In all the years of scientific discovery, we have not been able to detect any other planet in the universe with our unique chemical composition, which supports all forms of animal and plant life. Today, it is said that we are about to blow that chance at life by our careless overproduction of one of those natural chemicals, now called pollutants.
Like many of you reading this, I had education classes in high school and college that give me the background to examine this dilemma in a simple and practical way. In my time, scientists had identified all 92 elements within our planet. Since then, that detected number has risen to just over 100, using the scientific advancement of power microscopy. These elements are called atoms and have been given names and symbols. They exist all around us as single chemicals and are sometimes naturally combined and called molecules.
These atoms and molecules exist in three different forms within this climate bubble that we all live in together. One form is solid and can be easily seen as dirt. Another is a fluid form that is also visible, like water. The third form is gaseous and is not normally easily visible. Some of these molecules can even change from one form to another. An example is the one that is currently causing concern. Carbon and oxygen atoms exist naturally in a molecule known as carbon dioxide which is popularly symbolized as CO2. The solid form of CO2 is called “dry ice”. The extreme changes in temperature levels actually convert it from a gas to a solid and vice versa.
This gas is the non-visible element that humans and other vertebrates produce every time they exhale. It is also a very important gas that is necessary for the growth and health of all plants in our universe. We exhale CO2 and plants absorb it from that atmosphere. In turn, plants exude oxygen (O2) in that same climate and we breathe it beneficially into our lungs. Shortages, not excesses, of each chemical would cause human and plant death. This is the wonderful and natural exchange of gases that makes this planet unique in the universe.
Some plants have grown naturally since the beginning of time. Others have been cultivated as a means of producing food. Those grown outdoors are subject to naturally occurring changes in our climate. Control of plant growth in a closed atmosphere is possible and reduces the damaging effects of the weather. These enclosed facilities have an atmosphere that can be manipulated to artificially effect plant growth. Most of these enclosures are called greenhouses.
By manipulating the ratio of these two gaseous chemicals it is possible to produce positive benefits for humanity. By increasing controlled levels of carbon dioxide in a greenhouse, flowering plants produce much better flowers; more quickly and evenly. People with limited lung capacity are helped to breathe through the artificially increased proportion of oxygen they inhale. Outside a greenhouse it is much more difficult to change the proportions of these chemicals in the Earth’s atmosphere. This, however, seems to be the argument being made by elected politicians to convince the rest of us that the tides are changing and that we are the cause of this recklessness.
Since the measurements were sampled, our outer atmosphere at ground level has contained approximately 1 part of CO2 and 3,332 parts of other gases. Those other gases, which we cannot see, are: nitrogen (2600 servings), oxygen (666 servings), and argon (31 servings). The remaining 35 portions of atmospheric gases are too numerous to name, and each exists in very insignificant portions. The concern among government policymakers is that increasing this ratio beyond 1 CO2 serving would be unhealthy for humans and would increase the temperature of the planet.
Both concerns have been shown to be scientifically inaccurate. Valid studies have shown that humans in confined spaces can tolerate CO2 levels of 50 parts or more in their atmosphere without health hazards. These studies were done with humans breathing normally in submerged submarines, in space capsules, and in the Arizona Biosphere. It seems unnecessary to spend taxpayer money on methods that are intended to reduce man-made carbon dioxide levels, based on this practical knowledge.
The political intention is to put a price on the excess CO2 that is generated and market it to those who do not exceed the agreed limit. This measure has been called “the carbon footprint” for which a tax payable to the government can be collected. I wonder how a university will pay taxes on the CO2 produced by basketball fans screaming and cheering in their closed stadium during a winning season. The results of a packed stadium with a double overtime game would easily create 10 servings of this “polluting” gas in the arena during the event. The university could go bankrupt.
While many people claim that the earth is getting warmer, it has actually been cooling for the last decade. There seems to be only one strong indicator related to this warming and cooling phenomenon. That causal element is the sun. Can you believe it? The sun rises and the temperature of the earth rises. The sun sets and we cool off. Unusual daytime heating occurs when that sun is actively shooting solar flares at our earth. Approximately every eleven years, this solar activity slows or ceases. That is the time when the earth cools down. It is a natural cycle, not created by man. No other causes of warming have been scientifically identified.
Some have explained that this warming is the result of carbon dioxide trapping heat that warms the earth. Others include water vapor as a greenhouse gas, which is really the heat-trapping sauna factor, but water vapor doesn’t appear evenly across the planet, so most people don’t consider it a actual greenhouse gas. If we are convinced that it is a greenhouse gas, we might as well try to tax the water.
One reason some decades-long studies may trend toward warming is the location of measuring thermometers. Throughout the United States there are more than 1,200 weather stations that have continuously recorded the temperature of their immediate surroundings for decades. More than 90% of these sites are not in the “open field” where they were first located. The factor of urbanization in our nation has placed asphalt parking lots and other heat-trapping structures close enough to these stations to artificially raise recorded temperatures. Relocating them to sites away from “heat traps” would surely provide more reliable information. Could this be a better and less expensive political option?
It would be my hope that every elected official would use this common understanding of the way our wonderfully created planet has functioned since the beginning of time. We all breathe in oxygen (a greenhouse gas) and breathe out carbon dioxide (a greenhouse gas). Plants reverse this process and we benefit from it. It seems important that the attention of our elected officials be focused more on growing grass than politically passing gas.