Carbon is the DNA of life on the planet. It has nothing to do with climate change. To remove carbon would dial back the planet to pre-industrial revolution days in terms of technology. Life as we know it would revert to an agrarian, subsistence age.

Thus, the claim by Dipak Patel of the Climate Commission (Business Report, November 15) that “the just transition [to zero greenhouse emissions] is a pathway to ensure a quality life for all” is sheer fiction. Worse still, it is deception on a monumental scale because of the catastrophic human consequences of this madness.

Posturing themselves as custodians of human life, the hypocrisy of the green fanatics is galling. What they omit to disclose is that without fossil fuels, it will be impossible to feed the planet; without fossil fuels, millions will be unemployed in any job that concerns mining, engineering, transport, factory production, and lubrication, to say nothing of basic household living involving cooking, cleaning, and heating.

The omission of those realities is deliberate. The agenda of the WEF-directed green ideology is premised on depopulation. The WEF gauleiter, Klaus Schwab, can be viewed on YouTube expressing the need to get rid of the “useless eaters” so that the global population can be reduced to around one billion of highly controlled human lemmings.

Despite the absolute falsehood of the whole “green transition” agenda, the opportunity to make money by trading carbon credits is being exploited by what are hailed as “savvy entrepreneurs.”  A whole industry has mushroomed that invests in the unreliable, intermittent, and hugely expensive so-called renewables.

These same trailblazers will exploit this charade until its bubble inevitably bursts. The vast oil and gas finds off the West Coast will ensure the fossil fuel future of South Africa while Trump has vowed to return the US to fossil fuel self-sufficiency.

Just as the lies about the efficacy of the COVID vaccine have been exposed, so the day of reckoning for the green’s agenda beckons.

The post Green Agenda’s Day Of Reckoning Beckons appeared first on Duncan Du Bois.

According to James Lorimer writing in the Daily Friend, two new oil wells of vast potential off the Namibian coast rate among the most promising fossil fuel sources anywhere in the world. Further south, in what is called the Orange River Basin, off the Northern Cape, an oilfield there has an estimated capacity of 10 billion barrels.

The other bonanza of that area is the existence of a vast gas resource estimated at 50 trillion feet in capacity which could generate 1,000 megawatts for 25 years.

Besides the significant employment opportunities possible from the exploitation of those resources, they obviously constitute continuity in electricity generation and enormous economic benefit.

The silence of the green lobby and their pathetic wind turbine energy generating, bird killing apparatus along with solar panels – all imported from China – exposes the disingenuousness of their decarbonisation motives.

Instead of generating more debt by pursuing so-called renewable energy sources based on the utter falsehood that climate change is man-made through use of fossil fuels, the  media and elected representatives should be lobbying strenuously for the exploitation of these natural resources.  Certainly as part of BRICS which rejects the phony decarbonisation narrative, that is what South Africans should be endorsing.

The post Why Are Natural Resource Discoveries Ignored? appeared first on Duncan Du Bois.

There is no excuse for those who call themselves educated and researchers to ascribe the floods in KZN last year to climate change which is being exacerbated by fossil fuel emissions. How does Professor Naidoo explain the major flood of April 1856 when over 600mm fell over five days in Natal? What about the flood of August 1868 when 425mm fell in two days and swept away the newly erected bridge over the Umgeni River? How about the devastating rain, hail and snow storm which swept the entire province late in May 1905 causing unprecedented loss of life and infrastructure?

During those years fossil fuel emissions were unheard of. How does Professor Naidoo respond to the fact that over the past 60 years temperatures have been consistent? How does she account for the two global warming periods that occurred between 200BC and 1200AD when fossil fuels were underground? What about the cooling period that occurred in the late medieval period when the Thames froze over in winter?

If Professor Naidoo took these historical facts into account, she should conclude that climate change is a natural occurrence that is not man-made. Seeking to benefit the planet by reducing carbon dioxide emissions is an absolute fallacy which, actually, will have a devastating effect on the environment.

As Princeton Professor William Happer explained in a paper presented to the US Senate, higher CO2 levels are essential to plant growth. Rhodes University has proved that through its large-scale, elevated CO2 research study. Crop growth responded positively even under drought conditions.  Thousands of scientists know this, but it does not pay them to say so.

By reducing CO2 emissions, what the globalists will achieve is a food shortage and starvation for millions who cannot afford higher food costs. But then, that is the plan of the globalist elite. As their Fuhrer, Klaus Schwab of the WEF has stated, there are too many “useless eaters.”

As we are seeing with the admission of  falsehoods concerning the Covid PCR tests,  masks, lockdowns, contrived Covid death rates and the jab, we live in an era of giant hoaxes perpetrated by the global elite and their proxies in politics, the media, science and universities. The green energy narrative will fail not only because it is false and unaffordable but because it is contradicted by history.

The post History Contradicts Green Energy Narrative appeared first on Duncan Du Bois.

The former Under-Secretary for Energy in President Obama’s Administration, Dr Steven Koonin, who is a Physicist and Professor of Engineering at New York University, has shown that there has been no change in temperature ranges over the past 60 years. He, like thousands of others scientists who do not allow their research to be determined by those who fund them, has pointed out that two global warming periods occurred in the past 2,000 years when fossil fuels were unknown.

So, let’s put global warming to bed. It is a fiction purveyed by those in the World Economic Forum and their satraps in the mass media, universities and political forums.  Climate change is a natural and historical phenomenon. According to the UN’s own research model, if complete decarbonisation occurred its effect on global temperatures would be less than 0,02% of one degree Celsius.

Over the past 50 years there have been alarmist stories about climate extremes, none of which actually occurred. The most notorious purveyor of these has been Al Gore. None of his “inconvenient truths” has been realised. Obama, who echoes Gore’s alarm about rising oceans, owns two properties which have sea fronts: one in Hawaii and the other on Martha’s Vineyard off the Rhode Island coast.

Published in 2017, a study of Antarctica involving 112 independent scientists from 10 countries avoided generalising about the frozen continent by recognising that it comprises of seven regions. Antarctica experienced a “warm” period between 300 and 1000 AD and a “cool” period between 1200 and 1900. Based on its findings, it found “some non-significant evidence of an emerging warmer trend.” In other words, an historically normal development.

The fiction purveyors ignore the botanical and scientific reality that carbon emissions are essential for plant and crop growth. In 2018 Rhodes University launched South Africa’s first large-scale elevated carbon dioxide research facility plant. Its objective was to study the effect of elevated CO2 levels. The study recorded positive benefits in plant and crop growth even under drought conditions.

Those findings corroborated Princeton Professor William Happer’s statement to the US Senate in 2009 that an increase in carbon levels is beneficial to plant growth. As Takeda Kunihiko of the University of Japan has stated: “Every scientist knows that, but it does not pay to say it.”

Thus, it is a misnomer for the GEPF to boast in its latest Fund News bulletin that it is investing in a cleaner environment which will promote energy supply. Wrong, wrong, wrong. According to Business Report of January 12, decarbonisation of South Africa will cost R6 trillion. In the process it will destroy 92,000 jobs in the coal industry and tens of thousands in the petro-chemical industry.

Since 2008 Europe has spent $800 billion subsidising so-called green energy. The result is that energy bills have increased by 80% while a quarter of the population cannot afford the cost of heating their homes in the winter. Germany and California have regular power outages because  solar panels and wind turbines are not only unreliable but cannot produce enough power for consumers.

The GEPF’s boast of its green energy investment needs to be viewed in context. China supplies more than 60% of the turbine parts for wind energy along with solar panels and is also the largest manufacturer of Lithium batteries – all essential for “green energy.” So, the GEPF is contributing to China’s economy for a process that is far more expensive to produce electricity while, at the same time, is unreliable because of the intermittency of its supply.

While the GEPF’s investment in the Roggeveld Wind Project has had a small local spin-off in terms of once-off employment opportunities, maintenance of turbines is on-going and expensive and does not equate with their energy returns. And, of course, the main beneficiaries of such projects are Big Tech, China and the banks.

So, Gentlemen, if the GEPF wants to invest in South Africa’s energy footprint then nuclear is the way to go. It is expensive to initiate but its power output far exceeds that of coal and gas while its environmental footprint is negligible because its waste content is slight and safely and easily disposed of.

On the basis of the above, I strongly object to the GEPF ploughing pensioners’ funds into so-called green energy projects.

The post Objection To GEPF Investment In Green Energy appeared first on Duncan Du Bois.

As Western states in the Northern Hemisphere are already experiencing, wind and solar energy sources are no substitute for fossil fuel sources. For South Africa, with its rich coal reserves, to contemplate abandoning coal as the key driver of energy production is a no-brainer. Furthermore, given the already staggering unemployment reality, eliminating coal production would exacerbate unemployment to catastrophic levels. The other unaddressed results would be de-industrialisation, dramatic decline in food production, absence of the means to generate heat and starvation.

Those are the undisputed realities of this mania to end fossil fuels based on the outright lie that fossil fuels are overheating the planet.

Significantly, the different puppet organisations advocating the ban on fossil fuels are silent on the obvious consequences of their pie-in-the-sky energy fantasy because depopulation is the silent part of their agenda.

Research on the three “organisations” cited in supporting Ramaphosa’s trillion Rand sell-out shows that they are all beholden to the same set of funders. 350 Africa.org is based in Boston and obtains 60% of its funding from two donors, which their 2020 financial statement declines to name. The African Climate Reality Project, founded by failed environmental alarmist Al Gore, is based in Washington DC and derives 99% of its funding from a major donor. The Centre for Environmental Rights, based in Cape Town has seven foreign funders, the most significant one, being the new world order Soros Open Society Foundation.

None of the three cited above represents South Africa’s sovereign interests. Each of them purveys the narrative prescribed by their funders. That is the context of their support for the non-existent climate crisis in which Ramaphosa is ensnaring South Africa.

The post Ramaphosa’s Green-energy Sell-out appeared first on Duncan Du Bois.