Global Warming: Myth, Threat or Opportunity

In this article, Walter Starck dismisses the global focus that has been put on global warming and climate change and insists that the obsession with global warming has overshadowed the vital issues such as the diminishing supply of energy to run the world economy. Starck claims that, instead of focusing too much on the issue of global warming, which according to him is a “self-inflicted catastrophe” that has not been proved scientifically, the world should focus on the widening gap between the oil supply and the global demand for oil.

Starck argues that global warming is an imaginary catastrophe that the world has overemphasized. He supports this argument using various “key facts.” Firstly, Starck indicates that numerous peer-viewed scientific studies around the globe have found that the warm period during the medieval period exhibited higher temperatures than the temperatures being recorded today. In his second argument, Starck notes that the numerous studies that have been conducted to assess extreme climatic conditions indicate that what is regarded as extreme weather conditions today is not an extraordinary occurrence, but it has been experienced in the past. He also notes that the models used to predict global warming are wrong, and therefore they give the wrong impression. Additionally, he notes contrary to expectations the southern hemisphere has not experienced substantial warming, and the global temperatures have been constant in the last decade, despite the increased CO2.

On the other hand, Starck claims that the uninformed predictions of global warming have turned the world’s focus from the critical issue of the diminishing supply of oil. After supporting his argument that dismisses the claims of global warming, Starck proceeds to make a wakeup call, to the declining supply of energy. He supports his claim using what he refers to as “important facts.” He indicates that even though oil production has peaked, there is a deficiency of oil in 50 countries. Also, he indicates that even though new exploration technologies have been developed, the discovery of oil reservoirs has declined. Besides, Starck notes that oil export is declining due to the rising domestic demand for oil. Furthermore, the environmental restrictions have hindered the optimization of the refining capacity.

Based on these “key facts”, Starck argues that the decline in oil supply will persist amidst increased demand, thus significantly raising the prices of oil. He points out that this effect will negatively impact the global economy, which is fuelled by oil. Subsequently, Starck proposes the use of synfuel; which he opines would meet the energy demand in Australia, at half the current price of oil. However, he notes that while companies are ready to invent technologies that could facilitate the invention of synfuel, the CO2 restrictions are a great barrier to such inventions. He criticizes the government for concentrating on clean energy; which he argues is currently inadequate and will take decades to be commercialized. He uses the economic context of Australia to illustrate how shying away from the unclean energy would lead to detrimental aftermaths. He claims that even though Australia has booming resources, the situation will not be permanent. When the boom ends, Starck notes the exchange rate of the Australian dollar will fall drastically, leading to a “blow-out in foreign debt” . As such, starch urges Australia to consider wisely, its sacrifice towards its loyalty to curb the imaginary global warming. He advises Australia to develop its own liquid-fuel supplies or risk joining the other nations in the inevitable “self-inflicted hardships” that would result from the decline in energy supplies.

Notably, Starck is among the pioneers of the scientific investigations of coral reefs . He holds a Ph.D. in marine science . Therefore, he is conversant with the ecological phenomenon. He is thus suited to write this article. Besides, he has cited peer-viewed scientific research in his evidence, all of which supports his argument. For instance, the fact that numerous studies indicate that the current temperatures were experienced even when fossil fuels were not in use, dismisses the claim that CO2 emissions are the major cause of global warming. In the same manner, by depicting the declining trend in oil supplies, Starck has managed to support the claim that the world would be experiencing an oil shortage, which will definitely lead to economic problems; given that the global economy relies heavily on fossil fuel.

In conclusion, although Starck has cited various studies in his evidence, he has not cited any specific study or researcher. Therefore, the credibility of what he terms as “key facts” is compromised. In the same vein, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) portray a contrary picture of Starck’s arguments. NASA indicates that over the years, scientists have employed the aid of the earth-orbiting satellites and other technological advancements to collect a vast range of data. The analysis of this data had revealed a changing climate . These controversial opinions expound the perception of the reader regarding the issue of climatic change, and the need for further studies. All in all, Starck’s article is quite enlightening. Usually, the global concentration on global warming can actually yield a unanimous impression of the phenomenon of global warming. As such, differing opinions such as that of Starck stimulates the need to know more about the issue, and thus attracts scientific inquiry on the subject. This further yields more enlightenment on the subject. 

Did you like this example?

515

27