Emissions deal: Farming and environmental groups criticise 25% agriculture cut Government move a ‘sell-out of our family farm model’ which would make ‘whole classes of farms unviable’, ICMSA says...Considerably larger cuts are being sought from other areas, including a 75 per cent reduction from electricity, 50 per cent from transport, 45 per cent from commercial and public buildings, 40 per cent from residential buildings and 35 per cent from industry.,,,However, the total of all sectors’ emission cuts will not achieve the 51 per cent reduction by 2030 that has been set down in law. Instead, 26 million tonnes of carbon reductions are “unallocated” between 2026 and 2030, meaning further measures will be required to achieve them.....
so who decided to do these things? The decisions are coming from the elites, not the people.
In the meanwhile, the G7 and Biden claim they are worried about world hunger, and plan to blame Russia when this happens. From USA Today last month:
Biden, G-7 leaders will try to prevent millions from starving to death after war in Ukraine dramatically escalated food shortages Russia, which is blocking grain from leaving Ukraine, may hold "most of the cards."
so blame Russia, while the western elite are cutting back fossil fuels by forbidding drilling, by cutting back pipelines etc. while ignoring that this also means no fertilizer, which is made from methane.,. and that increasing the price of fuel means higher costs in using farm machinery and shipping food to markets.
and for good measure, they are implementing "Green"policies that order farmers not to grow food.
Who do you believe?
....
and then you have this discussion.
..
Mosher is the one who dared to expose the massive forced abortion policy of China under their 2 child policy in the 1980s: something that few western countries noticed because their reporters were in cities and mainly reported/echoed what was told to them:
at the end they discuss monkey pox. Well, today the Inquirer says one person admitted to the Philippines has it, and had contact with ten people (only 3 in his family... uh, who are the other 7? Neighbors or sexual contacts?)... uh, does this mean there will be a massive epidemic among the gay community and sex tourists in Makati etc.?
-------------------
update: An April article from the Asahi.com in Japan states these goals were discussed back then. And points fingers on who or what is behind these massive cuts:
with the Biden administration in the United States also taking a more aggressive stance on climate change, some U.S media reports have said Washington is seeking a new goal of 50 percent reduction in comparison to 2005 levels.
washington? Who in Washington? the activists of course, not the people, because no one noticed what was going on.
According to undisclosed government documents, other nations are using bases of comparison that are close to Japan’s fiscal 2013 base year.
uh what documents?
If 2013 was set as the base year for the other nations, the EU goal would be a 43-percent reduction, while the U.S. goal would be a 45-percent reduction. If Japan wants to set a goal that keeps it in the same ballpark as those figures, it will have to be at least 40 percent.
Further consideration will be given to the exact target figure as well as the expressions used to set the new goal, officials said.
uh, want to guess the new goals will be for even more cut backs?
and finally we have someone who dares name she who must not be named: TADA!
Under the Paris Accord on climate change agreed to in 2015, the goal is to keep global temperatures to within two degrees of the level before the Industrial Revolution and, if possible, to only have global temperatures rise by 1.5 degrees from pre-industrial levels.
ah wonderful. Let's live in a world of famines and poverty that have almost disappered thanks to the industrial revolution.
wait a second: The US didn't agree to that treaty, because to institute this into law, according to the constitution, it has to be ratified by the Senate.
Ah, but the MSM echo chamber at Newsweek says hey no, it is legal because the president did it by executive order.
Dirty little secret: The real bombshell of the Supreme court was not their ruling over abortion but the court case sent by West Virginia that said you couldn't do that. From the daily surge:
in West Virginia, the court corrected another usurpation of the legislative prerogative—this one by the EPA. It is very encouraging for those who believe in the rule of law to see the Supreme Court take a clear stand that each branch of government must stay in its own lane and restrict itself to exercising only the powers and responsibilities assigned to its own branch.
nuaced explanation at Reason blog
No comments:
Post a Comment