all legislation or agreements derived from it are a complete fallacy is warranted.

The global leaders either believe the lies or they believe the rest of the world is ignorant. While I would prefer to believe that they believe the lies I'm too smart not to recognize their intelligence and consequently I believe that they believe we're all ignorant. The serious problem attached to that perception is that most of the global population, almost all of it, actually is ignorant. Sadly, we as a species, humanity, do very little to disassociate ourselves from the ignorance that plagues us.

While that's not necessarily true of the population that's regularly active here on 12.160Mhz; in spite of my opinionated arguments with many of you I still find almost all of you far more cognizant and intellectually minded than most people elsewhere, which is the primary reason that I spend as much time as I do posting and commenting here. All of us here are, at the very least, are making a serious effort to understand the world around us, the world we live in.

That's more than I can say for most of the people we share the planet with.

Comment by I811st on December 18, 2009 at 12:04pm: Remember were gonna be borrowing the money from China so we can continue to be the world's nanny. And how will we pay them back? By buying and importing mediocre products from across the Pacific.Thoses ships burn 1,600 GALLONS of fuel pre HOUR!!!! WTF?

The Wartsila-Sulzer RTA96-C turbocharged two-stroke diesel engine is the most powerful and most efficient prime-mover in the world today. The Aioi Works of Japan's Diesel United, Ltd built the first engines and is where some of these pictures were taken.
It is available in 6 through 14 cylinder versions, all are inline engines. These engines were designed primarily for very large container ships. Ship owners like a single engine/single propeller design and the new generation of larger container ships needed a bigger engine to propel them.

The cylinder bore is just under 38" and the stroke is just over 98". Each cylinder displaces 111,143 cubic inches (1820 liters) and produces 7780 horsepower. Total displacement comes out to 1,556,002 cubic inches (25,480 liters) for the fourteen cylinder version.

Some facts on the 14 cylinder version:
Total engine weight: 2300 tons (The crankshaft alone weighs 300 tons.)
Length: 89 feet
Height: 44 feet
Maximum power: 108,920 hp at 102 rpm
Maximum torque: 5,608,312 lb/ft at 102rpm

Fuel consumption at maximum power is 0.278 lbs per hp per hour (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption). Fuel consumption at maximum economy is 0.260 lbs/hp/hour. At maximum economy the engine exceeds 50% thermal efficiency. That is, more than 50% of the energy in the fuel in converted to motion.
For comparison, most automotive and small aircraft engines have BSFC figures in the 0.40-0.60 lbs/hp/hr range and 25-30% thermal efficiency range.

Even at its most efficient power setting, the big 14 consumes 1,660 gallons of heavy fuel oil per hour.

Comment by Tara on December 18, 2009 at 11:58am: Like I've said before, whether you believe in Global Warming or not, the carbon credit/cap-and-trade is nothing but a power/money grab, so obviously the powers that be don't care about the environment, they care about another kind of green monster-money!

Personally, I believe that the climate forever changes and it is a natural occurence, mostly brought about by the suns activites and has been happening since the dawn of time! To claim that carbon dioxide is a toxic pollutant is ridiculous when green plants turn it into carbs and oxygen, part of the natural process of photosynthesis. Without carbon dioxide, life for all living creatures would cease to exist! Carbon monoxide however is toxic and is a whole other story!