Wake Up Media; Stop Repeating Mindless Falsehoods 

Loose lips sink ships. That was the catchphrase from the Second World War which sought to point out to people the potential damage in lives from thoughtless talk in public places. I can’t think of a similar neat line for the brainless use of words in the current debate about the environment in general and carbon dioxide (CO2) in particular, but I do know that if we don’t start to think about the implications of what we are saying, the environmental fascists in Europe and their dumb dupes in the media will paint us into a corner from which there will be no escape.

The BBC is the main culprit in all this, not least because of its outrageous, unaccountable monopoly over the airwaves and the power it has to set the environmental agenda with unthinking and unbalanced, or politically motivated coverage of important issues.

Because of the BBC’s lead, it is now quite acceptable to talk about the “pollution” caused by the CO2 emitted by modern cars. The Jeremy Vine show on BBC Radio 2 this week trampled all over this issue with stupid, superficial views on what cars do in terms of emissions. On budget day, BBC Radio 4 News had an item which said the Chancellor should favour cars “which are more fuel efficient and which therefore emit less pollution”. BBCTV’s NewsNight does exactly the same thing. This week the Daily Mail had a story “Hands off my Jag”, talking about how some cabinet ministers don’t want to drive Toyota Priuses and the government is “encouraging drivers to dump vehicles that pump out the most pollution”. Even my alma mater, Reuters, regularly makes the same error.

Spectacularly clean
The BBC and its imitators don’t seem to understand a basic fact. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is a crucial part of the makeup of the earth’s atmosphere. Sure, some say excessive use of CO2 might warm the planet, but that’s another argument. The BBC, and others, are confused. The problem of pollution was solved with the catalytic converter. Cars today are spectacularly clean. I seem to remember an advert from Saab recently which said there were more nasties to breathe in London’s air, than the emissions from the tailpipe of one of its cars. Even diesels will soon be California-compliant.

If you don’t believe my CO2 argument, maybe you will be impressed by a recent editorial in the Wall Street Journal, America’s biggest selling daily newspaper. The Americans are having a similar argument with their own nutters in California who are trying to persuade the government’s environmental watchdog, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to categorise CO2 as a noxious gas which can be regulated under the Clean Air Act.

The Wall Street Journal pointed this out.

Think human respiration
“The reason the EPA has never included CO2 with pollutants restricted by the Clean Air Act, like NOX or SOX, is that it is fundamentally different. It does not contaminate the air or make it unhealthy to breathe. It is natural. Think human respiration. Because there’s no technology that can limit its release as carbon fuel combusts, it is unavoidable,” the Wall Street Journal said.

And it came up with this killer quote, after pointing out that if CO2 is classified as a pollutant it will trigger a long sequence of regulatory booby traps, like forcing the closure of hospitals and schools.

“For instance, an (EPA) endangerment finding must apply beyond cars and trucks to all, even stationary sources. i.e. buildings. The floor for EPA permitting rules is 250 tons of a Clean Air Act pollutant per year, sometimes as few as 100. These limits might be reasonable for sulphur dioxide. But it’s nothing for CO2. A midsized office building that uses fossil fuels for heating easily exceeds the threshold. So do almost all factories, farms restaurants, schools, hospitals…….,” the editorial said.

I’ve been trying as a private citizen to persuade the BBC to stop telling these lies.  I’ve pleaded with the BBC Information unit. Nothing happens.

Black propaganda
Then it occurred to me that a national organisation I belong to, The Guild Of Motoring Writers, must be as concerned as anyone about truth in reporting about the auto industry. I wrote to them seeking to recruit its assistance. Let’s get together to seek more influence in pointing out inaccurate, misleading, or false information about cars, I said. But to may amazement, the Guild has been propagating the same black propaganda.

A recent Guild press release started like this.

“As we all become increasingly aware of our responsibilities towards minimising global pollution, the Guild has sought a way in which motoring journalists can offset the carbon emissions they produce during their annual mileage.”

So there is clearly a lot of persuading to be done.

But when the crippling consequences of this folly become more apparent, in crippling taxes for motorists, the pricing out of the use of cars for the low paid, the distortion of the European car industry when new E.U. regulations this year will make it impossible for Porsche, Aston Martin, Ferrari, Maserati, Bentley and their ilk to make anything other than luxurious golf carts, maybe the penny will drop.

Barely measurable
When you calculate the amount of CO2 these high tech cars produce compared with the mass market for cars, it is barely measurable. Even if you believe there is a direct link between CO2 emissions and climate change, you must know that this attempt is merely envious class warfare at its most obnoxious.

But most climate scientists say that there is no link between human CO2 emissions and climate change. The whole movement to cut carbon use is a waste of money which will cripple our economies and have no impact on the climate at all. That indeed is another argument.

 Neil Winton – March 21, 2008