United Nations

Keep It In The Ground: A Global Carbon Budget

"Globally, a third of oil reserves, half of gas reserves and over 80 per cent of current coal reserves should remain unused."

|

KeepItInTheGroundCOP22Bailey
Ronald Bailey

Marrakech – "Science tells us in order to bring reality to climate change rhetoric, we must keep fossil fuels in the ground," declared Center for Biological Diversity associate conservation director Jean Su. Su moderated the Keep It in the Ground panel at the COP22 U.N. climate change conference. The idea is that in order to keep global average temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, humanity can only burn so much more coal, oil and natural gas.

How much more? According to the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change humanity can only put an additional 870 to 1,240 gigatons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere by 2050 in order to preserve a 50 percent chance of keeping the global average temperature below the 2 degree Celsius threshold. By one estimate, burning known coal, oil, and natural gas reserves by 2050 would put an additional 2,900 gigatons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. A January 2015 study in Nature calculated that "globally, a third of oil reserves, half of gas reserves and over 80 per cent of current coal reserves should remain unused from 2010 to 2050 in order to meet the target of 2 °C."

In a major victory last year, the Keep It In The Ground campaign persuaded the Obama administration to block the construction of the Keystone pipeline that would have transported about nearly a million barrels of petroleum daily from Canada's oilsands fields in Alberta. In his November 6, 2015 statement rejecting the Keystone pipeline's construction permit request, President Obama declared, "If we're going to prevent large parts of this Earth from becoming not only inhospitable but uninhabitable in our lifetimes, we're going to have to keep some fossil fuels in the ground rather than burn them and release more dangerous pollution into the sky."

The current Standing Rock protests against the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline was a major touchstone of the Keep It In The Ground panel here in Morocco. The 1,172 mile Dakota Access pipeline would transport oil from the Bakken shale fields in North Dakota. During the session, Indigenous Environmental Network representative Alberto Saldamando read a statement from IEN Director Tom Goldtooth in which he characterized the pipeline as a "black snake threatening the Missouri River" and asserted "we are not protesters; we are protectors of our sacred waters." The Goldtooth statement continued, "The black snake represents a world out of balance which views all life as private property and looks at Mother Earth as without a soul or spirit." Saldamando added, "From a personal perspective, money is bad medicine."

Earlier this week, the Army Corps of Engineers halted pipeline construction near the protest site. The Corps announced that additional discussion and analysis of the project is "warranted in light of the history of the Great Sioux Nation's dispossessions of lands, the importance of Lake Oahe to the Tribe, our government-to-government relationship, and the statute governing easements through government property."

Other Keep It In The Ground panelists included Lidy Nacpil, coordinator, Asian Peoples Movement on Debt and Development from the Philippines, who denounced the fact that her country is slated to build 45 new coal-fired power generation plants and has approved environmental certificates for 118 new coal mines. Filip Lovstrom, from the Swedish group Youth Platform for Corporate Responsibility Platform Where Youth Cooperate for Sustainability (PUSH) decried the act of taking things from the ground and giving them "a fictional value." He declared, "The century we have before us can be a story of how we failed to live within planetary boundaries, and how we failed to maintain human rights. Or it can be the century in which we create a life worthy of all human beings and while preserving nature."

Swedish Green Party European Parliament representative Max Andersson argued that fossil fuel companies should be thrown out of future COP meetings. In fact, the U.S. delegation at COP22 formally accepted on Wednesday a petition signed by 500,000 people from the Corporate Accountability International group urging that fossil fuel companies be excluded from future negotiations.

Going forward, it will be interesting to see how the Keep It In The Ground campaign will fare in the United States during the Trump administration. Already, the backers of the Keystone pipeline are suggesting that they will ask the Trump administration to overturn President Obama's decision to reject its construction.

"A Broken Record"

Calm pervades the COP22 U.N. climate change conference. This is unusual. At previous COPs (Conference of the Parties) an air of crisis featuring frenzied denunciations from delegations and activists was the custom as the meetings wound down in their second week. The Paris COP21 last year has been described as the "commitment COP" at which countries hammered out the Paris Agreement on Climate Change and made promises with regard to how they were going to address man-made global warming. COP22 here at Marrakech is supposed to be the "action COP" where countries are supposed to figure out how to get on with meeting their commitments.

So why the tranquility? Two speculations. First, the meeting is still in shell shock over the results of the U.S. presidential elections. Second, and I think more the likely reason, is that the pressure is off. By that I mean that under the Paris Agreement countries do not have to make any further commitments with regard to how they are going to handle global warming until 2020.

For example, at the Keep It In The Ground session, the panel moderator commented on the low energy in the room and asked the audience were their outrage was? Of course, one can always count on predictable sources of ersatz anger. At a Friends of the Earth International press conference on Wednesday, Meena Raman, a representative from FOE Malaysia managed to gin some up and ritually declared COP22 is "a COP of broken promises" and "a COP of postponing ambition." However, Raman herself acknowledged that she "sounded like a broken record." Yes, she did.

Tomorrow: The end of COP22 and the Marrakech Action Proclamation.

Advertisement

NEXT: Read These Family Members of Current Inmates Urging Obama to Expand Clemency

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Why are these scientific thresholds always in even degrees and years ending in 0?

    1. Because those “scientists” only have ten fingers.

      1. If This Sound Good For You & Interested
        Watch Now….!!!Streaming Online HD Movie :
        ? ? ? http://bit.ly/2gkrFfx ? ? ?
        Happy & Enjoy to Watch For Free
        Or Visit first for check : https://www.facebook.com/movierolls/

    2. Way back on the way to getting an aerospace engineering degree, we were presenting a group project to undergrads and professors of the department.

      When we were done, a crusty old professor said in front of everyone, “Your whole presentation just chaffed my ass!”

      One of his main complaints: the propulsion group said that the engines should be 25% the size of a space shuttle engine. “How the hell did you come up with 25%? You just made it up! Why isn’t it 23% or 27.4%?”

      It was one of the best educational experiences I ever had.

      1. Exactly. Real life rarely hits on a pretty number.

        1. 36-24-36

          Nailed it.

          1. Only if she’s 5’3″.

      2. What multiple of 98.6 by your 113 birthday would you like UNEP to aim for ?

      3. Just to play devil’s advocate, 27.4% implies a degree of precision that may not be known. I’m cool with targets being nice and round.

        1. There are fairly precise optimization techniques that balance things like thrust, efficiency, or weight against some kind of desired outcome. Three digits of significance was probably attainable at this point in the design. The prop guys just didn’t do the math and write the code to run the optimization, so they got blasted by a memorable and beloved professor.

          Luckily, I wasn’t on the prop team.

      4. He meant “chafed”

        1. He meant “chapped.” “Chafed” would make more sense, but that’s not the idiom.

    3. I took your oil reserves and I THREW THEM ON THE GROUND! I am not gonna be part of your system, man!

      1. This ain’t my president, this a cell phone!

  2. OT: Was this covered yesterday? Wolfcamp Shale

    Going forward, it will be interesting to see how the Keep It In The Ground campaign will fare in the United States during the Trump administration

    Especially when the US finds a mother lode.

      1. His link was to that.

    1. I came here to say that. With known oil reserves increasing all the time, keeping 1/3 of them in the ground is not going to be a problem.

    2. I should’ve gotten into the drilling business.

  3. So we start by keeping “on the ground” the planes all those idiots used to get there.
    Let them “walk the talk” by hiking home. And if they came from a cold place, they can forgo heating their own homes to help out.

    1. Better, we deposit all progtards in to the ground. As they do emit CO2, yet have a negative utility value. This program should be compulsory.

      1. They will also eventually become fossil fuel themselves one day.

        1. Don’t tell them that. Can you imagine their horror if they ever discovered they could be useful for something other than being an idiot?

      2. As they do emit CO2

        Especially when you burn them.

    2. I am just so tempted to run up to North Dakota and drain all of that “evil liquid” out of their gas tanks so they can walk home….

  4. I’d say don’t keep it in the ground and let our standard of living soar compared to those countries that do.

  5. A good place to start curtailing energy usage would be: government.

    Of course that’s exactly the opposite of what the watermelons want.

    1. Sorry, not familiar with the watermelon analogy?

      1. Green on the outside, Red on the inside.

        1. Ah, thank you!

  6. I drink your milkshake. I drink it up!

    Full disclosure: They were going to mine for coal right next to my property, and my scenic vistas were going to be replaced by a coal mine entrance. They leased the land and went through the extensive surveying and permitting process. In the end, they determined the market for coal was not going to be there for any more investment into this mine to be worth it and the lease expired.

    1. So where is the part of the story where you chained yourself to their bulldozers to stop them from defacing your pristine vistas?

      1. It was more like Earnest goes to camp.

      2. I didn’t have to do a thing, nor did I really want to. The lane back to my place is terrible and the coal company likely would have graded and paved it for me. So I lost out on that.

  7. So why the tranquility? Two speculations. First, the meeting is still in shell shock over the results of the U.S. presidential elections. Second, and I think more the likely reason, is that the pressure is off. By that I mean that under the Paris Agreement countries do not have to make any further commitments with regard to how they are going to handle global warming until 2020.

    And if there is no political will to do this nonsense now, there will be even less in 2020. The climategate leak was really the beginning of the end of the AGW cult. The media did their best to ignore it and pretend the emails didn’t show what they clearly did, but the truth has a way of escaping and entering the public consciousness even if the public itself doesn’t even know how or from where it got there. No one believes this is a problem anymore and voters are not going to give up their standard of living to solve it.

    It is going to take a while. Nothing this big with this many people with a vested interest in it dies over night. Gradually it is going to fade away as the Left realizes it is no longer an effective tool for obtaining power and moves onto something else. As that starts to happen the money will dry up and the opportunists will move on as well.

    1. There are still crackpot shitbags like Jackandace that believe in this garbage. But it’s not like anyone really listens to losers like that. Especially in Trumpmerica.

      1. Even the people who believe it don’t act like it. Yeah, they drive their Prius and engage in other symbolic activity that has about as much effect on things as carrying a Rosary. What they never do, however, is take any action that requires any real sacrifice on their part. Vermont will kill off its local power industry and claim to have reduced the state’s carbon footprint only to just buy its fossil fuel generated electricity from other states. When push comes to shove no one is ever going to give up their standard of living for this nonsense. It was always doomed to fail.

        1. Some people do take it further than just driving a Prius. But that still doesn’t give them the moral authority to tell other people what to do.

        2. I’ve made much the same observation before. Most of the people that buy into this shit are doing it as some bizarre form of social signaling, but as soon as their standard of living is negatively impacted in an obvious way it comes crashing down.

          That being said, this same group is pretty oblivious. As an example, when energy prices necessarily skyrocket due to the green agenda, it’s not the fault of the agenda but rather the fault of the energy companies themselves. This is one reason why it’s so dangerous, there’s a percentage of people who believe this stuff that won’t realize their error until it’s far too late (if ever). Hopefully that percentage is small enough to be easily overridden but we shall see.

          Their hypocrisy and shallow beliefs are stark to anyone that has actually thought about the subject. For instance, the Prius is essentially a coal/natural gas powered vehicle that requires extra materials that need to be pulled out of the ground en masse (lithium, for example) yet these idiots act like they’re saving the environment by purchasing them. It’s that kind of shallow, short term thinking that defines the entire movement.

  8. During the session, Indigenous Environmental Network representative Alberto Saldamando read a statement from IEN Director Tom Goldtooth in which he characterized the pipeline as a “black snake threatening the Missouri River” and asserted “we are not protesters; we are protectors of our sacred waters.” The Goldtooth statement continued, “The black snake represents a world out of balance which views all life as private property and looks at Mother Earth as without a soul or spirit.” Saldamando added, “From a personal perspective, money is bad medicine.”

    I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE!!!!

    So if we’re keeping score: using religion as an excuse not to bake someone a cake is unconscionable and barbaric. Using religion to stymie progress that would improve the lives of millions of people is okay.

    I guess some people’s spiritual bullshit is more important than others when it comes to government.

    1. If Not-White, then Valid.
      If Else, then Scum.

      1. If White Then
        Valid
        ELSE
        Scum
        End If

    2. Did he really say “bad medicine”?

      That is awesome.

      1. That whole quote is so over-the-top I gotta think he’s secretly laughing at whitey. Also, they left off the line after “money is bad medicine” – “now give me lots of yours”.

  9. Marrakech ? “Science tells us in order to bring reality to climate change rhetoric, we must keep fossil fuels in the ground,” declared Center for Biological Diversity associate conservation director Jean Su.

    Estas no son Su’s decisiones.

    1. Science is pulling your leg, Mx. Su.

  10. “Globally, a third of oil reserves, half of gas reserves and over 80 per cent of current coal reserves should remain unused.”

    “Guys, on behalf of the Cato Institute, I’d like to discuss this fascinating little concept with you. Libertarianism. You haven’t heard of it yet, I can see, but you shall be amazed and no mistake.”

    That’s what you told them, Ron, right? Right? I bet you said something really pithy and abstract in favor of the non-aggression principle, that’s what I bet happened next.

    1. Just because government planning is the preferred “solution” among Europeans to everything (including climate change), that doesn’t mean that there aren’t free market, capitalist solutions, or that some solutions aren’t more capitalist than others.

  11. “[The Philippines] is slated to build 45 new coal-fired power generation plants and has approved environmental certificates for 118 new coal mines.”

    There’s the rub.

    If convincing Americans that they should make sacrifices for future generations were easy, we wouldn’t be staring at a national debt of some $20 trillion.

    Getting Americans to sacrifice their own standard of living for the benefit of future generations of Filipinos has an even higher degree of difficulty.

    That’s why Obama signed us onto the Paris Agreement. That’s why environmentalist interests are turning to increasingly involuntary measures–like Al Gore and the AGs suing oil companies for fraud.

    Forced people to make sacrifices for the common good is what being a progressive is all about. We should understand that this isn’t subterfuge or ignorance. The Tonys of the world may not understand anything about economics, but that ignorance doesn’t extend to the policymakers.

    Forced sacrifice isn’t an unintended consequence of their preferred policies. Forced sacrifice is the intended consequence.

    1. Just another reason why we need to leverage the current anti-Trump unrest as a valid basis to bring back HUAC. We need to start making it gradually more and more illegal to be a communist. Like in the good old days.

      1. If uniformity of thought is the problem (on climate change and other issues), then giving future governments the means by which to regulate our thought probably isn’t a long term solution to that problem.

        1. Not thought, action. Progressivism/marxism is inherently antithetical to our federal republic. Just look at the Bill of Rights versus the Ten Planks of Communism. They are antithetical. It isn’t really oppressive to go these kinds of oppressors. After all, there are valid reasons that we laws against sedition and treason on the books.

      2. P.S. HUAC was to communism as torture guidelines were to terrorism. Circa 2003, I didn’t think it was possible to create sympathy for terrorists, but the Bush Administration found a way with Abu Ghraib.

        Has anything in American history ever created more lasting support for communists than HUAC?

        1. That’s pretty good. The popular memory of HUAC was a paranoid right winger bullying people and getting them blacklisted just for refusing to be snitches.

          Never mind that many of those were in favor of a murderous ideology and wanted to bring it here after whitewashing the results elsewhere.

          1. That perception has more to do with distortions created by the very people we were trying to stop. And since we did not stop them, look how much worse things have gotten. I’ll take my chances being remembered as a bully versus sitting back and letting these people ruin the lives of actual innocent people who just want to be left alone (i.e. like most of the folks commenting here).

        2. The communist takeover of the education industry.

          1. Another example of why HUAC and McCarthyism are remembered so poorly. McCarthy was a drunk and a demagogue, but he was not wrong.

            1. He wasn’t wrong about what?

              Cajoling Hollywood into blacklisting people because of their ideas and into making propaganda films?

              He wasn’t wrong about driving people out of office because of their beliefs?

              WTF are you talking about?

              There isn’t anything libertarian about the thought police.

              1. McCarthy was right about one thing:

                There were people on the Soviet payroll working for the United States government.

                Whatever else can be said, that is a serious matter and dealing with it does not involve suppression of anyone’s beliefs. It may not be of particular concern to libertarians, but it isn’t anti-libertarian to point it out, either.

                1. Kbolino, thank you. If the progtards wanted to sit in their private hippie communes and spout their nonsense to each, I honestly don’t think I would have an extra fuck in my fuck bag leftover to give. But when they work with our enemies, or even on their own, to take what is ours, they must be stopped.

              2. You’re really cherry picking. The problem isn’t wpwhat they THINK. It’s what they DO. As the actual practice of communism means the destruction of our federal republic, our constitution, and the included bill of rights, it is therefor intrinsically treasonous.

                Look at all their efforts to strip our rights away at every level. You regularly point this out yourself. They aren’t competing in a marketplace of ideas and a free market. They are subverting those things and seek to replace them with their totalitarian system. They have made great strides in doing so, especially under the tyrant Obama.

                When someone presents themselves to me as an existential enemy, bent on my destruction, I don’t. Wait around for the final act to stop them. McCarthy understood that, as do I.

        3. I disagree. While Abu Ghirab was a huge embarrassment, let’s be honest. The real problem was the sick glee with which the progtard media sensationalized the whole thing. Have you ever seen the same media weasels do an in-depth examination on what Al Queda was doing to captured US troops?

          1. No. My problem with torturing people was not that the media sensationalized it.

            My problem was that it violated ethical standards, the Constitution, and that it was a stupid self-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism.

            Nothing fueled recruiting into the insurgency like Abu Ghraib.

            It was one of the stupidest things the Bush Administration ever did.

            Gonzo and Rumsfeld belong in prison.

            1. Yes, Abu Ghirab was bad, but it was incredibly overblown by a Marxist media for the primary purpose of discrediting their political rivals. The left will always find a way to twist and exaggerate things as long as they have a stranglehold on the media. Many of whom should be charged with crimes for their collusion with the DNC.

              1. Revisionist history already? *examines wristwatch* It hasn’t even been a decade, and you think you’re going to whitewash torture by our government? Go sell crazy someplace else, we’re all stocked up here. Your defense of McCarthyism is equally disgusting, frankly, but hardly surprising.

                If a witch hunt happens to scare a single witch out of her hovel, but you kill or imprison 100 innocents, I suppose it’s totally worth it huh.

  12. “We need to impoverish the impoverished even more, for the sake of the planet. That’s OK with you, 3rd World peasant? We thank you for your sacrifice.” [Gets back in private jet, scuttles off for more righteous do-goodery]

    1. That’s their justification for making Americans cut their emissions–so that the developing world can continue to develop.

      1. so that the developing world can continue to develop.

        some. wouldn’t want them to adapt to a standard of living they’d just have to sacrifice later to save Aborigines from extinction, and they’d do it, too.

      2. Ah, I see that the higher prices, from deliberately rationing the availability of carbon-based energy sources, will magically not transfer to the 3rd World. Good to know.

    2. You mean for the sake of making Jean Su feel good.

      1. And so Al Gore and George Soros can line their pockets.

  13. humanity can only put an additional 870 to 1,240 gigatons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere by 2050 in order to preserve a 50 percent chance of keeping the global average temperature below the 2 degree Celsius threshold.

    Okay. Get the fuck right out of here.

  14. I guess Peak Oil is over now.

    1. “Yeah, that didn’t turn out as we experts had predicted. Now we’re predicting this new thing…”

    2. Peak oil is an observation, not a theory. Take any finite resource. At some point, your will reach a PEAK in its production, that you will never exceed. The fact that technology means more of oil reserves are accessible doesn’t eliminate this basic physical constraint.

      1. Peak oil was also a (wrong) prediction that it would happen soon.

    3. That made me scratch my head, when they list percentages of fossil fuels that need to stay in the ground.

      That would indicate that they think they know how much is actually there, which they don’t know at all. They can’t.

      So, how do you leave 80% of an unknown value in the ground? They don’t care. They don’t want any coming out at all, but want to sound like they don’t mind a little use here and there. Basically, they’re happy as long as 7 billion people die since we’re kind of like a disease and there are too many of us. Malthusians, top to bottom. You’ll see it, on occasion, when their mask slips.

      1. Don’t confuse the commie AGW nuts with math.

      2. The percentages are for known reserves. Yet-to-be-discovered reserves are all to be left in the ground. That just goes without saying.

  15. “The black snake represents a world out of balance which views all life as private property and looks at Mother Earth as without a soul or spirit.”

    I assume all of the scientists and “I fucking love science” people laughed this guy out of the room. Right?

    1. In case anyone was wondering if it’s a religion or not…

  16. RE: Keep It In The Ground: A Global Carbon Budget
    “Globally, a third of oil reserves, half of gas reserves and over 80 per cent of current coal reserves should remain unused.”

    The other two thirds of the oil reserves, the other half of the gas reserves and the other 20% of coal reserves will go to the ruling elitist filth.
    But that’s only fair.

  17. This Alberta oil would be transported to where by the pipeline? Refineries in Lafayette? Those refineries are laying dormant now?

    If it is quiet tonight then around midnight and about five miles away I will hear one of Buffet’s trains pulling about 100 tanks of that shit going south. It always makes the wolves start howling when the train blows its whistle.

    There is so much stupid in this article I hardly know what to say.

    1. With Trump in charge, we might actually get some rules changed so the US gets a bunch of new refineries.

  18. The importance of Lake Oahe to the tribe??!!

    You mean the lake created by the accursed white man damning of the Missouri River??

  19. Short of a global flu pandemic like 1918, WWIII, or asteroid strike, there is no way that energy demand is going to slow down to the point where we will not need fossil fuels. Efficiency can be improved, but we will not get to their magic number, and even if we do, these assholes will just move the goalposts again to the point where they will demand zero fossil fuel use.

    1. That’s a feature, not a bug. They want us to ultimately live like they do in N Korea.

  20. Filip Lovstrom, from the Swedish group Youth Platform for Corporate Responsibility, decried the act of taking things from the ground and giving them “a fictional value.”

    Fictional value?

    And this guy lives in Sweden? I guess we could just chop things down above ground and burn that.

    Or we could see how long it takes this self-righteous, ignorant turd to light a coal-fired furnace after a day and night in the bitter cold.

    Would be fun to watch as the realization sets in that… he’s an idiot.

    1. The Swedes should just stick with snus, porn, and Abba…

        1. YOU TELL PORN YOU ARE SORRY, RIGHT NOW, MISTER!!!!

  21. I think oil might not be the primary thing they want to keep in the ground.

  22. Did the rejection of the Keystone pipeline result in a single barrel of oil staying in the ground?

  23. My mothers neighbour is working part time and averaging $9000 a month. I’m a single mum and just got my first paycheck for $6546! I still can’t believe it. I tried it out cause I got really desperate and now I couldn’t be happier. Heres what I do,

    —————– http://YoutubeJobs.Nypost55.com

    1. Be honest. You don’t have a mother.

  24. asked the audience were their outrage was

    Isn’t it a bit early in the season for the Airing of Grievances?

    1. What did the guy want/expect them to do? Start screaming and shaking their fists in the air, like they were at a rally for someone (in)famous?

  25. Filip Lovstrom, from the Swedish group Youth Platform for Corporate Responsibility, decried the act of taking things from the ground and giving them “a fictional value.”

    What else can you give it? All value is fictional.

    And to think that it is people like this economically illiterate buffoon who are appointing themselves the carbon police.

    1. I would not so much use the term “fictional” – doesn’t that imply some falsity?

      The value of a thing is what that thing will bring.

      1. I subscribe to the Subjunctive Theory of Value: hoping your customer thinks the product is worth more than you do.

  26. Tell ya what, feds. I’ll leave 80% of the useful energy I find in the ground if you will leave 80% of my tax money earmarked for direct debt reduction.

    OH…NOW you’ve suddenly seen the upside of consuming every resource you can get your hands on regardless of consequence, huh?

  27. Any “solution” which requires “The New Soviet Man”, as does this one, can be ignored out of the gate.
    Ain’t. Gonna. Happen.

  28. Yeah, Keep it in the ground is now Trumped by drill baby drill.

    Run to your safe spaces and stop exhaling…

  29. stupid people forget one of the prime “rules” of calculating such things: the earth, as it exists, and except for the odd erant meteor that hits our dirt, is a zero sum game.. in other words, the absolute number of molecules of each element in existence ten thousand years ago is the same as it is today.

    So, there’s a bunch of carbon-based mineral deposits in the ground, eh? HOW did they get there? Simple.. CO2 in the air was metabolised by plants, which fixed it into solid plant matter, biomass, if you will, as that died off, it went into the ground, got covered up, “fermented” and baked and got squeezed, and became coal, oil, natural gas. Now we “wise” men are all knicker-knotted because we “fear” that if that same carbon is brought to the surface and oxidised, it will somehow make MORE carbon dioside than there used to be…. and the result of that “extra” CO2 back then was the production of massive amounts of plant life that died, gut buried… etc. WHAT do these nitwits think will happen to all that “new” CO2 released from oxidising that carbon based mineral? Can’t they realise it will turn back into plant life again, repeating the cycle? We see the same pattern with rain…. but that “cycle” is an annual one, mostly, so can be seen year to year. The carbon cycle is milennia…. but it is functionally the same.

    Idjits making up junk science and using it to enslave us all. Reject it. Its bogus.

  30. “at the Keep It In The Ground session, the panel moderator commented on the low energy in the room”

    Low energy

    Bwahahahaha!

  31. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    >>>>>>>>>http://www.centerpay70.com

  32. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    >>>>>>>>> http://www.centerpay70.com

  33. You’d think they’d want to burn it all up so there would be no choice but to turn our cars into sailboats.

  34. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    >>>>>>>>>http://www.centerpay70.com

  35. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    >>>>>>>>>http://www.centerpay70.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.