Filed under: carbon dioxide emissions, consumption, energy, energy conservation, energy management, energy policy, energy use, global climate change | Tags: carbon dioxide emissions, chart, coal, electricity, energy, fossil fuels, fuel, greenhouse gasses, natural gas, petroleum
Here’s a chart I found on the Energy Information Administration site. It visually shows how much carbon dioxide the U.S. was putting into the atmosphere for 2006- Breaking down exact SOURCES of the emissions.
Energy-related CO2 made up 82.3% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions in 2006. “Energy-related” means that it came from the combustion of petroleum, coal, and natural gas for energy needs.
Take a look at how big an influence transportation is! Even though the industrial sector beats it out for energy use, it still emits more carbon dioxide (this is due to its complete dependence on petroleum fuels.)
This is a startling big-picture look at energy use, energy management, and how current energy policy isn’t doing the U.S. any favors at all.
Filed under: climate change, epa, global climate change, observation | Tags: environment, epa, ignorant elected officials, observation, outdated attitudes
I read this story from the Salt Lake Tribune this morning regarding the most recent EPA report on the declining state of the environment and climate change. I find the response from the quoted representative from southern Utah (Mike Noel, R-Kanab) to be especially sycophantic, hopelessly benighted, flagrantly nescient, and certainly callow.
It is frustrating as hell that STILL – people, especially elected officials, think global climate change is some kind of faith-based doctrine that we get to CHOOSE to believe in. Also, this guy is on the record as indicating that because temperatures are only predicted to rise “a few degrees” in his lifetime, doesn’t mean he’s prepared to “worship at the altar of carbon dioxide chastity,” he “hasn’t joined the church of global warming,” and he is “definitely not going to be jumping on the bandwagon of global warming.” Nice.
Oh, and he hadn’t read the new EPA report when he commented for the Trib story yet claims to doubt the data “is there to support the conclusions of the report” (which he hasn’t read).
People: it’s called science, which means there’s proof. It’s attitudes like this among elected officials that make the enormity of what we’ve got to do to heal this planet seem so hopeless.
