George Will, Sept 20^th

George Will turns his invective on Poe Francis today. In a remarkable display of rancor Will excoriates the Pope as “…trailing clouds of sanctimony…Ideas demonstrably false and deeply reactionary. They would devastate the poor on whose behalf he purports to speak—if his policy descriptions were not as implausible as his social diagnoses are shrill.” Nonsense! Pope Francis is a reactionary? By my dictionary that would make the Pope deeply conservative and that is simply an absurd way to describe this Pope.

He quotes the Pope who claims that, “People occasionally forgive, but nature never does.” and then Will points out that some environmental damage can be reversed; indeed it can. The Cuyahoga River will no longer catch fire; clear cut forests can be replanted, provided mudslides don’t remove all the topsoil. Raising the pH of the oceans to compensate for the dissolved carbon dioxide which increases the ocean’s carbonic acid content may take a bit longer. The increased acidity and increased temperature have already decimated coral reefs.

Speaking of an environmental conference Will, in a remarkable absence of insight, claims “…rhetorical exhibitionism increases as its effectiveness decreases.” He said it; I didn’t.

Will makes a good case that fossil fuels have brought significant benefits to mankind; no one can doubt that. Now, however, there is evidence that used as fuel the continuation of this process is hazardous for humanity. Will claims that, “fertilizer manufactured with gas halved the amount of land needed to produce a given amount of food.” He then goes on to praise “fossil fuels” for their inclusion in synthetic fibers, fertilizers and pesticides. Without fossil fuels global cropland would have to increase 150 percent—equal to the combined land areas of the European Union and South America-- to meet current food needs.” No one argues with that. There is simply no question that natural gas, coal and oil, produce products that have enormous benefits for all of us. And that is not the issue.

That fossil fuels are constituents in many wonderful products there is no doubt; in how many of these products are these fossil fuels burned?  How much is burned producing fibers, pesticides or fertilizers?  These products are not the issue here and Will must know that; the concern is with fossil fuels as fuels. The problem with fossil fuels comes when you burn enormous quantities of them that produce fly-ash and CO2.

France derives 75 percent of its power from nuclear sources. Why can’t we do at least as well?