OPINION:
Australians are supposed to feel guilty because some bureaucrat in the climate industry has calculated that we have a very high per-capita “carbon-dioxide footprint.” This means the amount of carbon-dioxide gas produced by whatever we do. Every human activity contributes to our carbon-dioxide footprint; even just lying on the beach breathing gently produces carbon dioxide.
Producing carbon dioxide is not bad. It’s an essential gas in the cycle of life and beneficial for all life. There is no proof whatsoever that human emissions cause dangerous global warming.
Moreover it is not per-capita emissions that could affect the climate, it is total emissions, and on that measure Australia’s small contribution is largely irrelevant. This is just another public relations weapon in the extreme “green” alarmist arsenal. Even if carbon-dioxide footprints were important, not all footprints are environmentally equal —- some are good, some are bad and some are just plain ugly.
“Good” carbon footprints are the result of producing unsubsidized things for the benefit of others. An example is a grazier in outback Australia whose family lives frugally and works hard but has a high carbon-dioxide footprint producing wool, mutton and beef from sustainable, native grasslands and may use quad bikes, diesel pumps, electricity, tractors, trucks, trains, planes and ships to supply distant consumers. Many productive Australians with good carbon-dioxide footprints produce food and fibers, seafood and timber, minerals and energy for grateful consumers all over the world. Activities such as these create a large per-capita carbon-dioxide footprint for Australia. That so few people can produce so much is an achievement to be proud of.
A “bad” carbon-dioxide footprint is produced when government subsidies, grants, handouts, tax breaks or mandates keep unproductive or unsustainable activities alive, leaving their footprint but producing little useful in return. The prime examples are subsidized “green” energy and the government climate industry, but there are examples in all nationalized or subsidized industries and activities. (Russia and East Germany easily met their initial Kyoto targets by closing decrepit Soviet-era, nationalized industries.)
An “ugly” carbon-dioxide footprint is produced by green hypocrites who preach barefoot frugalism to us peasants while they live the opulent lifestyle. Examples are the mansions, yachts and jet-setting of prominent “green” extremists, such as Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio.
The ultimate ugly carbon-dioxide hypocrites are those who organize and attend the regular meetings, conferences and street protests, drawing thousands of globe-trotting alarmists and “environmentalists” from all over the world by plane, yacht, car, bus, train and taxi to eat, drink, chant and dance while they protest about overpopulation, excessive consumption and heavy carbon-dioxide footprints of all those “other” people. Maybe they should lead by example and stop traveling, eating, drinking and breathing.
VIV FORBES
Queensland, Australia
Please read our comment policy before commenting.