Scape Scape:
She did respond to the rare earth issue here:
$1:
The film sets up a number of straw men. Gibbs focuses a great deal on the false notion that bio-energy from wood chips is promoted by climate activists. It is true that in earlier times, Bill McKibben thought renewable forests and bio-energy replacing coal was a solution. The film (dishonestly) claims he changed his mind once their film was out. In fact, Bill McKibben has attacked bio-energy for years.
Gibbs and Zehner set up the false notion that the bulk of renewable energy involves burning wood-chips and deforestation. That has occurred to an extent and is opposed by climate activists.
Their next straw man is that if we rely on renewables the only way to keep the lights on if it is raining or the wind isn’t blowing is from back-up fossil fuels, or from batteries with lithium and rare earth or by keeping linked to the grid – as though that is a bad thing.
The grid is for storage. That is our premise in Mission: Possible. Feed into the grid when renewables produce above local demand; draw from the grid when renewables drop. That is the way excess wind energy from Denmark is sold to Norway. Norway stores the excess, not in large batteries, but through storage in existing reservoirs, pumping water up to the reservoir using the wind energy from Denmark to then releasing it to generate hydroelectricity when the wind is not blowing. This is a major, low-impact storage system. It is why one core proposal in Mission: Possible is for a national grid to move green electricity from province to province.
I don't see the correlation between that statement and the fact that in order to address the the issues means we either have to find a renewable resource that doesn't require us to destroy the planet or kill off a bunch of children in poor countries so we can live like kings and carry on down this destructive dangerous path that might be worse.
We are getting near technology that will allow us to use oil and not create greenhouse gasses. They've discovered a way to create carbon negative oil and all people need to do now is get behind it like some did for all the other "green energy" plans, including the ones that don't work or are destroying the planet.
$1:
The startups have each been developing a technology called direct air capture. The idea is to build machines that can filter the air and capture only carbon dioxide molecules. If those molecules aren’t released into the atmosphere, the result is negative emissions. So far every startup has showed the technology works. The next hurdle is to scale the technology and lower its cost.
https://qz.com/1638096/the-story-behind ... ure-plant/The only problem is that it won't sit well with the environmentalists who hate big oil. But if they can do this on the scale we need and the environmentalists still fight it, it will at least expose their hypocrisy and show that alot of the people in the "green movement " aren't about saving the planet but about taking power.
CKA Uber 
CKA Moderator 
