Locals criticize Colchester City Council's Net Zero initiatives, calling them environmentally harmful and undemocratic. They urge people to hold their councils accountable and reject top-down globalist agendas based on climate pseudoscience. No hashtags included.
𝕏 Post Text
@wideawake_media - Wide Awake Media
MUST-WATCH: Three locals absolutely SCHOOL Colchester City Council on their catastrophic Net Zero initiatives that aren't remotely "green".
People need to hold their local councils accountable for foisting these top-down globalist agendas on us without our say or consent.
Keep reminding them that they work for us, and we're not going to tolerate them behaving like dictators, based on alarmist climate pseudoscience.
#ClimateScam #ClimateCult #NetZero #Agenda21 #Agenda2030 #GreatReset #15MinuteCities #15MinutePrisons #LTNs #ULEZ #ULEZExpansion
Video Transcript AI Summary
A group of concerned individuals express their worries about the environmental impact of electric vehicles (EVs) and the ethical issues surrounding the production of lithium batteries. They question whether the panel has researched the environmental consequences of battery production, such as the use of sulfuric acid and water, as well as the involvement of child labor in cobalt mining. They suggest exploring greener alternatives like hydrogen engines and emphasize the importance of not supporting corporate greed and exploitation. The dangers of EV fires and the lack of safety plans are also raised, along with concerns about the amount of CO2 produced during the transition to EVs. The group requests proper public consultation on bike lanes and road repairs, and questions the accuracy of air pollution statistics.
Speaker 0: Good evening. After the last meeting, a counselor here branded us as a group of dangerous far right extremists. In reality, we're unaffiliated individuals who are collectively very concerned about environmental issues and government policies, and we're hoping you can help us with our concerns. In the past, I've taken government advice and purchased a car heated in order to do my bit for the environment. That was when diesel was considered good until, of course, it obviously wasn't.
Now the government says electric vehicles are good for the environment, considering how many times governments u-turn on what is good and what isn't. Have members of the panel independently researched the environmental impacts of making the batteries for the proposed electric bikes, scooters, buses, etcetera? Do you know that in order to extract lithium, a single mine can use over 5,000 tons of sulfuric acid per day? To remove the acid, over 3,000 gallons of water is used per minute. Every year, that single mine produces over 350,000,000 cubic yards of permanent waste laced with sulfuric acid and radioactive uranium.
That information was provided by the US Bureau of Land Management about a mine in Nevada, and they anticipate what's left of the water supply in the area indigenous people rely on could be contaminated for an estimated 300 years. Cobalt is also required for rechargeable batteries. In the last meeting, Councillor Moore asked about ensuring the council use ethically produced batteries. Your professional standards require you to adhere to ethical principles. So have you researched this further?
Are you aware that unfortunately it isn't possible because 70% of cobalt is mined using child labor which is mixed in the factories with the 30% that isn't? Professor Cara from Harvard University, a slavery researcher who visited the supposedly audited eco mines in the Congo where children work and die in unimaginably awful conditions says, there is no clean cobalt. There is not a single company on planet Earth that makes a device has rechargeable battery in it that can reliably and justifiably claim that their cobalt isn't coming from sources like that. Do not support this corporate greed and exploitation, especially when there are good green alternatives to EVs. And if there aren't any electric vehicles to charge, then the large ugly power lines marching across our countryside won't be needed either.
So for the record, we do not consent to public money being spent on any lithium battery operated vehicle which will cause exponential increase in mining devastation. So no matter how enticing the financial incentives are, Can we have the council's absolute assurance that you will do what is right and not allow yourselves to be pressured by the government into actions that do more harm than good? Thank you.
Speaker 1: And we are aware that the, the environment's impact of producing lithium batteries, bad for the environment. I think producing anything from, producing anything has an environmental impact. So for example, a normal car would also have, environment to impact, and I'm assuming, materials for that would also need to be, mined and produced.
Speaker 0: Well, Current vehicles do not pollute the environment for 300 years just to make a battery. And also, there are greener alternatives available. British company, JCB, CB has developed a zero emission hydrogen engine that, the only thing that comes out of that is dry steam. So there are options like that for your fleet vehicles and the buses that should be looked at ahead of electric. And we need to set an example.
If everybody boycotts the vehicle industry and doesn't support it, then this type of thing stops. And we have a duty as people and counselors to make sure these kind of atrocities do not happen. You should not be using batteries that do child labor or supporting any endeavors that do.
Speaker 2: Has the panel considered the dangers of electric vehicles in their planning? And has a fire service approved safety plan been created for dealing with the fires. A freedom of information request shows that in London in the last 5 years, there have been over 500 fires caused by the back in electric vehicles. Over 200 of the fires were cars, over 100 electric bikes, over 60 scooters, 19 buses, and 10 HGV fires. The following information comes from a fire expert who holds a senior position in the fire service, training fire crews nationally and abroad.
The fire service require the burnt out vehicles to stay at the fireside for 24 hours due to the fact that they can reignite and explode. But if it's inside, the whole building has to be shut off for 48 hours. Sometimes a hole has been dug, filled with water, and the car or scooter has been pushed into it until it goes out. Have we have got enough fish to potholes, let alone car sized ones. Is there a plan in place if there's a fire at an electric charging station or multistory car park and how long these would need to be shut for, bearing in mind the number of electric vehicles that could ignite if one catches fire.
Who would be responsible for the shutdown of the area, and would the council compensate any businesses that have to close for 24 or 48 hours. If an electric refuse lorry caught fire on a housing estate, have evacuation, processes being put into place to get people away from the toxic fumes. Is the panel aware that whilst it's the fire service's responsibility for the polluted water runoff, they admit they're not able to secure the toxic water waste. So would the council take this responsibility? It can take 30,000 liters of water to put out an electric car fire.
Do your current safety measures meet the latest fire service fire hazard guidelines? If not, We request that you draw up safety plans with the fire service for the existing electric scooters and fleet vehicles and immediately remove the scooters until a fire service approved safety plan is in place and public safety can be guaranteed. As counselors and council officers, you have a duty of care to the public. The fire hazards of electric bikes and cars, etcetera, are well documented, which means any officer that recommends electric vehicles and counselors that authorize their use on the public could be held personally liable as they have violated their duty of care and indemnity insurance is unlikely to cover this. With all these points in mind, unless you can guarantee that they are a 100% safe, we request that you don't go ahead with more electric vehicles as we feel they are of great danger to the public and will eventually have to be scrapped, which will waste millions and won't help the environment, especially as there are safer, greener alternative options.
Thank you.
Speaker 3: Has the panel calculated the amount of CO 2 We will be producing making all electric vehicles they propose and scrapping existing fleet. And also, can the panel provide the data they use to calculate How many cars would you need to be off the road and using cycle lanes to make a noticeable difference to air quality in Colchester? We do in regards to the bike lanes and electric bike scheme. We requested the council do a full consultation with the public, asking only 800 people when they're out for a day. It's not a proper consultation.
Coles Festa has nearly 200,000 people in the area. Asking less than 1% is not democratic. Especially considering the cost of living crisis, People should be fully informed via newspapers and websites. You need to find out ahead of spending 1,000,000 building cycle lanes if they are wanted and will be used. And we love regardless of whether it stands at Colchester or Essex, our roads were appalling, wrecking people's cars and endangering life.
So a priority should be made to repair the roads the majority use and not spend 1,000,000 on minority, no matter how well intentioned. The data the mayor of London used recently, slating stating there was 4,000 deaths a year from air pollution were incorrect. When a member of the public did a freedom of information request to the office of national statistics, It turned out to be just 1 death in the last 20 years, which was a child with a rare form of asthma and could be exclusively put down to the traffic pollution.
