Seeding Cloudy Conspiracies

	Some poorly supported Conspiracy Theories have been making their way into the Mainstream Media. Ironically, there might be a deeper, more subtle corrosion beneath this superficial trend!

According to the recent surge of Public and Media interest in “Chemtrails” it seems that the amorphous realm of  ‘Conspiracy Theories‘ is no longer just being limited to the outer fringes of Society. Of course, there’s been an enormous amount of mainstream news coverage for all the officially sanctioned Climate Change issues, but during this time we’ve also been witness to a fracturing and perceptible shift in Public Opinion around the central Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) issue. This has resulted in a dizzying array of new points and counterpoints of discussion around the official stories that come out out of the UN, IPCC, and all the larger NGO’s and Environmental Groups, which invariably resulted in most truly alternative views being largely suppressed, rejected, or at least fully discredited through standard PR and Press (or propaganda?)  methods that offered no real room for rationale discourse or debate, outside the chaotic streams of  pseudo-moderated Comments fields, or obscure online forums. If you prefer to be spoonfed an opinion, or would like to consider a fact-based position on what actually causes the jet contrails implicated in Chemtrails, just click/scroll right down to The True Nature of Contrails

Generally speaking, the Media would certainly not turn against the hands that feed it, but rather than lose the over-stressed attentions of its brow-beaten Audience, certain segments of the Media (as a pandering reflection of its Advertisers first, and of Society as a close second) have been increasingly willing to selectively examine at least some of these more alternative points of view, even if they do verge on the realm of Conspiracy Theory. Not only to bolster flagging public interest, but perhaps to retain some general credibility as a balanced source of mainstream information, after having already whipped the leading Climate Change horses all the way down the backstretch to their disappointing finish in Copenhagen.

Unfortunately it seems that the lack of investigative reporting that we’ve seen for Climate Science is becoming even more obvious now in these fringe subjects as well, and leads us to wonder what the ultimate consequences will be of such Media-inspired lassitude?

In the same way that just a few key trigger points (such as ClimateGate, the failure in Copenhagen, and a cool Winter, etc)  started a right-wing Media landslide from the over-driven buildup of Global Warming issues, we also saw huge segments of both American and European populations get tipped off the AGW fence, and into the clutches of the right-wing media. These were loosely decided segments that might have otherwise remained open to further suggestions, or at least remain pliably indecisive. Can this be seen as a form of ‘statistical housecleaning for undecided remainders, or just a social backfire which will likely set the entire Environmental Movement back by at least a few paces. You can decide.

Anyhow let’s get back to finding some verity behind “Chemtrails” since this seems to better represent the types of environmental issues that people still seem to have a stomach for these days…Just as controversial, poorly defined, and relatively as un-actionable as climate change, yet at least with a strong anti-authoritarian spin to feel like they can finally push back against the “establishment” somehow, just by ‘spreading the word’…Just like in the early days of a easily adopted Global Warming Movement.

Sp let’s look at Chemtrails. The persistent theory is that any jetplane ‘contrails’ (condensation trails) that are observed to linger in the sky, overlap, and/or form clouds are actually ‘chemtrails’ – Which are claimed to not only be a method of Weather Control, but also of Population Control, Global Dimming, and Bio Warfare, or possibly just very expensive waste disposal.  In the true spirit of conspiracy theory though, lets drill down through the alternating layers of confusion and deceit, and interpret the core samples with yet another new twist.

Let’s consider the possibility that this recent Media phenomenon of openly validating and reporting on the subject of ChemTrails, (among other fringe theories) might possibly be part of a very clever strategy for an even more subtle form of mass/media/mind control!  Why hasn’t the Media simply researched and explained the actual physical phenomenon of (polluted?) Contrails instead?  Could the truth actually be, that among all the rather flimsy issues out there, that this alternative ‘climate issue’ has been handpicked (among others?) to achieve higher Media visibility in order to just publicly debunk it, and thus discredit the entire concept of Conspiracy Theory, or worse yet to help derail any public credibility around the existence of an underground railroad for  suppressed information, or any other signs of a growing Alternative Press which might risk having an impact on the Mainstream Media Message, and general Public Consciousness in the event of a genuine crisis?

Carbon Capture: A Solution in Stasis?

- EVENT REPORT –

	Worldwide adoption of Carbon Capture and Storage solutions have been delayed by an announcement at the Copenhagen Conference The link to this News Event is no longer available at COP15.dk but it has been cached at Google!

The primary thrust of the Copenhagen Conference on Climate Change was to implement an accord of limiting CO2 emissions worldwide, and thus necessitate various regulatory solutions which would have required industry to either reduce their emissions, or face stiff financial consequences. This is where Carbon Capture and Storage (CSS) would have liked to step in with some immediate industrial-grade solutions, presumably while the rest of us continued to consider the enormous challenges of actually reducing and eliminating our reliance on carbon emitting fossil fuels as a Society. As mentioned previously however (COP15.dk is History), the committee under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) had discussed the issue of CCS during the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference, but delayed any decisions on the subject until future summits. The committee contended that some countries had concerns over the long-term viability for the storage site, including liability for any seepage. Thus the larger challenges of capturing CO2 have seemingly become stuck behind a roadblocking question of legal liability in the ‘storage’ component of this much larger process.

Deja Vu

Proponents of Nuclear Energy will no doubt see a parallel in the bitter irony of yet another Green industry being hindered by the wasted energy and by-products of bureaucratic finagling and legal wrangling over questions of waste storage…Rather than getting on with the business of refining the existing (and already adequate) processes, while continuing to develop new and improved waste management solutions, and effectively reducing greenhouse gas emissions IMMEDIATELY, rather delaying movement until later, once the technical details and legal liabilities of any unforeseen accidents have been ironed out to the Nth degree. Carbon Capture Left Out in the Cold

What did Copenhagen teach us about CCS

In it’s search for an accord, Copenhagen seemed like a direct precursor to establishing and implementing Carbon Cap/Trade/Tax solutions, that would place financial burdens on all CO2 emitters, and incent the development and application of CO2 capture technologies to reduce such burden. Although the COP15.dk site is now dead in the water, there are still “selected” pages made available by the Danish Government, which may cast light on what the Conference organizers wished to present as their lasting legacy from this historic conference, or at least demonstrate where the organizers left things on the rather important subject of CCS. A search for “Carbon Capture” yields only four (yes, 4!) results on this rather critical next step in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Click Here, if you’d like to consider what these meagre results say about the Future of CCS from the POV of those who selectively transplanted the entire the COP15.dk site less that a month after the Copenhagen Conference closed.

CCS…Does green Energy hurt the Carbon Market?

In a short blogpost at Envirogy (derived almost entirely from Spiegel Online), we can clearly see how Green (or low emisions Renewable) Energy sources have actually hurt the price of carbon at the European Climate Exchange (and thus the cost incentives for implementing CCS), and in fact the entire system can be proven to have not reduced European carbon emmisions by a single gram!

Sitting on the Border Fences

Meanwhile, in North America, the open markets for carbon at the Chicago Climate Exchange is still awaiting the kinds of regulatory and political pressures that will kick things into a higher gear, and properly comodify Carbon in the U.S. and thus at least make select financiers, investors, and other assorted Middlemen rich in the process, if not at least repeating the lessons already being learned in Europe.

Meanwhile in the Oilpatch

Even though Copenhagen squashed any immediate hopes for Carbon Cap/Trade pricing, and delayed it’s pronouncements on teh future of CCS, searching the transplanted COP15.dk site yields a link to shipping giant Maersk’s role in bringing CO2 to oilfields in the North Atlantic, and there are examples all over the world where CO2 is pumped down into older oilwells to force out remaining oil, and maximize yield.  In fact contrary to popular belief, CO2 has already been getting stored in large quantities within used up gasfields, with the only concerns so far being in small amounts of CO2 re-escaping via carbonated water in the formations, and the possible formation of carbonic acid within any porous water areas. The fixation in carbonate minerals is playing only a minor role, so the search to chemically ‘fix’ CO2 into a more neutral and stable state will continue.

TBC…This is a work in progress

Please feel free to add to this Report Stub via the Comments Section below

Worldwide adoption of Carbon Capture and Storage solutions have been delayed by an announcement at the Copenhagen Conferenc

COP15.dk is History!

MEDIA & IMPACT REPORT:

	The official website for the Copenhagen Climate Conference has been taken down, and traffic is being redirected to : “The Official Website of Denmark”

Near the end of the proceedings at last months U.N. Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, news was posted to the official Conference website (COP15.dk) that capturing Carbon Dioxide (CO2) at the source (of industrial emissions) and storing it underground is not likely to become a measure supported by the UN-backed Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) this year. A committee under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has discussed the issue, but delayed any decisions until future summits.

Please don’t bother clicking on the above-mentioned COP15.dk link though, because less than a month after the conclusion of the conference, this newslink is now unavailable, along with all the rest of the COP15.dk website! Instead, all traffic is being directed to “The Official Website of Denmark”.

What we’re left with, as a reference on this historic event less than a month later, is a mere footnote that states: “this page contains a selection of some of the most popular content from Denmark’s Host Country website for UN Climate Change Conference 2009 -  cop15.dk “

What possible reasons could there be for taking down this official site so quickly? What benefits could possibly be derived from removing this enormous resource? Most importantly, what are the perceived repercussions of such an obviously hasty demise of what should have our greatest reference point on Climate Change at the end of 2009, if not an actual public launchpoint as we move forward through the Post-Copenhagen letdown, and proceed with all the work adn understanding that still needs to be accomplished?