Going Green! or Not, part I

4

This is the first in a multi-part series where I will explain some of the problems faced with the “green” industry, and the misconceptions people have about it.  As long time readers hopefully know, I believe that global warming is not a scientific fact, but a man made fear, and today you will begin to get to know just exactly why that is!  The popular theories about the cause of global warming, and the reasons behind it are all made up by companies, and scientists that are paid by those companies.  As my friends know, if you bring up Global warming, or WWII or multiple universes in conversation with me, you will have yourself a very long discussion on your hands, as those three things I am very passionate about.  So, without further adieu I will begin part I of the Going Green! or Not series.  Enjoy, and please, post your comments, I don’t censor anything, so if you want to say that I’m killing the planet and I am a stupid person, go right ahead.

No, I’m not going “green” but I have spent the past few days thinking about this and thought I’d share it.  It all started with Discovery Channel’s Planet Green.You see, that channel is right next to their Military Channel, so, in between commercials on Rommel’s tactics of tank warfare in the Afrika Korps, that’s the first one that comes up when I change the channel.  I watch it for a little while, and then move back after the commercial break is over.  (All men have the gift to always know when commercial breaks are over, anyway).

Have you watched the shows on that channel?  It’s such a load of global warming hype it’s ridiculous.  (I also find it kind of ironic that on back to back channels, one company would encourage recycling everything, and then turning it into a tank to blow up just because some guys want to on another show, seems like some double standards to me, anyway again…)

Now I don’t mean to shame the whole channel, but the idea behind it is purely marketing, and money, and the big words now are “Green”  (I used it in my post title to get you to read it!).  In my watching of the channel, (for real, and in between commercials), I found that about half (45%) the information they present is useful, relevant, and smart, the other half is biased, purely money driven, propaganda.

There’s a lot that show people how to make their homes and lives green, and a lot of people that did it.  They demo houses built, the items used, and the processes involved.  Now the purpose behind all this is to get people informed about the alternatives, so that when the time comes they can put them to good use (I have a bunch of ideas supplemented by my own research and things seen from shows, so the practice works).  The implementation of the practice is strike number 2 against them.  Making the channel a pay channel is stupid.

planet green logo

This channel should be included in basic cable packages next to the regular Discovery Channel (not a replacement by any means).  In hard financial times like this, people are cutting costs everywhere, this channel helps people come up with ways to do that for themselves, however, because of greed, in order to actually watch Planet Green, you have to subscribe to 200 other cable channels that you don’t watch at $65.99 a month.  I realize that this is partly the evil cable companies’ faults, but it’s Discovery’s responsibility.

I just took a quiz that’s pretty much all propaganda, but like all propaganda, there’s some truth mixed in if you know what to look for.  They don’t go out right and say to become a vegetarian, but it’s something they encourage, at least that’s what I got out of this anyway.  And they have a point there, it does take more energy and effort to raise livestock to eat compared to grain.  However, the nutrients in meat are far more then those in plants.  Humans evolved as omnivores, for thousands of years we’ve eaten animals, and raised animals to eat, that includes fish.  Certain fish are at a danger of becoming extinct not because of over fishing, but because of over demand.  More people are eating the fish, and they are being shipped around the world, and that’s just not as sustainable today as it was 300 years ago when fisherman only had to supply the local area of 50 miles and not the whole world.  How can this change, by eating locally caught fish instead.

Another thing on that list is bottled water.  Maybe it’s because I live in New York, which has some of the best tap water in the world, but I am very much against bottled water.  I always go for tap water first.  That being said, most people in the country (and the state of NY itself), still don’t do that, and instead waste money every day on bottled water.  Fun fact, most bottled water is tap water.  Anyway, the quiz goes on to inform you that it takes 1.5 million barrels of oil a year to produce the number of plastic water bottles used in the world.  I’m not gonna dispute that, it’s probably true.  They tell you that oil is used to make plastics, but they don’t tell you how.  The major ingredients of plastic come from crude oil.  But, do you really know how crude oil is processed?  Or do you think those barrels of oil that OPEC sells come from the Middle East (did you know Texas produces Oil too?) and go straight into your Jeep’s gas tank?

Crude Oil Refineries produce a seemingly endless list of products, all different.  How do they do it, through the process of distillation.  Crude Oil is distilled, and in the process, many different things are made, each at a different stage, and all from a single barrel of oil.  Regular gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, tar, and other products are made from crude oil.  One of those products are petrochemicals.  Petrochemicals are used in an equally endless list of items, chiefly of which are the ethylene’s.  Which are used to produce your plastic bottles.  So, on the extreme, these plastic bottles are being produced anyway, and to not produce them would be wasting the energy in crude oil.  But, if that plastic went somewhere else, it would still be destined for a landfill eventually (nothing will last forever).  If that’s not enough, the production of ethylene is a recycling plant, using the excess heat needed to produce the high temperatures of the plant to produce steam which turn turbines that compress the gas to produce the product.

There’s still much more I can say about the Green industry, like a whole lot more on Oil, and still more about planet Green.  Also I haven’t even broke the surface of the renewable energies – solar, wind, nuclear.  Yes, nuclear.  And that’s the reason why I’m splitting this up into multiple parts.  There’s at least one more, probably 2 more parts coming up in the next few days.  Maybe I’ll make it a Thursday thing for the month of April?  I don’t know.  You can find the rest of the series right here Going Green! or Not.

But before you comment, remember to do some research so that it’s intelligent, or not.  because knowing is half the battle!

[ad#adlinks]

4 responses to “Going Green! or Not, part I

  1. I like this article. I bookmarked it from when you first sent it to me and finally got around to reading it. Nice job and looking forward to the next parts.

    I think “green” is somewhat useful – but over-marketed for money sakes and campaign boosts. I don’t like hybrid cars or electric cars because regardless, you have to dispose of those batteries somewhere, and you are just transferring your oil cost to your electric bill. And where’s that electricity come from? Not wind mills or solar panels.

    But now this is me ranting…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *