If the "Green" movement had been about reducing pollution, then it might have had some redeeming features. However, what is being pushed is a method to destroy the world and kill people.

I really mean these words. It is not by accident, it is not just a little misguided, it is to make life harder, and lower the living standards for everyone, while, simultaneously destroying the environment.

But Builder, how can doing something to help the planet, destroy the planet?

Well, because we do not have real money, we do not accurately know the price of things. And since we have pushed mining and toxic manufacturing to 3rd world countries, we are not paying for the pollution.

As an example, if we had to build Lithium Ion batteries in The US, a new Tesla would probably be about $500,000.

The only way a Tesla is viable for purchase is because all the labor and pollution are eaten by someone else, while the purchaser gets their car subsidized.
 

And here is another illustration have how bad it can be. It is some people's estimate that more diesel is expended in the getting the rare earth elements to build the Tesla, then a similar sized ICE car would use in its entire life.

Imagine thinking you are going to save fuel, but didn't know that your car already burnt more diesel than the gasoline car sitting next to it at the dealership. The diesel was paid for by exporting dollars, and their inflation to the rest of the world.

CO2

CO2, the buzzword of the Green New Deal. It is the all encompassing bad guy/boogyman of the person who "cares" about the environment. And then, pushing the idiocy further, now, everyone must be carbon-neutral.

True carbon neutrality would have to include all the plants that we are growing to feed us, and the trees that we want to keep growing and all the plankton in the oceans. We would want to make sure we are producing enough CO2 to feed all of those plants.

So, are you carbon neutral? Or are you carbon deficit? Where, you really need to produce more CO2? Because if you do not, all those plants are going to be dying. And when the plants are dying because they do not have enough food, then you are going to be dying next.
 
Further they lump all carbon production into the same basket. You could have a theoretical hydrogen powered car, that only produced water out the tail pipe, and that is counted the same as the worst polluting diesel semi-truck in a 3rd world. These things are not the same. One is producing a lot more pollution, and it is the pollution that we care about. Not the CO2.

CO2 is just a convenient buzzword. An easy word to lump things together under… to tax.

Banning Oil

We currently do not have a better, easier source of power than oil.

If we went back to burning wood for heat, the pollution levels would be so much higher, and we would be cutting down all the trees. And, if the oil was turned off, that is exactly what we would be doing. Burning everything that burns. It is quite lucky that at this moment we still have oil to burn. (look into rocket stoves if you do plan on burning wood)

They want to ban gas stoves???!! The cleanest burning, least pollution way of cooking in the kitchen? Burning natural gas is far better and more efficient then burning that same gas in an electric generator and then cooking with electricity. So, why are they trying to ban gas stoves? Only reason i can think of is control. When they turn off the electricity, they want you to freeze. Not to live a while on the gas you have stored.

Basically, govern-cements are trying to make oil prohibitively expensive, saying that will spur innovation, but it doesn't. It just makes everything more costly. Makes engines more costly. Like, right now, we could improve ICE MPG by about 25% by adding hydrogen injection. But, that now requires a hydrogen station at every gas station, and an hydrogen tank (explosive) in every car, and the wiring and plumbing. So, we can get more fuel efficiency, but at what cost? And the more things cost, the less poor people have access to them.

So, really, they want the poor people to freeze to death.

All in, the Green New Deal is made to provide govern-cements more control over whether you live or not, while making everything more expensive, but has very little impact on actual pollution. In fact, it probably produces more pollution, because it pays more to offshore your pollution.

The mother WEFers want you controlled or dead, and they will use all the propaganda you can stomach to make you accept it. They are blatantly telling lies, and have all the "experts" telling us that it is the truth.

So, remember when they are talking, on the TV, about reducing carbon:

You are the carbon they want to reduce

 

All images in this post are my own original creations.