carbon dioxide

GERMANY – Natural Gas is Bad, People Freezing is Good

Posted on by Helena

ALAS ALAS.   Germany’s Deutsche Welle has just posted an article inspired by Climate Analytics which claims that Natural Gas is NOT a green source of energy and must be poo-pooed given it is actually more harmful than – coal. Never mind that it’s carbon emissions are 50% lower than coal, never mind it is plentiful, and never mind the NordStream II project which would provide Germany with cheap energy remains uncertified while Germans are freezing!   Why?   Because Climate Analytics said so.

Apparently, the pipelines are the problem.   Because pipeline infrastructure destroys the environment adding an additional carbon footprint.   Ah! It gets even prettier:   “Geopolitics is another problem: Just look at the delays getting the Nord Stream 2 Russia to Germany gas pipe connected amid escalating threats of war in Ukraine. It’s ready to go but can’t flow. Gas prices skyrocket as supply ebbs.”

Who wrote this drivel?   Apparently an anonymous person at Deutsche Welle who is afraid of getting pilloried for the … um drivel.

With a quaint picture in the background showing a windmill circa 1800 or so, the hideous monolith of a metal that is the new and improved windmill, and an old man on a bicycle, the idea is that we should all go back in time whereby we grind our own grain, saw wood, and transportation is a sailboat and a bicycle.

At some point the Cheshire Cat will reveal himself and we can all have a grand laugh!   If pipelines are the factor, then what next?   Roads?   Railways?   Houses?   ALL buildings?   Because they all degrade land and consume power in their production.  Ultimately, why not just rid the planet of people, then the planet would be carbon free! Right?

Actually – NO!

The largest natural source of carbon dioxide is the ocean. Oceans absorb carbon to feed the all living organisms that live there.  Without carbon the ocean and all that lives in it would not survive.   In fact, if there were no carbon in the ocean it would freeze solid.

“Carbon dioxide plays an important part in vital plant and animal process, such as photosynthesis and respiration. Plants and animals, in turn, convert the food compounds by combining it with oxygen to release energy for growth and other life activities. This is the respiration process, the reverse of photosynthesis.”

The cells in our body make carbon dioxide as part of their job, flowing thru the respiratory system and exhaling it when we breathe. When excess carbon is produced, it rises into the atmosphere and is absorbed into the oceans making them more acidic. An acidic ocean can harm shellfish and coral – like when a persons bones becoming softer. In a person, the effect is demineralization – loss of calcium and minerals that support bone health.

Remember ‘acid rain’?

The means of deterring the effect back in the 1970’s was to mediate pollution and deforestation. And then people got lazy.   Or maybe there simply wasn’t enough money to be made in recycling… I’m all in for completely stopping ocean pollution and getting rid of the arsonists!   But for some reason our esteemed governments want to get rid of our current energy sources without an alternative already in place!

Sometimes it seems theses mitigations are about as helpful as asphalt roads…   It’s cheaper than concrete, but within one year it requires repaving and/or filling all the cracks and potholes.  What it does achieve is a steady line of employees.

The idiocy of converting to wind power is the same – windmills die at age 18 and are buried in mass graves – somewhere. Meanwhile steel factories are busily firing their coal plants to make the windmills to preserve our environment.   At the last ‘climate summit’ in Germany, the wind had stopped – and Merkel was forced to fire up coal in order to provide the necessary energy so all the government representatives were ‘comfortable’.  Windmills are grand when its windy, but what happens when it’s not?

A Swedish Company has been dabbling for the past decade in using hydrogen instead of coal in the process of making steel.   Still in its infancy, a small amount has been made and sent to Volvo for testing in the making of trucks. The biggest problem with hydrogen is that it can embrittle metal making it more prone to break apart.

The production process of this hydrogen requires methane and water.   Today Methane Is Produced from “Natural Gas”. In the US 95% of hydrogen is produced using natural gas – the same gas that Climate Analytics has declared is more pervasive in environmental degradation than coal.  The same gas Germany refuses to accept in the NardStream pipeline to make German citizens more ‘comfortable’.

The National Resource Council has determined that a transitional use of hydrogen could be in place by 2037.   Fifteen YEARS from now.   At that point they estimate 60 billion kg of hydrogen will be produced annually at a water cost of “19-69 trillion gallons of water”!

“This would account for a 27-97% increase from the 195 billion gallons per day (72 trillion gallons annually) used today by the thermoelectric power sector to generate about 90% of the electricity in the US.”   Water our most precious resource for sustaining ALL LIFE.

Electrolysis of water is still being studied as a means for reducing that water usage which is primarily a part of the cooling process.   But this has yet to happen.

In the end, I doubt anyone would argue against reducing emissions if the hypocrisy were eliminated 100%. If the water usage was significantly reduced.   IF its value for the environment in all it’s creation/production did actually perform better, more efficiently, and with less impact on our natural resources than our present sources.

Today we aren’t there.   Until we are it makes absolutely no sense to freeze people to death, deprive them of low cost fuel and guilt them as being hazards to our globe.

But then Climate Analytics wouldn’t even exist because what they do is parade about analyses regarding all the harm – without any consideration to ‘The Flow”.

Climate Analytics supports climate-vulnerable countries in strengthening their roles and voices in international climate negotiations.

And evaluate the risks to sustainable development.

In a 2017, the Federal GAO found that of the $13.2 billion in climate change funding that year among the non-transparent organizations receiving the money all they actually accomplished was the creation of ‘talking points’. Hundreds of Billions spent across thousands upon thousands of organizations across the globe burning through the money to produce ‘talking points’ and articles.

As of 2018, US taxpayers had doled out $154 billion for talking. Not for science, not for the development of alternatives, but for more ‘talking’.   Including Climate Analytics.

In the meantime Germany has shuttered 3 of its 6 nuclear facilities and shuttered the NordStream II pipeline until next year… maybe.   Because now natural gas – is bad.   And freezing is good.

Climate Change: A Global Geo-Engineering Experiment

Posted on by Helena

Weather modification used to be considered a ‘conspiracy theory’, but like many other conspiracies, today it is acknowledged as fact.   From the simplistic to the complex, the concept has many useful positives;   increasing water supplies, preventing hail and hurricanes, and dousing wildfires. But there are also useful military objectives which are more cynical and deadly in their agenda.

While climate gurus continue to scream ‘the sky is falling’, Harvard has been busily at work the past two years geo-engineering weather thru solar deflection.

China has been manufacturing cloud rain for over a decade, launching silver iodide with rockets and via planes across swathes of the Tibetan Tableau the size of Alaska, the project is considered the largest in the world.

ScoPex is the Harvard experiment which includes the introduction of particles in the stratosphere in order to deflect solar activity away from earth.   According to NASA, such a scheme could devastate agriculture.   The argument in support of the program is that the positive effects out-weigh the negative impacts.   I disagree.

Harvard contends that rising sea levels as a result of global warming will decimate valuable land and millions of homes. The analogy is to ‘chemotherapy’.   But even the analogy is flawed given that chemo only works on some people some of the time.   By contrast, geo-engineering has been shown to have substantial impacts on weather intensity, weather patterns, and rainfall.

The same issues that the alarmists are now claiming are a result of global warming could in fact be the result of saving the planet from climate change.   Perhaps the very technology utilized across the globe to alter weather is actually responsible for creating intensely destructive weather.  For example our jet streams are linked to solar radiation, change the solar you alter the jet stream.  Air masses push the jet stream around, change the air mass and you have effectively altered the weather pattern.  The jet stream pattern has only been monitored since 2000, so identifying changes is only as good as the record exists.  But obviously if we suddenly begin inserting particle matter to deflect the sun, the jet stream will be affected.

It stands to reason that geo-engineering and cloud seeding may have far more disruptive ramifications than scientists are willing to reveal.  I refer to it as the ‘oops factor’.

While one justification for the manipulation is for the purpose of redirecting or eliminating hurricanes, it is just as likely that the modification could ramp up these storms as well.   While Harvard and China represent just two specific projects that are currently being utilized, there are likely hundreds being employed by various nations – none in collaboration with another.

India uses small planes equipped with twelve cylinders. Flying into the belly of a storm cloud, the cylinders are filled with combustible chloride and released at intervals. With agriculture in India failing from lack of water, the Harvard geo-engineering experiment could cause India’s production to fail completely from lack of sunlight.

It is less like chemotherapy and more like a Molotov cocktail.

While scientists had polar views on the effect of geo-engineering, Harvard ignored the negative reactions and sent up its first flood of particulates in early spring 2019.

And despite all the information available regarding these various geo-engineering actions, the media is still attempting to manipulate our understanding of the true cause and causal actions taking place.

“July was earth’s hottest month on record”! The articles go on to actually explain that the ‘record’ they refer to is for the 20th century.  In the realm of millions of years, a century is relatively meaningless.

Historically, temperatures were taken manually on land and ships at sea. There were no computers, no standardized measurement system, no sophisticated instruments like we use today.   All statistical science has margins of error.   But climate scientists fail to provide that margin – ever. In fact, determining temperatures historically did not even include tenths of percentages.   Thus to calculate that the global temperature rose by .7’ between 1850 and 2003 could not be factual, it would be a theory. An estimate. As of today, that estimate is .8% based on unproven science that has changed dramatically in its ability to create an accurate model.

In theory, the enhancement of global temperature could align with the advancement of weather manipulation and geo-engineering just as easily as claiming the casual factor is carbon emissions.

According to scientists, the last ice age ended between 10,000 and 20,000 years ago. That would indicate a potential deviation of 10,000 years – not terribly accurate.   Scientists claim that the reason the ice age ended was due to a rise in carbon dioxide.   Volcanic eruptions create vast plumes of carbon dioxide.   Volcanoes exist both on land and undersea. There have been 404 volcanic eruptions since 1883.   Since 1980 – there have been 18 volcanic eruptions with a rating of at least VEI of 4.

It is estimated that 200 million tons of carbon are emit into the atmosphere annually by volcanic action.

But even this data is an extrapolation, not a fact.   Still it has widely been the accepted causal factor that pulled earth out of its last ice age. Why? Because science has no other explanation.

In other words: based on massive extrapolations, estimates, best guesses, faulty science, and zero historical technology, science has concluded that our planet needs geo-engineering of our natural climate change in order to ‘save the planet’ and ‘save the children’.

And in so doing – may actually wipe out large swathes of agriculture production in order to save a few estimated millions of houses many of which are built of mud and clay.