|
From Heal the Harbor’s Climate Research Project August 9, 2001 General Collin Powell Dear Secretary of State Powell: Thank you for not wavering in opposition to the Kyoto Protocol; however, “We were met by the opposition at Bonn on the Rhine, where they engaged us and rolled the U.S. all the way back to Washington.” Hopefully, we can regroup and organize the carbon dioxide producers (oil companies) and the carbon dioxide end users (farmers, ranchers, fishermen and foresters) to “Unsell the War on Carbon Dioxide.” Let’s fight excess warming, if any is found, by local cooling, not by fighting its possible causes before there is any sign of net damage to the world environment. Carbon dioxide stands accused of creating damage, but there is no evidence that any climate damage has occurred or ever will occur at the present rate of increase. The small (1 to 2 degree) increase in climate temperature and 0.005% increase (0.035% now, up from 0.030%) in atmospheric CO2 concentration over the last 200 years have both been beneficial with slightly longer growing seasons and slightly faster rates of crop growth to date. In public opinion, CO2 should be the good gas you breath out, the only gas that plants can use to make food and higher world carbon dioxide concentrations as a buffer against harsh winters and the onset of the next Ice Age and not portrayed as a pollutant. We should not let the raw material for food production, CO2, at low atmospheric concentrations be legally classified as a pollutant for political or economic reasons as there is no scientific reason to do so. Page 2 In public relations, we need to write a better script for carbon dioxide, “Climate Killer or Life Saving Fire Suppressant and Plant Food”? Solid CO2 is even better at putting out fires than gas CO2, but the Clinton/Gore administration’s Forest Service that Secretary Veneman inherited is full of “CO2 haters” who to this day refuse to let CO2 be seen as a hero gas and fire fighter in property and fire crew protection. They would rather put toxic foams that pollute farm ponds and water supplies, than put toxic free, dry ice pellets, water ice products and long lasting combinations of these on buildings that are in a fire’s path. The Forest Services needs direction and to be brought in on the bigger program. Please ask President Bush to make an executive order putting CO2 on the Forest Service approved products list so that massive heat extraction (MHE) technology and cryogenic ordnance using tiny, free flowing, dry ice pellets and water ice pellets and flakes can be air dropped and tested for their use in crew protection studies in forest fire burn over situations. Also in the public relations battle to put a good face on the CO2 molecule, the U.S. Coast Guard needs direction. Ask Evans in Commerce to tell the Coast Guard to use helicopters deploying, tiny, free flowing, dry ice pellets on an oil slick that is then rolled up and collected cleanly off the water as a pure substance for salvage. The EPA recently (July 11th) did a show and tell for the California Coastal Commission on dispersants. Heal the Harbor has appeared before the Coastal Commission and is making arrangements to demonstrate improved CO2 systems to help the public relations for CO2. Please ask the wealthy oil companies that support the Bush administration or spend the money to fund a 25 minute film telling the true story of carbon dioxide. Start from its heyday at the beginning of life (CO2 @ 20+%, O2 @ 0%), through the age of dinosaurs (CO2 @ 14%, 02 @ 15%) to CO2 ’s atmospheric near depletion (CO2 @ 0.030%, O2 @ 20%) and cycle of geologically recent Ice Ages (over the last 2.5 million years 90% of the time has been in Ice Age) that has befallen Earth and is now statistically overdue to befall Earth again. This film should be suitable for middle school children and Senators to watch in November along with age appropriate art and reinforcement materials. The point is that a few million spent now on putting a “good face on carbon dioxide” will save tens of millions in an uphill Capitol Hill fight educating Senators and voters over the next few years after the Kyoto Protocol is approved. Page 3 In addition to some demonstrations for T.V., a film and video on CO2 for education, an ounce of prevention should go to environmental groups like Heal the Harbor, Inc. of California that support and help with the “great teaching” that needs to be done to educate with facts and concepts about carbon dioxide so that the Kyoto Protocol does not become established. Once established, the Kyoto Protocol becomes a misplaced mission and simplistic justification for “environmental” elimination of people because they exhale the “bad” CO2 “which is hurting the planet”. Apparently, we are to continue to watch the Democrats and the apparent world community isolate the Bush administration from American environmental voters and the leadership of the world community of nations “on a bogus politically fueled lie, false fear and unfounded slander of carbon dioxide” because of a lack of position articulation and ally building. The U.S. Position on the Kyoto Protocol should start something like this. Whereas the United States seeks to promote an increase in world food production to feed a growing world population; consequently, the U.S. does not seek to join in any efforts to restrict, decrease or reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. CO2 is the raw material of plant photosynthesis. In this respect, therefore the United States will seek to increase carbon dioxide uptake by photosynthesis of the world’s fields, forests and oceans in such ways that will also increase food, fiber and forest products production (see Appendix A, the “The John Martin Project” to increase photosynthesis in “ocean deserts” for marine fisheries production improvement, previously sent Evans). The United States does not recognize the CO2 molecule, the raw material for food production and all green plant growth, as a pollutant at low atmospheric concentrations for the purpose of law or treaty. Whereas the United States seeks to optimize the growth and productivity of the world economy, therefore the U.S. seeks to increase world fossil fuel production and availability at stable and reasonable prices to improve trade, transportation and industrial growth; consequently, the U.S. does not join in efforts to artificially restrict industrial processes which produce carbon dioxide as an end or byproduct. Page 4 Whereas the United States seeks to keep individuals of the world population safe, warm and empowered in winter, therefore the U.S. seeks to keep world heating oil, natural gas, fuel oil and gasoline prices at affordable levels; consequently, the U.S. will not join in general efforts to cool the planet. The U.S. opposes measures that might make winters longer, colder or contain less precipitation or measures that would increase the cost of home heating in winter. Whereas the United States seeks to secure and improve the domestic health, safety and comfort of the world’s peoples from excess heat in summer, therefore the United States will study and find ways to mitigate the adverse effects of excess warming as they appear. This may take the form of atmospheric cooling by heat extraction or shading from sunlight of acutely adversely heat effected populations and crops when the heat index moves to 120 or above. The United States will study ways to de-energize typhoon and hurricane intensity by ocean surface cooling (see appendix B, “Project Stormfury II”, previously sent Evans). As cheap and available electricity is needed for home cooling that is an essentially part of this plan of summer cooling; consequently, the U.S. will not join in efforts that will increase the cost of electricity by abandoning the free marketplace in favor of forcing electricity be made in ways that produce less carbon dioxide, but cost more. Whereas the rise in sea level is often cited (though unproven) as a consequence of global warming, therefore the United States will seek to study, find and identify the true causes of this rise (see Appendix C, 5 U.S. identified causes of sea level rise, previously sent Whitman) and slow this rise. The U.S.; however, sees this rise, air pollution and ozone holes as separate problems not to be caused by CO2 emissions. In fact, little thermal expansion of the world’s oceans or glacial melting other than in the tropics is being observed. The U.S. will study and implement practical technological solutions to decrease the rate of sea level rise (see appendix D, 10 U.S. identified ways to reduce the rate of sea level rise, previously sent Whitman) directly such as by measures decreasing top soil, sand and silt run off down into the oceans. As well as decreasing the rate of materials entering the world’s oceans, the U.S. will seek economic incentives to increase the rate and amounts of materials removed from the oceans in the form of sand for beach replenishment, materials from harbor channel dredging to improve ship access to ports and for the material used to make artificial islands and Page 5 peninsulas such as out of the Gaza Strip (see appendix E, U.S. backed “Cape Gaza Project” as a non-Israeli claimed territory suitable for the Palestine governmental offices. The model for this new area should be like Cape Coral, Florida with canals with sea access. The cost, size, timetable and who pays for what in construction should depend on the rate of Israeli expansion into the Left Bank and Gaza) and as the material of economic choice for use in near sea landfill projects worldwide rather than cheaper fill from land sources. The basic point is that the United States should not be stampeded into limiting carbon dioxide emissions by peer pressure or rush to limit the natural process of revitalizing the Earth’s atmosphere with emissions of carbon dioxide released from being trapped in fossil fuels over billions of years by ancient plant photosynthesis. The Pontifical Academy of Science in Rome may find that it is still too soon to determine if the CO2 increase may be “part of God’s Plan or not?” and the Vatican should not be overlooked as a possible ally in opposition to this Kyoto Treaty. We must not forget or be ashamed of our basic nature as animals to produce carbon dioxide that along with water are the two raw materials by which all green plants, with the energy provided in sunlight, make food on Earth. With best wishes, I remain Sincerely yours, Tim Beck, M.A. Research Director |