The Highwire with Del Bigtree - FARMER’S PROTESTS LEAD GLOBAL REJECTION OF GREEN AGENDA

Episode Date: January 17, 2024

FARMER’S PROTESTS LEAD GLOBAL REJECTION OF GREEN AGENDABecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

When you look at the European Union, our current Aredel is really being defined by farm equipment protesting in the streets. We saw in the Netherlands when they started shutting down the farms. We saw all of these tractors and farmers taking to the streets, shutting down capital buildings, blocking roadways. The same thing is happening right now in Germany. German farmers across the nation, they're blocking these roadways. Here's an article right. Here's an article we can look at right here. German farmers block roads nationwide as part of week-long protests.

Why are they doing this? Because the German government has just announced that the car tax exemption for farm vehicles and the tax breaks on diesel used in agriculture are ending. They're done. So the government is targeting these farmers. They're taking away their tax breaks. They're the first on the chopping block. And why are they doing this?

It makes no sense. Well, this article gives it kind of shableness. said, why is Germany's economy struggling and can the government fix it? It says, already widely seen as ineffective, the government was dealt a further bitter blow late last year when the Constitutional Court ruled that its 2024 budget broke fiscal rules enshrined in the Constitution, triggering a multi-billion euro budget crisis. It goes on to say the decision meant that the government was unable to divert 60 billion euros of borrowing left over from its pandemic emergency fund into a climate and transformation

Fund intended to fuel Germany's green transition and modernize industry. So Germany is an interesting study here because, remember, they are no longer relying on nuclear power. They're shutting down fossil fuel, and they had somebody blew up their Nord Stream 2 pipeline. We did a deep dive on that. Journalist Seymour Hirsch was pointing to American involvement in that. But that gas gave about two-thirds of energy to the German economy. So they are, they're stuck.

And they're basically saying we have about 60 billion euros left over from this pandemic fund. We need that to make this green transition. And the constitutional court said, nope, sorry, you can't tap that. Excuse me. So what did the government do? They went right to the farmers. And they said, guess what, guys, you're done. We're cutting out all your taxes.

Wow. Wow. And so again, we're seeing farm equipment all throughout the European Union. This is a big deal. But it's happening here in the United States. Well, it's a tack on our food supply, right? using energies and attack on the food supply for humanity. Right, and it's, and farmers are looked at as because of the climate change narrative,

this race to net zero, farmers and their, their fertilizers and their, the methane, the farting cows, they're seen as something that's no longer needed for the environment. So this is an, for a government with that mindset, this is an easy chopping block. Just get them, they're done, just shut them down. So under this climate change narrative, we're seeing, you're seeing, we're seeing also micromanagement here in the United States. So under President Biden, in 2024 here, we're seeing new rules put out by the Department of Energy. Here's the headline, Biden administration unveils string of eco-regulations and latest appliance crackdown targeting fridges and freezers. So remember, it was just stoves just a couple of months ago. People were up in

arms about that. Now we have residential refrigerators and by the way, I like to cook. And if I get forced to use an electric range, I may just go postal. That could push me over the And so we're talking about California, remember California said that they're going to be phasing out gasoline vehicles and be completely done with them by 2035. Well, that's not just an anomaly. So now we have a headline here. These nine states are banning the sale of gas power cars. So they're following California.

It says the state's advanced clean cars to rule requires zero emission vehicles to represent 35% of new cars and light trucks in lots by 2026. Wow. And then 68% by 2030 before reaching 100% in 2035. Now it goes on to say 17 states, remember as California goes, the rest of the country goes, but it says 17 states have historically followed California's regulations. But so far only Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington have announced they'll enforce the advanced clean cars to rule and prohibit

the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles. So that is moving along pretty fast here. And so just last month... At the same time, we've reported these automobile injuries are losing their shirts on electric cars because people just are not buying them at the level that they want them to. And there's a lot of questions about, you know, when we're thinking about the earth, by the way, how many of these, you know, rare minerals that are, you know, the coal ball and the lithium and the things that, you know, make up these cars and these horrible pit mines everywhere,

cutting the tops of mountains off. Is that really the answer? Right. And just before I went on air here, I saw that Hertz is basically getting rid of 20,000 of their electric vehicles because they're not reliable. So these things are not proven technology yet. So just last month, we had COP 28. This is the United Nations Climate Change Conference. And coming out of that conference was this headline. The world just made it clear that the fossil fuel era is ending. Now, for our viewers, the basics on that fossil fuels, coal, petroleum, natural gas. And so it looks like looking at that headline, the world's going to be done with fossil fuels.

Well, some people in the world may have not gotten that memo, and one of them is Asia. Here's the headline out of Reuters. Asian thermal coal imports hit record, but supply keeps prices muted. And this is thermal coals for energy and heating. It goes on to say, in the first 11 months of the year of last year, China, the world's biggest coal producer, consumer, and importer, saw production rise by 2.9% to 4.24 billion times. So they are going full steam ahead with this. Another country doing the same thing is India. Their industry is expanding. And so this headline just came out of the economic times of India. India plans to double its coal production but ignores climate threat.

It says to meet growing demand, the Indian government set on December 11th, it expects to roughly double coal production, reaching 1.5 billion tons by 2030. Later, the power minister, Raj Kumar Singh, set out plans on December 22nd to add 88 gigawatts of thermal power plants by 2032, the vast majority of which will burn coal. It almost seems like they didn't get the memo. They didn't get the consensus.

No, it sounds like they see supply and demand, and as the supplies disappearing here in America, there is demand. The energy need is not going away. And this is where I really sort of started seeing things in a different way. I've said it before. I was traveling the country,

talking about the vaccine issue, and I met with a senator in West Virginia. And I remember he came into the office, nice guy. And I saw the pictures on the wall. He said, oh, you used to be a coal miner. He said, no, I still am a coal miner. In fact, I was just in the mines this morning. And I realized, you know, these state senators,

they still have to have another job. But as he talked about, you know, how the mines had been shut down and destruction of West Virginia, I just kept thinking, I know the energy is going up in China. I know they're doing it somewhere else. So we're not actually fixing our climate issue.

we're just outsourcing the work. We're losing the jobs, but we still need the energy. And that's where I started thinking, man, we have got to get smarter. There's got to be better ways to do these things. And, you know, we're just destroying our economy. We're destroying the power of our nation. And he talked about how much these guys and women in the mind, how much they love their work and the pride they take in doing that work. It's, you know, it really was a shift for me in this conversation because if you're brand new to this show, I'll say it again. I grew up in Boulder, Colorado. I'm still an environmentalist. I want clean air, clean water, clean food, all of those things,

but I'm not into using slavery to achieve those things, and I'm not going to bow down to some golden god of global warming. I think that there's other issues at foot, and, you know, I think there's a lot of questions that we keep bringing up. I think you're probably going to ask another one here in just a second. Yeah, and the idea of cleaning up pollution from the environment from large polluters like corporations is a completely separate conversation than what's driving climate change. And so we talk about fossil fuels.

If this COP 28, this United Nations Climate Conference got its way, we can end fossil fuels tomorrow. What would that look like? Well, Dr. Patrick Moore, he's the co-founder of Greenpeace, he put a pretty fine point on this years ago talking about that. Take a listen. There's a lot of talk now in the United States about this great Green New Deal. I don't know if you've had an opportunity to look at that, but what are your thoughts? Is this a good idea? Are we in trouble? Or what's the plan?

Well, it's a recipe for mass suicide. It's just quite amazing that someone that is in government actually elected to the government of the United States of America would propose that we eliminate all fossil fuels in 12 years. This would basically result, if we did it on a global level, It would result in the decimation of the human population from seven odd billion down to who knows how few people. I mean, it would basically begin a process of cannibalization amongst the human species because the food could not be delivered to the stores in the middle of the cities anymore. How would this, even just that one point?

The point that bothers me the most is if you eliminated fossil fuels, every tree in the world would be cut for fuel. There's no other source of heating and cooking once you eliminate fossil fuels. You can use animal dung if there were any animals left, but the animals would all die too because, well, first off, they would all get eaten and any that survived would have to go wild because there'd be nobody left to look after them. I mean, it's the most ridiculous scenario I've ever heard. People recognize when something is preposterous, and I think that's the best word for it.

The best word for it is actually mass suicidal. But why would anyone vote for something that was going to result in the death of nearly all humans on Earth? Good question. Yeah, and as we talked about in the segments we've done in the past, about the carrying capacity of the Earth, the Club of Rome, overpopulation. It starts to paint a different picture, but what we do know is when things start being measured, then they can be curtailed.

And so we talk about the gas stove, the refrigerators, farming methods, nitrogen fertilizer. But what about the air you breathe? Well, they're starting to measure that now too. This is a study in PLOS 1. And it's titled, Measurements of Methane and Nitrous Oxide and Human Breath and the Development of UK Scales Emissions. Jesus.

Goes on to say this. Now, exhaled human breath can contain small, elevated concentrations of methane and nitrous oxide. Remember, methane, the cows were putting out, and they said, we have to get rid of the cows. It says, both of which contribute to global warming. These emissions from humans are not well understood and are rarely quantified in global greenhouse gas inventories. So let's get those quantifies.

I mean, I have questions. Like, who does a study like this? Either you're an alien or you're an idiot. I mean, you just, you hate humanity. I want to start measuring what catastrophic, you know, effect my own breath has on the planet because I think my day should be numbered. I think it's time to, you know, move on to something else than the human population. It's bonkers. Fortunately, there's people out there pointing this out

reflexively, almost immediately. This article here just breaks it down piece by piece. It's titled The Absurdity of Measuring Breath for Climate Change. Really?