Carbon Capture - Good or Bad Idea?

No denying the skill & ingenuity of CO2 "capture. BUT....

Tell and engineer to create a method or facility to "capture carbon" {carbon dioxide to be accurate}, and he or she will do just that. At great expense, to the cost of electrical production and other industrial processes. Which has happened globally.

But is "Carbon Capture" even desirable? Have we proven without a question of doubt that CO2 is leading to "Climate Change"? Well NO! We have not. It's just that the 'politics of science' {lobby} are claiming that the "Science is Settled"! Even the IPCC have done a deal with Google to ensure their "version" of the [Settled] science appears at the top of the search engine!! This is simply propaganda!

But questions and opposing opinion AND SCIENCE are challenging this dogmatic claim. And if correct - we, the consumers are paying an inflated price for this political dogma in our electricity bills and other industrial product subjected to this "notion" of "Carbon Capture", "Climate Emergency" and "Climate Change".

Have we been misled? Is this an example of disinformation or misinformation that governments {and media/social media} have tried to force us to accept?

We know that "carbon Capture" has increased the costs of electricity, in particular - the December 2009 Blog post warned us of this [ https://blog.sun-earth-energy.com/2009/12/report-carbon-capture-adds-50-to-power.html ]. But was any of this necessary?

Or has "Climate Science" become a bastardisation of some kind of "belief-system" a religion no less? Debate on this is very difficult as the 'acolytes' [and those indoctrinated] will simply shout at you - so yes a quasi-religion. But also labelled a "Political Orthodoxy". see below regarding August 2022 petition from 1,100 scientists and other professional who do not agree with the CO2 models. [ https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/08/over-1000-scientists-and-professionals-sign-formal-declaration-there-is-no-climate-emergency/ ]

The scale of the opposition to modern day ‘settled’ climate science is remarkable, given how difficult it is in academia to raise grants for any climate research that departs from the political orthodoxy. (A full list of the signatories is available here.) Another lead author of the declaration, Professor Richard Lindzen, has called the current climate narrative “absurd”, but acknowledged that trillions of dollars and the relentless propaganda from grant-dependent academics and agenda-driven journalists currently says it is not absurd.

"Particular ire in the WCD is reserved for 'climate models'. To believe in the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. Climate models are now central to today’s climate discussion and the scientists see this as a problem. “We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models,” says the WCD. “In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.”

The declaration is being promoted by the CLINTEL Group, which plans to give “solicited and unsolicited” advice on climate change and energy transition to governments and companies worldwide.

I am thinking that most of the advice they will give will be unsolicited. Here is hoping that policy makers, teachers, and everyone else listen to the group’s many points:

• Natural causes contribute to climate changes.
• Warming has been slower than predicted.
• Climate policy is being based on inadequate models.
• Carbon dioxide is plant food, and the basis for life on Earth.
• Global warming has not increased natural disasters.

Perhaps the last point the CLINTEL Group makes is the most critical:  Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities.

There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, and they certainly will, we have ample time to reflect and re-adapt. The aim of global policy should be ‘prosperity for all’ by providing reliable and affordable energy at all times. In a prosperous society men and women are well educated, birthrates are low and people care about their environment.

For those of you with a background in the climate sciences, and who would like to sign, information to do so is HERE.

If “Green New Deal” polices are allowed to continue, they will be even more destructive on this nation and the world than the {discredited} Covid policies have been.