Exclusive: The methane time bomb

Independent 23rd September 2008

The first evidence that millions of tons of a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide is being released into the atmosphere from beneath the Arctic seabed has been discovered by scientists.

The Independent has been passed details of preliminary findings suggesting that massive deposits of sub-sea methane are bubbling to the surface as the Arctic region becomes warmer and its ice retreats.

Underground stores of methane are important because scientists believe their sudden release has in the past been responsible for rapid increases in global temperatures, dramatic changes to the climate, and even the mass extinction of species. Scientists aboard a research ship that has sailed the entire length of Russia's northern coast have discovered intense concentrations of methane – sometimes at up to 100 times background levels – over several areas covering thousands of square miles of the Siberian continental shelf.

In the past few days, the researchers have seen areas of sea foaming with gas bubbling up through "methane chimneys" rising from the sea floor. They believe that the sub-sea layer of permafrost, which has acted like a "lid" to prevent the gas from escaping, has melted away to allow methane to rise from underground deposits formed before the last ice age.

They have warned that this is likely to be linked with the rapid warming that the region has experienced in recent years.

Methane is about 20 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide and many scientists fear that its release could accelerate global warming in a giant positive feedback where more atmospheric methane causes higher temperatures, leading to further permafrost melting and the release of yet more methane.

The amount of methane stored beneath the Arctic is calculated to be greater than the total amount of carbon locked up in global coal reserves so there is intense interest in the stability of these deposits as the region warms at a faster rate than other places on earth.

Orjan Gustafsson of Stockholm University in Sweden, one of the leaders of the expedition, described the scale of the methane emissions in an email exchange sent from the Russian research ship Jacob Smirnitskyi.

"We had a hectic finishing of the sampling programme yesterday and this past night," said Dr Gustafsson. "An extensive area of intense methane release was found. At earlier sites we had found elevated levels of dissolved methane. Yesterday, for the first time, we documented a field where the release was so intense that the methane did not have time to dissolve into the seawater but was rising as methane bubbles to the sea surface. These 'methane chimneys' were documented on echo sounder and with seismic [instruments]."

At some locations, methane concentrations reached 100 times background levels. These anomalies have been seen in the East Siberian Sea and the Laptev Sea, covering several tens of thousands of square kilometres, amounting to millions of tons of methane, said Dr Gustafsson. "This may be of the same magnitude as presently estimated from the global ocean," he said. "Nobody knows how many more such areas exist on the extensive East Siberian continental shelves.

"The conventional thought has been that the permafrost 'lid' on the sub-sea sediments on the Siberian shelf should cap and hold the massive reservoirs of shallow methane deposits in place. The growing evidence for release of methane in this inaccessible region may suggest that the permafrost lid is starting to get perforated and thus leak methane... The permafrost now has small holes. We have found elevated levels of methane above the water surface and even more in the water just below. It is obvious that the source is the seabed."

The preliminary findings of the International Siberian Shelf Study 2008, being prepared for publication by the American Geophysical Union, are being overseen by Igor Semiletov of the Far-Eastern branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Since 1994, he has led about 10 expeditions in the Laptev Sea but during the 1990s he did not detect any elevated levels of methane. However, since 2003 he reported a rising number of methane "hotspots", which have now been confirmed using more sensitive instruments on board the Jacob Smirnitskyi.

Dr Semiletov has suggested several possible reasons why methane is now being released from the Arctic, including the rising volume of relatively warmer water being discharged from Siberia's rivers due to the melting of the permafrost on the land.

The Arctic region as a whole has seen a 4C rise in average temperatures over recent decades and a dramatic decline in the area of the Arctic Ocean covered by summer sea ice. Many scientists fear that the loss of sea ice could accelerate the warming trend because open ocean soaks up more heat from the sun than the reflective surface of an ice-covered sea.

Drivers face 20 fine leaving engines running traffic jams

Daily Mail 17th September 2008

Drivers could be charged £20 if they run their engines while stuck in traffic

Motorists could face £20 spot fines if they leave their engines running while stuck in traffic.

Traffic wardens will be able to issue the penalties - after a warning - in a bid to cut down on pollution.

A pilot scheme is due to be launched in January in Shoreham-by-Sea, West Sussex, and will be expanded if it proves successful. West Sussex Council said it would target areas where exhaust emissions build up unnecessarily, such as rail crossings and town centres.

But drivers branded the plans yet another round of the war on the motorist. The AA pointed out that to switch off an engine and start up again within a minute actually uses more fuel than letting it idle.

Cabbie Roger Turner, 30, said he was disgusted with the idea,

adding: 'Who gave them the right to tell us to switch off our engines?

'It's not like we try to waste fuel, but can you imagine what would happen if everyone starts shutting off their engines?

'The ones I feel sorry for are the old dears, who won't know what's going on and could end with a £20 fine for not turning off the engine in their Fiat Panda. It's another example of the nanny state.'

West Sussex Council has already set up two Air Quality Management Areas in Shoreham, many of whose 20,000 residents are elderly.

A spokesman said: 'We want to get people out of the habit of leaving their cars ticking over out of convenience.

'We would stress that this is just an investigation at this stage. If it were ever introduced the fixed penalty would probably be £20, but we would hope the vast majority of motorists would be willing to cooperate. Air pollution is a particularly important issue for our residents, particularly those with asthma, lung and heart conditions.'

Signs have been put up at level crossings, telling drivers to switch off when the barriers are down.

AA spokesman Paul Watters said: 'We hope councils will not adopt a heavy-handed attitude with this. There is a huge difference between running the engine for less than a minute at the traffic lights and idling for a quarter of an hour.

'If you are stuck in a traffic jam and a warden slaps a ticket on your windscreen, that is ridiculous. The danger of everyone switching off in a jam is that some may not start up again. And then there's gridlock.'

Mr Watters added: 'The legislation allowing councils to impose such fines has been on the statute books for a few years, but few drivers are aware of it.'

The Department for Transport said it had issued guidance to councils stressing that they should not issue a £20 penalty notice without first giving drivers a warning.

Rule 123 of the Highway Code says: 'If the vehicle is stationary and likely to remain so for more than a couple of minutes, you should switch off the engine to reduce emissions and oil pollution.

'However, it is permissible to leave the engine running if the vehicle is stationary in traffic.'

Why turning the engine off in traffic might not be that green after all...

A car engine is at its most inefficient when it is idling, the AA said last night, but turning off the engine is not necessarily an improvement.

A spokesman explained: 'In terms of emissions, the catalytic converter only works properly when it's hot, and it cools down when idling.

'This means emission levels of gases and hydrocarbons will rise.

'Our own fuel consumption tests showed that a car uses somewhere between 0.36 and 0.78 litres an hour when idling - so that's no miles per litre, but plenty of carbon dioxide and more toxic emissions.'

An hour of idling can produce around 2.36kg of carbon dioxide - the 'greenhouse gas' blamed by scientists for global warming.

But switching an engine off is not necessarily a better option, the AA warns.

A burst of fuel is needed to start an engine, so switching it off and then on again seconds later actually uses more fuel than idling and produces more emissions.

The AA said: 'For less than a minute it is not fuel efficient to switch off because you will use more fuel starting up than you will save. It only becomes fuel efficient to switch off if you are going to be stopped for a minute or more.'

UK Lockdown point of view
Another example of the Green Mafia working hand in hand with the thieving criminal government to exploit motorists for simply being caught in traffic jams, keeping in mind that many traffic jams are due to excessive and unnecessary road works and poor phasing of the traffic light system the parasites that run this system are simply charging us for problems created by them on purpose in order to enable stealth taxation via tyrannical legislation; our government has been subverted by Zionist parasites and we must realise that if we are to realise what is really going on.

UN says eat less meat to curb global warming

Guardian September 7 2008

People should have one meat-free day a week if they want to make a personal and effective sacrifice that would help tackle climate change, the world's leading authority on global warming has told The Observer

Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which last year earned a joint share of the Nobel Peace Prize, said that people should then go on to reduce their meat consumption even further.

His comments are the most controversial advice yet provided by the panel on how individuals can help tackle global warning.

Pachauri, who was re-elected the panel's chairman for a second six-year term last week, said diet change was important because of the huge greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental problems - including habitat destruction - associated with rearing cattle and other animals. It was relatively easy to change eating habits compared to changing means of transport, he said.

The UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation has estimated that meat production accounts for nearly a fifth of global greenhouse gas emissions. These are generated during the production of animal feeds, for example, while ruminants, particularly cows, emit methane, which is 23 times more effective as a global warming agent than carbon dioxide. The agency has also warned that meat consumption is set to double by the middle of the century.

'In terms of immediacy of action and the feasibility of bringing about reductions in a short period of time, it clearly is the most attractive opportunity,' said Pachauri. 'Give up meat for one day [a week] initially, and decrease it from there,' said the Indian economist, who is a vegetarian.

However, he also stressed other changes in lifestyle would help to combat climate change. 'That's what I want to emphasise: we really have to bring about reductions in every sector of the economy.'

Pachauri can expect some vociferous responses from the food industry to his advice, though last night he was given unexpected support by Masterchef presenter and restaurateur John Torode, who is about to publish a new book, John Torode's Beef. 'I have a little bit and enjoy it,' said Torode. 'Too much for any person becomes gluttony. But there's a bigger issue here: where [the meat] comes from. If we all bought British and stopped buying imported food we'd save a huge amount of carbon emissions.'

Tomorrow, Pachauri will speak at an event hosted by animal welfare group Compassion in World Farming, which has calculated that if the average UK household halved meat consumption that would cut emissions more than if car use was cut in half.

The group has called for governments to lead campaigns to reduce meat consumption by 60 per cent by 2020. Campaigners have also pointed out the health benefits of eating less meat. The average person in the UK eats 50g of protein from meat a day, equivalent to a chicken breast and a lamb chop - a relatively low level for rich nations but 25-50 per cent more than World Heath Organisation guidelines.

Professor Robert Watson, the chief scientific adviser for the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, who will also speak at tomorrow's event in London, said government could help educate people about the benefits of eating less meat, but it should not 'regulate'. 'Eating less meat would help, there's no question about that, but there are other things,' Watson said.

However, Chris Lamb, head of marketing for pig industry group BPEX, said the meat industry had been unfairly targeted and was working hard to find out which activities had the biggest environmental impact and reduce those. Some ideas were contradictory, he said - for example, one solution to emissions from livestock was to keep them indoors, but this would damage animal welfare. 'Climate change is a very young science and our view is there are a lot of simplistic solutions being proposed,' he said.

Last year a major report into the environmental impact of meat eating by the Food Climate Research Network at Surrey University claimed livestock generated 8 per cent of UK emissions - but eating some meat was good for the planet because some habitats benefited from grazing. It also said vegetarian diets that included lots of milk, butter and cheese would probably not noticeably reduce emissions because dairy cows are a major source of methane, a potent greenhouse gas released through flatulence.

UK Lockdown point of view
Global Warming is not man made it is entirely caused by solar activity with only a fraction of the problem being caused by humans, the Zionist controlled UN and other groups are simply attempting to establish a global straight jacket system so they can introduce global taxation in order to fund a world army for their planned world government, don't be deceived by their lies and don't let these parasites tell you what to eat.

Can engineering the earth save it from catastrophe?

Independent 1 September 2008

Fears that the world is not doing enough to cut carbon dioxide emissions are forcing scientists to "think the unthinkable" by taking seriously the idea that humans may have to alter the global climate artificially with mega-engineering projects.

The Royal Society will launch a study later this year aimed at reviewing the possibility of saving the planet by "geoengineering" the climate on the grandest scales imaginable.

Geoengineering encompasses schemes such as fertilising the oceans with iron filings to draw down CO2 from the atmosphere, creating more reflective clouds, or even pumping vast quantities of sulphate particles into the air to simulate volcanic eruptions that cut out sunlight and lower global temperatures.

Until recently geoengineering has been a technology that dare not speak its name. However, a growing disillusionment with the ability of governments to reduce CO2 emissions has forced scientists to come up with a possible last-ditch technological fix to avert global catastrophe.

"Global emissions of greenhouse gases continue to rise, so there is inevitably interest in technologies that may be able to provide a 'fix'," said Lord Rees of Ludlow, the president of the Royal Society.

"It's not clear which of these geoengineering technologies might work, still less what environmental and social impacts they might have, or whether it could ever be prudent or politically acceptable to adopt any of them ... None of these technologies will provide a 'get out of jail free card' and they must not divert attention away from international efforts to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases."

The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, published today, devotes an entire issue to examining ways of altering the climate or interfering with the carbon cycle in a way that could offset the rise in greenhouse gases and the consequent increase in temperatures.

Professor Ken Caldeira of Stanford University said it was important to plan now for the possibility of having to use geoengineering. "Every year CO2 emissions continue to climb," he said. "Reducing CO2 emissions requires individual sacrifice in the here and now for the public good of the distant future. If we start soon, we can phase in climate engineering slowly and cautiously, and back off if something bad happens. The least risky thing to do is to start testing soon."

Professor Stephen Schneider, a climate scientist at Stanford who has resisted geoengineering in the past, said: "We are being placed in the precarious position of choosing the lesser of two evils. Potentially dangerous, uncontrolled climate change due to greenhouse gases emissions; or technological fixes involving large-scale geoengineering projects."

Geoengineering projects

*High Reflection

The eruption of Mt Pinatubo in 1991 pumped enough sunlight-reflecting sulphates into the upper atmosphere to cool the Earth by 0.5C for up to two years. It may be possible to inject sulphates into the stratosphere from aircraft, right, but this would not deal with ocean acidification caused by rising CO2 and might cause acid rain.

*Low Reflection

A variation would be to pump water vapour into the air to stimulate cloud formation over the sea, thus raising Earth's albedo (proportion of light reflected). Seawater could be atomised to produce tiny water droplets that would form low-level maritime clouds.

*Fertilising the sea

The limiting factor for growing phytoplankton – tiny marine plants – is the lack of iron salts. Adding iron to "dead" areas of the sea leads to blooms which absorb CO2. But whether the plants will sink, taking the carbon out of circulation, or be eaten, returning it eventually to the atmosphere is not clear.

*Mixing layers

Giant tubes could be built to carry surface water rich in dissolved CO2 to lower depths where it will be locked under the temperature gradient that keeps deep water layers from surfacing. Critics fear it could instead bring carbon locked in the deep ocean to the surface.

UK Lockdown point of view
Geoengineering would involve spraying chemicals into the sea, creating man made clouds and setting off volcanoes; it is now clear that these fake environmentalist are the real danger to the planet and it's time their fraudulent movement was fully exposed and shown for what it is, the Royal society & Stanford university must now be considered enemy organisations and must be exposed along with their environmental propaganda.

Now it's the citizen snoopers: Councils recruit unpaid volunteers to spy on their neighbours

Daily Mail 30th August 2008

Councils are recruiting 'citizen snoopers' to report litter louts, dog foulers and even people who fail to sort out their rubbish properly.

The 'environment volunteers' will also be responsible for encouraging neighbours to cut down on waste.

The move comes as local authorities dish out £100 fines to householders who leave out too much rubbish or fail to follow recycling rules.

Spy on your neighbours: Councils are recruiting spotters to report litter louts, dog foulers and bad recyclers

It will fuel fears that Britain is lurching towards a Big Brother society, following the revelation this week that the Home Office is extending some police powers to council staff and private security guards.

Critics said the latest scheme could easily be abused and encourage a culture of bin spies and curtain twitchers.

Matthew Elliott, of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: 'Snooping on your neighbours to report recycling infringements sounds like something straight out of the East German Stasi's copybook.

'With council tax so high, the last thing people want to pay for is an army of busybodies peering through their net curtains at their neighbours as they put out their rubbish.'

Recruitment adverts appealing for the unpaid environmental volunteers have appeared across the country in recent months.

In Hampshire, Eastleigh council wants locals to 'monitor local environmental quality' and report 'issues' involving recycling and waste. In East London, Tower Hamlets is recruiting volunteers for a crackdown on reluctant recyclers. Other councils are expected to launch similar schemes.

Officially, the volunteers are not encouraged to spy on neighbours or report them. But councils are unlikely to ignore tip-offs.

Earlier this year the Daily Mail revealed that councils have hired 850 agents and informers to catch fly-tippers, tax cheats and other offenders.

The 'covert human intelligence sources' keep watch on suspected law-breakers and yobs. Any evidence they find, such as illegal alcohol sales or wastedumping, can be used in court.

The latest recruits are being hired by council environment departments.

Eastleigh has already taken on around a dozen who answered an advert in a council newsletter which said: 'Volunteers will be involved in reporting issues in their area such as recycling, waste, fly-tipping, graffiti, dog fouling and abandoned vehicles'.

The recruits will also be involved in the 'promotion of recycling and waste minimisation across the borough'.

The LibDem-controlled council denied the volunteers would be asked to spy on neighbours.

'These are all people who care about the environment and they will be ambassadors for their area,' a spokesman said. 'They will be there to report graffiti, abandoned vehicles and local vandalism, but not to report on other individuals.'

The volunteers will be trained on the council's waste and recycling policies and asked to explain them in the community.

'They might go to an over-60s club and talk about recycling,' said the spokesman.

Citizen Spy: Councils are unlikely to ignore 'tip-offs' from their snoop-squad

But Labour councillor Brian Norgate said: 'I wouldn't be overkeen on asking volunteers to be snooping, if that's what this turned out to be. We have people trained in doing this.'

Tower Hamlets calls its volunteers 'environment champions'. According to the council they report on 'a number of environmental crimes, issues and concerns, such as graffiti, dumped rubbish and abandoned cars.'

A spokesman said: 'They demonstrate environmentally-friendly behaviour, encourage other residents to recycle and are pro-active in the neighbourhood.'

The Local Government Association said: 'Environment volunteers care passionately about their area and want to protect it. They are not snoopers. They will help councils cut crime and make places cleaner, greener and safer.'

The news follows a trend of recruiting ordinary people to help catch those responsible for minor crimes. On Wednesday, it emerged more than 1,400 people will have police powers under the Home Office's Community Safety Accreditation Scheme.

Security guards, park wardens and other local authority staff can issue fines for a large number of offences, stop cars and seize alcohol from underage drinkers.

UK Lockdown point of view
Any who opt to cooperate with this domestic spying program suggested by the criminals that have hijacked our country must be treated with the same level of contempt as the illegitimate criminal UK government itself deserves to be treated with, it is the duty of every freedom loving UK citizen to counter spy on the spy network being put in place in our country in order to expose them for their acts of treasonous crime against our society, if you have any pictures of local environmental spies feel free to send them to UKlockdown@hotmail.co.uk all pictures sent will be posted under the category heading UK Traitors.

Mayor urged to act on London pollution to avoid EU fines

Guardian August 26 2008

Up to 320,000 people in London are already exposed to nitrogen dioxide levels above EU limits, according to the government. Photograph: Matthew Fearn/PA

High levels of air pollution in London have forced the government to seek an urgent meeting with the mayor, Boris Johnson, to avoid the risk of unlimited fines from Europe.

The air quality minister, Jonathan Shaw, has written to the mayor offering the expertise of officials at the Department for Environment. The letter, written last month and obtained under freedom of information laws, says that Britain plans to ask for an extension until June 2011 to meet its legal requirements.

Britain has been breaking EU air quality laws on particulate pollution for three years and in July the EU demanded a detailed plan of how it will comply.

In addition, the new EU air quality directive will force the UK to reduce nitrogen dioxide pollution on some of the capital's busiest streets by more than a third by the end of 2009, in order to move towards World Health Organisation guidelines. If air quality improvements are not achieved quickly, the UK could be taken to the European court. The court has powers to impose unlimited fines.

"The objective was due to be met in 2005 but in recognition that nearly all member states are finding this very challenging ... [the government] intends to apply for this compliance flexibility," Shaw wrote. "My officials wish to work with your officials. We should not underestimate the scale of the task and we will also need to develop further national as well as local measures."

Air pollution in big cities is worsening as motorists switch from petrol to diesel to save fuel. Particulate pollution from diesel engines is linked to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases and asthma. Air pollution causes an estimated 32,000 premature deaths a year in Britain and between 157,000 and 319,000 people in London are exposed to nitrogen dioxide levels above EU limits, the government says.

"The government has been aware of the problem since 1999 but has taken no action," said Simon Birkett, who chairs the Campaign for Clean Air in London. "These obligations can only be met if long overdue action is taken now."

However, the government is in difficult political territory because taking such action will depend on Conservative party cooperation and the backing of Johnson, who in the three months since he was elected has threatened to ditch several measures that have improved air quality, including the western extension of the congestion charge and twice yearly taxi checks.

In addition, he is backing the expansion of London City airport and considering a road bridge over the Thames in east London, both of which would worsen pollution in the capital.

It is expected that London will have to introduce additional low emission zones with tighter standards than the existing zone, which covers only large vehicles, and could also demand that vehicles fit pollution abatement equipment.

It will also be challenging for the government to meet the EU target for nitrogen dioxide. Average annual concentrations in parts of central London are more than double the standard set in 1999, which became law earlier this year and requires compliance within 16 months.

The mayor's office said he was fully committed to working with the government. "He is also working, through Transport for London, to cut emissions from transport through a shift to walking and cycling and the use of new technology. He has committed £1m for the development of less polluting taxis, while by 2012 all new buses on the streets will have lower emission hybrid engines."

UK Lockdown point of view
Another excuse for the EU-SSR to swindle money for the construction of their police state using their links with the fake environmentalists (enviro-fascists/green mafia)
to justify removing our national sovereignty and our rights to set our own laws, we cannot allow the EU-SSR to hijack serious issues and use those chosen issues as a front to convert our society into a police state, this EU must be exposed and shown for what they really are.

Burly binmen refuse to take away rubbish because it's too heavy ... so this 7st housewife did it herself

Daily Mail 20th August 2008

She is 5ft 5in and weighs just seven stone, but Mia Cousins had no problem carrying bags of grass cuttings 50 yards from her garden to the roadside ready for disposal.

The same did not apply, however, to the four burly binmen on the council's 'green' collection run.

The three loaders and a driver left a note on the recycling sacks saying they had not been moved because they were too heavy.

Mia Cousins has no problem picking up bags of grass cuttings, but burly binmen on her local council's green collection run did

The council at Fareham, Hampshire, defended its binmen claiming they were acting within their rights under Health and Safety Executive rules on ' excessive manual handling risks'.

But Mrs Cousins, a 41-year-old widow and head of retail for the clothing chain Warehouse, said: 'I'm incensed by this. If I can carry the bin bags then so should they.

'Binmen are supposed to be quite strong. They're supposed to pick things up. They wouldn't be able to do their job if they were weedy.'

The note on the sacks complained that they weighed more than 45lb and contained soil including turf - a claim she denies.

'Everyone is encouraged to go green and recycle but they put up so many obstacles to stop you,' she added.

'Like most people I pay my council tax for services and I expect the council to keep their part of the bargain.'

Fareham Council spokesman Sue Mills said: 'The crew took the decision that the sacks were too heavy to lift and exercised their discretion.

'On that day the crew, comprising a driver and three loaders, lifted a total of 14.1 tons of garden waste.'

The council this year increased funding to employ extra binmen on its fortnightly garden waste rounds so it could limit the average weight lifted to five tons per person per day.

This followed a health and safety review after dustmen complained about the amount of garden waste bags they had to lift each day.

All other rubbish and recycling is put in wheelie bins which do not have to be lifted.

Last week, the Daily Mail reported how the people of Birks Road, Huddersfield, blockaded a bin lorry until operators agreed to take away rubbish left beside wheelie bins after a refuse strike.

Other victims of bin madness include Gareth Corkhill, from Whitehaven, Cumbria, who was fined and given a criminal record after leaving the lid of his full wheelie bin 4in ajar.

Widow June Kay, 79, was told to push her wheelie bin more than half a mile down a steep hill if she wanted it emptied by Ribble Valley Council in Lancashire.

And Lenny Woodward, 95, a nearblind former Desert Rat, was told that Norwich City Council would not collect his rubbish because he put a ketchup bottle in the wrong bin.

UK Lockdown point of view

As the green mafia increase their stranglehold on British society cases such as the one highlighted in this article are becoming increasingly common, these fake environmentalists need to be exposed for the fraud that they are all of their groups are tied up with foundations like the Rockefeller foundation that in the past have hijacked genuine green/environmental movements and replaced them with watermelons (green on the outside red on the inside) these groups are nothing more than control freak communists whose main purpose is to over regulate citizens, small businesses so that the giant parasite multinational companies can corner the market by stealth;
Rockefeller isn't your friend greens wake up.