More Deception on Common Dioxide and Climate Change

    In the Government Concentrates section of Chemical and Engineering News, August 20 issue, there is a short article saying that unless we undertake capture of carbon dioxide emission from power plants, "long-term climate heating would increase by nearly 50%".
    I thought I would take a look at the reference, which is in Environmental Science & Technology. I find that particular publication is part of the American Chemical Society's retinue of magazines. Let's recall that the ACS is a big promoter of large government and particularly a promoter of government grants to universities. In turn, government grants to universities favor projects which are advantageous to government policy, which is further increase in the size of government and taxation to support it.
    The article of interest came from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, which is almost a government agency. I was able to obtain only an abstract of the article. Access to the full article have cost me $35, or I could get a subscription to 250 articles for $500. I suspect this borders on limiting access to data which should be publicly available.
    Unfortunately, the abstract does not mention the "50% increase in heating", which still leaves me in the position of not knowing what it means. However, the abstract again goes on to justify whatever claim it's making because of "cumulative radiative forcing". This is a term which was invented by the environmentalists as a pseudoscientific reason to justify their attempts to establish public fear of climate change caused by carbon dioxide emissions.
    In fact, there is no reason to believe that any carbon dioxide emissions, which would increase carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere, would have any effect on climate. Tests of heat transfer through carbon dioxide are not significantly different than heat transfer through oxygen and nitrogen, which are the major components of the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide constitutes only about 0.025% of the atmosphere. At that low concentration, any effect would be negligible, unless carbon dioxide has some kind of magical property. The promoters of carbon dioxide capture have invented the "cumulative radiative forcing" as the magical property, with no explanation of how the magic works in the real world.
    In essence the government, with the assistance of universities and the American chemical Society, continues its unrelenting pursuit of attempts to force power plants to capture carbon dioxide from its emissions. If it is successful on this, all power plants will undergo major cost increases for new equipment, which will be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher electricity prices. In addition, there will be penalties imposed by government, and we all know from the recent decision of the Supreme Court on Obama care that it is difficult to distinguish between a penalty and a tax. They are essentially the same, with government obtaining money. Penalties paid by power companies will also be a "cost of doing business" and passed on to the consumer in the form of increased electricity prices. Do you want to pay a higher price for your electricity on government's mystical claim that if you don't, climate change will really hurt you?