That is exactly why what drives these policies can be considered evil. Evil at its roots seeks to destroy mankind. They also lie (whether they believe their own lies or not, who knows.) They say “for the good of people and the earth” but they hurt and destroy whatever they touch. At best they do no good. We are dealing with the same ideological issues here in the US. It just seems boiled down in Germany. In a sense microwaved in the process of ideation to implementation.
Not sure if your name is a play on the fiction piece John Carter of Mars but if it is just know I love that story. I think it's some wonderful fiction and while the movie was a financial flop I and my 12 year old daughter both loved it. Granted it's not equal to the FOUNDATION stuff but I still think its great.
Glad to find someone else who liked JOHN CARTER. Did you know it is in the list of the top 10 most expensive films ever made? I want to say it was something just over 300 million which at the time was a huge amount of money.
If you believe the world has 7.5B too many people on it and you and your pals control all the resources, what are you going to do? You could start making lots of bullets and designing camps and such, but that's a lot of work. It's easier to just dose the public with a variety of diseases and wreck their food supply and extract all the value out of their currency. Let nature do the work.
The same phenomenon occurred several years ago in the US with a "clean coal" demonstration project in Indiana. It was shut down for fear it would succeed.
I wrote a column on the problem with electric cars a while back (free subscribers can see the full achieves) Electric cars are the last step, not the first.
I was surprised that the article didn't go into the power of the environmental movement in Germany. Environmental concern caused Germans to outlaw warming up your car to clear your windshields. They weren't concerned with global warming, but with all the other pollutants.
Wouldn't it be karma if a German greenie were hit and killed by a car with a snowy/icy windshield that couldn't be cleared due to "green" energy policies?
The Germans might have wanted to prevent themselves from getting entangled in a nuclear fuel cycle morass that is likely to be more costly than profitable.
No connection to nuclear power other than uses the same class of energy. The Ukraine War runs on fossil fuel. So are you guilty of war because you filled your car with fossil fuel? Most countries that developed nuclear weapons did so without any commercial nuclear power. Most countries that have commercial nuclear power have not developed nuclear weapons.
Nonsense. Spent Nuclear fuel is a precious resource. Only due to idiotic and corrupt political blockades, many countries don't utilize it. Coal waste contains toxic elements such as mercury, arsenic, lead, even uranium & thorium that are toxic forever. In fact produce 18X the nuclear waste that equivalent nuclear power plants would use with a closed fuel cycle.
That challenge has been met and dealt with. We have 70 years experience and the technology to sequester it safely. But what about the storage challenge of carbon capture, or the disposal challenge of batteries?
Really? That would be an incredibly stupid and difficult way to "salt the fields". Far, far easier to just drop a radiological bomb which is easy to make out of medical or industrial isotopes that are your most radioactive substances. I worked in an industrial plant (not nuclear) that had 29 "hot" radioisotope sources, Co-60 & Cs-137. Unlike trying to bore into a nuclear core that would easy for any nation state to do.
Besides, why would anyone want to do that when there is a worldwide free-for-all, paid by Fauci & gang, to develop deadly pathogens, that are vastly more effective as a weapon, as we have seen for the past 3 yrs.
Or they can just do what the Government/EPA did to their own citizens in East Palestine, Ohio. Light a train load of highly toxic Vinyl Chloride on fire sending an incredibly toxic cloud of carcinogens, poisons, mutagens and teratogens into the atmosphere to be deposited over many square miles.
Green policies, like DIE, are just part of the background now. Hegemonic, assumed, axiomatic. For everyone inside the managerial, academic, corporate, regulatory etc. bureaucracies, it isn't a question of whether CO2 is driving a climate catastrophe, or even whether 'renewable' (lol) energy is the way to solve this. The only question is how best to implement the decisions they all agree must be implemented.
That none of this is based in reality, and all of it is guaranteed to result in an actual catastrophe, is of no concern to them.
In sum, there is no reasoning with these people. They must simply be removed from influence. The only question is how to do that without ripping everything apart ... although maybe that isn't possible, and the real question is closer to the one Hari Seldon posed at the beginning of Foundation.
The only way "these people" have the power and status they have achieved is because they have the promotion, financing and backing of the Bankster Malthusian cult who runs the Western World mostly. Just look at their manifesto that their Club of Rome endlessly touts. Germany might as well be called the Club of Rome model for the future - post industrial society.
Yes. However, status is a funny thing. It is, to use the terminology of the postmodernists, a social construct. They have status only because everyone agrees they have status. If that agreement is withdrawn, it does not matter what honours they accord themselves.
Exactly. They need our consent to their utter nonsense. They spend trillions to coerce and brainwash. All we need to do, really, is don't buy in to any of it -- to none of their narratives. They cannot create the reality they intend without our help. When enough of us simply stop agreeing to their propaganda, it's game over for them.
That's why they are trying so hard now to enforce censorship in every nation on Earth. Not in just one or two. But every one. Tells you how far reaching their power & control is. Just as their Covid Plandemic did.
Thank you for spelling the acronym correctly, in the order in which each noxious element was introduced: inclusion was in place long before equity. Either way, the spelling creates something horrid: either DEI (Latin = gods, as in, 'we who practice this stercus consider ourselves such') or DIE (a command to people from practitioners of this miasma)
Yes, I've been making the observation for some time in my own writing that the conventional order implies the DEIfication of their horrid ideology, appropriately enough as they have put it in place of God. Of course every institution they subvert begins to DIE. As for its adherents, they are IEDs.
Have just gone to look at Postcards from Barsoom---then to A Silver Circle--what a comfort to find like minds. Life has long been lonely. Until Substack came across my path and swept me up.
Would it matter? Germans have previously had no problem slaughtering their own and others in the name of ideological purity. This time will be no different.
So what do we have to offer that's better than what they're offering? It can't be that difficult, can it, when the option is a total surveillance state, slavery, freezing, and starvation?
It's amusing to call it such, but it's effectively reached religious status given its penetration of society. We won't defeat it using conventional politics, or facts and logic. This is a holy war and we must treat it as such.
Maybe, as Germany continues down their ruinous path, they'll at least serve as a negative example for the rest of the world not anxious to freeze in the winter, swelter in the summer, and pay exorbitant prices for power that's only available now and then.
sadly, not only Germany. Many countries in Europe will institute their desired measures with precision calculation. There will be back lash, however, this is why these powerful shit heads move so very slowly. The older generations are too confused about the changes (people like my dad, 99 yo) and the younger generations do not know any better.
You are right, it’s psychological not intellectual. Reason, logic, evidence, debate - casting pearls before the swine. No point in talking to people who won’t listen.
I suspect the only solution to total capture will be total non-compliance. A critical mass of people simply refusing to listen to or obey the useless institutions.
An attempt to create another energy crisis has also begun in the US, with new rules against natural gas heating and appliances being installed on new-builds in some states. Absolutely ridiculous considering that natural gas is one of the cleanest, most efficient energy sources ever discovered.
With new fracking techniques drillers can recover enough natural gas to supply the US for over 700 years . . . which, of course, totally ruins the elites' crisis narrative, and explains their anxiousness to be rid of it.
No Shale Gas supply is already peaking in the US. There is no way it can even replace coal in the US never mind supply the export market and certainly supply will be extremely restrained within 50yrs, likely less.
"Today we deep dive fracking and shale, the energy source that put Peak Oil concerns on the back burner for a decade and a half. According to recent analysis by Goehring and Rozencwajg Shale field production is showing signs of sliding down the backside of Hubbert’s curve. What are the geopolitical and economic ramifications? Are there more shale booms on the horizon overseas? What are the implications for nuclear which has been sidelined in deregulated markets by cheap abundant gas? Leigh Goehring joins me for a detailed discussion.
Using modern prospecting and extraction techniques there are hundreds – perhaps thousands of years’ worth of available petroleum resources left as yet untouched.
Then, using the steerable drilling techniques used for shale extraction and in situ gasification which produces synthesis gas, feedstock for the Fischer-Tropsch coal to oil process, there are trillions of tons of coal accessible in the UK alone.
And then there is the vast amount of methane available as hydrate on the ocean bed and in the arctic permafrost which is even now being investigated with a view to commercial exploitation, see here:
“At the same time, new technologies are being developed in Germany that may be useful for exploring and extracting the hydrates. The basic idea is very simple: the methane (CH4) is harvested from the hydrates by replacing it with CO2. Laboratory studies show that this is possible in theory because liquid carbon dioxide reacts spontaneously with methane hydrate. If this concept could become economically viable, it would be a win-win situation, because the gas exchange in the hydrates would be attractive both from a financial and a climate perspective.”
Some of what you are saying can of course be done and will be done. Japan is big on mining methane hydrate deposits right now. The cost of energy from these novel methods and the EROI from them is the critical factor. The numbers are, let's just say, dubious. And that's assuming nobody gives a damn about GHG emissions in the future. And that's a big assumption.
It's all an academic & political issue in any case. The simple truth that the PTB don't want you to know, is that nuclear power is easily capable of replacing all of the World's current energy supply, expanding it 5X to raise the standard of living of Developing Nations, and do that essentially forever, at least for millions of years, that's just fission resources.
And do so at an EROI that is nothing less than astonishing, certainly greater than 300:1, but likely upwards of 1000:1. And at a cost that NO form of energy can compete, not even close. Factory built SMRs, built at the scale they need to be built, will easily cost <$1k per kwe, $200/kwth, you just can't compete with that. With a tiny fuel supply, easily placed anywhere on the Earth, deep in the sea, in the high Arctic or Antarctic, on mountains, deserts or in space, Moon, Mars, Asteroids.
Those are just the facts. And believe me the PTB know that very well. They figured that out in the 1970's, when the USA was completing a new NPP every month, and would have been nearly 100% nuclear electricity by 2000 if they allowed that to continue. That's why they launched the international boycott of nuclear power, using Fear Porn, NGO's, corrupt media. There is strong evidence that even the TMI meltdown incident was contrived. And using ENGO's like Greenpeace, who still refuses to tell us where they get their $400M/yr from.
"And that's assuming nobody gives a damn about GHG emissions in the future. And that's a big assumption."
Not as big as all that, I doubt.
Currently the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation has just entered its negative phase, so the current warming pause is going to become cooling for the next two or three decades before the positive phase reasserts itself.
Remember that when the AMO went positive it triggered the change from the Great Ice Age caused by pollution scare to the current CO2 driven Anthropogenic Global Warming scare:
"We report here on the first results of a calculation in which separate estimates were made of the effects on global temperature of large increases in the amount of CO2 and dust in the atmosphere.<b> It is found that even an increase by a factor of 8 in the amount of CO2, which is highly unlikely in the next several thousand years, will produce an increase in the surface temperature of less than 2 deg. K.</b>
However, the effect on surface temperature of an increase in the aerosol content of the atmosphere is found to be quite significant. An increase by a factor of 4 in the equilibrium dust concentration in the global atmosphere, which cannot be ruled out as a possibility within the next century, could decrease the mean surface temperature by as much as 3.5 deg. K. If sustained over a period of several years, such a temperature decrease could be sufficient to trigger an ice age!</blockquote>
<b>Schneider S. & Rasool S., "Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols - Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate", Science, vol.173, 9 July 1971, p.138-141</b>
Those results were based on a climate model developed by none other than James Hansen, incidentally.
So quite soon we will be able to observe the "climate scientists" as they make excuses for having got it completely wrong for the last few decades.
If we are really unfortunate and the Solar Cycle cooling behaves as some are predicting, then it could get very cool indeed, and we really will have a climate catastrophe.
How much energy is the sun delivering at this time of earth year about 200 miles above the US surface facing the sun at noon. Has such a calculation ever been attempted.
Eugyppius, you are one of the wisest voices on Substack. Happy to see you getting into energy which was always going to be a far scarier grift than covid for a variety of reasons, many of which you elocuted here so well. But here is the real question: what shall we, mere mortals, do about this? Or shall we all just move to Russia? China? There must be some other solution. Hoping that your brainpower will help present some actionable things that can be done auf Deutschland and around the world.
The whole Climate Catastrophe narrative is far more scary than the Covid Crap narrative because it's been years in the making. I am old enough to remember the newspapers having mocked up photos of icebergs and polar bears floating along the Thames in London! I also remember the stories of how we would be growing grapes and avocadoes and housing refugees from southern Europe as it became uninhabitable due to the increasing heat. I remember the hole in the ozone, the acid rain, the uncontrollable forest fires, the melting of the Siberian permafrost, the drowning of the Maldives. We were either going to freeze or burn. Interestingly, because nothing much happened the public proved pretty indifferent. Unlike Covid where the public were easily fooled. It's so ridiculous - if you want to save the planet it's really simply. Just stop spraying chemicals all over it! CO2 isn't the baddie. Burning coal isn't the baddie. Killing things with chemicals and chucking plastic everywhere are the problems.
Do you really see some bigger picture in this? Some "grand design"? Or what if it's merely fads that come and go all the time? I remember reading how people in the 18th century used to scare each other with Earth going through a comet tail, and how the nascent electric power brought to life Frankenstein (or his creation). What if these climate lunatics are merely a branch of literature, a cultural stream that eats its own tail?
Of course, it should be taken in the larger cultural context, as the optimistic people of the past would have seen profit in the spread of agriculture to the North of Sweden, whereas modern cucks get scared because their dear African children will die.
From Red to Green. One year after Chernobyl, Mikhail Gorbachev announced the creation of “Green Cross International”, an organisation whose president he is still today. It is fighting for the worldwide adoption of the “Earth Charter”, a document drafted in close cooperation with the Rockefellers. Torsten Mann shows in his new book that the real aim of this charter is promoting world communism under the new “global sustainable community” label.
Critical Review:
Red Lies in Green Clothes
Torsten Mann: Rote Lügen im grünen Gewand. Der kommunistische Hintergrund der Öko-Bewegung. Kopp Verlag, Rottenburg 2009
"...there is nothing anybody can do about it" I disagree.
I know a German who worked in the energy field and "finally" toured a nuke plant last year. She was very impressed. However, she is in total denial of what's going on there and won't discuss anything negative.
I'll circle back to her in 2 years and the majority there like her. They will have seen reality and will stand up. Same problem in the US: until enough people feel enough pain, denial is easy. When harsh reality is their only friend, the instinct to fight back kicks in.
People who are just desperately trying to hang onto their Bunds and 401Ks respectively at present in the future when hungry and cold will not suddenly revolt. That’s a nice myth, that’s all it is, its always been a myth, it’s utter nonsense. People trying to survive only try to survive.
Meanwhile in energy-starved Germany reality is starting to bite... March industrial orders fell by 10.7%, overall production decreased by 3.4%, manufacture of cars parts and machinery fell by 6.5% and 3.4% respectively.
A little while ago some German Green somebody (possibly one of the men you mention) gave a statement regarding the potential delay to shut down one of the reactors (this was last year if I recall);
"They won't take away my victory"
I wish I'd make a note of it as I can't recall for the life of me the guy's name. Tells you everything you need to know. They're zealots on a crusade.
Is Germany just destined to destroy itself every hundred years? They're bang on schedule.
And just like in 1920’s, it’s communists stirring the pot again. Fascism is the only defense against communist revolution, fire v fire. Hitler 2.0 incoming...
Excellent overview, but these technocrats are behind it all ... the same crew the same agenda a few layers up. The covidians are thoroughly connected to the greenians by the money spigots creating the flow of resources. It's ALL to service the great reset.
The German electoral system gives too much power to small parties, that don't represent nearly a majority of citizens. A ranked choice ballot would be a much better choice for Germany.
It has to be mentioned though that this is only possible by the decade-long campaign of politics, media, schools and unis to persuade the public that there is a climate emergency.
It is now seen as self-evident by the vast majority of citizens. German's are happy to self-destruct, because they are convinced they save the earth.
The only fact that really matters for me anymore, is the absolute undeniable insignificance of German emissions in the global scheme. We are like a rounding error, compared to the Chinese. If this doesn't matter, how is addressing any of the empirical claims of climate politics even at all useful? The whole thing is a massive edifice of idiocy.
Eugyppius, come to Sweden and Germany will seem sane.
Here, people in a nation of 8 000 000 swedes and 3 000 000 assorted migrants believe, for real, that a tax on plastic grocery bags impacts climate change and stops garbage from being dumped into rivers in South East Asia.
A nation the population of which is a rounding error in China's or India's census thinks not using plastic drinking straws will save the planet...
The same, sadly, is true of the formerly great white north. Many, if not most, of the so-called 'liberal democracies' seem to marching in greenstep toward oblivion.
Yes, if one believes that the climate apocalypse will come if CO2 is not drastically reduced, then one has no choice than to believe that the climate apocalypse will sure come. Because the BRICS+ and all developing countries have promised already to burn for energy everything can lay their hands on.
But Germans have the ability to see themselves as the only people that matter in the world (and somehow call that diversity), and to be indoctrinated by the most stupid and uneducated people in history.
Those people have persuaded us that it is necessary to destroy ourselves, in the name of a few crying teenage girls.
The Nazis at least put us in smart uniforms and put on Wagner operas when they made us to kill everyone including ourselves.
It’s absolute madness. The Greens don’t reject nuclear power because it is dangerous and it doesn’t work. They reject it because it isn’t and it does. If you don’t mind me posting here. https://open.substack.com/pub/lowstatus/p/save-the-planet-unleash-godzilla?r=evzeq&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Yep. The only solutions that are permitted are the ones most damaging to civilization and human life.
Since we're shilling our own blogs, with apologies:
https://barsoom.substack.com/p/the-war-on-life
That is exactly why what drives these policies can be considered evil. Evil at its roots seeks to destroy mankind. They also lie (whether they believe their own lies or not, who knows.) They say “for the good of people and the earth” but they hurt and destroy whatever they touch. At best they do no good. We are dealing with the same ideological issues here in the US. It just seems boiled down in Germany. In a sense microwaved in the process of ideation to implementation.
Great! I very much enjoy your blog John Carter.
Thank you!
I now subbed to you both! My email box suffers from the weight of all my substack reads.
Just subscribed myself
Not sure if your name is a play on the fiction piece John Carter of Mars but if it is just know I love that story. I think it's some wonderful fiction and while the movie was a financial flop I and my 12 year old daughter both loved it. Granted it's not equal to the FOUNDATION stuff but I still think its great.
It is, and it is.
Glad to find someone else who liked JOHN CARTER. Did you know it is in the list of the top 10 most expensive films ever made? I want to say it was something just over 300 million which at the time was a huge amount of money.
If you believe the world has 7.5B too many people on it and you and your pals control all the resources, what are you going to do? You could start making lots of bullets and designing camps and such, but that's a lot of work. It's easier to just dose the public with a variety of diseases and wreck their food supply and extract all the value out of their currency. Let nature do the work.
The same phenomenon occurred several years ago in the US with a "clean coal" demonstration project in Indiana. It was shut down for fear it would succeed.
I wrote a column on the problem with electric cars a while back (free subscribers can see the full achieves) Electric cars are the last step, not the first.
Thanks Bill. I’ll look at that on you Sub.
I was surprised that the article didn't go into the power of the environmental movement in Germany. Environmental concern caused Germans to outlaw warming up your car to clear your windshields. They weren't concerned with global warming, but with all the other pollutants.
Wouldn't it be karma if a German greenie were hit and killed by a car with a snowy/icy windshield that couldn't be cleared due to "green" energy policies?
Most Germans still warm up their frozen cars, myself included.
The Germans might have wanted to prevent themselves from getting entangled in a nuclear fuel cycle morass that is likely to be more costly than profitable.
Really? Nuclear fuel is less expensive than any other fuel, and should be much more inexpensive with pyroprocessing or molten salt processing.
What do you know about nuclear weapon manufacturing?
No connection to nuclear power other than uses the same class of energy. The Ukraine War runs on fossil fuel. So are you guilty of war because you filled your car with fossil fuel? Most countries that developed nuclear weapons did so without any commercial nuclear power. Most countries that have commercial nuclear power have not developed nuclear weapons.
Nuclear fuel is the only fuel that presents a storage challenge for thousands of years.
Nonsense. Spent Nuclear fuel is a precious resource. Only due to idiotic and corrupt political blockades, many countries don't utilize it. Coal waste contains toxic elements such as mercury, arsenic, lead, even uranium & thorium that are toxic forever. In fact produce 18X the nuclear waste that equivalent nuclear power plants would use with a closed fuel cycle.
That challenge has been met and dealt with. We have 70 years experience and the technology to sequester it safely. But what about the storage challenge of carbon capture, or the disposal challenge of batteries?
Sure, let's go with that!
You are out-trumping Trump.
So far you've been taken to the woodshed on virtually every post. You should stop digging.
It’s part Morgenthau, but mostly so Industry comes to America.
Also we’ve crushed any Independent Europe. Little too close to the Russians and Chinese.
We’re flat out 🇺🇸 Empire.
When Russia or some other great power invades your country, those nuclear power plants suddenly become a great way to salt the fields.
I don't like the idea of betting on world peace.
It would also be interesting to see what happens to the spent fuel pools after a megatsunami.
Really? That would be an incredibly stupid and difficult way to "salt the fields". Far, far easier to just drop a radiological bomb which is easy to make out of medical or industrial isotopes that are your most radioactive substances. I worked in an industrial plant (not nuclear) that had 29 "hot" radioisotope sources, Co-60 & Cs-137. Unlike trying to bore into a nuclear core that would easy for any nation state to do.
Besides, why would anyone want to do that when there is a worldwide free-for-all, paid by Fauci & gang, to develop deadly pathogens, that are vastly more effective as a weapon, as we have seen for the past 3 yrs.
Or they can just do what the Government/EPA did to their own citizens in East Palestine, Ohio. Light a train load of highly toxic Vinyl Chloride on fire sending an incredibly toxic cloud of carcinogens, poisons, mutagens and teratogens into the atmosphere to be deposited over many square miles.
Green policies, like DIE, are just part of the background now. Hegemonic, assumed, axiomatic. For everyone inside the managerial, academic, corporate, regulatory etc. bureaucracies, it isn't a question of whether CO2 is driving a climate catastrophe, or even whether 'renewable' (lol) energy is the way to solve this. The only question is how best to implement the decisions they all agree must be implemented.
That none of this is based in reality, and all of it is guaranteed to result in an actual catastrophe, is of no concern to them.
In sum, there is no reasoning with these people. They must simply be removed from influence. The only question is how to do that without ripping everything apart ... although maybe that isn't possible, and the real question is closer to the one Hari Seldon posed at the beginning of Foundation.
The only way "these people" have the power and status they have achieved is because they have the promotion, financing and backing of the Bankster Malthusian cult who runs the Western World mostly. Just look at their manifesto that their Club of Rome endlessly touts. Germany might as well be called the Club of Rome model for the future - post industrial society.
Yes. However, status is a funny thing. It is, to use the terminology of the postmodernists, a social construct. They have status only because everyone agrees they have status. If that agreement is withdrawn, it does not matter what honours they accord themselves.
Exactly. They need our consent to their utter nonsense. They spend trillions to coerce and brainwash. All we need to do, really, is don't buy in to any of it -- to none of their narratives. They cannot create the reality they intend without our help. When enough of us simply stop agreeing to their propaganda, it's game over for them.
That's why they are trying so hard now to enforce censorship in every nation on Earth. Not in just one or two. But every one. Tells you how far reaching their power & control is. Just as their Covid Plandemic did.
Except for the stubborn fact that they have all the money.
You can’t get a research grant in America without mentioning global warming, no matter how utterly irrelevant you subject is..
Thank you for spelling the acronym correctly, in the order in which each noxious element was introduced: inclusion was in place long before equity. Either way, the spelling creates something horrid: either DEI (Latin = gods, as in, 'we who practice this stercus consider ourselves such') or DIE (a command to people from practitioners of this miasma)
Yes, I've been making the observation for some time in my own writing that the conventional order implies the DEIfication of their horrid ideology, appropriately enough as they have put it in place of God. Of course every institution they subvert begins to DIE. As for its adherents, they are IEDs.
Have just gone to look at Postcards from Barsoom---then to A Silver Circle--what a comfort to find like minds. Life has long been lonely. Until Substack came across my path and swept me up.
I do appreciate your thinking here. And the IED's--very good.
I wrote too fast--one cannot practice a miasma. Apologies offered.
"without ripping everything apart" not possible at this point. Do Germans have guns?
It’s not the guns
Its the balls
We cut them off
Remember?
Would it matter? Germans have previously had no problem slaughtering their own and others in the name of ideological purity. This time will be no different.
The very argument you use is why people need guns to defend themselves and their families. So yes it does matter.
If you try and defend at the family level, its not happening
Families scaled into nations by whatever name around 4400 BC in Europe, so...
So what do we have to offer that's better than what they're offering? It can't be that difficult, can it, when the option is a total surveillance state, slavery, freezing, and starvation?
The public has accepted the premise.
It's amusing to call it such, but it's effectively reached religious status given its penetration of society. We won't defeat it using conventional politics, or facts and logic. This is a holy war and we must treat it as such.
Maybe, as Germany continues down their ruinous path, they'll at least serve as a negative example for the rest of the world not anxious to freeze in the winter, swelter in the summer, and pay exorbitant prices for power that's only available now and then.
sadly, not only Germany. Many countries in Europe will institute their desired measures with precision calculation. There will be back lash, however, this is why these powerful shit heads move so very slowly. The older generations are too confused about the changes (people like my dad, 99 yo) and the younger generations do not know any better.
Slow and easy.
You are right, it’s psychological not intellectual. Reason, logic, evidence, debate - casting pearls before the swine. No point in talking to people who won’t listen.
There was this social revolution in the 1930s to try and prevent this....
....too soon?
That's the situation, yes.
I suspect the only solution to total capture will be total non-compliance. A critical mass of people simply refusing to listen to or obey the useless institutions.
I am generally very sparing with my praise. But this is an EXCELLENT analysis, Eugyppius. (From an American who lived a year in Germany. )
An attempt to create another energy crisis has also begun in the US, with new rules against natural gas heating and appliances being installed on new-builds in some states. Absolutely ridiculous considering that natural gas is one of the cleanest, most efficient energy sources ever discovered.
With new fracking techniques drillers can recover enough natural gas to supply the US for over 700 years . . . which, of course, totally ruins the elites' crisis narrative, and explains their anxiousness to be rid of it.
Gonna have to pry my natural gas stove from my cold dead hands before I give it up.
Insanity...led by California and NY.
No problem, they'll just turn off the gas.
Or the latest costly, and hopefully to be challenged, EPA regulation for power plants:
EPA proposes new rules that would dramatically slash planet-warming pollution from power plants
https://whdh.com/news/epa-proposes-new-rules-that-would-dramatically-slash-planet-warming-pollution-from-power-plants/
No Shale Gas supply is already peaking in the US. There is no way it can even replace coal in the US never mind supply the export market and certainly supply will be extremely restrained within 50yrs, likely less.
Have We Reached Peak Shale?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHzWGnbI9nw
"Today we deep dive fracking and shale, the energy source that put Peak Oil concerns on the back burner for a decade and a half. According to recent analysis by Goehring and Rozencwajg Shale field production is showing signs of sliding down the backside of Hubbert’s curve. What are the geopolitical and economic ramifications? Are there more shale booms on the horizon overseas? What are the implications for nuclear which has been sidelined in deregulated markets by cheap abundant gas? Leigh Goehring joins me for a detailed discussion.
For a deeper dive check out Goehring and Rozencwajg latest quarterly analysis. https://info.gorozen.com/2022-q4-commentary-peak-oil
Using modern prospecting and extraction techniques there are hundreds – perhaps thousands of years’ worth of available petroleum resources left as yet untouched.
Then, using the steerable drilling techniques used for shale extraction and in situ gasification which produces synthesis gas, feedstock for the Fischer-Tropsch coal to oil process, there are trillions of tons of coal accessible in the UK alone.
And then there is the vast amount of methane available as hydrate on the ocean bed and in the arctic permafrost which is even now being investigated with a view to commercial exploitation, see here:
“At the same time, new technologies are being developed in Germany that may be useful for exploring and extracting the hydrates. The basic idea is very simple: the methane (CH4) is harvested from the hydrates by replacing it with CO2. Laboratory studies show that this is possible in theory because liquid carbon dioxide reacts spontaneously with methane hydrate. If this concept could become economically viable, it would be a win-win situation, because the gas exchange in the hydrates would be attractive both from a financial and a climate perspective.”
http://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-1/energy/methane-hydrates/2/
Some of what you are saying can of course be done and will be done. Japan is big on mining methane hydrate deposits right now. The cost of energy from these novel methods and the EROI from them is the critical factor. The numbers are, let's just say, dubious. And that's assuming nobody gives a damn about GHG emissions in the future. And that's a big assumption.
It's all an academic & political issue in any case. The simple truth that the PTB don't want you to know, is that nuclear power is easily capable of replacing all of the World's current energy supply, expanding it 5X to raise the standard of living of Developing Nations, and do that essentially forever, at least for millions of years, that's just fission resources.
And do so at an EROI that is nothing less than astonishing, certainly greater than 300:1, but likely upwards of 1000:1. And at a cost that NO form of energy can compete, not even close. Factory built SMRs, built at the scale they need to be built, will easily cost <$1k per kwe, $200/kwth, you just can't compete with that. With a tiny fuel supply, easily placed anywhere on the Earth, deep in the sea, in the high Arctic or Antarctic, on mountains, deserts or in space, Moon, Mars, Asteroids.
Those are just the facts. And believe me the PTB know that very well. They figured that out in the 1970's, when the USA was completing a new NPP every month, and would have been nearly 100% nuclear electricity by 2000 if they allowed that to continue. That's why they launched the international boycott of nuclear power, using Fear Porn, NGO's, corrupt media. There is strong evidence that even the TMI meltdown incident was contrived. And using ENGO's like Greenpeace, who still refuses to tell us where they get their $400M/yr from.
"And that's assuming nobody gives a damn about GHG emissions in the future. And that's a big assumption."
Not as big as all that, I doubt.
Currently the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation has just entered its negative phase, so the current warming pause is going to become cooling for the next two or three decades before the positive phase reasserts itself.
Remember that when the AMO went positive it triggered the change from the Great Ice Age caused by pollution scare to the current CO2 driven Anthropogenic Global Warming scare:
"We report here on the first results of a calculation in which separate estimates were made of the effects on global temperature of large increases in the amount of CO2 and dust in the atmosphere.<b> It is found that even an increase by a factor of 8 in the amount of CO2, which is highly unlikely in the next several thousand years, will produce an increase in the surface temperature of less than 2 deg. K.</b>
However, the effect on surface temperature of an increase in the aerosol content of the atmosphere is found to be quite significant. An increase by a factor of 4 in the equilibrium dust concentration in the global atmosphere, which cannot be ruled out as a possibility within the next century, could decrease the mean surface temperature by as much as 3.5 deg. K. If sustained over a period of several years, such a temperature decrease could be sufficient to trigger an ice age!</blockquote>
<b>Schneider S. & Rasool S., "Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols - Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate", Science, vol.173, 9 July 1971, p.138-141</b>
Those results were based on a climate model developed by none other than James Hansen, incidentally.
So quite soon we will be able to observe the "climate scientists" as they make excuses for having got it completely wrong for the last few decades.
If we are really unfortunate and the Solar Cycle cooling behaves as some are predicting, then it could get very cool indeed, and we really will have a climate catastrophe.
https://i1.wp.com/electroverse.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Solar-Cycle-25-NASA-full.png?w=829&ssl=1
Mr. SmithFS
How much energy is the sun delivering at this time of earth year about 200 miles above the US surface facing the sun at noon. Has such a calculation ever been attempted.
WBJ
Scam, stock market scam, buy gold no doubt
Eugyppius, you are one of the wisest voices on Substack. Happy to see you getting into energy which was always going to be a far scarier grift than covid for a variety of reasons, many of which you elocuted here so well. But here is the real question: what shall we, mere mortals, do about this? Or shall we all just move to Russia? China? There must be some other solution. Hoping that your brainpower will help present some actionable things that can be done auf Deutschland and around the world.
The whole Climate Catastrophe narrative is far more scary than the Covid Crap narrative because it's been years in the making. I am old enough to remember the newspapers having mocked up photos of icebergs and polar bears floating along the Thames in London! I also remember the stories of how we would be growing grapes and avocadoes and housing refugees from southern Europe as it became uninhabitable due to the increasing heat. I remember the hole in the ozone, the acid rain, the uncontrollable forest fires, the melting of the Siberian permafrost, the drowning of the Maldives. We were either going to freeze or burn. Interestingly, because nothing much happened the public proved pretty indifferent. Unlike Covid where the public were easily fooled. It's so ridiculous - if you want to save the planet it's really simply. Just stop spraying chemicals all over it! CO2 isn't the baddie. Burning coal isn't the baddie. Killing things with chemicals and chucking plastic everywhere are the problems.
Scary is a bad word.
These are criminals.
Never show fear or disgust.
Do you really see some bigger picture in this? Some "grand design"? Or what if it's merely fads that come and go all the time? I remember reading how people in the 18th century used to scare each other with Earth going through a comet tail, and how the nascent electric power brought to life Frankenstein (or his creation). What if these climate lunatics are merely a branch of literature, a cultural stream that eats its own tail?
Of course, it should be taken in the larger cultural context, as the optimistic people of the past would have seen profit in the spread of agriculture to the North of Sweden, whereas modern cucks get scared because their dear African children will die.
From Red to Green. One year after Chernobyl, Mikhail Gorbachev announced the creation of “Green Cross International”, an organisation whose president he is still today. It is fighting for the worldwide adoption of the “Earth Charter”, a document drafted in close cooperation with the Rockefellers. Torsten Mann shows in his new book that the real aim of this charter is promoting world communism under the new “global sustainable community” label.
Critical Review:
Red Lies in Green Clothes
Torsten Mann: Rote Lügen im grünen Gewand. Der kommunistische Hintergrund der Öko-Bewegung. Kopp Verlag, Rottenburg 2009
El Gato Malo calls them watermelons: green on the outside, red on the inside.
put simply:
the Green New Deal is communism rebranded.
"...there is nothing anybody can do about it" I disagree.
I know a German who worked in the energy field and "finally" toured a nuke plant last year. She was very impressed. However, she is in total denial of what's going on there and won't discuss anything negative.
I'll circle back to her in 2 years and the majority there like her. They will have seen reality and will stand up. Same problem in the US: until enough people feel enough pain, denial is easy. When harsh reality is their only friend, the instinct to fight back kicks in.
Never give up. Never surrender.
This is hilarious.
“She” will stand up.
Is she a Mama Grizzly too?
They already surrendered in 1945. To Stalin.
We surrendered to Pelosi and Biden.
People who are just desperately trying to hang onto their Bunds and 401Ks respectively at present in the future when hungry and cold will not suddenly revolt. That’s a nice myth, that’s all it is, its always been a myth, it’s utter nonsense. People trying to survive only try to survive.
Germany had a revolution.
We the Allies crushed it.
Now our masters crush us all.
LMAO
Pretty much everywhere in the west.
Meanwhile in energy-starved Germany reality is starting to bite... March industrial orders fell by 10.7%, overall production decreased by 3.4%, manufacture of cars parts and machinery fell by 6.5% and 3.4% respectively.
It's not a fight when no one is punching back.
We cut their balls off, they can’t fight back, we being the Allies
Democracy is just lipstick on an oligarch pig.
oui.
We can wonder how that pig scarfs down so much with nary a smudge.
A little while ago some German Green somebody (possibly one of the men you mention) gave a statement regarding the potential delay to shut down one of the reactors (this was last year if I recall);
"They won't take away my victory"
I wish I'd make a note of it as I can't recall for the life of me the guy's name. Tells you everything you need to know. They're zealots on a crusade.
Is Germany just destined to destroy itself every hundred years? They're bang on schedule.
And just like in 1920’s, it’s communists stirring the pot again. Fascism is the only defense against communist revolution, fire v fire. Hitler 2.0 incoming...
I've also met a few electrical professionals who have fitted heat pumps and the verdict is unanimous - absolute shit.
Excellent overview, but these technocrats are behind it all ... the same crew the same agenda a few layers up. The covidians are thoroughly connected to the greenians by the money spigots creating the flow of resources. It's ALL to service the great reset.
Why do Germans keep voting for the Greens?
The German electoral system gives too much power to small parties, that don't represent nearly a majority of citizens. A ranked choice ballot would be a much better choice for Germany.
The Greens actually only won 14.8% of votes in the 2021 federal election.
civilizational deathwish
It has to be mentioned though that this is only possible by the decade-long campaign of politics, media, schools and unis to persuade the public that there is a climate emergency.
It is now seen as self-evident by the vast majority of citizens. German's are happy to self-destruct, because they are convinced they save the earth.
The only fact that really matters for me anymore, is the absolute undeniable insignificance of German emissions in the global scheme. We are like a rounding error, compared to the Chinese. If this doesn't matter, how is addressing any of the empirical claims of climate politics even at all useful? The whole thing is a massive edifice of idiocy.
Eugyppius, come to Sweden and Germany will seem sane.
Here, people in a nation of 8 000 000 swedes and 3 000 000 assorted migrants believe, for real, that a tax on plastic grocery bags impacts climate change and stops garbage from being dumped into rivers in South East Asia.
A nation the population of which is a rounding error in China's or India's census thinks not using plastic drinking straws will save the planet...
The same, sadly, is true of the formerly great white north. Many, if not most, of the so-called 'liberal democracies' seem to marching in greenstep toward oblivion.
Yes, if one believes that the climate apocalypse will come if CO2 is not drastically reduced, then one has no choice than to believe that the climate apocalypse will sure come. Because the BRICS+ and all developing countries have promised already to burn for energy everything can lay their hands on.
But Germans have the ability to see themselves as the only people that matter in the world (and somehow call that diversity), and to be indoctrinated by the most stupid and uneducated people in history.
Those people have persuaded us that it is necessary to destroy ourselves, in the name of a few crying teenage girls.
The Nazis at least put us in smart uniforms and put on Wagner operas when they made us to kill everyone including ourselves.
No, its power