Media crickets on critical story: South Dakota farmer stalls massive green energy land grab… for now

Media crickets on critical story: South Dakota farmer stalls massive green energy land grab… for now


The globalists are advancing their climate change agenda to seize property rights from US citizens by building a liquefied carbon dioxide pipeline to store carbon dioxide underground. Yeah you heard that right. and while their boondoggle scheme wreaks the environment, YOU will pay for it. Watch the attached film to see some of the tactics the pipeline people are pulling.

As Americans tear each other apart over transgender rights and live-action mermaids, a green energy company has quietly filed lawsuits against 80 South Dakota landowners in an attempt to claim eminent domain to seize property for a “carbon capture pipeline that will transport CO2 emissions from Iowa to North Dakota to be stored underground.”

Isn’t it interesting that the attacks are always on the countries energy system and nothing else? Lets take a look at dry ice manufactures shall we? The Thomas Register contains a list of top US manufacturers: https://www.thomasnet.com/articles/top-suppliers/dry-ice-suppliers-manufacturers/ The top five companies have combined sales in the billions and at least a #1.00 a pound that’s a lot of CO2. Then there is the soft drink industry, the largest user of CO2: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2021/01/07/2155056/0/en/The-Beverage-Industry-Is-The-Largest-User-Of-The-Carbon-Dioxide-Market.html not to mention CO2 use in home fire extinguishers and in food and medicine applications. You don’t believe the media would mention anything about these uses do you? No because everyone knows that fossil fired power units generate the most CO2? Oh really? Look at the attached image, it is actually breathing; utility plans are the lowest emitters of the group.

!

Source: https://newpatriotsblog.com/the-true-purpose-behind-global-warming

One of the biggest invasions of property rights in American history is currently happening in South Dakota to expand green energy,” Price tweeted on Tuesday.Summit Carbon Solutions “deploys capital across the agricultural supply chain with a particular focus at the intersection of agriculture and renewable energy,” according to its website. In late March, Summit boasted that it had “secured voluntary easement agreements with more than 375 North Dakota landowners accounting for 70% of the proposed pipeline route in the state.”

The corruption continues as Kristi Norm does nothing for the farmers because she is a recipient of the pipeline money. since Marxism touts that ‘man is controlled by money NOT the laws of God.”

The Republican leadership in South Dakota has also abandoned them. In the last legislative session, bills to protect landowners from eminent domain from Summit failed,” he stated. “Gov. Kristi Norm has done nothing. Why? Because Summit has connections to massive GOP donors.” They are also bankrolled by large investments, some of which are foreign, as well as benefit from massive federal tax credits for carbon capture expanded by Joe Biden’s ‘Inflation Reduction Act,’” he added. The one group that is speaking out about the “unconstitutional” Summit methods is the South Dakota Freedom Caucus (SDFC).

 As genesis states: ” While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.” – Gen 8:22



Banning Gas Stoves..Things you need to Know


close up of burning stove


For basically forever, gas stoves have been the preferred cooking appliance of professional chefs and at-home gourmets alike. They offer far greater temperature control compared to their electric counterparts, and there’s just something special about cooking over a live flame vs a glowing red coil. But lately, gas stoves have come under fire … uh, figuratively.

The hoopla began earlier this month when Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Commissioner Richard L. Trumka Jr. told Bloomberg that his agency was considering a ban on gas stoves in the US. The reason for a potential ban, Trumka cited, was related to health risks posed by natural gas stoves, as numerous studies have shown that the fumes they emit cause significant health risks. These risks potentially include cancer and respiratory illness, but the strongest evidence links their use to childhood asthma. (A recently-published study from the peer-reviewed International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health found that nearly 13% of childhood asthma in the US was caused by gas stoves.)

cooking on gas
SolStockGetty Images

Trumka’s quote set off an absolute firestorm of panic about gas stoves. Much of that panic came from the right-wing media machine, which seemed more than happy to open up yet another battlefield in their ongoing culture wars as red meat to feed to their base (cooked on a gas stove, naturally). With deluded fears of federal agents breaking down their doors and dragging out their gas stoves, many people began to see the gas stove as a symbol of freedom against government overreach. But let’s take a deep breath (away from the gas stove, please) and look at what’s actually going on with your gas stove.

No one is coming to take your gas stove

Even if gas stoves do end up being banned in the US, that doesn’t mean you’ll have to give up the stove that’s already in your kitchen. “We are not looking to go into anyone’s homes and take away items that are already there. We don’t do that,” Trumka told CNN in an interview. Any potential ban would only apply to new products, and not the 40% of US households that already have a gas stove, as the commissioner went on to explain. “If and when we get to regulation on the topic, it’s always forward-looking. You know, it applies to new products. Consumers always have the choice of what to keep in their homes and we want to make sure they do that with full information.”

The president opposes a gas stove ban

Even if you don’t own a gas stove currently but are hoping to buy one in the future, you shouldn’t anticipate any federal ban going into effect as long as President Biden is in office. The 46th US President is against banning gas stoves, according to White House spokesman Michael Kikukawa, who was quoted in the New York Times as saying, “The President does not support banning gas stoves. And the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which is independent, is not banning gas stoves.”

However, even without federal intervention, gas stoves will likely be harder to come by in new buildings in the future, as a number of cities (and a few states) have already enacted or are looking into bans that would prohibit natural gas lines from being built into new construction, effectively banning gas stoves along with gas furnaces and water heaters.

close up natural gas stove burner with blue flame
Photography by Keith Getter (all rights reserved)Getty Images

What to do if you have a gas stove

Given the dangers associated with gas stoves, you may want to consider swapping yours out if you have one. While the government won’t be forcing you to do so, it will incentivize you to exchange your stove for an electric one. The Inflation Reduction Act, signed into law by the Biden Administration last year, allows for rebates of up to $840 for the purchase of a new electric stove and up to an additional $500 for the cost of converting your setup from a gas one to an electric one.

If you do insist on cooking with gas, or if your situation doesn’t allow you to pursue other options, there are some safety measures you should consider. Proper ventilation can greatly reduce the risks associated with gas stoves, so always be sure to open the windows in your kitchen (or those closest to your kitchen) and turn on your range hood if you have one to mitigate the negative effects of gas cooking.






Climate ‘Experts’ Are 0-41 With Their Doomsday Predictions...*UPDATE 0-53*

by John Nolte (Breitbart)

For more than 50 years Climate Alarmists in the scientific community and environmental movement have not gotten even one prediction correct, but they do have a perfect record of getting 41 predictions wrong.

In other words, on at least 41 occasions, these so-called experts have predicted some terrible environmental catastrophe was imminent … and it never happened. And not once — not even once! — have these alarmists had one of their predictions come true.

Think about that… the so-called experts are 0-41 with their predictions, but those of us who are skeptical of “expert” prediction
number 42, the one that says that if we don’t immediately convert to socialism and allow Alexandria 'Ocasio-Crazy' to control and organize our lives, the planet will become uninhabitable.

Why would any sane person listen to someone with a 0-41 record?









The Romans had a self-healing concrete lasting for 1 thousand years

by Allen Williams


Looks like the ancients had a better concrete than us, one that self-heals. But according to the guardian Concrete is the most destructive material on earth  So depending on whose criteria you use the results differ considerably: Even using the worst case I could find that of 1 metric ton of cement produces 1 metric ton of CO2 doesn’t even bring you to the lowest rung on the ‘Human and Natural sources of CO2 chart’ below, so 6-7% of the world emission is meaning less. What they are quoting alludes to all CO2 sources and this doesn’t even come close. If you smell a rat you would be correct.

Concrete use is a 55 billion/year industry generating some 4500 metric tons of CO2 world wide.

One shortcoming of most of those estimates is that they report only a part of the cement industry emission, the one related to the calculation process. However, IEA estimates the proportion of the process emission to be two thirds [8] while Ecofys [9] estimates it at 55%. Data from our GNR database [10] confirms the 2/3. On that basis, total emissions from the cement industry can be estimated between 6-7% of world emission.

What s the 6-7% CO2 standard? Likely it’s a fraction of the world total of 4500 tons, in other words, so what?

Assuming 1 metric ton of conrete produces 1 metric ton od CO2 then 4500 metric tons of cement equals 4960 US tons of CO2 so:

4960 US tons x 2000 lb /.ton x 1 / 44 lbs / mole x 359 ft3 / mole (Std conditions) = 8.097 E7 ft3 CO which doesn’t even hit the lowest rung on the Human and natural sources of CO2 chart.

Beware of environmentalists using percentages to scare you on global warming. The whole of climate change is an elaborate scam to extract billions of dollars out of the gullible.