WEF Pushes Net Zero — Even Though Trees and Humans Need Carbon to Survive

Last month, WEF — the group that previously published the plan for you to “own nothing, have no privacy” and enjoy it — posted, “Achieving net zero: Why costs of direct air capture need to drop for large-scale adoption.” Net zero carbon emissions is an impossible goal, and, as noted above, living things (including humans) absolutely need carbon to survive. Carbon is essential for life on Earth. Indeed, evidence indicates that increased carbon actually helps plants — including food crops — thrive.

There is evidence too that fossil fuel carbon emissions are too low to drive global warming. Besides this, climate alarmists have been consistently and wildly wrong for 50 years now; don’t start preparing for climate apocalypse just because the WEF screeches that the globe is going to turn into a burning ball of fire. The science shows that the climate alarmists are exaggerating, as usual. As Rush Limbaugh said for years, it’s a political hoax.

In its usual sublime disregard for reality, however, the August WEF piece asserted:

• By 2050, up to 10 billion tons of carbon dioxide needs to be removed from the atmosphere each year to achieve net zero.
• Direct air capture can provide the highest-quality carbon dioxide removals in terms of scalability, permanence and verifiability.
• However, for direct air capture to be widely adopted, the cost must fall from $600-$1,000 per ton to below $200 per ton.

Here are a couple of key points. Data shows that the globe has not warmed in eight years. Furthermore, again, living creatures need carbon. By trying to suck carbon out of the air, WEF and others are potentially sabotaging plants — including food crops — and humans. But perhaps WEF is all right with that — after all, climate alarmist and WEF agenda contributor Bill Gates expressed his support for significantly reducing world population in pursuit of cutting carbon emissions back in 2010.

The main point is that while it actually isn’t necessary to suck a ton of carbon out of the atmosphere because humans aren’t really creating an imminent climate crisis, it is in fact potentially deadly to cut atmospheric carbon. WEF’s priorities, as always, are out of whack.

Why does WEF push technologies that could only harm humans and the environment? Why does WEF use climate change to justify destructive technologies to solve a “crisis” that doesn’t exist? I don’t know for sure, of course, though WEF’s overweening love of tyrannical Communist China and its various plans for a dystopia straight out of “1984” (including a digital ID required to do or buy anything) make its motives highly suspect. It often seems that climate change is used as an excuse for increasing government power and chipping away at citizens’ rights and freedoms.

It’s also important to note that the world’s biggest polluter, China, is considerably increasing the number of its coal plants. So all this carbon capture tech is totally pointless while China ups its pollution.

”Getting to one gigaton of direct air capture capacity won’t be cheap,” WEF confessed. In fact, WEF’s estimate was that direct air capture (DAC) would require “additional capital expenditure and operating expenses investment of about $200 billion.” That’s an awful lot of money that has to come from — where? All to fund an unnecessary and possibly damaging technology? The real environmental poison is not carbon emissions but tyranny-loving climate alarmists.