Should we be concerned about the greenhouse effect ?

First, what is this effect? Ever since the Industrial Revolution began in the 18th Century smoe
from fossil fuels, oil, natural gad and es!ecially coal had de!osited carbon dio"ide in the lower !art
of the earth#s u!!er atmos!here$ %he effect of this had been that !art of the energy of the sun#s rays
reflected from the earth#s surface had been absorbed by the C&' and by water va!or and returned to
the earth in the form of heat$ %hud the atmos!here is behaving increasingly lie a greenhouse$ %he
glass allows the sunlight through but tra!s the heat$ %he conse(uence is what is called #global
warming#$
%here is a school of thought which says that the result will be a change in the earth#s climate, !lus
an increase in nitrous o"ide, methane gad and FRE)*S$ It is !redicted that by the mid '1st Century
average tem!eratures will ride by + degree C ,- degrees F.$ %his will result in the melting of
glaciers and the !olar ice/ca!s$ Coastal waters will ride and inundate many low/lying countries$
Food !roduction for an increasing world !o!ulation will be !ut at ris$
*ot everyone, of course, acce!ts this scenario, though the (uantity of C)' in the lower u!!er/
atmos!here is constantly monitored, and the fact that the level is increasing is not dis!uted$ 0hether
or not the e"!ected ride in average tem!erature will ha!!en is another matter$ %here have been no
significant climatic changed for centuries, indeed millennia and, the o!!onents of the doom/
merchants argue, nature has it#d own methods of damage/limitation and self/ad1ustment$ 2oreover,
there are no !resent signs of global warming$ %he weather !attern in 3ritain, for e"am!le, is much
the dame ad it wad in 4ictorian days, or Roman days for that matter$ 0hy should it suddenly
change? Coal had always been burnt and before coal, wood and charcoal$ Forest fired have always
raged$ 4olcanoes, and e"!losions such ad 5raatoa ,1886. have always thrown tons of no"ious
gases into the atmos!here$ 7fter that !articular e"!losion a cloud of dust and gas drifted over
Euro!e and darened the sun for si" months / before dis!ersing naturally$ 7 tidal wave drowned
68,&&& in the 9ava/Sumatra area$ *ature#s self/damage greatly e"ceeds any !ossible human
contribution$
%he fact is, however, that many !eo!le do tae the #greenhouse# threat seriously, and there is a cross/
section of !eo!le in most industriali:ed countries who lobby continuously against the continued use
of fossil fuels$ 0hether they are right, or merely alarmist, only time will tell$ ;owever, the fact that
C)' is on the increase is undis!uted$ Further, it cannot be dis!uted that the greenhouse effect is a
!ossibility, even if remote$ *uclear war is also a !ossibility, though remote, but every !ossible ste!
is taen by democratic countries to ensure that it will not ha!!en$ So, therefore, should every
!ossible ste! be taen to reduce, even eliminate C&' emissions$ %here are already agreements in the
<S7 and in Euro!e to cut down, or eliminate the use of fossil fuels by certain target dates$
%he !roblem is that many countries are geared to fossil rather than nuclear !ower sources$ Su!!lies
of coal, and !robably of oil and natural gas, are virtually unlimited$ In 3ritain, most !its have closed
down, causing wide/s!read unem!loyment and much conse(uent human suffering$ %he coal lobby
argues for emission cleansing and a com!romise, both economic and environmental, may be
!ossible$ It would be chea!er, they argue, than to transfer entirely to nuclear !ower, whose
installations may in any event cause health ha:ards and even the occasional disaster$
)ne o!timistic sign is that !ro!onents of all !ower sources agree that every generation has an
obligation to !reserve rather than e"!loit and !ollute the !laner$ %he worst cul!rits in the C&' saga
are the old/fashioned heavy industry !lants, such as those in the Ruhr, East =ermany, and what was
the Soviet <nion, and the fossil/fuel fired electricity generating stations$ 2uch of the old industrial
!lant has now been either modernised or su!erseded, and some countries such as France have
moved over almost entirely to nuclear !ower$ %hat, in my o!inion, is the way forward$
I do not believe that in any event the greenhouse effect would have the dire conse(uences which
have been !redicted$ >et it is a ris which we should not tae$ 2odern technology has outgrown the
use of fossil fuels, and a!art from any !ossible dangers to future generations, the ind of world to
which we commit them should be a clean, wholesome and beautiful world, as the Creator intended$