Climate change: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Since the beginning of the industrial age in the 1800s, the addition of more carbon dioxide ( | Since the beginning of the industrial age in the 1800s, the addition of more carbon dioxide (CO₂) and other gases (e.g., methane [CH₄] and nitrous oxide [N₂O or NOx]) to the atmosphere than can be naturally absorbed (e.g., by plants and bodies of water) is widely thought to have caused an unnatural warming of the planet. | ||
Consequently there is a push to reduce | Consequently there is a push to reduce CO₂ and other emissions to slow, if not reverse, that warming. That push is used to promote the large-scale development of wind energy and to overcome objections of cost and [[Adverse impacts of wind energy|adverse environmental effects]], as well as to avoid questions of actual benefit.<ref name=CO2>[[Carbon emissions]]</ref> | ||
But any controversies over the science or politics of anthropogenic climate change are irrelevant to the arguments for wind energy. If there is a need to reduce | But any controversies over the science or politics of anthropogenic climate change are irrelevant to the arguments for wind energy. If there is a need to reduce CO₂ and other emissions, then wind energy has proved to be ineffective.<ref name=CO2>[[Carbon emissions]]</ref><ref>https://wind-watch.org/pix/displayimage.php?pid=515</ref> With that acknowledgement, the costs and adverse impacts of wind energy far outweigh any other benefits that might be claimed and that remain minuscule. | ||
<references /> | <references /> |
Revision as of 16:17, 3 September 2017
Since the beginning of the industrial age in the 1800s, the addition of more carbon dioxide (CO₂) and other gases (e.g., methane [CH₄] and nitrous oxide [N₂O or NOx]) to the atmosphere than can be naturally absorbed (e.g., by plants and bodies of water) is widely thought to have caused an unnatural warming of the planet.
Consequently there is a push to reduce CO₂ and other emissions to slow, if not reverse, that warming. That push is used to promote the large-scale development of wind energy and to overcome objections of cost and adverse environmental effects, as well as to avoid questions of actual benefit.[1]
But any controversies over the science or politics of anthropogenic climate change are irrelevant to the arguments for wind energy. If there is a need to reduce CO₂ and other emissions, then wind energy has proved to be ineffective.[1][2] With that acknowledgement, the costs and adverse impacts of wind energy far outweigh any other benefits that might be claimed and that remain minuscule.