by Felix Feistel
"Castor et Pollution"
Max Ernst (1923)
That is the official narrative... and it is from this perspective that the inadequacy of the solutions offered is here demonstrated.
After a period of silence, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC, released a new report this year.
The panel, which brings
together scientists from around the world to share their findings on
climate change, concluded that carbon dioxide emissions would have
to be reduced by about 50 percent
by 2030, if we still want to avert
the great catastrophe that has been announced.
This is probably fed by the fact that they believe they have found the solution to all this.
And the solution is, of course, quite simple:
Everyone now knows what this means:
But is that really the
Of course, wind is always blowing somewhere in the world, and the sun will continue to shine for several billion years. Yes, and even water flows incessantly.
The energy sources are therefore not the problem.
This begins right with the mining of the required resources.
Here, aluminum, copper, gold and the so-called "rare earths" are needed in large quantities. In other regions of the world, the mining of these raw materials destroys entire regions.
When this material is mined, large areas of whole regions become radioactively contaminated.
In addition, wind
turbines contain large quantities of plastic resins as well as glass
Composite materials, such
as those used on the turbines, cannot be separated again and are
therefore simply disposed of somewhere. This creates a huge disposal
problem with disastrous consequences.
Thus, energy that was previously obtained from fossil fuels is not simply obtained in an ostensibly renewable way, but an additional energy demand is covered.
This is simply added on top of the previous energy demand.
Thus, nothing is gained
by the wind turbines - but more of nature is destroyed to gain
additional energy - when nature is an important carbon sink that
absorbs our emissions.
The wind turbines erected in Germany through 2018 alone have given the country an additional 0.27 degrees Celsius temperature increase as a result - and that's in just five years.
Erecting even more of them, and clearing forests to do so, is absurd... if the fight against climate change were really the issue.
In addition, people and nature are exposed to noise or infrasound, which can lead to illnesses, such as cancer and cardiovascular disease.
In close proximity to
residential areas, cast shadows also pose a problem. The constant
change from light to dark and back again, the so-called
"strobe-effect," is a strain on every organism, be it human, animal
or even plants in the field.
In the documentary Planet of the Humans produced by Michael Moore, all the madness associated with renewable energy is illustrated.
Moore shows how power
plants have to be started with the help of fossil fuels; how solar
plants are built in the desert and then deteriorate - and most
importantly, all the destruction associated with mining the
materials needed for so-called renewable energy.
This is because entire rivers are often dammed for such a hydroelectric plant. This interrupts the natural course of rivers, and animals such as salmon can no longer swim up and down the river unhindered.
But they have to, because
they usually live on the lower course of the river or in the ocean
and only return to the upper course of the river to spawn.
This makes them an important food source for other animals, bringing nutrients from the ocean up the river.
The natural flow of these nutrients is also interrupted by the dams, causing sediments to pile up on them that were supposed to reach the lower part of the river.
In this way, dams kill
the water body as well as the life around them.
Tesla built a plant
specifically for this purpose in Grünheide near Berlin.
Many people have already lost access to drinkable groundwater in this way, and the regions are becoming increasingly desolate.
However, the increasing
demand for lithium means that more and more new deposits are being
developed in previously untouched regions.
Large quantities of water
are also needed to assemble the vehicles.
The company is allowed to
use vast amounts of water for the construction of environmentally
harmful vehicles and batteries, while local residents have to think
twice about every shower.
According to Tesla, this could allegedly be completely removed and did not reach the environment. However, it should be common knowledge as to what to make of such statements on the part of the manufacturer.
It also shows that there
is a potential for environmental catastrophes here, should the
accident or leak ever turn out to be somewhat larger. In addition,
the use of toxic paint shows how far off the environmental
friendliness of the vehicles really is.
Once again, the batteries are a major factor here, as they are pure poison for nature. In addition, as with all supposedly renewable technologies, there is the energy-cost of production.
For example, the emissions backpack of every electric car ex-works is already twice as large as that of a conventional car. In addition, it has to be charged with energy again and again.
This energy, however, is usually obtained from fossil fuels or nuclear power plants.
Thus, for the feeling of clean driving, whole swaths of land are polluted elsewhere and fossil fuels are extracted and burned.
The fact that governing politicians cling to the so-called renewable or green technologies - despite all this destruction - has a simple reason:
Elon Musk, owner of Tesla, is now one of the richest people on earth for a reason.
There is also the reason why this meets with so little opposition:
For a long time now, the issue of climate change has been decoupled from that of environmental protection.
Supposedly, climate change (aka global warming) is the biggest threat of all - the contamination and destruction of nature plays no role in the discussion.
The slogan is:
The complex issue of
nature destruction and environmental protection is thus reduced to a
neutrality" is put forward as the only goal, and now also serves as
a label for all kinds of products, so that consumers can get elude
their complicity in the destructive system - at least in the way
they feel - in a cheaply bought cleansing of conscience,
a kind of "indulgence trade."
This is because the individual is always faced with a fait accompli in the supermarket or wherever, and has no way of influencing the manner of production, nor any control over the quantity produced.
But by means of
eco-labels and product descriptions as "climate neutral," the
impression is created that the consumer is contributing to saving
the world with his choice.
Now, some would suggest that this adaptation is not happening because climate change either does not exist or is not man-made.
And yes, it is also very
striking that while the individual is to be educated with a moral
finger to save energy, industry and industrialized agriculture
blithely continue to consume energy.
But that doesn't suit those who, in the current system, make very large profits from destroying nature, producing useless goods and shipping them all over the world.
Focusing on carbon dioxide and its removal, on the other hand, makes a veritable business out of wind turbines, solar panels and electric mobility.
As a result, the debate
focuses on these, rather than addressing the real causes of nature's
For these, too,
But instead of causing more destruction for a technology that does not solve the problems of our time, we should turn to the causes.
Only a society that gets
by with a minimum of energy consumption, that focuses on what is
really necessary for life instead of constantly throwing new,
useless products onto the market, is truly acting sustainably.
But it is precisely this
progress that has led to the problems of the destruction of nature,
the extinction of species, plastic waste and sewage and waste in the
The history of this progress has shown, however, that it knows no end.
It only brings us more
and more new problems, new devices and products that have to be
consumed and then end up as waste in nature to keep a capitalist
machinery going, which leads us to ruin and hardly improves our
True progress would be,
However, this should not be a frugality decreed from above, a "Great Reset" that drives this society with momentum against the wall and claims countless victims in the process.
On the contrary,