The mass-production of biofuels from high-nutritional foods,
such as the production of ethanol and biodiesel, have become the driver for a worldwide food
crisis that has become the greatest holocaust of all times.
massive burning of
food in the face of a billion people 'living' in chronic starvation,
especially in times of poor harvests under drought conditions, is resulting in
a silent holocaust of mass murder, - a genocide demanded for the depopulation
of our planet from the present 7 billion world population to less than one
billion people remaining alive when the target is reached.
The biofuels project for the mass-burning of food in a starving world is a
typical aspect of policies flowing from the 'sewers' of the oligarchic system
of the ruling empires where humanity is despised and feared as a danger to the
system. The resulting travesty has grown to gigantic proportions. The food
resources that are diverted to biofuels production in the USA alone, to be
burned in cars, could have provided 1,200 calories of nutrition for more than
a thousand million people of which probably a hundred million are committed to
an agonizing death by starvation each year.
that champions this holocaust of utter inhumanity has lost its soul and with
it the foundation for its civilization and its own survival.
Yes, the biofuels project is a
critical social issue for its human tragedy. It is also a vast financial and
economic drain as the biofuels cycle produces almost no energy gain overall,
but increases pollution that affects human health, and in addition nearly
doubles the resulting carbon emissions. It all adds up to a tragedy on a wide
front, especially the spiritual front as it destroys our humanity, for which, fortunately,
solutions are possible via my NAWAPA-22 project proposal.
for the detailed exploration with images
Whether or not to commit mass murder? That's the issue. It should be a Presidential
Election issue. It is definitely not an energy issue, because its actual
energy gain is minuscule if it exists at all. Some say that biofuels are
promoted in the shadow of Peak Oil and are paraded as a new energy resource.
But is this true?
Peak oil is played
up as an energy crisis, while in real terms it is a syndrome of a long period
of blocked energy development. Energy has been used as a profit engine to feed
the speculative binge, while next to nothing of society's energy payments are
directed to advances in energy development. We should have put oil aside for
large-scale nuclear energy development and the development of the plasma
energy that is powering the Sun that is also attracted by the gravity of the
Earth, though to a lesser degree.
Some also say in defense of the biofuels that some of the food
value is retained, as in ethanol production that ferments only a portion of
the corn input, and leaves a by product for animal feed, called Dried
Distiller Grain. This is true. Producing corn ethanol gives 30% on the input
corn back as Dried Distiller Grain that is used for animal feed. Cattlemen
report however that the DDG is inferior. Judging by the complaints, the
depleted corn may be only 30% as efficient, so that only 10% of the input food
value is recovered, and 90% is wasted. Nor do bio fuels produce a significant
energy gain over the energy input. The average gain for corn ethanol may be
only 10%, and for biodiesel 0% or negative. Peak oil is being used as a
political tale to justify food burning for depopulation genocide.
There is a mass movement unfolding in the U.S. Congress and in almost
all layers of the food producing industry that is collapsing for the lack of
affordable inputs. Unfortunately the political forces that protect the food
burning are stronger.
See the video: What
About the Food? November 22nd 2012 • 6:01PM
Instead of burning food, we should have put oil aside and have
opted for large-scale nuclear energy
development and beyond that the development of the plasma energy that is powering the Sun,
which is also attracted by the gravity of the Earth, though to a lesser
degree. The so-called energy crisis is an under-development crisis. It is not
a resource crisis. For the thorium nuclear power, for example, the USA has all by itself
900,000 gigawatt-years of energy sitting on the ground in unused deposits
while it is committed to burning food for zero practical energy advantage.
Peak oil is a result of blocked real energy development, and this
appears to be intentional as it drives up the prices and makes living too
expensive for evermore people, which is precisely what the masters of empire,
the present masters of the world, aim for to achieve world depopulation that
they hope will protect the system of empire. This is the background
against which the video unfolds.
(Preliminary transcript below)
At the moment it isn't. This is why the
murdering continues unabated. The murdering of 100,000,000 people a year,
globally, is presently an ongoing silent holocaust that pales the worst
holocausts in the history of civilization. The driving force of the murder is a
Western policy that the USA is
actively supporting by the mass-burning of food. This adds up to murder on a
gigantic scale in a world in which a billion
people live in chronic starvation.
The intention to
commit murder is plain.. The amount of food that is burned in
automobiles every year, in the form of biofuels, would normally feed a hundred
million people. Since the food, having been burned, is no longer available for
the nourishment of human beings, the
policy of food burning on a gigantic scale has unleashed a silent holocaust of
death by starvation that makes every country participating, a mass murderer
Shouldn't a people have at the very least the right to determine
whether their tax money should be devoted to carrying out this horrendous
crime, a crime that pales the Nazi Holocaust into insignificance. The Nazi
murdered six million people over the span of six years. That's miniscule, in
comparison to the hundred million people a year who are murdered by imposed
starvation in the biofuels'
Every global problem that is in the frontlines today has an underlying purpose that is centered on killing people. All the hidden roads of intention lead to that. The wrecking of America, Africa, China, India, and Russia too, ultimately has this one goal. This adds up to a grand betrayal of mankind. The footsteps are fraud, and the cover up is fraud.
The global warming doctrine is one of the holocaust-crimes of
Look at the world grain supply with a harvest of two billion
tons per year. 60 percent of that used to be consumed as food, and 40 percent as
animal feed. Then the biofuels travesty began by which agricultural products
became burned as fuel. While the use of grain for food and feed increased in a
growing world by roughly 1 percent per year, the burning of grain as fuel
exploded, and is now growing by over 20 percent per year. This is big.
Converting food to Ethanol jumped in the USA from 1.6 billion gallons in 2001, to 9 billion gallons in
2008, and now stands at roughly 14 billion gallons. That's a lot of corn liquor,
etc. This is huge, and eats up huge food resources. Here is where the tragedy unfolds.
It takes roughly 60 million hectares of farmland to produce the
feedstock for the worldwide ethanol production. This vast acreage would normally produce food for
120 million people. This is how much food is now being burned every year.
This also means that over 100 million people are killed per year in the ethanol holocaust. If the burnt food was available, it would likely prevent the death of a large chunk of the over 900 million people worldwide that are presently subjected to 'chronic' starvation. That's how ethanol spells genocide.
And what does the world get out of this food-burning process, other than a huge genocide?
It gets a fuel that is only 61% as efficient as gasoline and releases large quantities of ozone, a serious air pollutant, and formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, peroxyacyl nitrates, plus benzene and butadiene, which are all carcinogens.
It also causes internal stress-corrosion- cracking in metals. Failures are known to have occurred in as little as 50 hours on pumps
processing ethanol, that have a rated 2000-hour life expectancy. And worst of all, it takes more energy input to produce the Ethanol than it gives back.
While an energy-gain of 30% is claimed by the proponents, this
claim is disputed as too many energy-input items are typically not counted,
and energy loss due to general inefficiencies in the combustion process in
automobiles that are not specifically tuned or manufactured for ethanol use.
Researchers claim that an overall 30% energy loss covering the entire energy
cycle is more likely the case.
Whatever the case may be, biofuels can hardly be called an
energy resource, or at the very best only an extremely marginal one.
Estimates of water usage during ethanol production range from 3 to 4 gallons of
water per gallon of ethanol produced. Thus, a 50-million-gallon per year ethanol facility can expect to
use 150 to 200 million gallons of water per year, or over 400,000 gallons per day (1.2
acre-feet day, or 440 acre-feet per year). In the corn belt, the source of this is often groundwater.
This does not include feedstock irrigation, and stands in competition with
irrigation needs. The worldwide ethanol production requires roughly 100
trillion gallons of water per year, which in many areas is becoming a 'rare'
And what is it all for? There is no energy gain realized, or
at the very best, only extremely little, nor does it reduce CO2 emissions, but
more than doubles it instead.
The full combustion of ethanol results in CO2 and water vapor.
The ratio is 40% C02 molecules and 60% water vapor molecules.
The full combustion of gasoline is similar. It yields 47% CO2
molecules and 53% water molecules.
However, ethanol is only 61% as efficient, so that 39%
more ethanol needs to be burned for the same energy output, so that ethanol
yields in total the equivalent of 55.6% of CO2. This means that ethanol
actually produces 8.6% more CO2 than gasoline, and this in addition to the CO2
produced for the input energy.
All this means that the entire global warming hoopla about
ethanol being a carbon-saving clean fuel is not true. The ethanol cycle
doubles the carbon emission. Not that CO2 actually matters in the
climate equation, since the CO2 climate effect is essentially nil (see: Man-made
Global Warming IMPOSSIBLE). The only aspect that the ethanol fuel cycle
does achieve is a holocaust unequalled in history.
The story of burning food for biodiesel is similar. While the
total figures are smaller, with the total world production being roughly 5
billion gallons, the underlying insanity is worse. The acreage required for
the feedstock for biodiesel production is 3 to 4 times larger, per gallon,
ranging from 26 gal/acre for hemp to 102 26 gal/acre for rapeseed, with an
average of about 90 for peanut, soy, and sunflower oil. In addition to this
dramatically larger land requirement, a 2005 study found that biodiesel from sunflower oil requires 118% more energy input than it gives back, or 27%
more for diesel from soybeans. And when it is all done, the resulting fuel itself, is 11% less efficient than real diesel.
This is hardly what one would call a renewable energy resource. It is a food
consuming energy drain.
In addition, biodiesel produces just as much CO2 as any other carbon based
fuel. So here again the biodiesel fuel cycle more than doubles the CO2
emissions, rather than reducing them. And here again, it appears that the only thing that biodiesel does well, is kill people by massively
consuming the already insufficient food resources in the world.
acreage required for the production of 5 billion gallons of biodiesel
worldwide, considering the poor efficiency of the process, would normally
nourish roughly 100 million people. This adds another 100 millions potential deaths per year to the
biofuels-holocaust, considering the size of the acreage that is diverted away
from food production. In a world that has close to a billion people living in
chronic starvation, the diversion of agricultural resources that would
normally nourish 220 million people, to the food-burning processes, likely
causes as many deaths per year by starvation.
death toll may be somewhat less, though it is probably far more than the
estimated 100 million deaths per year, that is an extremely conservative
No statistics are being compiled of the people
who are quietly, gradually starved out of existence. In real terms the
resulting tragedy is probably far worse than what the statistics would ever be
able to tell, because the long-term malnourishment of the affected populations
has deep degenerative consequences that may yet come to haunt the entire
world. Starvation diminishes the immune system and opens the barn-doors to all
kinds of diseases. Of course, this may be intended by those in high places who
have made the depopulation of the world from the present 7 billion people to
less than 1 billion a policy priority.
The intention to commit large scale murder is
a typical high-minded one that is rooted in the system of empire where the
human being is an item of little value, or no value at all. The great historic
pacifist from the heart of empire, Bertrand Russell, the man who lobbied for
the atomic bomb as an imperial terror weapon, illustrated what type of heart
rules in the world of empire. He lamented in 1951 in a policy paper that wars,
even the big wars, are disappointing in that they do not kill enough people.
He suggested that if a biological holocaust like the Black Death could be
unleashed once in every generation, the little people of humanity could
procreate freely without making the world too full for the likes of his
masters. He agreed that the prospect is, "somewhat unpleasant," as
he had put it, "but what of it? Really high minded people are indifferent
to happiness, especially other people's." (ref. The Impact of Science
Upon Society - New York: Simon Schuster, 1953 - pp. 102-104) As ugly as
Bertrand Russell's dreaming was, his policy that guided the policy of empire,
is being fulfilled. Where the 'Black Death' of AIDS has failed, the burning of
food succeeds, though it is merely a part of the wider landscape of policies
for the depopulation of the world from the current 7 billion world population,
to less than 1 billion. Would you like to be depopulated? Actually, you are
already on the target list.
"We are not really killing the
people by burning their food," say the high minded with
their countless twisted arguments to justify their holocaust. "People
will die anyway, all people will die," they suggest in so many ways.
" We are merely helping them to die
sooner. It's good for business."
the wave of death
keeps on rising
and rising as the
biofuels ratio that is mandated by law is increasing
evermore. It started at
E5, which means that
5% of the fuel is
produced from food products. Then it became E10.
In 2011 it
became at E15,
and some cars run on E75.
In order to meet these enormously
ever-larger tracts of land are taken out of food production,
exacerbating landlessness everywhere in the Third World, and of course also
hunger and starvation.
biofuels cycle is anti-economic in nature as an energy producer, because
biomass has an extremely low energy content, giving it an extremely-low energy
density. If one compares biomass with nuclear power, the energy density
of biomass is so low that it is near-zero in comparison. It is this low
density that prevents the biomass
fuel cycle to be a net energy producer. The production and the gathering, transporting,
and processing of the biofuels input, because of the large mass that is
required to get anything out of the system, requires so much energy that the
produced product doesn't deliver anymore energy than is required to produce
it. Only under ideal condition can a marginal energy gain be realized. In
comparison, the energy gain in nuclear power systems is gigantic. The use of
biofuels is actually less efficient than burning wood. At least the burning of
wood, as inefficient as it was, produced an actual energy gain.
that the entire biofuels process was created for the purpose of committing
genocide, because as an energy producing system the underlying process is
about as inefficient as such a process can get. The biofuels cycle is
inefficient because less than 2% of the solar energy is used to capture carbon
from the air. The biological system was not designed as an energy producing
engine, but as a life-supporting engine. That's where its power lies. We are
destroying this power by burning it, instead of utilizing its potential to
advance the power of human living with advanced nutrition.
biofuels cycle is a destructive scam. This well-hidden fact becomes evident
when one looks at the balance sheet.
energy gain for the entire fuel cycle, which is the energy produced by the
fuel, minus the energy required to produce the fuel, is typically NIL.
Proponents claim that the ethanol fuel cycle produces an energy gain of
upwards to 30%. While this is disputed and often the result of not counting
all the input energy costs, a marginal gain may well be achieved in some ideal
cases. In real terms the over-all energy gain is typically zero. The bottom
line on the plus side of the ledger is ZERO.
negative side the ledger is heavy. The C02 emission is double in
comparison with gasoline. While CO2 is not a pollutant, it is so regarded by
many people. In addition, ethanol combustion emits large quantities of ozone,
a serious air pollutant, and also carcinogens in the form formaldehyde and
benzene and so on.. The production process is also a major contributor to
is another factor on cost side. Biofuels are a contributor to inflation as the
extension of the fuel cycle nearly doubles the energy cost. It is a process
that uses fossil fuel energy to produce a different form of energy with
roughly the same energy output. The process is therefore merely an energy
conversion process, not an energy production process, and it is a complicated
and expensive process to operate with nothing to show for in the end. The
process is thereby anti-economic in nature. It is comparable to travelling
from San Francisco to Los Angeles via Tokyo. The process is so costly and
inefficient that it can only be forced into being by government subsidies, and
by legislation that forces the consumer to bear the higher cost. The biofuels
cycle is an energy conversion process that adds a huge cost burden and thereby
biofuels cycle is of course antihuman. It imposes a huge economic cost. Since
this is a cost that the the poor countries that cannot subsidize financially,
they subsidize it with cheap labor, which is a form of slavery.
biofuels process thus adds up to murder on many fronts, such as
slave labor, child labor, economic theft, and of course also mass
are also a major contributor to economic collapse. Biofuels are forced by
legislation, not economics. The shortages of land resources has opened the
door to international land 'thievery,' targeting the poor countries, and of
course is also driving the rampant food price inflation that hurt the poor
countries deeply where the food/fuel land competition for export has blocked
by law, under the WTO regime, the poor countries' traditional food self-sufficiency.
Whatever is green is now up for grabs to be 'stolen' by the rich to meet their
biofuels quota and their own food needs, which they can no longer fulfill. In
this road, for much of the world, GREEN has become to be synonymous with
reported in 2010 that in
just five African countries 1.1 million hectares have been given over to
industrial biofuels for export; while 1.4 million hectares were taken
over simultaneously to produce food for export, and this on a continent that
has one of the largest ratio of the population starving.
biofuels displace food from agricultural land,
and as the rich countries also run
out of water for
since the biofuels
production requires enormous amounts of
the rich countries' food
production is increasingly outsourced to cheap lands
that are easily bought up
in poor countries, while the thereby created artificial shortages that
are creeping up are
driving up the world food prices. This treachery
hits the poor countries even harder. Food and fuel are now
competing everywhere for land.
By 2010 European Union
already acquired or requested
a minimum of five million
hectares of land for industrial biofuels production
in developing countries.
And this was just the beginning. In order
to meet the EU’s
E10 target required
another 17.5 million hectares for growing biofuels in developing
line is that biofuels are one of the leading engines for genocide, though
not the only ones. The onset of increasing drought conditions,
with no end in sight, is making the situation still worse.
the shadow of the massive 2012 global drought, with harvest falling far short of
what is needed of
the most critical foods, many food
related organizations have petitioned President Obama to allow an emergency
lifting of the biofuels mandate in order that the food that has become scarce
may be made more fully available to nourish the population and other people,
instead of being burnt. Their petition was
denied. The President said NO! The burning of food takes precedence. President
Obama said in essence: Let the people die.
With the food crisis, that is still
in the beginning stage so far, expanding exponentially, the President's
intention is becoming the future of America with consequences for the entire
Yes, you may very well become 'depopulated' as food, with prices driven
scarcity, becomes evermore unaffordable.
and Interview with Marcia Baker on
the food crisis)
So, how will you vote in the modern Roman circus
of empire politics that the political scene has become in evermore countries? Would you vote for
depopulation, and your own 'depopulation?' Would you like to be
depopulated? This is not a hypothetical question. The burning of food as
biofuels is subsidized with your tax money, so that when harvests fall short,
it's good for business, is it not? There is money to be made in the markets
as the evermore increasing drought conditions enables the speculators to drive
prices up on the basis of increased scarcity. The ethanol distilleries, etc.,
of course are not affected by the scarcity-driven price increases, as their input
is subsidized. Only you, the consumer, will be forced to pay the inflated speculative rates.
Of course price isn't the only thing that will determine whether you eat or
not. You won't be able to eat the
food that is burned, which then no longer exists, nor eat the meat of the animals that can no longer be fed,
which then no longer exist either, and so on. Thousands of feed-lot operators and dairy operators have shut their
doors. The world is on the fast track towards the greatest food crisis in
modern history, and this means more murders by starvation. That's the policy,
Shouldn't this be an election issue? There is no need for using biofuels,
which take nearly as much fossil-fuel energy to produce, if not more when all
energy inputs are counted, than they give back. Nor do they reduce global
warming. See: Man-made Global Warming Impossible.
the food crisis itself cannot be solved by merely stopping the burning of
food. With the global drought conditions now increasing, which one would
expect to result from the ongoing Ice Age transition dynamics that are
gradually beginning to unfold, compensating infrastructures are required, such
as the building of a nation-wide water-supply network for irrigation and the
development of new agriculture in the tropics where most of the rainfall occurs
and the sunlight is the strongest. (See: NAWAPA-22)
In addition, the CO2 enrichment of the Earth's atmosphere is required, which
is presently at the lowest level in the entire history of life on our planet
(see illustration). In historic terms the
ecological system of the Earth is presently choked by a creeping CO2
starvation that promises to become so critical in the coming Ice Age
environment, to which the transition has already begun, that without a
technological CO2-enrichment of the atmosphere, the entire eco-system is
doomed to collapse by CO2 starvation (See: Ten-fold
While the above are all long-term
development projects that take years and decades to implement, the currently
unfolding food crisis can be stopped almost immediately in the short term by
simply prohibiting the burning of food instead of mandating it by law, with
the addition of price controls and farm support legislation that breathes some
life back into the currently struggling world agriculture, coupled with the
termination of idling agricultural lands in the ecological reserve system.
This would be a good first step, in conjunction with terminating the practice
of worldwide financial looting of the predatory speculative monetarist system
that currently demands to be fed with countless trillions in bailout funds to
keep the thievery processes alive a little longer.
Shouldn't we be able to choose the path away from
insanity and towards assured
food-sufficiency and a rich and productive future for all human
beings on our planet? I think this path will be chosen, and will be
chosen globally, because to live, and to live richly and
productively, is the common aim of all mankind. In this context the
proposed NAWAPA-22 Ice Age Alliance could become a seed-kernel to
unite all nations for a single grand purpose for which war, theft,
genocide, etc., will simply vanish as relics of a primitive age.