'Climate Change' and the coming 'Climate Lockdown'

Captain X

Well-known member
Osaul
That's old. It was because they'd voluntarily signed onto some program to get a break on their energy bill. Only thing I haven't heard is how many people dropped that program after this happened. Pretty good case in point that people should stick to regular thermostats and such. I never got this need to stick a computer into everything to make it "smart."
 

Agent23

Ни шагу назад!
That's old. It was because they'd voluntarily signed onto some program to get a break on their energy bill. Only thing I haven't heard is how many people dropped that program after this happened. Pretty good case in point that people should stick to regular thermostats and such. I never got this need to stick a computer into everything to make it "smart."
a) It lets the vendor sell you more 'as a service' crap.
b) generates hype, both for the investors and for some dumb sap customers.
c) Makes equipment more complex and prone to breakdown, so you have to buy new appliances more often.Harder to repair, too.
d) vendor lock-in.
 
Colorado thermostat

DarthOne

☦️
Anyone seen this?
Got confirmation?

omg]

Seems to be true:


 

Sailor.X

Cold War Veteran
Founder

Simonbob

Well-known member
I saw this in my news feed so I am posting it here.

Should be interesting.

Of course, the real secret is always how much other elements it requires. Massive amounts of power, rare materials, etc.



We'll have to wait and see.
 

bintananth

behind a desk
Cost? Didn't see that mentioned at all.
Or what the fuel actually is. Carbon dioxide and water is what you get from a clean burning engine with expensive emission controls ... and your lungs every time you exhale.

They're turning CO2 into an alcohol - probably methanol (CH3OH) or ethanol (C2H5OH) - and aren't being straightforward about what they're doing.

If it looks like bullshit it probably is bullshit.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
Should be interesting.

Of course, the real secret is always how much other elements it requires. Massive amounts of power, rare materials, etc.



We'll have to wait and see.
Considering the usual chemistry of such, it's going to be seriously expensive, need more power to make than it gives burning, and getting CO2 in useful concentration also takes power.
Still could be a great money grift for the green lobby though.
US Navy's algae fuel experiments have more potential i think. Algae get their own CO2 and energy, just need to spend some more energy on treating and processing them into a more convenient form.
 

bintananth

behind a desk
Considering the usual chemistry of such, it's going to be seriously expensive, need more power to make than it gives burning, and getting CO2 in useful concentration also takes power.
Still could be a great money grift for the green lobby though.
US Navy's algae fuel experiments have more potential i think. Algae get their own CO2 and energy, just need to spend some more energy on treating and processing them into a more convenient form.
There aren't a whole lot of things which can easily pry an Oxygen molecule from Carbon. You've either invited 2.25lbs of Fluorine for every pound of Oxygen to the party or are jumping through complicated hoops like photosynthesis to make Oxygen say "Goodbye".

Oxygen is the 3rd most common element in the universe and reacts with damn near everything.
 

Scottty

Well-known member
Founder
There aren't a whole lot of things which can easily pry an Oxygen molecule from Carbon. You've either invited 2.25lbs of Fluorine for every pound of Oxygen to the party or are jumping through complicated hoops like photosynthesis to make Oxygen say "Goodbye".

Oxygen is the 3rd most common element in the universe and reacts with damn near everything.

Or by using electrolysis.
 
Last edited:
Australian Bank Begins Linking Customer Transactions to Carbon Footprint

DarthOne

☦️
Australian Bank Begins Linking Customer Transactions to Carbon Footprint


In another foretaste of potential future ‘carbon allowance’ limits, a major bank in Australia has introduced a new feature that links purchases to a customer’s carbon footprint and warns them when they are going over the average.

Australia’s Commonwealth Bank (CBA) has partnered with Cogo, a “carbon management solutions” company, to launch the new feature, which is part of CBA’s online banking platform.

The bank gives the customer the option to “pay a fee” to offset their carbon footprint, with the average listed as 1,280 kilograms, a long way from the ‘sustainable’ figure of 200 kilograms.

bank1.jpg


A person’s carbon footprint is calculated and then an ‘equivalent’ metric is show to make the customer feel guilty about it, such as “8 trees being cut”.

“By combining our rich customer data and CoGo’s industry-leading capability in measuring carbon outputs, we will be able to provide greater transparency for customers so that they can take actionable steps to reduce their environmental footprint,” CommBank Group executive Angus Sullivan said in a statement.

The bank has promised to refine the calculation down to showing how much CO2 individual purchases are responsible for.

bank2.jpg


While initially presented as a handy way for someone to track their consumption habits and the supposed impact they have on the environment, some fear that such schemes could one day become mandatory and place limits on purchases of customers who exceed their ‘carbon allowance.’

As we previously highlighted, allied with climate lockdowns, technocrats want to exploit hysteria over climate change to increase financial control over individuals.

Such a proposal was presented in the science journal Nature by four environmental “experts” as a means of reducing global carbon emissions.

Everyone would be issued with a ‘carbon allowance card’ “that would entail all adults receiving an equal tradable carbon allowance that reduces over time in line with national [carbon] targets.”

The authors make it clear that the program would be a “national mandatory policy.”

Carbon units would be “deducted from the personal budget with every payment of transport fuel, home-heating fuels and electricity bills,” and anyone going over the limit would be forced to purchase additional units in the personal carbon market from those with excess to sell.”

Of course, the wealthy would be easily able to afford the offsets, and many of them are directly invested in the trading mechanisms that the scheme would be based on.


The proposal makes clear that the means of measuring a person’s uptake of carbon units for travel would function “on the basis of the tracking the user’s movement history.”

The authors note that mass compliance with COVID-19 lockdown regulations has greased the skids for further intrusive tyranny and that, “people may be more prepared to accept the tracking and limitations related to PCAs to achieve a safer climate” as a result.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top