Kaboom!

Volcanoes contribute about 110 million tons/year, whereas other sources contribute about 10 billion tons/year.

It may be that what I read was in fact a piece of misinformation ... I really don't know. But I'll say this -- I'm just a little skeptical of the information you posted. Not that it is wrong, but that it's not addressing my initial point. Volcanoes might well product 1100 million tons/year, but I'm not talking about annual production ... I'm talking about extraordinary production, created by an extraordinary event like the eruption of St. Helens (1980) or Pinatuba (1991) the expected output from the "Yellowstone Caldera" (which went off 600K years ago and is, I understand, a bit overdue ... yikes!). The articles you referenced didn't seem to say whether the annual figures accounted for extraordinary events, or were true annual output figures. If it did, I didn't see it.

* * *
I have no axe to grind either way, I'm just looking for the truth.

I'll take it one step further -- truth and reasonable policy decisions that flow from that truth. Right now I don't believe we have either. I believe with all my heart that this "climate change" thing is being used as a trojan horse for imposed socialism. Mark my words -- if and when this thing takes root at the policy level, what you'll see in the fine print will be all sorts of exemptions for individuals and organizations who craft the policy. They'll impose travel taxes on tourists to curb "unnecessary flying" but they'll exempt themselves for their "fact finding missions."

Watch also how they'll look to shift most of the burden on the United States. Kyoto already tries to do that -- China and India, two of the most polluting countries in the world and getting worse each year (I was in Beijing; I experienced first hand the awful quality of their air), were exempted. Why?

People say, "The U.S. represents 5% of the people but consumes 25% of the energy." That may be true enough. We also produce a comparable share of the world's GDP, and that is what fuels the quality of life elsewhere. You want to see death on a scale far larger than any "global warming" will produce any time soon? Hobble the U.S. economy to the tune of 20% or more (which is roughly what compliance with the strictest interpretations of Kyoto would have called for). That would drag down the rest of the world. Suddenly farmers in Africa would have nobody to sell their coffee to; no more supplemental food shipments to Africa and other poor countries; no more massive subsidization of drug and relief efforts overseas.

That's my axe to grind.

Look ... there's no question that many in the United States are ostentatious. Yes, we live a big lifestyle. I don't think I do all that much, but I'll grant many do. But I think these fools (and yes, I use that word with intent) who craft worldwide global bureaucratic policy want it both ways. They want to hobble the U.S. out of envy, yet they want to milk the U.S. wealth for all its worth. All the while, of course, while they craft exemptions from their own rules so the ruling elite can live in luxury while others carry the burden.

I truly, truly hate those people.