Tim writes in his article at the Register: “… despite every scientist worthy of his slide rule pointing out that growing and processing the plants emits more than the oil being replaced.”
Much as I dislike the CAGW agenda, this accuses them of lacking even their own logic. Which is, IIRC, that burning fossil fuels returns to the ecosphere, CO2 that was taken out of it by natural processes over millennia.
The true defence, IMHO, is that this return of CO2 to the ecosphere does not matter, to either the planet or to human society.
Overall, Tim’s article is very interesting. On efficient farming, I recollect that Zimbabwe was once well ahead of its neighbours in this respect. I wonder if what has happened there was a regression towards the third-world norm, for reasons typically found in the third-world.
I should pay more attention sometimes, I was halfway through the article this morning when I thought “this guy is good, reminds me of Worstall”.
Tim writes in his article at the Register: “… despite every scientist worthy of his slide rule pointing out that growing and processing the plants emits more than the oil being replaced.”
Much as I dislike the CAGW agenda, this accuses them of lacking even their own logic. Which is, IIRC, that burning fossil fuels returns to the ecosphere, CO2 that was taken out of it by natural processes over millennia.
The true defence, IMHO, is that this return of CO2 to the ecosphere does not matter, to either the planet or to human society.
Overall, Tim’s article is very interesting. On efficient farming, I recollect that Zimbabwe was once well ahead of its neighbours in this respect. I wonder if what has happened there was a regression towards the third-world norm, for reasons typically found in the third-world.
Best regards