Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

If Green Energy Is the Future, Bring a Fire Extinguisher

Lithium batteries keep bursting into flames

By Steve Goreham | Climate Depot | October 7, 2024

Alternative energy is exploding—literally. Lithium battery fires are breaking out on highways and in factories, home garages and storage rooms. The rise in these fires is caused by government efforts to force the adoption of “green” energy.

Lithium batteries have high energy density, making them valuable for phones and portable appliances. But when they catch fire, they burn with high heat and can even blow up. That’s why airlines prohibit lithium batteries in checked baggage.

On June 24 a battery factory in Hwaseong, South Korea, caught fire, triggering explosions and killing 22 workers. Experts estimate that most were killed by toxic gases emitted by the burning batteries.

Scotland has suffered two major fires in battery-recycling centers this year. On April 8 a large fire broke out at Fenix Battery Recycling in Kilwinning. More than 40 firefighters and personnel from six different stations responded to the blaze, which burned for several days. The Scottish Fire and Rescue Service urged nearby residents to remain indoors with windows closed as long as two days after the fire started.

On June 23 a large fire broke out at the battery-recycling facility of WEEE Solutions in Glasgow. Eyewitnesses reported explosions, noises like gunshots, “steel flying everywhere” and a huge plume of black smoke. Ten fire trucks were needed, and the blaze lasted four days.

E-bike battery fires are a leading cause of fires in New York City, causing 270 blazes last year and killing 18 people. These have become a serious problem in Australia, Canada and other nations as well. E-bicyclists often store their bikes in first-floor storerooms, where they can self-ignite and destroy the buildings. Even high-quality batteries are prone to self-ignition after damage or when connected to a faulty charging system.

Lithium batteries have been used for the past 30 years in phones and small appliances. But the introduction of electric cars led to a massive increase in battery size—and potential destructiveness. On Aug. 19 a Tesla semi truck crashed into trees along Interstate 80 in California. The crash ignited the truck’s large lithium battery. Firefighters required 50,000 gallons of water to extinguish the flames, and the highway was closed for 15 hours. The California Advanced Clean Fleets regulation passed last year requires all new semi trucks to be zero-emissions vehicles by 2036, which in practice means electric trucks with batteries prone to fire.

Automakers have contended with lithium-battery fires for more than a decade. Alfa Romeo, BMW, Ford, General Motors, Hyundai, Porsche, Tesla and other manufacturers have recalled millions of EVs because of battery-fire problems. Batteries can self-ignite while the vehicle is in motion, when connected to a charger, or even when sitting in a parking lot. EVs prone to self-ignition have been banned from parking lots in China, South Korea and across the U.S.

On Aug. 24 a fire broke out in the parking lot of EV manufacturer Rivian in Normal, Ill. More than 50 vehicles were destroyed. The same plant also reportedly suffered three other battery fires in the last year and three more in 2021-22.

On July 26 a truck containing several large lithium batteries ignited after a crash on Interstate 15 near Baker, Calif. The road was shut down for 44 hours as firefighters worked to put out the blaze. Hundreds of motorists were stranded in the desert in 100-degree heat. Ambulances and medical teams with fuel and water were dispatched to the site to help stranded motorists.

How are governments responding to the rash of battery fires? They are doubling down, promoting the use of even larger high-density lithium batteries as part of their efforts to phase out coal, oil and natural gas in favor of wind and solar energy.

Grid-scale batteries are viewed as the solution to wind and solar intermittency. They store excess electricity when wind and solar output is high and release it when wind and solar output is low. The number of grid battery fires is growing, and grid batteries are hundreds of times the size of EV batteries.

October 10, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | Leave a comment

Energy prices cross a critical threshold in Poland, leaving some companies fighting for their lives

By Liz Heflin | Remix News | October 10, 2024

Energy prices have crossed a critical point in Poland, leaving some companies fighting for their lives, according to wnp.pl. The site further says that the EU’s goal of lowering greenhouse gas emissions means higher obligations on those companies that depend on energy usage.

Market participants are finding it increasingly difficult to compete, with those relying on coal burdened by emission fees. “The energy-intensive industry is responsible for over 20 percent of Poland’s GDP,” WNP says, which has led to more and more demand for renewables to lower carbon footprint and remain competitive.

Henryk Kaliś, president of the board of the Chamber of Industrial Energy and Energy Recipients, says the key factor for companies is not the price of energy itself, but whether it allows for profitable production and competition with foreign (non-European) companies. Electricity prices need to be below 60 euros per megawatt-hour to compete, and prices have already surpassed this threshold.

The EU’s climate policy affects companies across the continent and has led to European industry moving to Asia. However, Poland is in a particularly vulnerable position, as gas fuel accounts for 45 percent of the country’s energy system, explains Robert Tomaszewski, head of the energy department of Polityka Insight. Compare this to Scandinavian countries where electricity is mainly supplied by hydroelectric power plants, Spain where nuclear and renewables make up 70 percent of the energy mix, or France which has turned back on their nuclear plants, driving one megawatt-hour of electricity down to €47.

In early August, Polityka Insight’s data had Poland’s average wholesale price of electricity at an average of €90 per megawatt-hour, with higher prices only seen in Ireland (€98.68) and Italy (€95-98)

Mikołaj Budzanowski, who sits on the management board of Poland’s Boryszew Group, says there is no doubt that high energy prices are a major problem for Polish industry.

October 10, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | Leave a comment

U.S. Swings and Misses in Energy Competition

By Wallace Manheimer | RealClear Energy | September 30, 2024

Who can develop reliable, cheap, clean power? In the parlance of baseball, the U.S. led early with a leadoff home run. It invented, developed and perfected the first ultra-super critical (USC) coal-powered plant.

Coming online in 2012, the 600-megawatt (MW) John W. Turk Jr. Coal Plant in Arkansas employed new technology, most notably, an advance in metallurgy that allowed pipes and boilers to operate for extended periods at extremely elevated temperature and pressure.

This higher temperature allows efficiency of 40%, instead of the more usual 33%. Also, Turk had the best pollution controls, its emissions being mostly carbon dioxide and water vapor. Power Magazine was so impressed that it gave the plant its highest honor in 2013.

It looked like the U.S. was set to win the game, until it took its eye off the ball and made numerous errors. Instead of exploiting its remarkable technological achievement, U.S. policymakers decided to abandon coal and promote wind and solar.

Powerful environmental groups fought to end coal; Michael Bloomberg bragged that he contributed $500 million to the effort. Companies in the coal industry suffered, some went out of business, and domestic consumption of the country’s most abundant fuel declined. Turk is still the only USC plant in the U.S.

Solar and wind do not provide reliable power, as they fluctuate with the weather and time of day.

Also, they are not cheap. Germans, whose electric system relies heavily on solar, pay more than twice as much for electricity as the nuclear-dominant French and nearly triple the amount paid by U.S. consumers.

Furthermore, solar and wind technologies, contrary to popular belief, are not clean; not where their materials are mined, nor where they are used, nor at the end of life.

First, the mining: These technologies use many exotic and rare earth materials like praseodymium, terbium, cadmium, indium and dysprosium. Such materials are available mostly in Western China and Africa, under who-knows-what environmental and working conditions.

Secondly, where they are used, solar and wind take up tremendous amounts of land – many times the acreage of a coal plant. The average solar power reaching Earth is about 200 MW per square kilometer. Hence, with a perfectly efficient conversion to electricity, a 1,000 MW solar farm would require 5 square kilometers. But maximum solar efficiency is only 20%, boosting the land requirement to 25 square kilometers, space that could not be used for anything else. Even the maximum theoretical efficiency is only 30%.

The numbers for wind are worse: A 1,000 MW wind farm would require a whopping 500 square kilometers – equal to about 27,000 big league baseball fields. This land could be used for crops and grazing animals, but not much else.

Finally, disposal of the huge amount of material used in the fabrication of solar and wind facilities, whose life spans are mere fractions of traditional generating plants, must be disposed of. Many of these exotic materials are not suitable for standard landfills, as their compounds are harmful to humans and are water soluble. Frequently, the solar or wind company has just walked away and left the relics in place for others to worry about.

Solar and wind are more of an environmental disaster than an environmental savior.

With the U.S. relegated to the locker room, China came to bat and staged a tremendous scoring rally. Out of the top 100 Chinese coal plants, 90 are ultra-supercritical units.

Having improved on USC technology, Chinese plant efficiency is around 44%. The new 1,350 MW Pingshan Phase II plant achieves 49% efficiency! The best Chinese coal plant is now cleaner and 22 % more efficient than its American counterpart.

Since 2010, India has constructed more than 90 super critical and ultra-super critical coal plants.

Has the U.S. played its last coal-fired season?

Perhaps- unless America’s free enterprise system were brought fully into the game, with the private sector mostly doing the engineering and the federal government sponsoring long-range scientific research.

However, U.S. policymakers must abandon their obsession with solar and wind as answers for a climatic “existential threat.” Otherwise, sensible people play a fool’s game in a fantasy league that demonizes a gas sustaining all life — carbon dioxide – as others compete in the majors.

Such absurdity is no match for the technical leadership displayed in China and India.

Dr. Wallace Manheimer is a life fellow of the American Physical Society, the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers and is a member of the CO2.Coalition. He is the author of more than 150 refereed papers.

October 7, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | 2 Comments

African Energy Chamber Calls Western Funding Withdrawal From Key Projects ‘Immoral’

Sputnik – 27.09.2024

The withdrawal of Western funding for key projects in Africa is outrageous and constitutes “financial apartheid,” NJ Ayuk, the executive chairman of the African Energy Chamber, told Sputnik.

“One of the key things you have to see is that the exclusionary rule, which we call financial apartheid, that you’ve seen from Western countries when it comes to financing Africa and really providing funds, it is wrong. It is immoral. It is outrageous what they’re doing,” Ayuk said on the sidelines of the Russian Energy Week International Forum.

The official pointed to energy projects, saying that natural gas powering Europe was described as green, which was not the case for Africa.

“Africa is still the country where you have so many millions of people without electricity and without access to clean cooking,” Ayuk added.

The Russian Energy Week is taking place in the Russian capital from September 26-28.

September 27, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

German Green Party in crisis – board resigns after election defeat

By Patrick Poppel | September 25, 2024

The Greens in Germany are drawing personal conclusions from a series of electoral defeats and are now restructuring the party leadership. The two chairmen Ricarda Lang and Omid Nouripour announced their withdrawal from the party in Berlin on Wednesday.

The Greens had suffered heavy losses in the last four elections (European elections and the regional elections in Saxony, Thuringia and Brandenburg). In Brandenburg they had more than halved their result. The party has left two regional parliaments.

Only in the state of Saxony did they narrowly manage to be represented in the state parliament again. “The election result on Sunday in Brandenburg is a testimony to the deepest crisis our party has faced in a decade,” said Nouripour. “It is not about the fate of one party alone.” It is about the fundamental question of whether in Germany, as “the country with the greatest responsibility in the European Union, it will be possible in the future to continue to make good politics for peace, for Freedom, for justice, for prosperity and for climate protection”.

“It takes new faces to lead the party out of this crisis,” Ms Lang said. “Now is not the time to be stuck to your own chair. Now is the time to take responsibility and we are taking that responsibility by enabling a new start,” she added.

Lang and Nouripour were elected chairmen at the end of January 2022. They are relatively popular in the party. Lang and Nouripour did not comment on their successor.

According to media reports, State Secretary for Economic Affairs Franziska Brantner and Bundestag member Felix Banaszak are in discussion. Brantner is a close confidante of Economics Minister Robert Habeck, who could lead the Greens into the next federal election as their candidate for chancellor.

Banaszak was formerly leader of the Green Party in North Rhine-Westphalia and is an important representative of the left wing. The Green Vice Chancellor and Economics Minister Robert Habeck called the party executive’s announcement a “great service to the party”.

CDU General Secretary Carsten Linnemann called on the government to hold early elections. “Our country will not be able to endure this government for another year!” Linnemann told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.

There is no way around new elections. The resignation is a respectable step and the Greens have to fundamentally change their policies, said Linnemann. But how could a party that has become increasingly established in Germany over the last 80 years come to this disastrous point?

Of course, most of the Green Party’s voters are in western Germany and in the big cities. But even there the party faces competition from other left-wing groups. Despite the massive media debate on climate change, which is one of the Greens’ main issues, they suffered such a strong defeat.

Since the AFD (Alternative for Germany) can be seen as the clear winner of all these elections, the question naturally arises as to where the Green voters went. Green voters do not easily vote for a right-wing party. It is therefore very clear that the votes have gone from the political center to the right and the Greens have lost their quota to the center.

But what was the reason for these defeats? Maybe it wasn’t a lack of effort in the election campaign or the constant unprofessional appearances of the Green Foreign Minister. The reason for the problems and possible decline of this party is the increasingly visible distance from its roots. The Green Movement was known for its peace initiatives for decades. And the party has finally moved away from these ideals of peace in recent years.

The harsh words regarding arms deliveries to Ukraine particularly irritated many voters. The Greens used to be against wars and now they are marching at the forefront of escalating forces. Completely absurd political behavior when it comes to migration policy has also led many voters to make a different decision.

When it comes to energy policy, fewer and fewer people trust the Greens. The rise of the AFD and the decline of the Greens show us yet another aspect of German domestic politics. The real political center has clearly shifted to the right and Green voters have moved to the center. Since the consequences of the absurd migration policy and other mistakes will be visible for years to come, this shift from the center to the right will not end any time soon.

Patrick Poppel, expert at the Center for Geostrategic Studies (Belgrade).

September 25, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Militarism | | 2 Comments

They Think We Are Stupid, Volume 11

Everything you need to know about our ruling class’s opinion of you

By Aaron Kheriaty, MD | Human Flourishing | September 19, 2024

September 20, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

UN ‘Pact for the Future’: Digital IDs, Vaccine Passports, Massive Censorship

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 12, 2024

World leaders will convene later this month in New York to discuss proposals that critics believe will enshrine global digital ID and online censorship and give the United Nations (U.N.) secretary-general unprecedented emergency powers.

Proposals to be discussed at the 79th U.N. General Assembly include the Pact for the Future, described by the U.N. as an “opportunity to create international mechanisms that better reflect the realities of the 21st century and can respond to today’s and tomorrow’s challenges and opportunities.”

The proposed Pact for the Future encompasses 11 policy proposals. These include proposals for the establishment of a U.N. “Emergency Platform” and a “Global Digital Compact,” and policy proposals on “Information Integrity” and “Transforming Education.”

Also among the U.N.’s proposals is the “Declaration on Future Generations.”

Under these proposals, the secretary-general would have “standing authority” to declare “an Emergency Platform in the event of a future complex global shock of sufficient scale, severity and reach.”

Discussions for the Pact for the Future will take place under the auspices of the Summit of the Future, described as “a high-level event, bringing world leaders together to forge a new international consensus on how we deliver a better present and safeguard the future.”

The proposals are part of “Our Common Agenda,” an initiative described as “the Secretary-General’s vision for the future of global cooperation.”

‘Lack of checks and balances is very worrying’

Critics of the proposals warned The Defender that they threaten personal and health freedom, will grant the U.N. unprecedented powers and may lead to an internationally binding treaty.

Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst said the U.N. is attempting to attain “more executive power.”

Francis Boyle, J.D., Ph.D., professor of international law at the University of Illinois, told The Defender, “What the secretary-general is trying to do is an end run around the United Nations charter and delegate to himself all the powers he can possibly assume.”

“The lack of checks and balances is very worrying. The member states will have very little or no power,” Terhorst said, noting that these proposals are drawing increasing opposition as they threaten national sovereignty.

The emergency powers and other proposals contained in the pact may have ominous consequences for humanity, Boyle warned.

“The most pernicious [outcomes] would certainly be extremely dangerous vaccines that probably would violate the Nuremberg Code on medical experimentation, such as these mRNA vaccines, and then also censorship, outright censorship for anyone who dissents,” Boyle said.

Other experts warned the U.N. is not being fully transparent.

According to independent journalist James Roguski, “The U.N. is not being fully transparent about the process leading up to the Summit of the Future. At this time, a consensus agreement has not been reached and the status of the three documents has not been honestly presented to the general public.”

Roguski noted that a fourth revision of the Global Digital Compact was drafted Aug. 27 but “has not been made publicly available on the U.N. website.”

And according to Dr. Meryl Nass, founder of Door to Freedom, the pact “puts the U.N. ‘at the center’ of international affairs, giving the U.N. unspecified powers.” It contains no definitions for the terms used, “allowing it to be interpreted later in ways citizens may not like.”

A means of ‘turbocharging’ the ‘Great Reset’?

Critics also connected the U.N.’s proposals to the agendas of other international organizations, such as the World Economic Forum (WEF), which promoted the “Great Reset” and “Fourth Industrial Revolution.”

“In spirit, the Summit and Pact for the Future is a relaunch of the Great Reset,” said Tim Hinchliffe, publisher of The Sociable. “Both talk about reshaping our world, which includes a desire to transform the financial system and to implement global governance surrounding issues such as climate change, healthcare and all things related to the SDGs” (Sustainable Development Goals).

“While the WEF has no direct, authoritative or legislative power to carry out its agendas, the Pact for the Future would be signed by member states whose governments wield actual executive and legislative powers,” Hinchliffe said.

“What they are trying to do is to take the WEF agenda … and turn it into solid international law and from there into solid domestic law,” Boyle said.

According to Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D., author of “The Great Reset and the Struggle for Liberty: Unraveling the Global Agenda,” the U.N.’s proposals “have been written in support of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the ‘global governance’ regime that it aims to establish.”

Rectenwald said the proposals involve “accelerating the achievement of the SDGs” and represent the U.N.’s continued “attempt to establish a global socialist world system that is ‘inclusive’ and ‘equitable.’”

“‘Inclusion’ is achieved through such technological means as closing the ‘digital divide,’ which depends on the universal adoption of a digital identity system. Digital identity is the means by which one is ‘included’ and without which one essentially does not exist. Thus, there is to be nothing outside the system — i.e., totalitarian governance,” Rectenwald said.

Global Digital Compact calls for digital IDs, vaccine passports

Accompanying the Pact for the Future is a proposal for “A Global Digital Compact — an Open, Free and Secure Digital Future for All.”

Published May 2023, the proposed compact sets out “principles, objectives and actions for advancing an open, free, secure and human-centred digital future, one that is anchored in universal human rights and that enables the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals.”

However, the compact contains proposals for the introduction of digital ID, “digital public goods” and “digital product passports,” and calls for “addressing disinformation” and preventing the “misuse” of online tools.

“With digital ID, it is easier for governments to censor and threaten voices with a different opinion,” Terhorst said. “In the U.N. proposals, suppressing ‘disinformation’ or ‘hateful speech’ is mentioned. Who is to decide what information is right and what is wrong?”

“Information Integrity on Digital Platforms” policy brief goes further, specifically addressing “threats to information integrity,” such as so-called “misinformation” and “disinformation.” It also calls for “empirically-backed consensus around facts, science and knowledge,” but does not clarify how this “consensus” would be determined.

Similarly, a policy brief on “Transforming Education,” proposes “incorporating practices that strengthen the ability of learners and teachers to navigate the increasing flow of false and fake information.”

The compact also proposes “Novel platform-based vaccine technologies and smart vaccine manufacturing techniques … to produce greater numbers of higher-quality vaccines.”

Terhorst said the goal of digital ID is to introduce global vaccine passports that would “overrule the right of everyone to say no to a vaccination.”

Hinchliffe noted that the U.N. has “established principles for a ‘Code of Conduct‘ that calls on not just member states, but private groups such as stakeholders, digital platforms, advertisers, and news media to crush narratives that go against the U.N. and the SDGs.”

Secretary-general ‘trying to set himself up as the UN dictator’

According to Boyle, the U.N. secretary-general is “supposed to function as a secretary in charge of the secretariat,” but these proposals are trying to “set himself up as the U.N. dictator.” He noted that the U.N. is composed of six independent organs, but said these proposals may usurp their independence.

“He would have authority over them and arguably could exert authority over U.N. specialized agencies like the World Health Organization. That ties in with the International Health Regulations and the Pandemic Treaty,” Boyle said.

Boyle argued that by specifically referring to the Pact for the Future as a “pact,” the U.N. is intentionally “trying to turn this into an international treaty that is binding” under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

“If you call it a pact … that would clearly fall within the terms of the Vienna Convention,” Boyle said.

“We’re in the fight of our lives here. The world has to be alerted to the dangers of this pact.”

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

September 14, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

Banks Urged to Stop Financing Livestock Production

By Jesse Allen | American AG Network | September 13, 2024

Over 100 climate groups are pressuring JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, and other private banks to stop financing global meat and dairy companies.

Agriculture Dive Dot Com says the institutions’ lending activities undermine their environmental commitments. An open letter from groups led by Friends of the Earth to some of the world’s biggest banks calls for a halt on any new financing that expands industrial livestock production and to add requirements that meat, dairy, and feed clients disclose their climate action plans. The letter calls out the banks by name for supporting the world’s biggest meat, dairy, and animal feed producers like JBS, Tyson Foods, and others.

While food companies are a small part of the banks’ overall lending portfolios, the groups say they have a much bigger impact on the institutions’ environmental footprints. The letter says increased lending has let the world’s biggest emitters grow their operations and emissions.

September 14, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | 1 Comment

British Labour’s raw deal for working people

By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 12, 2024

Keir Starmer’s Labour Party won a landslide election in July with the slogan “a new deal for working people”.

Already the electioneering can be seen as a sham. This week, the Labour government won a majority vote in the House of Commons to cut winter fuel payments for pensioners. Around 10 million senior citizens will no longer receive a financial grant to help them pay soaring energy bills and keep their houses warm this winter.

The energy crisis for households in Britain and across Europe is a result of the NATO proxy war in Ukraine and the cutting off of Russia’s abundant gas and oil supplies to the continent. The Biden administration ordered the blowing up of the Nord Stream gas pipelines under the Baltic Sea from Russia to Germany. That was in September 2022. The best way to end the energy crisis for European households would be to stop the war, make peace, and return to normal relations. But the new Labour government is having none of that common sense. It is eagerly fueling the proxy war as much as the Conservatives before it, and what’s more now making the poor of Britain pay for the warmongering.

Prime Minister Starmer told angry unions and workers that he would make no apology for the winter fuel payment cut. His ministers are claiming they have “no choice” but to repair a “£22 billion blackhole” in public finances gutted by the predecessor Conservatives.

Starmer’s Labour is warning that more “tough choices” are coming in the coming weeks, meaning that working people and low-income families are going to face more economic austerity. So much for a democratic change from the hated Tories and the supposed “new deal for workers”.

The warped priorities of this government (as with the previous one) can be seen from the promises to boost spending on Britain’s military. Starmer has vowed to uphold a commitment to increase Britain’s “defense” budget from £54.2 bn (€64 bn, $74.7 bn) a year to £57.1 bn. That represents a 4.5 percent increase.

Under Starmer, Britain will continue to donate billions of public money to the Kiev regime.

This week, while the Labour government was voting to cut winter welfare for pensioners, the British foreign minister David Lammy traveled to Kiev alongside the U.S. secretary of state Antony Blinken, where they assured the Ukrainian regime that they would deliver more weapons, hinting at ending restrictions on long-range missiles to hit deep inside Russia.

Meanwhile, Britain’s defense minister John Healey will be in Ramstein, Germany, this week to meet with other military chiefs of the so-called Ukraine Contact Group. Healey, who calls himself “Mr Ukraine”, is to unveil another British military aid package of multi-role missiles worth £162 million. Healey is very much a deep-state figure inside the Labour government. This means a continuity in foreign policy despite the name change in Downing Street.

To date, since the eruption of the conflict in Ukraine in February 2022, Britain has doled out £12.5 bn (€14.7 bn) in military aid to the Kiev regime, including the training of up to 45,000 Ukrainian soldiers.

Britain is the third-biggest military aid donor to Ukraine after the United States and Germany.

Starmer’s new Labour government is showing itself every bit as committed to funding the proxy war against Russia as its Conservative predecessor was.

Just three days after the general election on July 4, the new defense minister, John Healey, made his first overseas visit to Ukraine on July 7. Healey vowed to continue Britain’s support.

So while the Labour government claims that it has “no choice” but to slash public spending at home, it unquestioningly keeps spending on militarism at home and abroad.

This is a matter of political choice. If a Labour government were to genuinely prioritize the needs of working people, it could find the finances easily by cutting Britain’s excessive military budget and the largesse it bestows on a NeoNazi regime and the reckless proxy war against Russia that could escalate into a nuclear conflagration.

The insulting deception of Labour’s “new deal” means that Starmer’s government will require close shepherding, just in case it wobbles from the inevitable public backlash.

The vote this week to axe winter fuel payments to elderly citizens has sparked fury among the wider population. The anger will grow as more austerity measures against citizens kick in and while the proxy war in Ukraine continues to receive endless support with British public money.

It seems no coincidence that this week Britain’s Starmer is to visit the White House. The visit by Blinken to London and thence to Kiev alongside his British counterpart, as well as the Ramstein meeting for UK defense chief Healey, all suggest that a close eye is being kept on Downing Street to ensure that it does not get any notions about “serving the people”.

To that end too, it seems significant that the former Conservative defense minister Ben Wallace has taken to whipping up public fears of Russia.

Wallace wrote a recent oped in the Daily Telegraph in which he claimed that Russian leader Vladimir Putin “will soon turn his war machine on Britain”.

The article was reported in several other British media outlets. The same fear-mongering has been echoed by the new head of Britain’s armed forces, General Sir Roly Walker, who warned that the United Kingdom could be in an all-out war with Russia in the next three years.

Wallace, who is a cipher for Britain’s deep state, claimed that “Britain is in Putin’s cross-hairs”. He added: “Make no mistake, Putin is coming for us… we must be prepared for the inevitable.”

The hysteria from Britain’s ruling class is of course cringe-making. These claims about Russia’s malign intent and comparing Putin with Hitler are completely bereft of any historical facts, such as NATO expansionism and the weaponizing of a Nazi-adulating regime in Ukraine to provoke Russia.

Russian leaders have repeatedly said they have no intention of attacking any NATO nations. They say their involvement in Ukraine is a special operation to neutralize NATO threats to Russia’s national security.

Sooner or later, the British and Western public are going to demand accountability from their governments on why such huge finances are being ladled into promoting a highly dangerous conflict with Russia.

Britain’s Labour government is vulnerable to a public backlash because of its blatant duplicity.

That would explain the close attention from Washington to London’s policy, ensuring Starmer keeps toeing the line of NATO’s hostility to Moscow. British deep state assets like Ben Wallace also need to keep writing scare stories to frighten the public away from common sense criticism of London’s deranged warmongering and betrayal of working people.

September 14, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Militarism, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Greed, New Form of Religion, or Compliance Test: Why Are Britons Forced to Eat Bugs?

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 13.09.2024

The UK’s National Alternative Protein Innovation Center (NAPIC) has received £15 million ($19.5 million) in British taxpayer money to bolster the alternative proteins sector in the country.

According to the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) website, cultured meat and insect-based proteins could soon be “a sustainable and nutritious part” of Britons’ diets.

Over the past few years, the British press has peddled the idea of embracing edible insects as an alternative to meat. They are rich in protein, healthy fats, vitamins, and minerals, and have a lower environmental footprint, the media asserts to Britons.

“British firms strive to create a buzz around insect farming,” “Edible insects and lab-grown meat are on the menu,” “Would you eat insects if they were tastier?” and “Why it’s time to embrace edible insects?” UK headlines read, stressing that the global insect protein market is projected to reach $8 billion by 2030.

Where Did the Idea of Eating Insects Originate?

Entomophagy, or eating insects, has been actively promoted at the World Economic Forum (WEF), which insists that the consumption of insects “can offset climate change in many ways” and prevent the “impending food crisis,” as the world’s population is set to reach 9.7 billion people by 2050, with just 4% of arable land remaining available.

In 2013, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations (UN) issued a report stating that around two billion people worldwide eat insects as part of their traditional diets.

In 2014, the Belgian food safety agency AFSCA approved 10 worm and cricket species for sale on the Belgian market, exploiting a loose interpretation of a 1997 EU law on “novel food.” The Netherlands, UK, Denmark, and Finland also authorized insects for consumption.

In 2017, the EU and UK permitted seven species of insect to be used as feeds in fish farms.

In January 2018, a European Parliament regulation concerning “novel foods,” including insects, came into force.

In May 2021, the EU officially approved the first insect, the yellow mealworm, as food for humans.

By 2023, four insects had been approved by the EU Commission: the yellow mealworm; the migratory locust); the house cricket; and the lesser mealworm. The EU food safety agency signaled at the time that another eight insects could be authorized soon.

The EC claims that “the environmental benefits of rearing insects for food are founded on the high feed conversion efficiency of insects, less greenhouse gas emissions, less use of water and arable lands, and the use of insect-based bioconversion as a marketable solution for reducing food waste.”

Who’s Driving the Bug Business?

EnviroFlight (US), Innovafeed (France), HEXAFLY (Ireland), Protix (Netherlands), Global Bugs (Thailand), Entomo Farms (Canada), and Ynsect (France) are named as key players in the market.

Europeans are believed to be the first who delved in the insect protein business, with French firm Ynsect, founded in 2011, and the Dutch producer of insect ingredients Protix, established in 2009.

Insect protein firms are attracting hefty investments from global foundations and food giants.

In 2017, Protix raised $50.5 million in equity and debt funding, marking the largest investment in the industry at the time.

The US rushed to catch on, with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation granting $100,000 to All Things Bugs in 2012 to explore insect food production.

Two American food corporations, ADM and Cargill, invested a whopping $250 million in the French insect protein firm Innovafeed in September 2022. In 2023, the US food giant Tyson poured around $58 million into Protix.

According to some estimates, the edible insect market reached $3.8 billion in 2024, and is projected to amount to $9.04 billion by 2029.

The European market is seen as the largest, while South Asia is the fastest growing. Still, it pales in comparison with the fresh meat market, which amounted to $1.11 trillion as of 2024 and is set to expand further.

Insects Can Be Toxic, But Entomophagy Proponents Don’t Care

Scientists warn that the consumption of edible insects may result in allergic reactions, particularly in people with asthma, hay fever, or allergic skin rashes. Individuals with shellfish allergies – 2% of the worldwide population – are likely to suffer allergic reactions after consuming insects due to their chitin exoskeleton.

Edible insects, including those approved by the EU, are often infected with pathogens and parasites that pose a threat for humans and livestock, a 2019 study by researchers from the University of Warmia and Mazury, Poland, concluded.

What Does the Western Public Say?

Insects have never been part of Western societies’ diet. A 2023 YouGov survey showed that 18% of Americans would be willing to eat whole bugs, while 25% would agree to eat food made with insects.

High living standards still allow Westerners to consume animal protein. The edible insect protein business doesn’t offer high margins amid low consumer acceptance. Consumption of insects is fraught with risks of allergic reactions and parasitic infections.

Nonetheless, entomophagy is being rammed down their throats by the WEF, media, and Hollywood stars eating bugs on camera.

Then-Fox News host Tucker Carlson in 2023 investigated the environmentalist push to eat “creepy crawlers” and suggested that it’s a “compliance test” similar to excessive COVID restrictions.

“Our politicians know that when they control the food, they control the people,” Dutch political activist Eva Vlaardingerbroek told the journalist, referring to EU environmental regulations which make traditional farming in the bloc unprofitable.

“It’s all a new religion… We have to be fearful and scared for COVID, for nitrogen, for carbon dioxide, for [Vladimir] Putin… and meanwhile these people who are in power, now they do whatever they want,” Dutch politician Wybren van Haga said.

Meanwhile, the research and propaganda relating to insect eating has already become a source of wealth for researchers, media companies, speakers, and international forums.

September 14, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | Leave a comment

Anti-Establishment Parties Have Triumphed in Germany’s Regional Elections

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 02.09.2024

The Eurosceptic party, Alternative for Germany (AfD), won a regional ballot for the first time, surpassing Scholz’s ruling coalition.

AfD secured 32.8% in Thuringia, leading the race, followed by the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) with 23.6%, according to exit polls.

In Saxony, the Eurosceptic party garnered 30.6%, losing to the CDU by a narrow margin.

The Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW) claimed third place in both races, with 15.8% in Thuringia and 11.8% in Saxony.

Scholz’s “traffic-light” coalition of Social Democrats (SPD), the Greens, and the Free Democrats (FDP) performed poorly. The FDP failed to reach the 5% threshold required to enter either regional legislature, and the Greens did not make it into the parliament in Thuringia.

SPD received 6.1% and 7.3% in Thuringia and Saxony, respectively.

“We are ready to take on government responsibility,” AfD leader in Thuringia, Bjorn Hocke, declared, celebrating what he called a “historic victory.”

Omid Nouripour, co-leader of the Greens, lamented the outcome and described it as “a profound turning point” in German history.

The AfD’s victory sparked a heated debate, with mainstream Western media warning that Germany’s political center is “crumbling” ahead of the next federal election in September 2025. Some outlets noted that Scholz have been “humbled” by the German right-wing party.

Others highlighted the rise of anti-establishment parties in Germany, acknowledging that both AfD and BSW, which advocate halting arms supplies to Ukraine, and imposing immigration controls, have performed notably well.

September 2, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Militarism | | Leave a comment

Glimpse into the Future of Food

By Meryl Nass | Brownstone Institute | September 1, 2024

Is your food making you sick?

Suddenly, the fact that food is making us sick, really sick, has gained a lot of attention.

When Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. announced he would suspend his presidential campaign and campaign for President Trump on August 23, both he and Trump spoke about the need to improve the food supply to regain America’s health.

The same week, Tucker Carlson interviewed the sister-brother team of Casey and Calley Means, coauthors of the #1 New York Times bestseller Good Energy: The Surprising Connection Between Metabolism and Limitless Health Their thesis, borne out by thousands of medical research studies, is that food can make us very healthy or very sick. The grocery store choices many Americans have made have led us to unprecedented levels of diabetes, obesity, and other metabolic and neurologic diseases that prematurely weaken and age us, our organs, and our arteries.

There is a whole lot wrong with our available food.

  • Chemical fertilizers have led to abusing the soil, and consequently, soils became depleted of micronutrients. Unsurprisingly, foods grown in them are now lacking those nutrients.
  • Pesticides and herbicides harm humans, as well as bugs and weeds.
  • Some experts say we need to take supplements now because we can’t get what we need from our foods anymore.
  • Subsidies for wheat, corn, and soybean exceed $5 billion annually in cash plus many other forms of support, exceeding $100 billion since 1995, resulting in vast overproduction and centralization.
  • We are practically living on overprocessed junk made of sugar, salt, wheat, and seed oils.

And that is just the start. The problem could have been predicted. Food companies grew bigger and bigger, until they achieved virtual monopolies. In order to compete, they had to use the cheapest ingredients. When the few companies left standing banded together, we got industry capture of the agencies that regulated their businesses, turning regulation on its head.

Consolidation in the Meat Industry

Then the regulators issued rules that advantaged the big guys, and disadvantaged the small guys. But it was the small guys who were producing the highest quality food, in most cases. Most of them had to sell out and find something else to do. It simply became uneconomic to be a farmer.

The farmers and ranchers that were left often became the equivalent of serfs on their own land.

Did you know:

  • “Ninety-seven percent of the chicken Americans eat is produced by a farmer under contract with a big chicken company. These chicken farmers are the last independent link in an otherwise completely vertically integrated, company-owned supply chain.”
  • “Corporate consolidation is at the root of many of the structural ills of our food system. When corporations have the ability to dictate terms to farmers, farmers lose. Corporations place the burden of financial liability on farmers, dictate details of far.”
  • “Corporations also consolidate ownership of the other steps of the supply chain that farmers depend on — inputs, processing, distribution, and marketing — leaving farmers few options but to deal with an entity against which they have effectively no voice or bargaining power.”

When profitability alone, whether assisted by policy or not, determines which companies succeed and which fail, cutting corners is a necessity for American businesses — unless you have a niche food business, or are able to sell directly to consumers. This simple fact inevitably led to a race to the bottom for quality.

Look at the world’s ten largest food companies. Their sales are enormous, but should we really be consuming their products?

Perhaps the regulators could have avoided the debasement of the food supply. But they didn’t.

And now it has become a truism that Americans have the worst diet in the world.

Could food shortages be looming?

If it seems like the US, blessed with abundant natural resources, could never suffer a food shortage, think again. Did you know that while the US is the world’s largest food exporter, in 2023 the US imported more food than we exported?

Cows are under attack, allegedly because their belching methane contributes to climate change. Holland has said it must get rid of 30-50% of its cows. Ireland and Canada are also preparing to reduce the number of their cows, using the same justification.

In the US, the number of cows being raised has gradually lessened, so that now we have the same number of cows that were being raised in 1951 — but the population has increased by 125% since then. We have more than double the people, but the same number of cows. What!? Much of our beef comes from Brazil.

Pigs and chickens are now mostly raised indoors. Their industries are already consolidated to the max. But cows and other ungulates graze for most of their life, and so the beef industry has been unable to be consolidated in the same way.

But consolidation is happening instead in the slaughterhouses because you cannot process beef without a USDA inspector in a USDA-approved facility — and the number of these facilities has been dropping, as have the number of cows they can handle. Four companies now process over 80% of US beef. And that is how the ranchers are being squeezed.

Meanwhile, efforts are afoot to reduce available farmland for both planting crops and grazing animals. Bill Gates is now the #1 owner of US farmland, much of which lies fallow. Solar farms are covering land that used to grow crops — a practice recently outlawed in Italy. Plans are afoot to impose new restrictions on how land that is under conservation easements can be used.

Brave New Food

That isn’t all. The World Economic Forum, along with many governments and multinational agencies, wants to redesign our food supply. So-called plant-based meats, lab-grown meats, “synbio” products, insect protein, and other totally new foods are to replace much of the real meat people enjoy — potentially leading to even greater consolidation of food production. This would allow “rewilding” of grazing areas, allowing them to return to their natural state and, it is claimed, this would be kinder to the planet. But would it?

Much of the land used for grazing is unsuitable for growing crops or for other purposes. The manure of the animals grazing on it replenishes soil nutrients and contributes to the soil microbiome and plant growth. “Rewilding” may in fact lead to the loss of what topsoil is there and desertification of many grazing areas.

Of course, transitioning the food supply to mostly foods coming from factories is a crazy idea, because how can you make a major change in what people eat and expect it to be good for them? What micronutrients are you missing? What will the new chemicals, or newly designed proteins, or even computer-designed DNA (that will inevitably be present in these novel foods) do to us over time? What will companies be feeding the insects they farm, when food production is governed by ever cheaper inputs?

It gets worse. Real food production, by gardeners and small farmers or homesteaders, is decentralized. It cannot be controlled. Until the last 150 years, almost everyone fed themselves from food they caught, gathered, or grew.

But if food comes mainly from factories, access can be cut off. Supply chains can break down. You can be priced out of buying it. Or it could make you sick, and it might take years or generations before the source of the problem is identified. How long has it taken us to figure out that overprocessed foods are a slow poison?

There are some very big problems brewing in the food realm. Whether we like it or not, powerful forces are moving us into the Great Reset, threatening our diet in new ways, ways that most of us never dreamed of.

Identifying the Problems and Solutions

But we can get on top of what is happening, learn what we need to, and we can resist. That’s why Door to Freedom and Children’s Health Defense have unpacked all of these problems and identified possible solutions.

During a jam-packed two-day online symposium, you will learn about all facets of the attack on food, and how to resist. This is an entirely free event, with a fantastic lineup of speakers and topics. Grab a pad and pencil, because you will definitely want to take notes!

The Attack on Food and Farmers, and How to Fight Back premieres on September 6 and 7. It will remain on our channels for later viewing and sharing as well. By the end of Day 2, you will know what actions to take, both in your own backyard, and in the halls of your legislatures to create a healthier, tastier, safer, and more secure food supply.

See below for a summary and for the complete program.

September 1, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »