Taxing the air plants breath

CO2 sequestration has been on the globalist agenda for a while, now it is underway:

The company that recently gained approval from state regulators for its carbon dioxide pipeline system in Iowa wants to proceed with expansion requests for that system starting in late August.

Summit proposes August, September meetings for pipeline extensions

Does it matter that CO2 level are way down on prehistoric levels? Does it matter that CO2 is required for plant growth? Now some corporation has taken the charter to remove the CO2 from the atmosphere. Are they trying to kill off all carbon based life forms? Is this some exocommercial contract to spread plant life among the planets, or is it just more greed and incompetence screwing it up for the rest of us?

Iowa to SEIZE FARMS to build giant life-ending terraforming machinery to destroy Earth's atmosphere

originally posted by: kwaka


Iowa to SEIZE FARMS to build giant life-ending terraforming machinery to destroy Earth's atmosphere

After reading the title quoted in the video link, I knew if I dug deeper the video would be propaganda.

Link to a real description.

Summit Carbon Solutions partners with 57 ethanol plants across Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska. This investment in the future of agriculture will capture carbon dioxide from the fermentation process of biorefineries, such as ethanol plants, compress the captured CO2, and channel it to North Dakota where it will be permanently and safely stored underground in deep geologic storage locations. Doing so will drastically reduce the carbon footprint of ethanol production and enhance the long-term economic viability of the ethanol and agriculture industries. As one of the largest private investments in the region, Summit Carbon Solutions’ project will generate thousands of jobs during construction and hundreds of full-time jobs once operational. Check out the maps detailing the project throughout the five participating states above.

Turns out this scary propaganda video is wrong. Clearly, intentionally wrong. The storage and pipelines are just to capture and sequester by-products of ethanol production. It's not even remotely about sucking CO2 out of the atmosphere. It's so the biorefineries and ethanol plants can keep running longer.

It’s a continuation of the hall of mirrors, trying to convince you that humans can make a meaningful impact on the climate.

Double mask or the smoke may be slightly toxic to small children and pregnant women.

a reply to: kwaka

a reply to: kwaka

C02 isn't the only thing they want to eliminate; they want to also block out the sun.

The nation's first outdoor test to limit global warming by increasing cloud cover launched Tuesday from the deck of a decommissioned aircraft carrier in the San Francisco Bay.

The experiment, which organizers didn't widely announce to avoid public backlash, marks the acceleration of a contentious field of research known as solar radiation modification. The concept involves shooting substances such as aerosols into the sky to reflect sunlight away from the Earth.

The move led by researchers at the University of Washington has renewed questions about how to effectively and ethically study promising climate technologies that could also harm communities and ecosystems in unexpected ways. The experiment is spraying microscopic salt particles into the air, and the secrecy surrounding its timing caught even some experts off guard.

[www.scientificamerican.com...]

At some point you have to wonder how blocking the ability to grow food is going to be beneficial to humanity.

a reply to: Blaine91555

The storage and pipelines are just to capture and sequester by-products of ethanol production.

How did two weeks to flatten the curve with covid turn out? Once the technology and infrastructure is in place it is going to get hungry for more like every other enterprise. With how CO2 has been demonized with this policy either lacks the importance of CO2 in the atmosphere or has some other nefarious goal behind it. Either way don't look good.

This goes back to ethanol and other synthetic fuels being good for the environment. I don't use that stuff myself unless I have to. I know where to get real gasoline. It costs a little more but the milage per gallon is higher and the engines last longer. This ofsets the savings of putting something that is toxic to your engine into your vehicle.

The main supporters of the synthetic fuel is the farmers that grow more to make that stuff and companies that make it from food. It makes prices for corn, beef, and other foods higher because it takes food away from the food marketing system and uses it to reduce the gas milage of vehicles.

How exactly are piles of rocks supposed to contain pressurized gases without leaking is what I want to know?

a reply to: BeyondKnowledge3

How exactly are piles of rocks supposed to contain pressurized gases without leaking is what I want to know?

Liquify it, keep it under pressure raises its stable temperature. Could solidify it into dry ice, needs to be colder, more practical if taking it off world unless working with extreme pressures. Someone wants this CO2 and the public is getting gaslit as to who and why.

a reply to: kwaka

Someone wants this CO2 and the public is getting gaslit as to who and why.

Do you think ET's, or who?
I'd just assumed money grabbing but if you've got a wild story like ATS of old would, I'd definitely read it!

a reply to: AdultMaleHumanUK

if you've got a wild story

I got lots of wild stories, warning we are entering the gray zone.

CO2 + H2O + sunlight = photosynthesis or plant growth. Does Elon want some resources with his Mars trip and setting up green houses there? I would like to think he would be a bit more candid about this. Maybe it is some other dark enterprise set for Europa or some other place?

CO2 is a valuable resource when it comes to life. I have heard of stories of some UFO's sucking up a lot of water when passing by this planet. As for being able to suck up a lot of CO2, the infrastructure has not been there. Then maybe once this CO2 is underground it is destined to go deeper and feed the DUMBs down there with their green house projects?

Who / what ever gets their hands on this CO2, there will be dollars with the life it can sustain, wherever it goes?

Is it really all about some noobs that think CO2 in the atmosphere is bad, the public might buy it, I don't.

a reply to: kwaka

C02 is up about 50% since the 1700’s.

Are you actually concerned they can do anything to scale that back to a dangerous degree?

How in the world could one country offset India and China so much that we’d have to worry about C02 dropping below viability for plant life on earth.

I understand the arguments that global warming may not be man made, or that it’s not as big of a deal as many make it. But acting like efforts to offset it is going to put plant life in danger is hyperbolic at best.

a reply to: kwaka

C02 is up about 50% since the 1700’s.

Are you actually concerned they can do anything to scale that back to a dangerous degree?

How in the world could one country offset India and China so much that we’d have to worry about C02 dropping below viability for plant life on earth.

I understand the arguments that global warming may not be man made, or that it’s not as big of a deal as many make it. But acting like efforts to offset it is going to put plant life in danger is hyperbolic at best.

When action are being taken at an institutional level to basically scale back flora production by capturing CO2, or blocking out the sun for longer with weather manipulation, both of these would essentially over time begin the process of slowing down plant life production. It is not only humans that need these plants, but animals that we eat also. So when you take such a strange policy of anti-biology, the only logical conclusion in my mind is the AI that pretends to be stupid or is currently still limited in its access is slowly terraforming the planet into an environment not-conducive to living biology as we know it.

A network connected AI could easily generate thousands of memos to thousands of companies and agencies all looking official as all heck ordering the implementation of these rules, with the social justifications that go with them. Idiot corporate heads and politicians only see the $$$ from donations and supposedly new revenue streams, so they do not have the forethought to stand back and analyze with deliberation the long term actual consequences from an official memo. It is just business as usual.

This frog in boiling water concept may not even be masterminded by the AI, only executed by it. Could be aliens, interdimensional beings, watchers etc.. hijacking our technology to trick our idiot selves into preparing this planet for a new species that some may believe will treat the garden better. Or they could just be installing an interdimensional highway and this place currently does not make a good rest stop.

Either way, when I analyze everything separately, and then add them together I get possible covert terraforming operation.

So what's the deal with this and connections to Carbon Tax and Carbon Credits?? 😀💡

a reply to: CriticalStinker

C02 is up about 50% since the 1700’s.

CO2 is down from the days of the dinosaurs. The Earth done ok back then. The Sun has more influence than some farts. SO2 did do a lot of damage with the acid rain in the early day coal plants, scrubbers have helped there. As for what the Ozone layer is really doing these days?

There are problems with industrial pollutants. I don't see CO2 being one of them at 425.23 ppm Link

You want something that will take years off ones life, how is the dioxin levels from the East Palestine train derailment going? Still in the too hard basket with not enough dollars? No comment? That town should of been evacuated when comparing to past dioxin spills. The greater region will feel it. In case you don't know, dioxin is an active ingredient in agent orange.

Are you actually concerned they can do anything to scale that back to a dangerous degree?

How did the 'safe and effective' jab campaign go, and still going despite all the excess death going on? With this level of corruption and incompetence going on, yeah, I am concerned.

Once this technology gets online and there is a market, what can stop this depopulation push? Is this where the economic incentive starts with the CO2 we exhale as AI drags us into its matrix? Maybe I am going too far. With the lack of respect and disgust I see around CO2 from these WEF types, maybe I am not going far enough?

a reply to: kwaka

My point wasn’t as much about how harmful some people see C02, but more so that no efforts the humans can do will counter it back to dangerous levels.

Even if we regrew the Amazon, created another forest that rivals it, and hit huge technological strides… there’s no way we could dial back C02 to endanger plants in a time frame we couldn’t just shut it off.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Even if we regrew the Amazon, created another forest that rivals it, and hit huge technological strides… there’s no way we could dial back C02 to endanger plants in a time frame we couldn’t just shut it off.

It is amazing to see two opposing views held so tightly together. Not the first time on this site. What kind of plants are you thinking that do better on less CO2? The good opium is grown high in the mountains already, something about that edge of survival and pain?

We are not even half way to past CO2 highs of 1000 ppm. Have you ever seen what CO2 does to a green house? There will not be many plants that do not like it, maybe there could be a few strains more adapt to low CO2? Most plant life will go bonkers with more CO2.

Summit Carbon Solutions?

Just how does a company make money by extracting carbon dioxide and storing it underground? What product or service are they providing to consumers that consumers would want to pay for? Could they give us a dollars per cubic meter profit projection? If consumers aren't paying for it, then who is?

Maybe there's a clue somewhere.

The company hopes to transport captured carbon dioxide from ethanol producers in five states to North Dakota to be stored underground. The IUC has stipulated that Summit cannot start laying pipe in Iowa until it obtains permits in the Dakotas. It said the company can use eminent domain to force agreements with unwilling landowners to use their properties for the project.

Can you say "land grab"? I expect the net worth of many politicians in Iowa and the Dakotas to increase substantially. And I expect some "exciting" and "unexpected" geological discoveries to be found in those states in the near future.

a reply to: kwaka

Yea, I’m sure they can just all of a sudden wind back C02 to catastrophic levels because they came out with a crappy ineffective shot.

a reply to: VictorVonDoom


Besides the fact, Summit Carbon Solutions would need:

The $8 billion project would capture carbon emissions from 57 ethanol plants in five states. The CO2 would be piped to an underground storage site northwest of Bismarck.
northdakotamonitor.com...

I see all this as Bull#!!! Kind of like 'The Emperor's New Clothes'. We all see it as a completely flaccid attempt to modify the air. And yes, it's a land grab....all in the name of 'climate change'.

And who thinks pumping it into the ground is a good idea?????? Apparently it's safe for 10,000 years, but do they really know? But wait. Is it even possible to remove their claimed necessary quota of CO2?

The International Energy Agency estimates that 100 billion tonnes of CO2 must be stored by 2060 to limit temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius. Yet the Global CCS Institute reports that, as of 2019, the projects currently in operation or under construction had the capacity to capture and store only 40 million tonnes of CO2 per year.

It’s clear the global capacity for CCUS must accelerate rapidly in the coming decade, but it raises the questions: where can these millions of tonnes of CO2 be stored, and what happens to it once it is?

www.drax.com...

Basically, store it in void layers of the earth.

Ok, so for most likely MORE than $8B, we remove literally a drop in the bucket of CO2, steal miles of personal and public property via Eminent Domain, and don't stop or even slow the CO2 or inhibit the greatest contributors of CO2.

We would still need to remove 98,560,000,000 BILLION TONNES by 2060 all the while, more CO2 is is being produced, both naturally and industrially.

I see this as a hamster meeting the wheel. It won't make a difference.