Carbon Emissions Are a Political Issue

Carbon emissions—how do we know global figures are right?

Carbon footprints—are they accurately measured?

I have seen notes about how a company can gain a carbon footprint evaluation, by measuring the amount of energy they use; gas, electricity, diesel, petrol, etc. They measure the input of these to the company, and from this they calculate their carbon footprint. As an engineer I can see a few difficulties in getting accurate results, and I am certain any scientist will see variables that have to be allowed for, but it can be assumed this gives a comparative figure (not necessarily a scientifically accurate actual figure) for the company involved. But how are global figures arrived at? Does every nation tell someone how much gas and electricity etc. have been used? Who do they tell? Does anyone check this for accuracy? What happens to countries who do not supply accurate information? How about forest fires, volcanoes, wild animals, etc.? How are all the 60 million individuals in Britain, and all the billions round the world accounted for? Is it just by national energy consumption? If so how accurate are these figures? From Africa to Britain much heating can come from burning wood, how is this measured? Not all electricity generated is actually consumed, not all methods of consuming energy have the same efficiency ratios. At any given moment the amount of electricity generated from “green sources” varies relative to that generated by more conventional means. The electricity generated in nuclear power stations may have very unwelcome waste products, but it does not burn carbon-containing fossils, and so can not create a carbon foot print. Is this allowed for in national figures for carbon emissions? Is it in fact allowed for when a company calculates its own carbon footprint based on electricity use? If the only energy consumed by a business is electrical, and they can claim all their electricity is generated by nuclear power then they must have a zero carbon footprint.

There are electricity supply companies in Britain that are claiming they supply X percent of Green electricity, yet they actually have no generation facilities at all. They buy power wholesale from the grid, and it it has to be a wonderful feat of generation control if they can separate the power they buy into which Kwh is generated by reusable, and which is by other means. If, for example, there is no wind-generated power available, do they cut off their customers, while neighbours get power from the same grid but from another retailer, carry on getting supplied? All of this shows the energy supply industry is not totally honest and open. So how do we get these global figures for carbon emissions?

It is claimed that electrically-powered cars are zero emission vehicles, and so have no carbon foot print, but some studies have concluded that if the total emissions involved from getting the lithium, making batteries, and producing the vehicle, to scrapping the vehicle, and generating the electricity to charge its batteries—not forgetting the relatively short life of those batteries; the end total is no better than a modern diesel car. So many statistics are claimed to be factual, but they are selected figures not totals of the whole. They may be factual in themselves, but they are not necessarily the whole picture. It is a bit like the difference between claiming the NHS in Britain is free, and stating it is free at point of delivery. Electric cars may not produce emissions while driving along a road, but they do involve emissions in their manufacture and maintenance and recharging.

There are worldwide demands that governments “do something” about carbon emissions, in many countries arbitrary targets for reduction in carbon emissions have been set in place. These are mostly political answers to social problems. They are put in place by politicians wishing to stay in power. It is a much greater vote winner to say “we” are going to reduce carbon footprints by “Y” percent than it is to decree draconian penalties for leaving pollution in any and all forms.

To most voters, especially younger ones, carbon emissions are evil things that come from big business and previous uncaring generations, and so claiming this is going to be forcibly controlled has an appeal. Tell the same voters that all forms of pollution, including electromagnetic waves, light, litter, noise etc. are the responsibility of each individual and these pollutions are to be forcibly curbed; this will not result in many young peoples' votes. Especially when they realise the ramifications of reducing electromagnetic wave pollution. When told they will be fined for litter left at music festivals they will also decide against voting for the advocates of this policy.

There are a lot of questions about the figures quoted for carbon emissions and carbon footprints, and these are important questions, since governments all round the world are imposing controls on the people, based on these figures. Because all our lives are being affected by the numbers, we all have a right to know exactly how they are arrived at, who first obtains them, who independently verifies the accuracy, and who pays those involved in getting and publishing the statistics. We want complete openness on where, how, who, and why these numbers are arrived at. We need to see accurate verifiable facts, not interpretations made by a few people based on opinions about possible changes that may occur in the future. We certainly need better information than vague media reports about some unseen report, which claims this and that. A bandwagon of carefully orchestrated public opinion has been set rolling, since the intention is to change how all of us live, we have a right to know how these figures are checked against actual evidence. We should not be governed by the opinions held by a small elite, and we certainly should not be governed by those making profits from any policy.