New Global Warming Alarmism from LA Times: 'The World is Running Short on Air Pollution'
We have now reached the apex of “heads I win, tails you lose” global warming-alarmism. In his April 18 op-ed for the LA Times, author Eli Kintisch warned that “the world is running short on air pollution, and if we continue to cut back on smoke pouring forth from industrial smokestacks,” global warming consequences could be “profound.”
Having painted themselves into an environmental conundrum, Kintisch and climate scientists are left debating how they are going to proceed with sulfate aerosols – a natural and anthropogenic air pollutant believed to have cooling properties on the earth’s atmosphere.
“Thanks to cooling by aerosols starting in the 1940s, however, the planet has only felt a portion of that greenhouse warming. In the 1980s, sulfate pollution dropped as Western nations enhanced pollution controls, and as a result, global warming accelerated,” Kintisch wrote.
“There's hot debate over the size of what amounts to a cooling mask, but there's no question that it will diminish as industries continue to clean traditional pollutants from their smokestacks. Unlike CO2, which persists in the atmosphere for centuries, aerosols last for a week at most in the air. So cutting them would probably accelerate global warming rapidly.”
Kintisch and environmentalists will be happy to find out some scientists have predicted that recent fireworks in
The LA Times article actually acknowledged that the hasty policies social-engineers imposed in years past have resulted in unforeseen and unintended consequences.
“[M]odelers forecast what would happen if nations instituted all existing pollution controls on industrial sources and vehicles by 2030,” Kintisch stated. “They found the current rate of warming – roughly 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit per decade – doubled worldwide, and nearly tripled in
“Despite intransigence on carbon emissions, even
And so, because all the other fixes have been so successful, Kintisch suggested we may need to resort to geo-engineering.
“We might need geo-engineering to stave off the worst effects of the warming,” he said. “But most climate scientists think we're not there yet. And so the most important thing we can do now is to train our sights on both the unexpectedly helpful sulfates and the unexpectedly pernicious carbon. We can't continue to only focus on traditional pollutants without reducing greenhouse emissions. We simply have to find a way to clean our air of both.”
Like this article? Then sign up for our newsletter, The Balance Sheet.
