Wired: Screw the spotted owl

Wired magazine has a good go at environmentalists this month. The front cover must have got them grinding their teeth.

Wired makes some good points, including:

• Air conditioning - uses less energy than heating in a cold city, so stop complaining about people who live in hot climates
• Live in cities - urban living uses less energy (e.g. no back garden to mow, less car use). Environmentalists already push for this.
• Organic food is hopeless as it requires a lot more energy and space than normal food. It is also transported further. Of course this is obvious to anyone with any faith in capitalism - just look at the higher price
• Farm trees - old trees absorb less carbon and eventually die and release all of it. If we care about carbon (I don't) then we should chop down and replant trees which reach a certain age
• China is good - much of the clean energy technology is coming from there, and China has a strong incentive to continue to invest in this area
• Accept GE - that is how we will feed everyone cheaply
• Carbon trading is a disaster as it doesn't achieve its objectives
• Nuclear power - coal fire plants release 520 times as much CO2 as nuclear, so get into nuclear
• Prius is not the answer - the Prius takes the equivalent energy of 4000 litres of petrol to make, and it takes ages to make back that deficit. Buy a second hand car and drive it instead
• It's too late - if reducing CO2 in the air is the objective it is too late to do it. There is a huge time lag of up to 50 years before the CO2 being emitted today has its full effect. We might as well just try to deal with the symptoms of the problem (if there is one) since the problem itself cannot be averted

Wired then gives an environmentalist just a page to pedal his religion. It is a very weak piece - I'm sure Wired could have come up with better, but it's nice to see the environmentalists being beaten at their own game.

Wired comes close to finding environmentalists out. Many of them are more interested in destroying humans than saving the planet (whatever that means). Everything else is just a smokescreen.

Comments

[Bryan Spondre]

Fantastic post!!!

"Live in cities - urban living uses less energy (e.g. no back garden to mow, less car use). Environmentalists already push for this."

We live in evil Ponsonby and my wife & I pretty much walk everywhere. One of my wifes best friends runs an organic farm up north and has to drive everywhere and frequently. Who has the lower carbon-footprint ?

[The Optimist]

Yes and organic food is more energy intensive too. These environmentalists can't even get their own lives in order and are in no position to preach to the rest of us.

I also reduced my carbon footprints by banning pencils from the house.

[Marbled Murrlet]

YOU GREENS SAY I AND MY MATE NEED OLD GROWTH TREES TO NEST BUT THAT A LIE WE RANGE FROM THE SAN FRANSICO PAY AREA TO THE ATTULIANS and thats pleny of treeless tundra GET OUTTA MY LIFE OR I,LL DO SOMETHING UNPESENT ON OUR HEADS SQUAWK SQUAWK

[Flu-Bird]

To you eco-freaks please go SOAK YOUR HEADS and quit lying and quit fling stupid lawsuits

[Flu-Bird]

Eco-wacko hypotcrits who blabber about those who drive SUVs then travel around in their gas guzzling 4 mpg limos are the realy annoying types of hypotcrit greens

[Flu-Bird]

Hey eco-wackos plants depend upon CO2 to survive which means car exuaste are good for the trees