The science of climate change is often presented in complex language, involving computer models and their theoretical inputs and outputs, and concludes that the planet is on the verge of “boiling.” [emphasis, links added]
Well, let three physicists, well-versed in calculus and arcane matters such as the behavior of molecules and the charge of atomic nuclei, simplify the analysis and arrive at a less shocking decision.
“Simple calculations show that eliminating U.S. carbon dioxide emissions by 2050 would avoid a temperature increase of 0.0084 degrees Celsius,” states a short paper written by Ph.D. Richard Lindzen, MIT; William Harper, Princeton University; and William A. van Wijngaarden, York University, Toronto. On the Fahrenheit scale, the amount of warming avoided is 0.015°F.
Simply put, the amount of warming avoided by eliminating CO2 emissions in the United States would be too small to be measured.
The paper supports the position of some that climate change is the product of natural forces, that human-caused carbon dioxide emissions have a minimal impact on global temperatures and that carbon dioxide is a valuable plant food rather than a pollutant.
Rather than using theoretical assumptions about the various factors fed into the computer, The paper's calculations rely almost entirely on widely accepted and publicly available “observable data”said Dr. Harper.
“This is something anyone with a calculator can figure out,” said the scientist, who is perhaps best known for his contributions to laser-based technology used to destroy incoming ballistic missiles. This was part of the so-called “Star Wars” program of the 1980s.
The data required for the calculation include the number of years to 2050, the amount of carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere that scientists regularly measure, and the current atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration (about 427 parts per million as of June 2024).
The only assumed data point is the increased sensitivity of the atmosphere to carbon dioxide. The values used in the paper are almost identical to those commonly used “before global warming alarmism became popular.”
Even if that figure were quadrupled, to the figure favored by the politically driven Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the averted warming would still be only 0.034 degrees Celsius.
So what if the entire world eliminated CO2 emissions from human activity? Since U.S. emissions account for 12% of global output, the answer lies in doing math to determine the remaining 88%.
The paper calculated that a warming of 0.07 degrees Celsius could be avoided. Using the higher IPCC sensitivity value, this number increases fourfold to 0.28 degrees Celsius. Both remain irrelevant and certainly not worth destroying the world economy.
Noting that others have reached similar conclusions to the paper using different methods, Dr. Harper said he and his co-authors wanted to show that: The controversial topic of climate change is not complicated.
“The greater public should understand that they are falling victim to disinformation spread by people whose interests have more to do with money and power than with environmental issues,” he said. “The answer is found in relatively simple mathematics strongly suggests that this is the case.”
Whatever the motivation, spending trillions of dollars replacing fossil fuels with expensive and unreliable wind and solar power is foolish, futile and dangerous.
For more information, visit RealClearMarkets
