|
Our Carbon Footprint
"The next revolution in
the Sustainable Development saga appears to be the use of Global
Warming hysteria to implement a global carbon tax or carbon credit
trading system. this will give the United Nations, or whatever
hierarchy oversees the system, complete control of the world's
economy. Fossil fuels are the life blood of an economy. One barrel
of oil contains 23,000 hours of human work output. Controlling the
amount of oil that can be consumed, and taxing its consumption, will
complete the Sustainable Development agenda of controlling and
reducing human activity in order to protect Mother Earth from her
greatest enemy - humans!" [source].
"If you ask [Greenpeace
members] for the name of any mine that is operating in an
environmentally acceptable standard you will draw a blank. They have
become so cornered by their own extremism that they must deny their
daily use of cell phones, computers, bicycles, rapid transit, and
yes, the simple teaspoon" [quoted at:
source].
Green Energy, Fracking,
Shale Gas
"According to
sustainablist doctrine, the idea behind forcing shortages and higher
prices for energy will make us change our behaviour, and so change
how we live by forcing us to use less energy. In that way society
will lower its standards and needs to match the lower output of wind
and solar power, And that, they say, is how we will reach true
sustainability; sacrificing modern society and giving up our
standard of living" [source].
"While the federal
government spends billions in grants to fund for the alternative
energy industry, wind and solar contribute only about 2-3% to our
energy supply, and contribute only when the sun shines or the wind
is blowing - since they cannot be stored. And ironically, any
sizeable solar or wind installation still requires a conventional
fossil fuel backup generator power plant, again proving that
alternative fuel is so highly inefficient that critics can
comfortably label them as a waste of money and resources"
[source].
"Fracking may or may not
be a safe method of securing our energy requirements. ... but the
point is that fracking is just the latest manifestation of
capitalism to be brought before the public. And it is capitalism
that they are after. As [James Delingpole] says, the greenies are
'watermelons', green [outside], but cut them open, and they are
bright red" [Comment at:
source].
"Commenting on this
story a couple of days ago I wrote how genuinely frightening it was
to hear the police say they couldn't guarantee the safety of the
Cuadrilla site, the operators of which had every legal right to
carry out their exploratory drilling. I added that you could imagine
the howls of protest there would be from the liberal-left which
provides most of the support for these environmental protests, and
their mouthpieces in The Guardian and the BBC if police said the
same about demonstrators protesting against the building of a wind
farm ... But then on yesterday's news the police were quoted a
saying that they couldn't even guarantee to prevent intruders from
getting into the site either. The same report, accompanied by a
twanging [of] guitars and folk music, described the protestors' camp
as a 'mini-Glastonbury' complete with a 'tranquillity' tent,
whatever that was supposed to be. I fully expected TV news pictures
of long-haired protestors legging it over the fences or battered
[sic] down the gates of the Cuadrilla site while shirt-sleeved,
helmet-less bobbies, pranced around and joined in the chorus of
'Give peace a Chance' with flower waving demonstrators. This is mob
rule by any definition but because it's a leftie mob the police
buckle despite the fact that Cuadrilla is doing nothing more than
what it is legally entitled to do. It was the same with the trashing
of fields of crops grown during studies into genetic modification,
or animal rights activists physically threatening premises and
people involved in medical research. There is a genuinely fascist
element within these groups where the democratic process and the
rule of law can be similarly trashed by professional protestors and
rent-a-crowders. But they seem to get away with it because so many
of those in power today still look back with fondness to their own
flower-power, music festival come protests of the late 60's and
probably wish they could dig their own 'Che Guevara' T-shirts,
flares and cheese-cloth tie-dyes out of the attic and join in. And
how typical Vivienne Westwood's [sic] was on hand to support the
protestors when all she's ever contributed to the general good and
betterment of society is to make millions from that most
narcissistic, insubstantial and ephemeral of self-indulgent
activities, fashion. But then when it comes to narcissistic,
insubstantial, ephemeral and self-indulgent, doesn't that just about
sum up the 60s anyway?" [Comment at:
source].
"What do all these
protestors do for a living? Do they take a week off from work?
Perhaps it's all demo-leave. Or are they all on benefits, paid for
by pensioners who can't afford to keep themselves warm with the
outrageous and rising cost of energy, that shale gas might reduce"
[Comment at:
source].
"[I]s there a deliberate
anti-human Malthusian eugenics plan to de-industrialise and
depopulate the west beneath the lie of global overpopulation? If
not, then why deny us abundant safe energy sources in favour of
costly unsustainable failures following decades of global warming
hoaxes/ While people are forced to freeze to death, end up on the
streets or are humiliated into being unable to feed themselves
without government food parcels, why, oh why, are we being forced to
leave abundant cheap energy such as shale gas in the ground? is this
about the powers that shouldn't be hogging the energy or is it
perhaps a green attack on the most vulnerable? To zealots of the
depopulation movement priesthood I have this to say - 'you go first,
kill yourself ands I'll watch and see how you get on, teach by
example.' But I think I've already decided - I'm pro-life"
[Joe Scanlan, Environment Correspondent, Sovereign Independent UK].
"A group of over fifty
lecturers and professors has
written to the Guardian newspaper in support of fracking
and shale gas exploitation in the abundant Bowland Shale in
North-east England. ... It's quite possible that, given their
educational background and training, they know slightly more about
the the subject than the group of fashion designers, installation
artists, pop stars, children of rich celebrities, green activists,
actors and models who
signed that letter the other day demanding that fracking should
be stopped. Then again, perhaps not. As I'm sure Radiohead's Thom
Yorke or designer Stella McCartney or public intellectual Russell
Brand would happily confirm, every one of these scientific experts
is tainted by their association with the Big Oil industry and
therefore cannot be trusted to tell the truth. Unlike, say, their
fellow signatories wind farm developer Dale Vince, Greenpeace or
Friends Of The Earth, none of whom have any vested interest
whatsoever in promulgating the global warming scare and the green
energy scam, apart from the small fact that it makes them millions
and millions of pounds" [source].
"It took a Freedom of
Information request by think tank Renewable Energy Foundation to
prise out the unpalatable fact that household electricity prices
will rise by up to 40 per cent by the end of the decade (an increase
of £250 a year on average) as a result of the Government's green
energy policies including subsidies to wind farms and solar power
and the introduction of smart meters. The Government disputes this
saying that the costs are offset by energy efficiency savings and
that bills will in fact go down. But the Department of Energy and
Climate Change deemed the tables detailing these changes were too
'confusing' and withheld them. To furious bill payers this
information will seem alarming as well as confusing and many will
take with a pinch of salt any reassurances that bills from energy
companies will ever go down. These increases in electricity prices
will also have a devastating effect on small to medium-sized
businesses who necessarily will be forced to pass on the rises to
the consumer. Yet again the customer loses out. The Government must
know that its public is infuriated by the way that energy prices are
ramped up several times a year seemingly in deference to the demands
of the green agenda. To have the information about further price
hikes kept from the public as well only adds insult to injury"
[Editorial Comment, Daily Express, 15 December 1014].
Earth Hour
"Many participants
claimed that they are 'celebrating' Earth Hour. 'Celebrating' what,
exactly? Perhaps they are celebrating the 3 billion+ people who do
not have access to cheap energy. That's a higher number than it
would be had the Greens not spent decades campaigning against and
interfering in other nations' attempts to develop fossil and nuclear
power infrastructure" [source].
"The problem is these
terminal idiots of Earth Hour don't even do going without properly.
And they seem to be utterly clueless regarding the actual
environmental impact of candle. Ask any eco-warrior what a candle is
made of and they'll just say 'wax'. What they miss out is that it is
paraffin wax. It's a hydrocarbon. Burning it releases CO2. And, in
fact, burning one paraffin candle for one hour releases about
eight times as much CO2 as having a single 5 watt light bulb
(e.g. a night light) switched on for about the same period. If you
tried to match the illumination produced by a single incandescent
bulb with candles, the amount of CO2 you would release relative to
the bulb would be even higher"
[source].
Renewable Energy
The following
extended quote is from the book by James Delingpole,
The Little
Green Book of Eco-Fascism, pp.247-248:
Renewable Energy "involves nice,
lovely natural things like wind, which is breezy and keeps you cool
on a hot day and is great when you're a kid and flying a kite.
Solar, too, which comes from the sun and if we can just learn to
harness even a fraction of its power, why, evil dirty fossil fuels
would be banished forever, and greed and selfishness would almost
certainly be abolished with it, and we'd all live in peace and
harmony under a rainbow sky. Why, to not like renewable energy,
you'd have to hate nature itself...
"For renewable energy to make any
kind of sense whatsoever, its benefits would have to exceed its
costs. This they don't, with the odd rare local exception such as
Norway whose physical geography makes hydro-electric power a viable
option. But that's about as far as it goes: wind, solar, biomass,
tidal and so on are virtually useless as serious substitutes for
fossil fuel (or nuclear) energy, a) because they're so relatively
expensive and b) because of their dreadful side-effects ranging from
environmental blight to causing food riots.
"Why then are renewables so widely
believed to be the solution and not, as they really are, the
problem?
"Two reasons, both equally stupid and
wrong:
- Plummeting educational standards
have essentially resulted in the lobotomisation of the entire
Western world, meaning that when a few green campaign groups
blather on about 'harnessing nature's free energy', hardly
anyone bothers to subject this claim to the rigorous scrutiny of
a cost-benefit analysis;
- Partly as a result of reason
one, we have most of us been persuaded that there are these
things called 'scarce resources' which we need to preserve for
'future generations' - and that, as a result of this, renewable
energy is both a moral and economic necessity.
"In truth, renewable energy is
neither of these things, Far from being moral, it represents a
grotesque confidence trick on the credulous populace, perpetrated by
an unholy cabal of green activists and the cynical rent-seeking
corporatists who have flocked to the subsidised renewables sector
like vultures to a rotting carcass.
"There is nothing moral about:
- artificially driving up the cost
of energy;
- enriching corporate fat-cats at
the expense of the poor;
- distorting free markets through
compulsory tariffs and subsidies;
- trashing the countryside;
- driving up food prices;
- wiping out birds and bats;
- diverting land from food
production to cost-ineffective energy production.
RenewableUK
"Formerly the British Wind Energy
Association; pumping out dubious propaganda on behalf of the wind
industry since 1978.
"So, next time you're reading the
papers and you see RenewableUK's indefatigable spokesman Maf Smith
assuring you that, 'Not only are wind farms good for birds but they
actually protect their eggs, incubate them, feed them yummy little
titbits which they've kindly chopped up with their blades and
finally teach them how to fly' - or similar - my advice is to take
it with a pinch of salt"
[End]
Wind Turbines
The following
extended quote is from the book by James Delingpole,
The Little
Green Book of Eco-Fascism, pp.22-23:
"Bats are one of the world's most
heavily protected species. In Britain, for example, it is actually a
criminal offence to: deliberately capture, injure or kill a bat;
disturb a bat in its roost; damage a bat roosting place (even if
there are no bats there at the time); possess or
advertise/sell/exchange a bat (dead or alive) or any part of a bat;
intentionally or recklessly obstruct access to a bat roost.
"Has the world gone mad? Well
obviously it has; that's a given. But there is, in this case, at
least a glimmer of almost-sanity behind this legislative lunacy:
bats - because of their long life cycle and slow breeding cycle -
are unusually vulnerable. Kill a breeding pair and you may well have
wiped out the bat neighbourhood for miles around.
"Given that this is so - and known to
be so by all conservationists - you've got to ask yourself why the
environmental movement isn't united in opposition to the wind
industry. Wind turbines are the worst thing to happen to bats ...
For some unfortunate reason (possible to do with the vibrations),
bats are attracted to those spinning blades like moths to a flame -
at which point, if they survive the collision, they are killed by
the pressure wave which ruptures their internal organs ('barotraumised')
and causes them to drop from the night sky like stones.
"Every year, in the US alone an
estimated 28,470,000 bats are splatted by wind turbines (that's
based on a fairly conservative estimate of two bat-deaths per
turbine per day). So why, you might wonder, aren't the tree-huggers
kicking up more of a stink? Why aren't the greenies marching on
Westminster with their Save the Bat placards to demand that
subsidies to the wind industry (the only reason anyone would bother
erecting these hideous, noisy bat-chomping eco-crucifixes in the
first place) be slashed to zero, forthwith?
"Why indeed. Here is a perfect
illustration of the cognitive dissonance at the very heart of the
green psychopathology. In the environmentalist mindset, wind power
is 'clean', eco-friendly and morally right: therefore when strong
evidence emerges that wind power is none of these things, the only
response of which the greenies are capable is to stick a finger in
each ear and go, 'Nyah nyah nyah. Not listening.'"
[End]
|
