alicespringstomind

Net Zero Carbon seems about as acceptable as Net Zero Covid. Both come from the same group of snake oil peddlers.

From Bernie Spofforth on Twitter: CONGO – unregulated mines employ thousands of workers, mining cobalt for batteries, so NET ZERO can be ‘achieved’ & we feel good. These mines often collapse & trapped workers are dug out by hand, if they are lucky.

Video 1:

And: GREEN ENERGY – 72% of the cobalt for rechargeable batteries comes from the Congo. Mining for rare minerals will destroy more environments and lives than it saves. Your virtue seeking will not save them.

Video 2:

Video 3:

It is amazing to think that “philanthropists” claiming to “help humanity” have attempted to demand that these people receive a covid “vaccine” but don’t have any program plans for such things as access to clean water, access to childhood education, safe housing, food security, protection against trafficking. Covid zero and carbon zero are what will “save them”. Really?!

The batteries in an electric car weigh about 500 kg. To make a car battery of this type, you need to process 10 tonnes of salt for the required lithium, 15 tonnes of ore for the required cobalt, two tonnes of ore to get enough nickel and 12 tonnes of copper ore. In total, you have to process 200 tonnes of soil to make a single battery. This pollutes more than a petrol/diesel car does in 20 years of normal consumption. The batteries have a lifespan of around 10 years before they need to be replaced.

As with Covid, so much of the climate change agenda makes no sense. Unless the intent is nefarious, ie to remove our rights to access the energy we need to heat or cool our homes, cook our food, travel as we wish? Energy poverty is directly related to economic poverty. Reducing energy resources away from gas and petrol, to a single source (electricity), which could then become unaffordable or be cut off at the whim of the people who now have power (and permission) to “protect” us from “emergencies”…

So is there really a climate emergency? Thousands of scientists say there is not. Why is environmental care by the Net Zero crowd always about “climate”, and never pollution? Surely the oceans and land need to be protected, rather than the “climate”?

What does carbon have to do with it? Carbon is the 15th most common element on earth. Humans are a carbon life form. Animals and vegetation are carbon life forms. Is carbon really the problem? Or is this another mockery of our intelligence?

Gregory Wrightstone describes climate change as a non-existent crisis eloquently, here. He says the plan is to drive everyone away from using fossil fuels, and drive up energy costs for everyone. Which just so happens to be another way to impoverish us.

Candace Owens describes Wrightstone’s book, Inconvenient Facts, as Al Gore’s worst nightmare. Carbon credit trading schemes and climate change fearmongering have made Al Gore a billionaire. So when he rants at the World Economic Forum about boiling oceans, I wonder which part of which ocean is boiling because of the carbon that I emit? Warming the till: preachers of the apocalypse make billions, [another] political agenda dressed in the lab coat of science.

Connected to the history of Big Pharma, the history of Big Oil is equally fascinating and relevant to events of today.

Sandi Adams has researched the climate agenda thoroughly and speaks about it regularly. She recently schooled Glastonbury City Council, who are attempting to transition into a “15 minute city”.

She has given more detailed presentations, for example here with James Delingpole. We can only refuse this if we know about it. And of course, those planning it want us to think it’s a “conspiracy theory”. Personally I find her perfectly sane, and it’s the Al Gores and Bill Gates of the world who seem like lunatics.