The guy behind carbon capture scam is actually a Trump backer - Bruce Rastetter. Kennedy exposed the boondoggle at the Iowa fair back in July 2023. Trump also took contributions from Monsanto last time and deregulated GMOs in 2019. Kennedy should know about these things
yet they got people to believe it. same with the 'let's cut down millions of trees to put up wind power. say what?? don't hear anybody talking about a moratorium on plastic manufacture or massive cargo ships burning the dirtiest of fuel oils. nope, everybody wants their cheap shit from China at the dollar store. next time you have a run in with one of these purple-haired climate 'activists', ask them if they're still buying crap made in China??
important article, especially since so often I see RFK's detractors insists that he is 100% behind the climate change 'agenda', supports carbon tax and carbon credits, etc. Obviously nothing could be further from the truth. the legacy media and even many alt media sites, repeat these lies, often including cherry-picked soundbites in which RFK talks about fining corporate polluters, but its presented like he was talking about individual citizens.
its one thing to believe that humans activity is damaging the environment (who could argue that that's not a thing? heck, the loonies have been spraying toxic particulates into the atmosphere deliberately for many years already!) another thing entirely to claim that RFK jr is on board with the whole CO2/carbon BS non-science.
Same thing goes here in the UK. The government gives our tax to wealthy corporations to plant trees on farm land and then they die in the summer sun because nobody waters them.
Meanwhile so called green sustainable consulting companies like SLR Consulting write false reports that allow wealthy landowners to cut down woodland.
I am all in favour of natural carbon capture. And its nice to know that it is accelerating naturally without the need for taxpayer subsidies. As the CO2 content in the air increases plant leaf stomata can close up marginally and this enables the plant to retain moisture. So, all the dry country becomes viable for plant activity, and there is a lot of it. Seeds are carried by the wind, insects and animals and take root in locations that were formerly inhospitable. As plant biomass increases so does the humidity. Humidity breeds clouds, clouds breed rainfall, this enhances the circulation of wet air from the ocean to the land. A woodland can turn into a forest. Its all good.
The cycles in climate are both short and long term in nature and we simply don't know what causes them. If we adopt a warming mantra and reward people for adopting it, we will never know.
This is highway robbery, just like the biofuel from corn funding was, only this is worse, due to the network of pipes---on our dime! I sent this to my Representatives, yet they don't respond. What Congress person cares about funding accountability? Rand Paul? We need others!
Not to mention the subsidies that go into toxic monoculture Monsanto corn and soy crops grown to feed the biofuel industry. It’s a completely toxic cycle from beginning to end.
A biofuel industry can be built that is decentralized and utilizes local feedstocks that don’t require Monsanto corn and soy and doesn’t affect food production. Fossil fuels have always been an environmental and societal disaster and need to be stopped.
YES! those feedlots could use rotation methods for a methane fuel production (covered) and put in pressurized tanks, to operate the beef industry or aspect of it.
People just don't have the Reuse/Recycle mantra in their heads!
I was very suspicious of the huge fires in eastern Canada, last year. This could have been encouraged by the HAARP/geo-engineering programs, to encourage fire with nanoparticles sprayed from above, for incendiary purposes (activated by lazars or otherwise).
You quote an article in TIME magazine regarding ethanol plants. The quote implies that the scheme to sequester carbon released by the plants is somehow "supporting" the plants; nothing could be further from the truth. There is no need to sequester carbon dioxide produced in the process of fermentation, that CO2 is part of a closed cycle where plants use CO2 and release oxygen; the released carbon goes right back into growing the feedstocks that supply the plant. I'm wondering about the remark about ethanol being "obsolete" as humans have produced ethanol for thousands of years why is it now suddenly "obsolete"? How does ethanol pollute when it is based on growing plants and converting the stored solar energy from those plants into fuel or whatever. Fossil fuels depend on highly polluting processes and one way carbon pathways-from the ground to the air. Ethanol integrates into the ecosystem, every single production byproduct is useful. The mash can be used as fertilizer or used as cattle feed, The CO2 from fermentation can be directed to greenhouses to supercharge vegetable production. Highly centralized rube goldberg schemes to produce ethanol should be replace with local small scale plants using locally produced feedstocks and plowing byproducts back into feedstock production. Don't be like Rockefeller who acted to kill ethanol production (it's why he promoted prohibition) so his dirty gasoline could be used instead as auto fuel. Following the science which they say RFK jr. will do will reveal the same bought off crooked "science" that has been used to promote pharma is used in the same way to discredit and slander what is the cleanest fuel out there.
The guy behind carbon capture scam is actually a Trump backer - Bruce Rastetter. Kennedy exposed the boondoggle at the Iowa fair back in July 2023. Trump also took contributions from Monsanto last time and deregulated GMOs in 2019. Kennedy should know about these things
https://youtu.be/yxvXfu2Hp2g?t=892
https://www.summitag.com/news/presidential-endoresement
https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/press-releases/5624/cfs-statement-trump-signs-executive-order-to-further-gut-federal-gmo-oversight
Burning oil and then burning more oil to collect Co2 and cram into into pipes and wells is severely crack pot science.
yet they got people to believe it. same with the 'let's cut down millions of trees to put up wind power. say what?? don't hear anybody talking about a moratorium on plastic manufacture or massive cargo ships burning the dirtiest of fuel oils. nope, everybody wants their cheap shit from China at the dollar store. next time you have a run in with one of these purple-haired climate 'activists', ask them if they're still buying crap made in China??
important article, especially since so often I see RFK's detractors insists that he is 100% behind the climate change 'agenda', supports carbon tax and carbon credits, etc. Obviously nothing could be further from the truth. the legacy media and even many alt media sites, repeat these lies, often including cherry-picked soundbites in which RFK talks about fining corporate polluters, but its presented like he was talking about individual citizens.
its one thing to believe that humans activity is damaging the environment (who could argue that that's not a thing? heck, the loonies have been spraying toxic particulates into the atmosphere deliberately for many years already!) another thing entirely to claim that RFK jr is on board with the whole CO2/carbon BS non-science.
Now we have an article to refer those RFK Jr detractors to.
Same thing goes here in the UK. The government gives our tax to wealthy corporations to plant trees on farm land and then they die in the summer sun because nobody waters them.
Meanwhile so called green sustainable consulting companies like SLR Consulting write false reports that allow wealthy landowners to cut down woodland.
Happening now in Market Drayton Shropshire.
wow, that's really sad. :(
I am all in favour of natural carbon capture. And its nice to know that it is accelerating naturally without the need for taxpayer subsidies. As the CO2 content in the air increases plant leaf stomata can close up marginally and this enables the plant to retain moisture. So, all the dry country becomes viable for plant activity, and there is a lot of it. Seeds are carried by the wind, insects and animals and take root in locations that were formerly inhospitable. As plant biomass increases so does the humidity. Humidity breeds clouds, clouds breed rainfall, this enhances the circulation of wet air from the ocean to the land. A woodland can turn into a forest. Its all good.
The cycles in climate are both short and long term in nature and we simply don't know what causes them. If we adopt a warming mantra and reward people for adopting it, we will never know.
If they really cared about the carbon capture issue they would embrace regenerative farming/agriculture…if they really cared…
This is highway robbery, just like the biofuel from corn funding was, only this is worse, due to the network of pipes---on our dime! I sent this to my Representatives, yet they don't respond. What Congress person cares about funding accountability? Rand Paul? We need others!
Not to mention the subsidies that go into toxic monoculture Monsanto corn and soy crops grown to feed the biofuel industry. It’s a completely toxic cycle from beginning to end.
A biofuel industry can be built that is decentralized and utilizes local feedstocks that don’t require Monsanto corn and soy and doesn’t affect food production. Fossil fuels have always been an environmental and societal disaster and need to be stopped.
YES! those feedlots could use rotation methods for a methane fuel production (covered) and put in pressurized tanks, to operate the beef industry or aspect of it.
People just don't have the Reuse/Recycle mantra in their heads!
These psychopaths want to eliminate photosynthesis by burying trees and then burying carbon. What has happened to common sense?
I was very suspicious of the huge fires in eastern Canada, last year. This could have been encouraged by the HAARP/geo-engineering programs, to encourage fire with nanoparticles sprayed from above, for incendiary purposes (activated by lazars or otherwise).
You quote an article in TIME magazine regarding ethanol plants. The quote implies that the scheme to sequester carbon released by the plants is somehow "supporting" the plants; nothing could be further from the truth. There is no need to sequester carbon dioxide produced in the process of fermentation, that CO2 is part of a closed cycle where plants use CO2 and release oxygen; the released carbon goes right back into growing the feedstocks that supply the plant. I'm wondering about the remark about ethanol being "obsolete" as humans have produced ethanol for thousands of years why is it now suddenly "obsolete"? How does ethanol pollute when it is based on growing plants and converting the stored solar energy from those plants into fuel or whatever. Fossil fuels depend on highly polluting processes and one way carbon pathways-from the ground to the air. Ethanol integrates into the ecosystem, every single production byproduct is useful. The mash can be used as fertilizer or used as cattle feed, The CO2 from fermentation can be directed to greenhouses to supercharge vegetable production. Highly centralized rube goldberg schemes to produce ethanol should be replace with local small scale plants using locally produced feedstocks and plowing byproducts back into feedstock production. Don't be like Rockefeller who acted to kill ethanol production (it's why he promoted prohibition) so his dirty gasoline could be used instead as auto fuel. Following the science which they say RFK jr. will do will reveal the same bought off crooked "science" that has been used to promote pharma is used in the same way to discredit and slander what is the cleanest fuel out there.