Not Enough Minerals For Green Energy

Dreams of electric everything defy reality; put the D in population

Sep 08, 2022

Only 5-10 % of the minerals exist to replace oil, gas and hydrocarbon fuels today
Switching to renewable energy is not just difficult but impossible
Unless the population declines dramatically
Are they pushing Agenda 21 without checking if the mineral resources exist…
Or are the egenicists waging a war of deception upon We The People?
Why is there no plan to shift to lower consumption, new ways of living
Western nations are under attack as globalists shift focust to Asia
Not an open and competitive Indo-Pacific but one led by China
The aim is to control territories/resources and political systems
Bankers tell us their money system must be reset but it is based on a lie
They are not neutral intermediaries but decide to produce or speculate
Banks have no right to determine the social and political shape of society

The ‘Green energy’ series:
Not Enough Minerals For Green Energy - Putting the D in population (Sep 08, 2022)
UN Terrifies Youth To Push 'Polycrisis' (Sep 24, 2023)
Europe's Parallel Reality: C02 & Degrowth (May 09, 2024)

See Related:
Hate And Depopulate (Aug 24, 2022)
When The Skies Were Free - Clouds, currency & carbon (Jun 12, 2022)
Follow The Consensus To Your Demise (Aug 9, 2023)
Germany May Ban Opposition Party - Narrative Babel breaks down (Jan 21, 2024)
The Great Replacement Of Everything (Jul 21, 2024)

(About 3,000 words or 14 minutes of your time.)

Sep 8, 2022

Memories and minerals

As a child the only organisation I belonged to, apart from the cub scouts, was the World Wildlife Fund. It was just a few short years after the WWF had been launched. We didn’t know its founder was Prince Bernhard of Bilderberg, or that Prince Philip shot tigers, and nor did our parents since the press didn’t report those kinds of things.

My brothers, sister and I sent off our fee and cherished our membership cards with the panda icon. Today two-thirds of funding still comes from individuals, though 17 per cent from bodies like the World Bank and USAID, but only eight per cent from those oh-so-woke corporations (2020).

Today, thankfully, the media is more vociferous: we are in the middle of an existential crisis, driven by climate change, we are told, as humans spoil the planet, mainly by using oil and gas. The Covid pandemic is the opportunity to set things right.

And we’ve got the Internet. Fifty years after joining the WWF, I checked its site to see what I should do to fight climate change:

Write a letter
Reduce my carbon emissions.
Commute by carpooling or using mass transit.
Plan and combine trips.
Contact my electricity provider to find out about the “green power.”

Everything except for writing a letter, I do. Restrictions on travel have been replaced with inconvenience so I simply don’t.

I’m a “moderate fundamentalist” on the environment, not given to alarmism. I grew up in nature, am happiest walking in the hills, even more by a stream, carry a big plastic bag to collect litter — yes plastic bags can be a good thing (did the Duke of Edinburgh collect litter?) I rage against all types of pollution which I see as the bigger problem. I support Green energy if it does less harm.

And that is where I thought the argument rested: on the merits of one type of Green energy against another.

Colour me shocked to discover that the “offer” of renewable energy is unviable as proposed by the United Nations; not difficult to achieve, like sacrificing some comforts for Ukraine while we renounce Russian gas, but impossible.

Mills of wind

State corporate media is quick to blame humans for Climate Change but it misleads when it comes to the viable solutions.

If we were to replace all our oil and gas energy today, we’d have only 10 per cent of the copper required — not that which is mined, mind, but which is known to exist.

An Australian geologist, Simon Michaux PhD, told Channel Nine News that known reserves contain only 5 per cent of the minerals needed to make the first set of batteries, assuming all the world’s vehicles were replaced with electric.

The shortfall for lithium, cobalt, graphite and vanadium is even worse, according to Michaux of Geological Survey Finland, who has done a detailed study of what’s required to phase out hydrocarbons.

He based his calculations on the year 2018 with 84.5 per cent of primary energy still dependent on coal, oil and gas, and less than 1 per cent of the world’s vehicle fleet electric. The life cycle of renewable energy equipment is eight to 25 years. Then it needs to be made again. [1]

Even with abundant oil, polluting but calorific, the last industrial revolution took 100 years, Michaux says. “We now seek to build an even more complex system with very expensive energy, a fragile finance system saturated in debt, not enough minerals, with an unprecedented number of human population, embedded in a deteriorating environment.”

Bloomberg/NEF is more sanguine, suggesting that demand for copper will rise by half by 2040. Yet primary copper production (as opposed to recycling) can only increase 16 per cent in that time.

Where are the minerals to make the cities smart or transport you between them?

They exist on a much smaller scale than the Green proponents claim. Either they plan to power the world with the hot air from their own prognostications, or they are misleading us. Michaux presented his findings to European bureaucrats and they pled ignorance.

What gives? Population.

We have encountered the Club of Rome and the depopulation plan before. They know they are corraling humanity into a dead end?
See Crisis Update - Hate And Depopulate (Aug 24, 2022)

A lesser known globalist body is the Council On Inclusive Capitalism (CIC), led by Lynn Forester de Rothschild. In practice it is a mechanism to promote environmental, social and governance criteria, ESGs, using a doubtful process of auditing. This raises the question whether ESGs themselves are the objective or the means to another.

Are the bodies, from the UN to the Vatican, seriously planning Agenda 21 without checking whether the mineral resources exist on planet Earth to meet their sustainable development goals or SDGs?

Why doesn’t Lynn de Rothschild call a cousin and ask about mining? If anyone has a handle on the minerals business and can tell you what’s in demand, practically off the top of their head, it would be the ennobled banking family.

From 1830-1940 the Rothschilds largely controlled the world markets in non-ferrous metals — lead, nickel, mercury, copper, sulphur — not to mention their more famous mining activities including diamonds, oil, coal and gold. In the 1950s they were buying up large tracts of Canada for mining. In addition NM Rothschild acts as an adviser and broker specializing in mining deals. [2]

Better still, place a call to their family journal, The Economist, and its famed Intelligence Unit. Lynn Rothschild is part owner!

They must know that the Green energy plans as stated are unworkable — which begs the question: is Green energy a subsidised boondoggle or a cover for something else?

War by deception

If they are lying about the Climate response, just like the Covid response, where does the lie end and the truth begin?

The CIC is one of many foundations run by the same groups and which pursue the same goals: WEF, Club of Rome, Bilderberg, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations.

The key individual who connects them is the late David Rockefeller (1915-2017).

His speech at the UN Business Council award in 1994, captures the programme of the WEF and UN which today is called by various names: Sustainable Development Goals, the Great Reset and Build Back Better.

Language and power

Words are more than labels. Phrases are the packaging for big ideas. Headlines influence the subconscious. Scary words induce fear and stop us thinking — words mean one thing to the gang that’s shouting, and another to the terrified victims.

Think of the words around Climate Change.

One possiblitity is that these central planners mean something else by words like sustainable. If there is to be less energy, food and water, one way to make it sustainable is to have fewer people. In other words, code for depopulation.

If your objective is to manipulate humanity (for whatever purpose) through your control of the energy that makes life possible (whether that’s food, oil or the metals that distribute energy) then you need to control territories and political systems.

Abe’s Japanese perspective

The state funeral of Shinzo Abe cost $10 million, a lavish sum that further distracts analysis of his assassination.

Abe promoted the phrase Indo-Pacific and the self-determination of Japan in spite of its troubled past. He saw that China’s rapid growth would destablise the region, meaning Japan had no choice but to reconsider its pacifist constitution.

By focusing on Indo-Pacific he moved the focus away from Asia-Pacific with China at its hub, and pulled out to southeast Asia where China has economic ambitions.

He was a neo-liberal in an age when the powers that be (TPTB) have moved on to state corporativism. He opposed protectionism at a time when TPTB are poised to split the world into mercantilist fiefdoms and trade zones under the “rules-based international order.” [3]

BlackRock’s Chinese ambition

This conflicts with the world as shaped by BlackRock, the asset manager, led by one of the most powerful financiers, Larry Fink. An open and competitive Indo-Pacific is fraught with risk and the investor-owners don’t like risk. They want the continent and its resources to serve their interests, even if that means promoting China as the supra-national corporate governor of that particular part of the globe.

Fink sees China as the heart of a new world order and is so invested in the country and its leadership that a master manipulator like George Soros took a page in The Wall Street Journal to denounce BlackRock. That is, if the split is real, for Soros, a Rothschild foil, cannot publicly back a totalitarian state when his business model is the color revolutions of the Open Society Foundation.

Soros is the disruptor, from Britain’s exit from the Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1992 (closely linked to the Rothschilds since the day he bet against the Bank of England) to the downfall of Viktor Yanukovych in Ukraine in 2014 in the tradition of the bankers’ Bolshevik putsch.

BlackRock (Rockefeller) is the healer, from the takeover of the American Medical and domination of petro-pharmaceuticals, to social experiments like the Third Reich and communist China.

Think of the two forces as chaos providing the opportunity for a new order, or the mythical dialectic.

There is nonetheless a split in the power elite over China. Someone has created a website to “expose” Fink. [4]

The objectives behind Green

Like Japan, since World War 2 Germany has been a conduit for supra-national corporate governance. They are not allowed to be nations, let alone nationalists.

The rhetoric of the multipolar vs unipolar, communism vs fascism misses the point that the world is poised to revert from capitalism to mercantilism, and the people to a neo-feudalism, in which nations will be grouped together as fiefdoms and the currency will not be the coin of war, to which David Graeber ascribed the rise of the monetary system, but physical occupation and the extraction of land resources.

That is why the bankers are content to see their control over specie and credit replaced so long as they, personally, retain their stakes in resources: hence stakeholders. Fairness to the common man, or equity, is not part of the plan and is misdirection except in the sense that you’ll get what you deserve (equity).

Control of mineral resources will be the central objective if the transition from hydrocarbons is to be achieved. There aren't enough and the competition will be brutal.

Let’s dig behind the claims of the Greens, the World Economic Forum, the bankers and their Inclusive Capitalism, the UN and its sustainable equity.

Is this mass delusion, wilful ignorance or are they deceiving us?

Who has the minerals?

Rare earth elements and minerals are deposited largely in Asia. From Russia, to China, down to Myanmar, Vietnam and Indonesia. But if you look at the ownership, there are only two big players in cobalt: the Glasenberg family of SA, and China.

After Russia, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations are among the main producers of nickel, copper, tin and gold. Indonesia is a key source, while Vietnam and Myanmar have rare earth elements along with China — and there’s more under the seabed, where China proposes to mine. Currently there’s more newsprint given to mining asteroids.

Copper is much more dispersed but the ownership is again concentrated — in the UK and China. Lithium is found in Australia, Chile. As to ownership, China has a third of it (plus the biggest reserves) are in China, followed by BlackRock and Vanguard.

Nickel is mostly found in Indonesia but its ownership lies in industrial and investment firms, as with Lithium. According to Luc Leruth, visiting resident scholar at the International School of Economics at Tbilisi University, developing countries need to investigate the ownership and control of companies working in these mineral sectors. [5]

The new mercantilism

The economist and author Arvind Kumar wrote a critical take on the philosopher Amartya Sen in 2018 accusing him of being one of the cogs by which the Western bankers control the developing world, in particular India. [6]

He says Sen represents the acceptable face of the descendants of the East India Company, since he is married into the Rothschilds. The levers of modern-day control are business deals and broking, assisted by political connections and funding a powerful network of civil society NGOs.

Kumar has an axe to grind. As a Hindu he opposes the relativist ideology that the globalists and billionaires are using to wear down and transform society.

In his view the International Monetary Fund, a provider of emergency lending, and the World Bank, a development bank, do for the owner-investors what the EIC did before — which should give us pause.

The EIC used military force to repress India, to break the traditional hierarchies and regional loyalties, turning maharajas into tools of Western power. The country was unified, leveled and forbidden to use the technology of the time, so that it would be merely a source of raw materials and a market for finished goods.

The Bolshevik revolution was an attempt to eliminate Russia as a competitor just as it was industrializing at the turn of the 20th century. The West wanted it to be a source of raw materials (oil and gas) and a market for finished goods. The Rockefellers and Rothschilds had built a monopoly to extract and ship oil from the Russian empire but in the end settled for the Bolsheviks disrupting development while still supplying raw materials.

Rival economic systems

Something similar was done to Japan in financial terms after WW2 and again after it got too powerful industrially in the 1970s. It was forced to “open” to Western banks on the pretext of liberalizing markets. Foreign creditors lent lavishly, until an asset boom took off. Then the bankers called in the loans.

The result was that Japan’s economic model based on keiretsu was undermined along with its banking system. The take-down of Japan was described by Dr Richard Werner in the must-read (or at least view the documentary) Princes Of The Yen (2003). Werner is one of the foremost authorities on central banking, the inventor of quantitative easing, and one of the only people who can explain it plain language.

Like the late David Graeber, Werner torpedoes the WEF narrative. He overturns all the assumptions behind which banks disguise their activities.

Classroom lies

First, he undermines their claim to foster growth and employment using interest rates, because the monetary theory upon which that authority rests is invalid.

Central bankers are given the right to create money on the assumption they will use the power to manage interest rates to the benefit of all. This public good is why we tolerate usury at all.

But if its a lie, then central banks have no right to determine the monetary, social and political shape of society.

Prof Werner argues that higher growth leads to higher rates. In economic terms, he overturns the negative correlation of interest rates and growth. Furthermore, if banks create money out of thin air at the moment they put your loan on the books, then the credit creation theory of banking is correct and the fractional reserve and financial intermediary theories collapse. [7]

Banks are not neutral financial intermediaries but decide how to allocate money. If they allocate money to productive endeavours that produce goods not inflation, that is a choice. If they allocate to speculate in asset prices that, too, is a deliberate decision and not an accident.

Secondly, Werner questions that corporations will do good if governments get out of the way. This is the central proposition of the World Economic Forum: that corporations should have more power because regulation slows innovation. Like Apple, corporations “just work” — and big tech already has your data, so let’s go.

Not surprisingly the World Economic Forum did not like this line of reasoning. Werner was a WEF Global Leader For Tomorrow in 2003-2004 but the WEF abolished the programme and set up Young Global Leaders, ridding itself of Werner and his cohort.

The moral outcome is that Werner exposes the power relations that lie behind the talk of equity and inclusion. The proposed solutions to the crises of Covid and climate change reflect these unchanged realities of power.

There is no reason to listen to the Council on Inclusive Capitalism talking about equity and lifting people out of poverty because these are the same people who have run the banking system for at least the past century.

They have no right to reset the world — for whatever purpose — nor to replace your birthright or personal integrity by logging your DNA in a database or manipulating it so they can patent it. [8]

Far from letting bankers and big pharma infringe on our bodily integrity, we should question theirs.

Moneycircus

Discussion about this post