The ‘carbon footprint’ of Iceland’s Eyjafjallajokull volcano

Eyjafjallajokull, Volcano in Iceland

For all of you out there in America and across the globe who have fought so hard to tackle the hideous enemy of our planet, namely carbon emissions, that bogus god you worship named “Climate Change” or “Global Warming”, there is some really bad news that will be very painful for you to process. But it is my mission to pass it on to you anyway.

Are you sitting down?

Okay, here’s the bombshell. The current volcanic eruption going on in Iceland, in it’s first week of spewing volcanic ash, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet. Not only that, this single act of God, in it’s first week, has added emissions to the earth estimated to be 42 times more than can be corrected by the extreme human regulations proposed for annual reductions.

Yeah and it just keeps on giving too!

I know, I know (have a group hug Libs), it’s very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up til midnight to finish your kid’s “The Green Revolution” science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, going on vacation to a city park instead of real vacation, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your $1 light bulbs with $10 light bulbs …well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just the first week.

The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth’s atmosphere in the first week has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And, those hundreds of thousands of American jobs you helped move to Asia with expensive emissions demands on businesses… you know, the ones that are creating even more emissions than when they were creating American jobs, well that must seem really worthwhile now.

I’m so sorry. And I do wish that there was some kind of a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud but the fact of the matter is, that the brush fire season across the western U.S.A. will start in about two months and those fires will negate your total efforts to reduce carbon emissions, in our world for at least the next two years!!!

Note: This article has been going viral around the world, via email; the author is not known to us (although the earliest copy located so far is here, dated 30 April 2010).


  1. SaveTheAustralianPeo says

    This article should have been clearly marked as humourous, as there are people here taking it totally seriously.

    Or it should be deleted.

    Here are some articles that counter what this article says (especially the top 2 or 3):

    Iceland volcano causes fall in carbon emissions as eruption grounds aircraft

    Volcanic Gases and Climate Change Overview (look at "Volcanic versus anthropogenic CO2 emissions")

    Planes or Volcano?

    Volcanoes and climate changes

    Eyjafjallajökull volcano on Iceland erupts

    • I appreciate that you have clarified that this is a humourous report. The very subtle use of the number 42 was indeed hillarious to the extreme. The comments below show that most people didn't get the joke however including myself so thank you for this follow up post. You have provided some really good links too.

      Although the New Scientist report did turn out to be second from the top on the google search I suggested, I admit that I may be lazy. I was reading the comments. I new the story was a lie so wanted people to know so. That is all. My job here appears to be done.

      (FYI – Expecting to debate you, I was going to attack your reference to the expert in mineral deposits Ian Pilmer. The fact he does not support peer revue, and claiming that a whole field of science consisting of 1000's of scientists around the world dedicating their lives to discovering the truth about their particular niche of knowledge are all simply wrong? Then I was going to relate him to "Lord" Monckton and the fact that he is not a lord, is not a scientist, has not won a nobel prize, has not discovered a cure for aids, and has no expertise in climate change science. I was going to mention the loads of money they are both earning travelling the world spreading their lies. Then I was going to highlight the desperation of the climate change skeptics trying to find any scraps of evidence that may appear to support their argument and having only out of date debunked arguments from Pilmer and Monckton to choose from. Possibly mention Bolt and Jones here as well. I was going to relate how climate skeptics are now begining to change their arguments to fit the new truth just as religions have done for eons. Then I was going to finish off trying to describe the vast bulk of data that is being recorded by numerous experiments around the world and in space every month, the resulting scientific papers that are published for peer review and the greater accuracy in predictions and calculations that are constantly adding to our knowledge…but thank god I dont need to mention all of that now. Have a nice day and I wish this party success as long as it doesnt spread lies.)

      • SaveTheAustralianPeo says

        No worries!

        "My job here appears to be done."

        Wasn't that a quote from a superhero or something similar?

        (Looks out window to see Dave zooming away, cape flapping in the breeze).


  2. TOTAL FABRICATED LIES!!! The Icelandic volcano was the worlds first carbon negative eruption. The grounded aircraft around the world would have released much more pollution then what was released by Volcano Eyjafjallajökull . Do some real research before spreading your lies to all your ignorant friends.

    • SaveTheAustralianPeo says

      Chillax dude.

      This was originally a humourous email that was going around.

      Although what is says does make some sense.

      As for…

      "TOTAL FABRICATED LIES … The grounded aircraft around the world would have released much more pollution then what was released by Volcano Eyjafjallajökull"

      …that sounds like some pretty interesting information there, please post the links to the science journal that published this info.

      Or were you just telling us some "TOTAL FABRICATED LIES" ???


      "Save Australia"

      • Oh fancy that. This story is suddenly just a joke now. Well it was created and spread around the world as well as posted on this very websight to spread a lie and support an agenda. You weren't even willing to try defending it.

        I first read it in a New Scientist issue, and then again in the New Scientist 2010 overview. Just google first carbon negative volcano.

        If you want the truth on climate change check He gives all the sources with links.

        • SaveTheAustralianPeo says

          Oh fancy that, your reply was useless.

          You provide no proof of what you're saying. A vague "I first read it in a New Scientist issue" isn't actually proof or a link to an actual article – you do know the difference, right?

          And giving a link to a YouTube page of 64 videos is not proof of a point either – it's just a bunch of videos on a wide range of climate change issues. It's like someone giving you a link to a climate sceptics site and saying "See, told you so".

          Interestingly, Ian Pilmer says "Over the past 250 years, humans have added just one part of CO2 in 10,000 to the atmosphere. One volcanic cough can do this in a day."

          Surely there must be stuff out there to counter his argument, so why don't you give a link to something like that?

          But yeah, it was obviously a humourous email, e.g. "sitting up til midnight to finish your kid’s “The Green Revolution” science project": yep, that's humour.

          Most of the articles on this site are obviously not humourous, most are serious and give references. This one doesn't have any references re. the info in it, so that's probably a bit of a clue right there.

          It does make sense that an active volcano releases lots of carbon into the atmosphere; "How much?" and "What is the carbon footprint?" are the pertinent questions.

          What is the carbon footprint of the Icelandic volcano eruption? Or of the other volcanic eruptions? I don't know, nor have I ever pretended to know – what I do know is that the article was funny.

          If you think you're right, then just post the proof. I'm willing to read what you say, if you're willing to back up what you say.

          • SaveTheAustralianPeo says

            Since you haven't posted any links to back up what you are saying, I have done so and will post some for you.

            You still should post the link to the article you were talking about.

          • I'm not here to prove anything. I'm just saying this story is bullshit because it is. No use even trying to prove anything here, you have all ready backed down claiming this story was all simply a joke! That's one of the standard come backs from someone who's faith is being challenged. So why aren't the comments full of LOL's? It's up to you to do the research. I'm not going to re-read 52+ issues of New Scientist Magazine so I can post the page and paragraph number to a quote suitable to your liking. I suggested you search "First carbon negative volcano". Oh look at that! I just googled it and a related New Scientist article appeared second from the top. Gee that was difficult. :[

            I gave you the Youtube channel because if you are truly interested in learning the facts about climate change, you will watch them all. I bet ya Jones and Bolt haven't. The guy that makes those videos gos to the source documents of both sides and debunks all of the climate denial arguments in simple easy to digest terms and supplies all the links to the source documents. Funny thing is this story has no original source documentation. Fancy that hey.

          • SaveTheAustralianPeo says

            You're wrong.

            "you have all ready backed down claiming this story was all simply a joke"

            — I haven't "all ready [already] backed down", because the very first post I made on this article was pointing out that this post was clearly humourous, which it is in several places. So I haven't "backed down", have I?

            What I did do was post some links that queried the accuracy of the article that you got all het up about, because you seemed too lazy to do so.

            "Group hug" and so on is clearly tongue in cheek. As are other parts of it.

            Didn't anyone else pick up on the author's usage of "42" as being a reference to the "Ultimate Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, The Universe, and Everything" from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? I mean, c'mon.

            It is sooooo obvious that the author is out to poke fun at people. It probably started off as an email that went viral, but some people like you take it seriously (fancy that, hey) without seeing that it is clearly tongue in cheek.

            So, as I first said, chillax dude.

            "Save Australia"

  3. Nature is not at risk.

  4. Science trumps idiocy. Please read the following:


  5. Lets have a tax on those countries with active volcanoes ! There are a few popping off around the globe currently,

    Seeing the despots probably won't get their thieving hands on our cash through carbon trading extortion schemes maybe this will be a way to rake up some sheikels for their corrupt colleagues in financially less off countries.

    Carbon trading/tax is similiar to foriegn aid. " The transfer of wealth from the poor in rich countries to the rich in poor countries "

    The mongrels who instigated this fake science/global hoax are the same crew who manipulate governments through control of the media, pharma companies, purveyors of poisons (flouride) in your water, and rat poison in your food (aspartame)

  6. ClimateSkeptic says

    Just a note to the authors of this blog.

    Why haven't you indicated that this article is not originally yours? Isn't that plagiarism, and perhaps infringement of someone's copyright?

    This story appears in quite a few blogs and forums around the internet, many of whom acknowledge in some way it isn't their original story, but no report as to where the story originated. It has even gone viral on e-mail, rapidly spreading around the world in people's Inboxes. Yet again however, the e-mails lack any reference to a source, credible or otherwise.

    At the time of posting this comment, I'm still trying to locate the original source of this story as I would like to be able to use it on my own blog, and wish to verify the scientific standing of the author & give credit where it is due. So far, I've tracked it back to early April, 2010. Unfortunately none of the other places I've found it on are the original source, nor do they quote the source, and quite often the story carries some minor chnages to alter it to be relevant to local conditions (as is the case here as you have altered the original by inserting your reference to the Liberal Party).

    You have my e-mail address (as I'm required to provide it as part of the posting process), so I'd be most interested in any information you could give me to help me locate the source.

    • Guardian says

      Good question! Yes, why are there no references for this article? I'm begining to smell a rat. The article and its claims are probably bogus. The APP should not run articles from unknown provenances.

    • Guardian says

      P.S. The reference to "Libs" in the article probably refers, not to the Australian Liberal Party, but to small-l liberals as they exist in the U.S.A.

    • Warung Discussion says

      So! its a copy? big deal. it wasn't posted here claiming to be original. what matters is the TRUTH.

      what are you trying to do. divert attention?

      yes i have read this on other sites. so what.?

      use your brain for the good of Australia.

      get of your twiddly little high horse?

  7. Jay Privette says

    Great points, I just wish more of the "masses" would listen. Fortunately all polls indicate we are slowly making progress. I am sure there are plenty of "educated" environmental extremists that know the facts of this article, but their agenda is not saving the planet but the establishment of a new social order where only people as smart as themselves will be in charge of all fascists of our lives. To accomplish their goal they must first tear down the free market capitalist system by tagging it as evil by all means possible. This is all covered in Saul Alinsky's book "Rules for Radicals". Too bad they are either too stupid or blind to the fact that it is they, not the masses, that are the stupid evil ones. It is their efforts to establish social equality and justice that will lead to the destruction of freedom and prosperity. What they are attempting has been tried hundreds of times with the same results every time.

    • Despite the apparent loss of support for the agw scam, Jay, Newspoll maintains support for the Greens has jumped from 12% to 16% in the last fortnight. This polling suggests poor sampling to me, or deliberate manipulation to garner a bandwagon effect. However it does suggest the masses [no unnecessary quotes-no need to qualify accurate descriptors] are still being swayed by the politicised scaremongers and guilt exploiters.

    • Warung Discussion says

      actually the free market system is what brought us here in the first place. to this. i do not agree with you. the free market has and is killing us. we do not have a manufacturing base left.

      now we have this immigration agenda and islam to contend with.

      I remember hearing the words :"free trade" in the 70's.

  8. While there are still those who insist that those who believe anthropogenic global warming is a significant impact on the environment are in the majority, the fact is that polls in America and Europe show the opposite. This eruption of Eyjafjallajokull is further proof that nature has a greater impact on nature than humanity ever can.

    While there are still those who insist that those who believe anthropogenic global warming is a significant impact on the environment are in the majority, the fact is that polls in America and Europe show the opposite.

    In any case, climate change isn’t running for government. Majorities don’t matter.

    What matters is informed expert opinion. There is no single scientific field that addresses the impacts of changes in climate or where they originate. Over 250 disciplines are involved in studies of facets of climate change. No real scientist claims to be an expert.

    On the other hand, opportunists, like the failed politician Al Gore, and the doddering economists Ross Garnaut and Nicholas Stern are given free reign to make pronouncements on a body of knowledge, and speculation, they cannot begin to understand.

    Ian Plimer noted that even if Al Gore were right, his view of Armageddon is not based on science. Plimer had the temerity to point out to Tony Jones on Lateline the potential impact an earthquake could have, and now, a few months later, he is vindicated, as if by vis maior, something even the climate believers cannot deny.

    Other misrepresentations of anthropogenic are as easily refuted. The maximum sea level will rise by 2100 is 1 foot, not 20 as Gore purports. Plimer bases his view on research from the likes of Moerner’s paper, Revolution in Cretaceous Sea Level Analysis, in the journal Geology, 1981, and Geomagnesium and Climate V: General Conclusions in Geological Research Abstracts, 2003.

    Gore bases his view on the best way for his company Generation Investment Company to profit from solar and wind energy; he accepted a a board position on the now dissolved Lehmann Brothers, that hoped to broker emissions trading permits. Gore charges $200,000 a lecture to frighten people about climate change. His untruthful film an Inconvenient Truth netted Gore $50 million.

    Gore is hardly innocent of conflicting interests. His cronies at the ALPBC are also still holding out for a feed at the climate change trough. But the magma from Eyjafjallajokull may have forced even the gluttonous Gore out of the trough.

    The hysteria concerning global warming has been manufactured through the United Nations and vested business interests for the purpose of demanding funding for poor countries that can’t develop their own economies and to facilitate massive migrant intakes by developed countries. Political parties, notably Green Parties, and business interests like those investing in solar and wind power, have exploited panic for their own ends, either as hypocrites or under the delusion they are building some type of better world. Each group is as insidiously pernicious as the other, and each constitutes as much of a threat to European civilisation as the specious apologists who insist on the benefits of diversity, and the irrelevance of European intelligence.

    As some contributors have noted, the information provided by climate change advocates are very selective in what they admit to their models, such as the mini-Ice Age of 500 years ago when there was little latitude for accusing one society over another as responsible for climate change, even if the political machinery for so doing were in place.

    Climate change is simply another ploy for social control, whereby socialists and others who like to see themselves as harbingers of good, with a wiser and kinder perspective than those who are to be coerced into supporting the dregs of the world. If it is so essential to save the unproductive masses of backward countries who can’t utilise their own resources, then the only way to achieve social progress for them is to rule them. To apply equitable distribution of hard won wealth on the pretext of responsibility for some fantastic environmental disaster will only lead to universal impoverishment and genuine, global catastrophe, an economic disaster more overwhelming that the eruption of Eyjafjallajokull.

    But if numbers matter, Professor Ian Plimer has trawled through the IPCC publications and found there were only about 20 genuine scientists who put there names to peer reviewed articles. The rest of the 2000 plus employees at the IPCC are ancillary staff. On the other hand, the Oregon group has 35,000 signatories, all scientists owning to doubt regarding anthropogenic global warming. These signatories will no doubt be augmented by the fallout from Eyjafjallajokull.

    But none of these doubters have a voice at the coming synod on global warming in Melbourne.

  9. localyokel says

    The volcanic ash that is being spread around from its eruptions would be benefiting plant life. Farming communities will reap the rewards.

    Mankind should focus on the positive. It's not all doom and gloom.

Leave a Reply