What is the nitrogen problem, why are the farmers complaining and why is the speed reduction?

Filed in NEWS ANALYZES by on 7 November 2019 11 Comments

source: nos.nl

It seems to be a real scourge! All farmers suddenly need to reduce nitrogen. That word 'nitrogen' already has the subliminal word 'suffocate' in itself and so that makes the average man on the street think that we are dealing with a substance that we are all going to choke on. Presumably many also associate the word with CO2 and the difference is unknown. Nitrogen is basically an elementary particle in nature. The term 'nitrogen' therefore refers to an atom that can only occur in nature as a bound form (as a molecule). That is why, as a farmer, you cannot actually reduce nitrogen. You can, for example, reduce ammonia. Ammonia NH₃ is actually measurable and is found, for example, in the excrements of cows. That the state wants to do a reduction in nitrogen is clearly primarily a NLP (Neuro Linguistic Programming) choice to play the people at subliminal level. Nitrogen reduction actually means nothing at all. What do you reduce nitrogen gas, ammonia of one of many other substances in which the element nitrogen occurs?

source: indiamart.com

You probably know nitrogen best from that stuff that is under high pressure in a bottle and you have to pour it out with thick gloves (or as in the photo 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 starts to boil and evaporates. It has a boiling temperature of -195,8 ° C and that is the temperature at which nitrogen is liquid. Nitrogen gas is therefore very cold and immediately begins to evaporate in the open air. Keeping it under high pressure in sturdy steel bottles makes it fluid. That is a physical law.

We already knew that we had to reduce CO2. CO2 has nothing to do with nitrogen gas (N2). CO2 means carbon dioxide. So that word is structured like this: di-oxide stands for 2x oxygen. A carbon atom with two oxygen atoms attached to it. Carbon dioxide is produced by burning fuel containing carbon atoms. Gasoline, kerosene and diesel all contain carbon atoms. The fuel molecule is therefore made up of, among other things, carbon atoms and, when burned in the air (oxygen, being O2 gas), CO2 is created with full combustion and carbon monoxide (CO) can arise with incomplete combustion. The latter sometimes happened at gas heaters in a home, causing choking. There you may also see the subliminal link between nitrogen and CO2. Chemically and in the real world, the two have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

If farmers have to reduce nitrogen, they must reduce something whose definition is not entirely clear. This is because farmers do not produce nitrogen gas. Nitrogen gas is the most common pure gas and constitutes 78,1% of the total volume of the atmosphere. Note that an atom can only be found in nature in connection with other atoms. Just like an oxygen atom (O) only if, for example, oxygen gas (O2) or in water occurs (H2O). 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 the farmers (at least their cattle) produce. Ammonia is useful and useful for plants, which is why farmers spread fertilizer over their land.

source: wikipedia.org

When the ammonia is absorbed 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 nitrogen-containing waste (ammonia). Finally, these organisms die and decompose, undergo bacterial and environmental oxidation and denitrification, releasing free nitrogen gas (N2) into the atmosphere. A wonderful useful and necessary cycle.

Just like CO2, there is actually nothing toxic or dangerous about nitrogen gas. In fact, nitrogen gas is an 'inert' gas that by nature is not inclined to enter into a chemical reaction with other substances. It is therefore harmless, non-toxic, odorless and we breathe it in all day; just like oxygen. That oxygen that is produced again by trees as a result of the absorption of CO2. Both CO2 and nitrogen gas are therefore positive and good gases, and politics now (and activist groups) claim that they are dangerous. That's because governments on a global scale have compromised scientists to make the story credible, while 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 that CO2 is a consequence of solar activity and not the cause. We are witnesses of science magic in introducing a worldwide tax system and a system where everyone's expenses can be traced (so blockchain money).

Since 2015, farmers have been held at the PAS (Nitrogen Approach Program). We see the protests of the last few weeks because of the imposition of requirements that are difficult or impossible to implement, which leads to bankrupt farmers. The fact that Mark Rutte spent a day yesterday listening to the farmers (talking woolly and then doing nothing) is about the same as the Groningen gas extraction and the earthquakes that result: Every now and then a politician visits his acting piece. and let the people blow off steam. Rutte can go to such a farmers' meeting with confidence, knowing that the Dutch state has invested for years in a network of pawns in every profession; a network of Inoffizieller Mitarbeiter as being controlled opposition pawns in every layer of society. As an actor who can call himself 'prime minister', he does not have to be afraid of real attacks, because the farmers who will be spared all misery are probably also among this group and they will keep quiet.

Because you cannot measure nitrogen emissions, if you do not have clear definitions of who or what is emitting nitrogen, you have a problem. For example, does a cow emit nitrogen gas when he farts? No, there is a nitrogen compound in the urine and in the poo, but a cow does not emit nitrogen gas. Nitrogen gas is sometimes used by farmers, for example to prevent hay growth or to store fruit, but that does not say much and, moreover, nitrogen gas is harmless and a good gas. Farmers therefore had to get a calculation tool, with which the state determined for them with which they do nitrogen pollution. In the end it turns out to be about ammonia and therefore for what is in manure and urine. Nitrogen remains a word chosen for propaganda reasons and for subliminal programming "that you suffocate". Why isn't it? ammonia pollution mentioned and do we always hear the name that reminds us of suffocation? As explained: that is what we call 'subliminal programming'.

The latest plans from the actors association The Hague are that the maximum speed on the roads must be reduced. And then there was something else about construction? Do you still get it? Apparently there should be fewer farmers, because we want to be able to build more homes and infrastructure, and so the speed on the roads must be reduced, because the state can spend a few billions in extra on traffic fines. Every logic is missing in every discussion and that seems to be the intention. There is only thrown in with terms that touch nothing more than a gut feeling (but actually still go ashore). It is no longer about logic and content; everything in the world of media, politics and environmentalism is all about gut feelings. In the meantime, there is only one effect and that is that everyone has to put a lot of money into it or simply (like the farmers) goes bankrupt.

Shell, you know that company in which our royal family has a significant share (hidden behind all kinds of beautiful constructions) started in 2009 nitrogen compounds on to add its fuels. That would be to make engine emissions cleaner. In fact, the opposite seems to be the case and we could say that the problem has been added to the fuel by oil companies. The problem for which the Rutte government is now trying to come up with a solution via the maximum speed reduction from 130 to 100 on the motorways. André L. Boehman (who will now be the bogeyman), professor of fuel science, materials science and engineering at Penn State University in New York, reported in 2009 in the New York Times:

Nitrogen-enriched fuels have been 'in use for a while'. He said that the term "nitrogen enriched" says nothing to the average person who is not aware of the chemistry of additives. What I ask myself as a fuel expert is: "Why did they add more nitrogen, because that will generally increase NOx emissions?"

The addition of nitrogen-containing compounds to fuel is therefore the cause. The solution must therefore be found there: with those who supply the fuel; You know that billions of dollars run by that family that lives in palaces and to whom we pay taxes in the illusion called democracy. Simply remove the nitrogen compound additives!

Every measure that we now see the people flying around is pure and based solely on gut feeling propaganda supported by the experts hired by Jeroen Pauw and other perception management TV programs. There is no thorough criticism or solid scientific foundation. And if there is criticism, the censorship will ensure that people do not see it. It is all about gut feeling, subliminal programming, and heavily paid actors who put you in the wool with a lump. In my opinion, the nitrogen requirement for farmers revolves around landjepik, whereby 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. The fact that the maximum speed is going down will probably result in the extra billions of dollars (from fines), from which those new infrastructure and construction projects can be financed. The fact that a few farmers are going into the bottle will make the state a mess. These farmers can get along nicely as servants with their neighbor. It's not all about the environment; it's all about money and more regulations (read: more control, more police state). The Netherlands as a testing ground for the rest of Europe and the rest of the world.

Read continue here

Source link listings: nytimes.com


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

About the Author ()

Comments (11)

trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Matthijs van den Brink wrote:

    "The heath grew well and purple," the farmers said, so there could not (apparently) be too much nitrogen. Which suggests that there can also be too much nitrogen. Or is this more due to acidification of the soil due to too much ammonia? And not so much nitrogen? But then also the constant spreading of manure is not good. Do you then have no point (even if the term nitrogen is incorrect)?

    • Martin Vrijland wrote:

      Ammonia itself is not acidic, but basic; ie it neutralizes the acid.
      The term nitrogen is explained in the article and has nothing to do with what the cows have in their excrement other than that the nitrogen atom is part of ammonia. Ammonia is useful and good for the plants.

      Of course you can say that everything that says 'too much' is not good, but the political agenda seems to be mainly about money and land ownership (or taking it away), with these environmental requirements as alibi

    • Martin Vrijland wrote:

      The story is that the Netherlands has a lot of cattle and therefore also a lot of manure and ammonia emissions. If this settles on land then plants that love poor soil - and cannot process so much nitrogen - suffer from it. Plants that thrive on nitrogen-rich soils, such as grass and nettles, get the upper hand.

      That is the official lecture ... it is reminiscent of the "acid rain" hype of a few years ago. "Plants that love poor soil ...", "endangered plants" .. yeah yes .. Again we see the word nitrogen and nitrogen-rich soils. The word nitrogen remains unjustified. Nitrogen only occurs in the compounds as stated in the picture in the article.

      I say: it's all about money, more regulations and land grab

    • Martin Vrijland wrote:

      So the official reading is that ammonia would be bad for some plants in certain nature reserves.
      It will undoubtedly be that too much is not good, but it all seems to resemble the destruction of animal husbandry in the Netherlands. The environment as an alibi to get more money away from the population.

      It may all be a bit less, but it seems to be mainly about the introduction and habituation to totalitarian control systems and about money.

      We also saw the well-known method of 'scientists who contradict the official lecture get a promotion and others who endorse the story get promotion' at the CO2 story. The question is whether this is also the case here.

  2. Martin Vrijland wrote:

    Please note:

    Imposing a reduction in ammoina emissions is a small step towards a reduction in meat consumption. How do you check how much meat people buy and eat? Via 'the internet of things' (5G) and traceable consumption. That requires a blockchain-based money system and things like smart meters in the house (fridge to measure what goes in, smart toilet to measure what goes out).

    The "nitrogen" alibi, together with the CO2 hype, is therefore an excellent way to introduce totalitarian control systems.

  3. SalmonInClick wrote:

    And if a farmer then comes up with solutions, then that is logically stopped, because it does not fit with the worldwide 2030 agenda. Restricting liberties and entering a plantation like a slave ..


    • Martin Vrijland wrote:

      Beautiful solution. I once started a wholesale business in zeolites and was the first to bring that stuff to Europe from mines from Turkey and Australia. Unfortunately, at a certain point a large buyer did not pay the bills, so I could not save the company. The new owner who bought it from bankruptcy has all the texts written by me at the time still on the website. The best is now a millionaire and thanked me for all the work with a phone call.

      Zeolite, and in particular Clinoptilolite, filters ammonia from droppings and is regenerable through a salt bath. The Clinoptilolite that I supplied has also been approved by the EU as a dietary supplement. I was the first to deliver this to horse farms and large (loose-running) chicken houses.

      Another solution that works. But people don't want solutions, they want to break up the industry and get a better grip.

  4. danny wrote:

    Also note that the boom started with "the nitrogen ruling" from the council of state.
    The club that Willen-Alexander is chief of.
    So it is clear from which case this hassle comes.

    • Sun wrote:

      Everything, especially things that are important for the boys in the script, are directed to perfection. It therefore makes no sense to go to court in their 'courts'.
      I don't understand that farmers, the construction world, etc. don't work together? The danger remains that organizations that want something deep, deep, have been infiltrated by multiple undercovers. What a country. Fortunately we live in a 'rule of law'.

  5. Martin Vrijland wrote:

    And the largest propaganda newspaper in the Netherlands may now start doing damage control, now that it is becoming clear (because measuring is knowing, big data) that the people are not taking it


    (free to read in Incognito mode, but better not to see that nonsense)

    People keep talking about nitrogen, but it's not about nitrogen. That is a propaganda name, to give the impression that you are choking!

Leave a Reply

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to 'allow cookies' to give you the best browsing experience possible.If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click on "Accept" below then you agree with these institutions.