Saturday, August 7, 2010

Was Agent Smith Right?

I'm not an environmentalist in the generally recognized sense.  I'll never chain myself to a tree to save the blind salamander, Mexican free tailed bat,  or any other blind endangered species.  Seriously, Austin, why does every creature you move hell and earth to save have to be visually impaired? 

I do recycle.  We cloth diaper.  I support local everything. Things I can do to lessen my impact, I attempt.  I do not break my back however to ensure everything is green or self sustainable (hell, I work in an industry that is wholly dependent on petroleum).  All of this is simply to establish that I am a.) not a jerkweed treehugger with an agenda and b.) not an expert of any sort on this topic.


Boing Boing posted an interesting audio/visual of nuclear explosions around the world.  The video link is about 15 minutes long.  But really the impact is incredible.  It starts with Trinity, the first successful American A-Bomb test in New Mexico, July 16, 1945, moving on to "Little Boy" in Hiroshima and "Fat Man" in Nagasaki, the following month.  It continues with others from the US and then the USSR, Great Britain, France, China, India and Pakistan joining in through 1998.  2053 total nuclear explosions across the globe in 43 years.

There has to be an environmental impact here.  Some from each country exploded in the Pacific Ocean.  All countries seemed to prefer relatively uninhabited areas of their territories.  The US used much of the Sierra Desert, France blew up their land in the Sahara, Russia/USSR didn't seem to give a shit where, but that's not so surprising.  Few people or not, there is still an ecosystem in existence along with water supplies and whatnot that were impacted.  The idea of the ocean life breeding after the explosions is terrifying.

The death count and subsequent feasting on irradiated bodies alone scares me.  What carcinogens have we consumed from the wild caught fish in the Pacific?  I realize a nuclear reactor explosion and an A or H Bomb explosion are different.  But the affects on the Japanese survivors and those from Chernobyl don't seem so different, just time.

So has anyone studied this?  Has anyone accounted for the explosions on the endangered species lists?  How bout global warming?  Wouldn't thousands of explosions reaching into Earth's atmosphere have some impact?

So speaking of global warming and ozone depletion, I have a theory (I don't really care that my physics teacher in high school says both are utter crap, the terms work for the direction I'm about to go) that I want to run by everyone.  The way I've always understood the whackadoodles is that the temperature of Earth has increased a couple degrees over the span of a millennia or more.  This results in ice caps melting and oceans desalinating and the end of the world as we know it in general (especially those on the coast)!  We have about 50,000 aircraft flights per day across the world.  Think about the heat and pollution we hear about cars producing all the time.  Just imagine what an airplane creates?  This is jet fuel being burned, not just gasoline.  AND, they are up there right in the higher reaches of our atmosphere!

I'd guess that could account for a large amount of nonexistent ozone depletion and cyclical global temperature shifts spikes.  Really, just give it a thought, the concept is far easier to grasp than the CFC usage and cow farts bovine emissions they point their fingers at.  PETA would hate me, I'm saying vegan doesn't save the environment, walking/biking and internet conferencing does.

What are your thoughts?  Am I off my rocker?  Did you even realize the amount of Nuclear Bombs we launch?  Does my Flaming Jet theory hold water?  Are you a militant recycler or do you prefer to start forest fires?   Because nothing but extremes exist when talking about the environment, right?

No comments:

Post a Comment