Shut Up And Take My Money!...
... Wait A Second, Hold On, Let's Pump The Brakes Here Shall We?
Little Sarcasm To Kick Things Off
A post was made, and usually pictures of "facts" rarely catch my eye, as the majority I've researched are ripe with convolution, lies, and fraud. This one however, did catch my eye. For what ever reason, I happened to have time (at that moment) to spare, I saw this post and it is this post that originally peaked my interest in the points discussed. I'd like to give credit to whoever did this first, it's not entirely accurate for today, but the math is solid, and everything is verifiable from it if you look in the past.
In my post I'll go a little more in depth and I'll update and verify the original work, as well as show you how the carbon tax that's become such a popular money grab topic errr I mean, environmental issue, by the current politicians in office today is completely 100% unjustified and nothing but a crime in itself.
So Let's Just Jump Into It
Let This Serve As A Warning To Other Countries When They Hear The Words "Carbon Tax"
In my post I've sourced all the material to back it up, it's all government stat websites or credited sources. I want this to be as transparent as possible and truly the math isn't hard at all. it's quite easy to follow and see that IN REALITY CANADA'S FORESTS AS A WHOLE ARE ABSORBING, CLEANING UP, AND SWITCHING OUT FOR FRESH OXYGEN, FAR MORE CARBON THEN IT'S EVEN CLOSE TO PUTTING OUT. Seems to me if anything like previously said in the other post, we're basically doing the world a favour here and the people are now having to pay extra for doing a good deed.... how nice are Canadians to support the world and pay our politicians extra for no reason, such generosity, such wow...
Fuck It, Lets Get This Show On The Road
So what am I ranting and raving about, well let me show you. Turns out, yes Canada does has close to 990,000,000 acres of forest like it was stated (this is by far the worst number that was used in the calculations), but a more accurate number would be about 860,000,000 acres as shown (close to) in the first and second photos as well as being referenced Here and Here. I'm using the government's latest stats for my math.
His farmland numbers are a little old, from 2006 actually, the latest govt survey is from 2011, so I'll use that, which canada sits at 160,200,000 acres as referenced HERE and HERE.
His wetland stats are a tiny bit high for the wetlands, everything's disappearing, so it makes sense. The wetlands come in at 345,428,612 acres so 345,000,000 as referenced HERE, and HERE. Did a little google conversion on this from km2 to acres which is shown in the additional pictures.
Ok so now let's find how much carbon an acre of forest removes and replaces with O2. For this one I couldn't find any government stats so I had to go to google scholar and find an actual scientific backed study...
Bingo.
A single tree stores on average 13 pounds of carbon annually.
A community forest can store 2.6 tons of carbon per acre per year."
He's Bang On, Yes An Acre On Average Absorbs And Stores About 2.6 Tons Of CO2 A Year.
Time For A Little Global Perspective
The total combined CO2 of the world was easy enough to find, the latest government stats for canada being in 2012 as referenced HERE and in the photos. The world in total, is putting out about 45,000,000,000 tons, now, a sharp expected increase yet Canada as you can see is still at 1.6%, not going up at all. That I found interesting. As clearly shown China has been at the forefront of dumping CO2 into the world's atmosphere for a while, NOT CANADA.
Ok now we just do the math which in the original numbers are close but for shits and giggles let's just do the new numbers shall we, he didn't include the extra wetlands and farmland as well so I won't either, however I may do an additional post in the future if I feel like digging into those, I already have enough evidence here to be more than a little annoyed, and I think any Canadian dealing with a carbon tax has the right to feel the same. But here it is.
860,000,000 x 2.6 = 2,236,000,000 tons
45,000,000,000 x 1.6 = 720,000,000 tons
Hmmm Starting To Look Pretty Shady...
2,236,000,000 - 720,000,000 = 1,516,000,000 tons extra that Canada recycles out of the world.
1,516,000,000 x 100/45,000,000,000 =3.369%
2,236,000,000/720,000,000 = 3.106
3.106 x 100 = 310.6%
Canada cleans out of the world's air on top of already cleaning our own 100%. We clean more than double our own air on top of what we already clean, and we get to pay a carbon tax?
Canada could literally increase their CO2 output 310.6% and then, at that point it would become justifiable to talk about a carbon tax (not saying they should increase the CO2 output, merely stating a point).
And what political figure brings this information up ever? You'll commonly hear them talk about how Canada is the eighth largest greenhouse gas producer world wide, but do they ever say "but we clean up over 3 times that amount producing fresh Oxygen for all". Nope, they sure do not.
Why?...... Money.
Are they not supposed to have the backs of the citizens they're supposed to serve? Also how that is a laughing matter... "oh dem politicians, theys just does what theys wants to hueck hueck", is beyond me. It's not fucking funny.
This Is Absolutely UNACCEPTABLE.
"Climate models have grossly underestimated the power of our plants because they failed to take into account that when carbon dioxide (CO2) builds up in the atmosphere, plants actually thrive, become larger, and are able to soak up more CO2. As part of photosynthesis - a natural cycle that helps plants convert sunlight into energy - plants capture CO2 to help them grow and then release oxygen as a waste product."
Published In The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Originally:
For Christs sake even BBC is reporting the carbon scare is blown out of proportion:
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29601644
Although they do fuck up reporting on it in typical BBC fashion, they literally reference the scientific journal I referenced above (found it first before clicking on BBC that's for sure), and while the study talks about how environmentalists have overplayed the carbon issue, BBC says it in a far more biased manner towards the environmentalists. They threw this stupid little line in for absolutely no reason other than its BBC "But experts believe the new calculation is unlikely to make a difference to global warming predictions." literally doesn't say anything even remotely close to that in the study... BBC seriously, you suck. But after their bullshit they start showing numbers from the study and math doesn't lie.
And for the last little photo I figured I'd slap you in the face with some tree/carbon knowledge crafted together in numbered form, in a pretty little photo, and that is where I will end this post.
Sources For All Links:
Sources For Additional Photo's added:
Tree Facts Picture:
Carbon Tax Picture:
I haven't done a solid researched post on here in a while, just been so busy with life and other steemit projects. It was nice to find a topic that intrigued me that I could write about on my personal account.