reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Alex Nickel, a former policy adviser, reveals the issues with the Renewable Energy Act in Australia. Wind farms receive huge subsidies, costing the economy billions annually. These subsidies are funded by taxpayers through increased power bills. Wind turbines are inefficient, drawing power from the grid to operate and producing unreliable electricity. The turbines do not effectively contribute to the grid and are financially draining the country.

Burning ancient carbon (coal, oil, gas) has created a wonderful quality of life for many, but this practice must stop.

We are being misled with exaggerated information about a climate crisis. Human carbon dioxide emissions are said to drive global warming, but only account for 3% of emissions. The rest is natural. The climate hysteria is about money, not the environment. Expensive electricity bills and job losses are linked to this deception. It is a con not supported by science.

Satellites help us measure the number of trees and carbon dioxide emissions on Earth. Surprisingly, vegetation absorbs more carbon dioxide than humans emit, putting us at net zero. However, excess carbon dioxide comes from the oceans, with only 3% of emissions being human-caused. Simple calculations debunk the idea that carbon dioxide drives global warming, especially when looking at past ice ages with higher atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Dismissing the past would mean disregarding the laws of physics and chemistry. This misinformation is causing significant harm, particularly to the average person who is already struggling with inflation and high living costs, largely due to expensive energy.

Canada has opportunities in carbon capture, small modular reactors, and hydrogen, and could be a clean energy superpower. Mark Carney's ideas about energy omit the fact that Canada produces less than 1.5% of total global emissions. Even if Canada were wiped off the map, it wouldn't matter. Also, about 96% of all the machinery for climate change is made in China.

It takes a massive amount of diesel to create concrete, steel, and transport materials using heavy machinery. The carbon footprint of these operations, along with solar panels and lithium batteries, may not be offset during their lifespan. The existing transmission lines are inadequate to power the world with electricity. We have a 120-year petroleum-based infrastructure that is essential to our lives and found in roads, car wheels, tennis rackets, lipstick, refrigerators, antihistamines, plastic products, cell phones, clothing, soap, and more. We will run out of petroleum before we find a replacement, which will kill us as a species. Oil extraction is dangerous, but we do it because we run out of options. The demand to keep pumping oil is to blame for the danger.

When all else fails, they take you to war, and the climate hoax is an effective tool. In the name of saving the planet, they will take food, cars, gas boilers, and air travel. Land seized from farmers will be used for wind turbines and solar panels, which won't provide reliable energy, potentially leading to a new dark age. The production of turbines and panels uses oil, gas, and coal, requiring the mining of rare earth metals and minerals, destroying habitats and ecosystems. Mining for lithium, cobalt, cadmium, copper, and lead may increase by 2,000%. While coal mines are shut, other mines are opening to obtain materials for batteries. Child slaves give their lives for cobalt used in electric batteries. When turbines and solar panels reach the end of their lives, they can't be recycled and are buried in landfill sites, leaking lead, cadmium, and other toxins into the soil and water supply. This is driven by greed, benefiting the few and denying the many, after years of brainwashing people into thinking the Earth is about to catch fire.

Canada has opportunities in carbon capture, small modular reactors, and hydrogen, and could be a clean energy superpower. Mark Carney's ideas about energy omit the fact that Canada produces less than 1.5% of total global emissions. Even if Canada were wiped off the map, it wouldn't matter. Also, about 96% of all the machinery for climate change is made in China.

Energy producers have significantly lower energy costs because they sell gas at a fraction of the price others pay. Additionally, some producers receive substantial state subsidies, up to 90% in certain regions. This creates a double standard for the cost of goods produced, resulting in unfair competition.

EDF, the cheapest energy provider in Europe, has successfully met all challenges and achieved a remarkable advantage in greenhouse gas emissions. However, there was a need to establish a market price, even though there was no market. This price was based on gas, despite not using it, because Germany does. The obsession for the past thirty years has been to dismantle EDF, and they have succeeded. The absurdity of selling one's own production to virtual competitors with no production obligations is surreal. EDF has few competitors, mainly some scattered wind turbines and solar fields, which is laughable.

Fossil fuels are better for the environment because without them, all the trees would have been cut down. They also save the whales because whale oil was used before fossil fuels. The climate change issue is about controlling energy resources. If everyone uses electricity, it all has to be mined, mostly by slave labor in communist countries owned by dictators. This is not necessarily better than fossil fuels, which make money for those who extract them, involving less exploitation. Scientists who say climate change is real only get grant money if they say climate change is real, while scientists who disagree with climate change have their budgets taken away and are blacklisted. Changing energy resources changes who controls the power in the world.

Carbon dioxide is often labeled as a pollutant, but it is actually essential for life and serves as plant food. Despite being invisible and odorless, it can be intimidating, as we tend to fear what we cannot see. Exploiting this fear, some argue against carbon dioxide, even though it only makes up 1 molecule in 85,000 in the atmosphere and Australia's emissions account for just 1 molecule in 6,500,000. So why is this innocent molecule under attack?

The speaker, a long-time green energy supporter, was dismayed to learn about the environmental and human costs associated with green technologies. A single lithium mine allegedly creates millions of tons of waste annually, laced with sulfuric acid and radioactive uranium, polluting water for 300 years. Child labor is used to mine cobalt. Solar panels are allegedly made by laborers in razor wire enclosed camps exposed to quartz dust, causing silicosis. The Ethical Consumer Organization reports that forced labor in the solar panel supply chain is hard to avoid. Wind turbines consume vast resources, require diesel to start, gallons of oil to lubricate, and are hard to recycle. Solar panels are also extremely difficult to recycle, costing more than production. Lithium batteries pose steep challenges too. The speaker claims these "green" solutions are actually good marketing from the $1.5 trillion climate change industry. They urge people to prevent further escalation through unnecessary EVs and solar farms consuming farmland.

We've built a great quality of life for many by burning ancient carbon like coal, oil, and gas, but we need to stop.

Oil, natural gas, and coal still dominate as the main sources of global energy, providing 84% of the world's energy. Despite claims of a rapid transition away from fossil fuels, the reality is that we have made little progress in shifting to green energy. The main challenge lies in the need for a significant increase in mining to obtain the necessary materials for solar panels, wind turbines, batteries, and other components. This mining process requires a substantial amount of energy, further contributing to the challenge. Additionally, the location of new mines is a concern, as China currently holds a monopoly on critical energy materials. Attempts to build mines in the United States and elsewhere face strong opposition. Future energy demands will only increase with population growth and technological advancements, making it clear that a diverse mix of energy sources, including fossil fuels, nuclear energy, and renewables, will be necessary.

Speaker 0 questions whether the climate change narrative is dying, noting that many people are afraid to say so for fear of being called a climate denier. They claim a growing number of people believe “this is bullshit.” They relate conversations with energy industry people who said, “the thing is collapsing because the money people are realizing we can't pay for this,” and that the grid cannot rely on solar and wind because it “needs to maintain frequency.” They reference Spain shutting down last year and describe the grid as unstable now. They say, for the last ten years, engineers have known there’s a major problem but won’t say it in meetings because “the climate stuff comes from the top and you can't question it,” yet this is starting to break down as people realize trillions of dollars have been spent to move from “85% of our energy is from, you know, real fuels” to “84.2” or so, which they view as insane. Speaker 0 asserts that “Real fuels are gonna be needed,” and notes a shift in stance on the climate hoax. They claim the pivot is happening because “they want data centers and they want to pour massive energy into them,” and suddenly “don’t care about the climate because all the boys up the top who are pushing the climate are now saying, no. We need data centers. We need CBDC. We need a crypto,” which is described as a huge energy use, along with mentions of AI. They conclude that it’s “always crypto,” and state that these developments reveal the climate pushers to be liars.

The speaker, a long-time green energy supporter, was dismayed to learn about the environmental and human costs associated with green technologies. A single lithium mine allegedly creates millions of tons of waste annually, laced with sulfuric acid and radioactive uranium, polluting water for 300 years. Child labor is used to mine cobalt. Solar panels are allegedly made by laborers in razor wire enclosed camps exposed to quartz dust, causing silicosis. The Ethical Consumer Organization reports that forced labor in the solar panel supply chain is hard to avoid. Wind turbines consume vast resources, require diesel to start, gallons of oil to lubricate, and are hard to recycle. Solar panels are also difficult to recycle, and lithium batteries pose challenges. The speaker claims these so-called green solutions are actually good marketing from the $1.5 trillion climate change industry. The speaker urges people to prevent the exponential escalation of these issues with unnecessary EVs and solar farms.

The deindustrialization of Germany seems like a market, what, move towards insanity. Oh, And this remarkable situation where China and India are industrializing at a rate that leaves Europe and its negligible effect on the environment in the dust Right. And increasingly so and at an ever accelerating rate. All of the industry that's leaving Europe and the West in general is localizing in China and in India. China's building coal fired plants at a rate that's just staggering and we all breathe the same The whole bloody climate change narrative is a scam and a lie. It's not warming up, it's increased variability.

Humans only produce 3% of the CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere. However, the Canadian government has implemented two carbon taxes to collect money from its citizens. They also aim for net zero emissions by 2050, but if CO2 levels drop below 0.0155%, all plants will die. Canada has 318 billion trees and produces 672 megatons of CO2. To capture Canada's CO2, it would require 25.7 billion trees. Each year, a hardwood tree can absorb up to 48 pounds of CO2. Therefore, Canada is already at net zero. It's important to note that this information is not typically taught in high school science classes.

According to government data, Australia emits nearly 500 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide annually. However, research shows that the country's 24 billion trees alone absorb 453 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide each year. This figure doesn't even account for other plant life, like mangroves, which can absorb 50 times more carbon dioxide than a standard tree. Given these findings, it seems counterintuitive for the government to prioritize cutting down trees for solar farms when nature has already provided a solution.

The speakers discuss the claim made by the IPCC that renewable energies can replace fossil fuels. They mention a report from 2011 that states renewable energies could provide 80% of global energy by mid-century. However, they argue that this claim is absurd and goes against common sense. Renewable energies only produce electricity, which accounts for 22% of global energy needs. Additionally, these energies are not constant and rely on factors like sunlight and wind. Therefore, they can only replace a fraction of fossil fuels, at most 8-10% of global energy consumption. They highlight that renewable energies are heavily subsidized and currently only provide 2% of global energy, not the claimed 80%.

To make a wind turbine, you need a large amount of iron ore, concrete, and steel. The concrete production emits carbon dioxide, and the steel requires rare earth elements, which are often sourced from China and come with environmental concerns. Additionally, the cobalt used in wind turbines is often mined by child slaves in dangerous conditions in the Congo. The turbine blades are made from balsa wood obtained by clearing parts of the Amazon forest, and they contain a toxic chemical called Bisphenol A. These blades cannot be recycled and end up as landfill, polluting the soil and water. Supporting wind and solar power means supporting pollution, slavery, and environmental damage.

Advocates for NetZero need to address the practicalities of achieving it. Without fossil fuels, which are used in almost everything we do, including food production, transportation, and job creation, it's not feasible. The goal of achieving net zero emissions by 2050 is unrealistic and has not been successful so far, as global carbon emissions have actually increased. This policy benefits countries like China, India, and Russia, who don't follow the rules, at the expense of Western nations. Eventually, this will lead to anger and frustration when net zero emissions cannot be achieved.