Why the climate marchers got so little coverage

There are a few answers as to why the march got so little coverage. Think of who owns the media. Also think of what news media likes to cover. My take on it is that the marchers are preaching about the problem getting worse but they don’t have any solutions. The majority are clueless when it comes to understanding energy. The 350.org and the Climate Reality followers are against the one best solution and that is nuclear energy.

Where the American public should focus their thoughts is on what climate change really is. It is too abstract an idea to reduce to those two words “climate change.” It is really only measurable by all of the contributing factors and measurable results. The marchers have witnessed the results such as tornadoes, drought, forest fires, hurricanes, floods and melting ice caps and glaciers but the unseen factors are farther from their minds. The actual contributing factors are a mix of ideas that are only foggy notions.
They mostly see that CO2 is on the rise. They would mostly say fix it with renewables. They like this word renewables but as Dr. Alex Canarra likes to point out the word is meaningless and funnily enough it does mean less.

When you look at the problem from the aspect of resources and how much energy comes from those resources it is clear that what they call renewable is terribly inefficient. To get enough wind they build gargantuan towers of steel that is both wasteful and unreliable and worst of all intermittent. The same is true for solar. Not only is the building process dirty and messy but measuring the costs saved in comparison to the costs spent are not good enough. The land use and abuse needed to build the wind and solar farms are is on a scale that would make any visiting aliens say “how primitive.”

Far from the minds of the majority of those marchers is the fact that the oceans are a large part of the equation when considering the effects of too much CO2 and acid rain. The food chain we hear about is being devastated by the rise in acidity due to the rise in CO2.

Also far from their minds is the economic growth rates of China and India and the effects that is having on energy usage. How much coal is in your state? Illinois can boast that they have about 50% nuclear but guess what the other half is made up of? Coal produces 50% of it’s electricity in this modern U.S. of A. How many windmills and solar farms do you think it would take to convert that 50% to renewable sources.

Also far from their minds is that the clean energy experiment in Germany that is failing. They have the highest electricity bills in the EU and their coal usage is on the rise. The most incredibly foolish idea is that they want to close good functioning nuclear plants. They can’t learn from France that nuclear has produced a very successful economy and given them the cleanest air in all of Europe?

I like Steven Colberts adolescent play on words the en-viral-mentalists and his additional comment about how many cars used gasoline to get to the event.

So, to the realists, the idea of the marchers being noble heroes is giving them a little too much credit. It must seem more like the peace marches of the 1960’s because the majority of those participants were probably more interested in having a good time than they are in solving the problem.

One thought on “Why the climate marchers got so little coverage

  1. Rudy

    Excellent observations! When is the delusion of “renewables” going to collapse? What a silly lapse we have had in the latter half of the 20th century where we should have been moving progressively more to nuclear, and when will we finally realize our folly??

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *