planet of the humans

Eric Cartman

In general im not a michael moore fan , i know he was only half involved but the film is very good at exposing the intermittency fault with solar and wind, the issues with idling coal or gas plants and the storage issues and issues with the harm rare earth mining causes.

The most important part of that film is talking about ‘biomass’ and deforestation . The greens here are pro biomass, they lambaste peat power production but think burning trees has a place in our ‘green future’ . We would be well to all take head that the move towards cutting emissions should not involve shutting the bogs to cut down the forests to power everything.

Pa ElGrande

Eric Cartman wrote: »

In general im not a michael moore fan , i know he was only half involved but the film is very good at exposing the intermittency fault with solar and wind, the issues with idling coal or gas plants and the storage issues and issues with the harm rare earth mining causes.

The most important part of that film is talking about ‘biomass’ and deforestation . The greens here are pro biomass, they lambaste peat power production but think burning trees has a place in our ‘green future’ . We would be well to all take head that the move towards cutting emissions should not involve shutting the bogs to cut down the forests to power everything.

This is "evil capitalist" Moore pushing his usual "evil capitalists" muckumentary storyline (you know they are evil because Koch brothers), however his audience has been faltering in recent years.

The film does expose the random energy sector for what it is: subsidy harvesting. The section of the political spectrum that Moore originates does not like crony capitalism, their answer tends to be crony socialism. It's broadly along the same lines as Naomi Klein with her disaster capitalism storyline. The film is not an attack on the entire political left, or the eco-loons.


In light of this film it is interesting to note that there is/was a wood-chip burning electricity generating station to be setup in Killala, Co. Mayo (then Taoiseach Enda Kennys constituency), but ran out of money and the project ceased, but it is still floating around. The raw material to be burned would need to be imported from the United States through a port like Foynes in Co. Limerick and driven by truck to Co. Mayo.

Speaking to an Oireachtas Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Director of Energy Markets John Melvin said the original application made in 2012 was different to that made in 2018.

He said one of the key differences between 2012 and 2018 is the cost of the fuel input.

Mr Melvin said that in 2012 the fuel was much cheaper and was to be imported from the US in a dry state and the plant was to dry and sell it in Ireland.

He said appropriately dried wood chips would be a very valuable product.

However, he said in the 2018 application the same plant was proposed to be used - but using a different fuel input.

He told the Committee, it proposed to use 70% of the dried biomass output of the plant and burn that in the plant.

<snip>

Fine Gael Senator Michelle Mulherin said Ireland had renewable heat and electricity target which had to be met.

She said she found it ‘bizarre’ that that CRU was concerned about how much raw materials would cost the company -- but wasn’t concerned about the carbon footprint about where the material come from.

source

Just like the 1963 planning act that enriched Mr. Haughey and others, the law has been changed to "meet climate targets", and that smell you get in the air is not burning wood, but the body odour of excited subsidy harvesters masked with the fragrance of Green hypocrisy. The Greens want Ireland planted with trees, but can't cut them down because the wolves, therefore the raw material has to be clear felled in the United States and imported and burned here.

KyussB

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

This is "evil capitalist" Moore pushing his usual "evil capitalists" muckumentary storyline (you know they are evil because Koch brothers), however his audience has been faltering in recent years.

He's right to paint the Koch's as corrupt. Funding by and connections to the Koch's, and their huge network of funding for think-tanks etc., is the no.1 most reliable indicator of propaganda aimed at corrupting science and public discourse.

You're the no.1 person citing Koch funded/linked material on the entire forum.

James Brown

spatchco wrote: »

just watched this doc on youtube i see that some people are trying to have it taken down as it shows the green agenda is not all what it is supposed to be check it out some eye openers

It's about how the green movement was co-opted by multinationals and assorted billionaires. The green agenda is saving the human race from annihilation. The bastards...

jaxxx

#HumansSuck

#HumanExtinction

#BringItOn

#Hashtag

Pa ElGrande

Bowie wrote: »

It's about how the green movement was co-opted by multinationals and assorted billionaires. The green agenda is saving the human race from annihilation. The bastards...

There is no single "green agenda". There are are multiple competing groups with their own agendas gathered under a green umbrella who masquerade their intentions by claiming to save the planet from the human race.

Human nature has not changed in eons and environmentalism has become the a substitute for religion among people where Christianity and Marxism have fallen out of favour and has its own priestly class and proselytisers and a “potential for dogmatic zeal and obsession" as discussed in the article linked.

Now the secular world still has to make sense out of its own invisible, psychological drama—in particular, its feelings of guilt and indignation. Environmentalism, as a substitute for religion, has come to the rescue. Nietzsche's argument about an ideal God and guilt can be replicated in a new form: We need a belief in a pristine environment because we need to be cruel to ourselves as inferior beings, and we need that because we have these aggressive instincts that cannot be let out.

source