It seems to be a real scourge! All of a sudden all farmers have to reduce nitrogen. That word "nitrogen" in itself has the subliminal word "suffocate" in it and so that makes the average ordinary person on the street think that we are dealing with a substance here, of which we are all going to suffocate. Presumably many also associate the word with CO2 and are not aware of the difference. Nitrogen is basically an elementary particle in nature. So the term "nitrogen" points to an atom that can only occur in nature as a bound form (as a molecule). Therefore, as a farmer, you cannot actually reduce nitrogen. You can, however, reduce ammonia, for example. Ammonia NH₃ is actually measurable and can be found, for example, in the feces of cows. That the state thus wants to do nitrogen reduction is clearly mainly an NLP (Neuro Linguistic Programming) choice to play the people on a subliminal level. Nitrogen reduction actually means nothing at all. So what do you reduce nitrogen gas, ammonia or any of the many other substances in which the element nitrogen occurs?
You probably know nitrogen best from that commodity that sits under high pressure in a bottle and you have to pour it out with thick gloves (or as in the picture from an insulated bottle), because otherwise your fingers will freeze: nitrogen gas (N2). This is used, for example, to remove warts. As soon as nitrogen comes out of the high-pressure bottle, it begins to boil and evaporate. This is because it has a boiling temperature of -195.8 °C, which is the temperature at which nitrogen is liquid. So nitrogen gas is very cold and immediately begins to evaporate in the outside air. Keeping it under high pressure in sturdy steel bottles makes it liquid. This is a physical law.
We already knew we had to do CO2 reduction. CO2 has nothing to do with nitrogen gas (N2). CO2 means carbon dioxide. So that word is constructed like this: di-oxide stands for 2x oxygen. One carbon atom with two oxygen atoms attached to it. Carbon dioxide is created when burning fuel containing carbon atoms. Gasoline, kerosene and diesel all contain carbon atoms. So the fuel molecule is made up of carbon atoms, among other things, and when burned in air (oxygen, being O2 gas), carbon dioxide (CO2) is formed during complete combustion and carbon monoxide (CO) may be formed during incomplete combustion. The latter sometimes used to happen with gas stoves in a home, causing suffocation. There, then, you may also see the subliminal link between nitrogen and CO2. Chemically and in the real world, the two have nothing at all to do with each other.
So if farmers have to do nitrogen reduction, they have to reduce something whose definition is not quite clear. Farmers, in fact, do not produce nitrogen gas. Nitrogen gas is the most abundant pure gas and makes up 78.1% of the total volume of the atmosphere. Note an atom can only be found in connection form with other atoms in nature. Just as an oxygen atom (O) occurs only as oxygen gas (O2) or in water (H2O), for example. Nitrogen compounds constantly exchange between the atmosphere and living organisms. Nitrogen must first be processed or "fixed" into a plant-usable form, usually ammonia. Ammonia is what farmers (at least their livestock) do produce. Ammonia is usable and useful to plants, which is why farmers spread manure on their land.
When the ammonia is taken up by plants, it is used to synthesize proteins. These plants are then digested by animals that use the nitrogen compounds to synthesize their own proteins and excrete nitrogenous waste (ammonia). Finally, these organisms die and decompose, undergo bacterial and environmental oxidation and denitrification, returning free nitrogen gas (N2) to the atmosphere. So a wonderfully useful and necessary cycle.
Like CO2, there is actually nothing toxic or dangerous about nitrogen gas. In fact, nitrogen gas is an "inert" gas that is naturally not prone to chemical reaction with other substances. So it is harmless, non-toxic, odorless and we breathe it all day long; just like oxygen. That oxygen which in turn is produced by trees as a result of absorbing CO2. So both CO2 and nitrogen gas are positive and good gases and of both, politicians now claim (and activist groups claim) that they are dangerous. This is because governments on a global scale have compromised scientists to make the story credible when no plausible biological, chemical or physical explanation can be given. Reports that would show that there was more CO2 in the air during warmer periods on Earth show precisely that CO2 is a consequence of solar activity and not the cause. We are witnessing science magic to introduce a global tax system and a system where everyone's spending can be tracked (blockchain money that is).
Farmers have been held to the PAS (Program Approach to Nitrogen) since 2015. That's what we see these protests of the last few weeks for, because requirements are imposed that are impossible or hardly achievable, leading to bankrupt farmers. The fact that Mark Rutte spent a day yesterday to listen to the farmers (woolly talk and then do nothing), is roughly comparable to the Gronings gas extraction and the earthquakes it produces: Every now and then a politician goes on a visit to perform his act and let the people blow off steam. Rutte can go to such a farmers' meeting with confidence, knowing that the Dutch state has invested years in a network of pawns in every profession; a network of Inoffizieller Mitarbeiter as being controlled opposition pawns in every layer of society. Thus, as an actor who may call himself "prime minister," he need not fear real attacks, for the peasants who will be spared from all misery are probably also among this group and they will keep a low profile.
Because you can't measure nitrogen emissions, if you don't have the definitions clearly of who or what is emitting that nitrogen then you have a problem. For example, does a cow emit nitrogen gas when it farts? No, there is a nitrogen compound in urine and in poop, but a cow does not emit nitrogen gas. Nitrogen gas is sometimes used by farmers, for example to prevent hay fever or for preserving fruit, but that doesn't say much and besides, nitrogen gas is harmless and a fine gas. Farmers therefore had to be given a calculation tool, with which the state determined for them what they are doing about nitrogen pollution. In the end, it turns out it is mostly ammonia and thus that which is in manure and urine. Nitrogen remains a word chosen for propaganda reasons and for subliminal programming "that you choke on it." Why is it not called ammonia pollution and we keep hearing the name that reminds us of choking? As explained: that's what we call "subliminal programming.
The latest plans of the actors' association The Hague are that the maximum speed limit on the roads should be reduced. And then there was something about construction? Do you still get it? Apparently there have to be fewer farmers, because we want to be able to build more housing and infrastructure, and so the speed on the roads has to be lowered, because then the state can nicely rake in a few extra billions in traffic fines. Any logic is missing from any discussion and that seems to be the intention. Only terms are being thrown around that are nothing more than gut feelings (but in fact do not make sense). It has long since ceased to be about logic and substance; everything in the world of media, politics and environmental activism revolves around gut feelings. Meanwhile, there is only one effect and that is that everyone has to pay big bucks or simply (as in the case of farmers) go bankrupt.
Shell, you know that company that our royal family has a sizable stake in (hidden behind all sorts of fancy constructions) started adding nitrogen compounds to its fuels in 2009. That would be to make engine emissions cleaner. In fact, the opposite seems to be the case and we could say that the problem was added to the fuel by oil companies. The problem for which the Rutte administration is now trying to come up with the solution via the speed limit reduction from 130 to 100 on highways. André L. Boehman (who will probably be the bogeyman from now on), professor of fuel science, materials science and engineering at Penn State University in New York, reported back in 2009 in the New York Times:
Nitrogen enriched fuels have been "in use for a while. He said the term "nitrogen enriched" means nothing to the average person who is not familiar with the chemistry of additives. What I wonder, as a fuel expert, is, "Why did they add more nitrogen because that will generally increase NOx emissions?"
So the addition of nitrogen-containing compounds to fuel is the cause. That is where the solution must be found: with those who supply the fuel; you know the billion-dollar company of the family that lives in palaces and to whom we pay taxes in the illusion called democracy. Just get the nitrogen compound additives out again!
Every measure we see flying around the people now is purely based on gut feeling propaganda supported by the hired experts on Jeroen Pauw and other perception management TV programs. There is no thorough criticism nor solid scientific foundation. And if there is criticism, the censorship machine will make sure people don't face it. It's all about gut feelings, subliminal programming, and fat-paid actors who use woolly words to drive you nuts. In my opinion, the nitrogen requirement for farmers is all about land grabbing, where the state wants to make it as difficult as possible for farmers. So difficult that some go bankrupt and their farmer neighbors can take over the land and the rest of the land can go to the state for construction and infrastructure projects. That the speed limit goes down probably provides the extra billion dollar pot (from fines) from which those new infrastructure and construction projects can be funded. The fact that a few farmers go bankrupt will be of no concern to the state. Those farmers can work as servants for their neighbors. It is not all about the environment; it is all about money and more regulation (read: more control, more police state). The Netherlands as a testing ground for the rest of Europe and the rest of the world.
Source link entries: nytimes.com
14 Comments
"The heather was growing good and purple" said the farmers and so (apparently) there could not be an excess of nitrogen. Which suggests that there could therefore also be an excess of nitrogen. Or does this have more to do with soil acidification from too much ammonia? And not so much nitrogen? But then also the constant spreading of manure remains not to be good. Doesn't one then have a point (even if the term nitrogen is then incorrect)?
Ammonia itself is not acidic but alkaline; that is, it neutralizes acid.
The term nitrogen is explained in the article and has nothing to do with what cows have in their droppings other than that the nitrogen atom is part of ammonia. Ammonia is useful and good for plants.
Of course, you can say that anything that says "too much" is not good, but the political agenda seems to revolve mostly around money and large land holdings (or taking them away), with these environmental demands as an alibi
The story is that the Netherlands has a lot of livestock and therefore a lot of manure and ammonia emissions. When this precipitates on the land, plants that like poor soil - and can't process as much nitrogen - suffer. Plants that thrive on nitrogen-rich soils, such as grass and nettles, get the upper hand.
That's the official reading...reminiscent of the "acid rain" hype of a few years ago. "Plants that like poor soil...", "endangered plants"...yay.... Again we see the word nitrogen and nitrogen-rich soils. The word nitrogen remains unjustified. Nitrogen occurs only in the compounds as mentioned in the picture in the article.
I say: it's all about the dough, more regulation and land grabbing
So the official reading is that ammonia would be bad for some plants in certain natural areas.
No doubt it is true that too much is not good, but it all seems very much like the destruction of animal husbandry in the Netherlands. The environment as an alibi to take more money away from the population.
It could all do with a little less, but it seems to be mostly about the introduction and habituation to totalitarian control systems and about money.
The familiar method of "scientists who contradict the official reading don't get promoted and others who support the story do get promoted" we also saw with the CO2 story. The question is whether this is also the case here.
Notice:
Imposing reductions in ammoina emissions is a small step toward reducing meat consumption. How do you control how much meat people buy and eat? Through "the internet of things" (5G) and trackable consumption. That requires a blockchain-based money system and things like smart meters in the home (refrigerator to measure what goes in, smart-toilet to measure what goes out).
Thus, the "nitrogen" alibi, along with the CO2 hype, is a fine path toward the introduction of totalitarian control systems.
And then when an agrarian comes up with solutions it is logically blocked, because, after all, it does not rhyme with the global 2030 Agenda. Restricting freedoms and acting like a slave on a plantation....
https://www.rtvoost.nl/nieuws/320525/Ondernemer-uit-Almelo-Mijn-biologische-ammoniakfilter-wordt-bewust-tegengehouden
Wonderful solution. I once started a wholesale zeolite business and was the first to bring that stuff to Europe from mines in Turkey and Australia. Unfortunately, at some point, a major buyer didn't pay the bills, so I couldn't save the business. The new owner who bought it out of bankruptcy still has all the texts written by me at the time still on the website. The best one is now a millionaire and thanked me with a phone call for all the preliminary work.
Zeolite, especially Clinoptilolite, filters ammonia from feces and is regenerable through a salt bath. The Clinoptilolite I supplied is also approved by the EU as a nutritional supplement. I was the first to supply that to horse farms and large (free-range) chicken houses.
Another solution that works. But people don't want solutions, they want to break up the industry and get more control.
Martin your explanation explains a lot, everything in Madurodam etc. is subject to luciferian inversion.
Also note that the fuss started with "the nitrogen ruling" by the council of state.
That club of which Willen-Alexander is chief.
So it is pretty clear from which quiver this fuss comes.
Everything, especially matters of importance to the script boys, are directed to perfection. Therefore, there is no point in seeking your justice in their ' courts'.
I don't understand why farmers, construction etc don't work together? Danger remains that organizations that would want something deep, deep, are infiltrated by multiple undercovers. What a country. Fortunately we live in a ' rule of law'.
And the largest propaganda newspaper in the Netherlands can now start doing damage control, now that it has become clear (because measuring is knowing, big data) that the people are not buying it.
https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/1439735619/doorgeslagen-onbegrip-over-groene-maatregelen
(free to read in Incognito mode, but better not to see that nonsense)
People keep talking about nitrogen, but it is not nitrogen. That is a propaganda name, to give the impression of suffocation!
How are we going to tackle the "thought dust" 😉
https://themusterstation.com/largest-cruise-ships/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Royal_Navy_ships
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy_ships
You know Martin, farmers can refuse anything,
Ministry LNV is a trading company and is registered with the Chamber of Commerce.
Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 70338574
Branch No. 000035685956
Graadt van Roggenweg 500
3531AH
Utrecht
Branch office
70338574 0002 000035685956 Regiebureau POP Regiebureau Plattelandsontwikkelingsprogramma (POP) Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality General Government Administration ...
Source : https://zoeken.kvk.nl/search.ashx?q=70338574
They can refuse everything anyway, because every law is signed by an institution that says it can do so by the grace of God: the king