79 Comments

  2. I was informed this morning by a family member about the disappearance and sunken yacht of tech mogul Mike Lynch.

    Morgan Stanley Bank’s International Chairman happened to be on board also.

    Lynch’s former VP of Finance was the victim of a hit and run whilst out jogging with his lawyers last Saturday.

    Anyone any idea what’s going on here? I don’t know anything about Mike Lynch, but was he not on board with something to do with the control grid? Is it a warning to other tech moguls to toe the line or else? Both? Neither?

    Curious if anyone has intelligence on this.

    1. Have read the article about the deaths. Looks to me that someone was unhappy with the court verdict. Good place to start would be the main court documents and decisions. Let me know what you find if you look .

  3. Good morning Catherine. Reading the comments here and listening to the radio 990AM THE ANSWER in Philadelphia. Chris Stigall just said he will be interviewing you!!! Wish Sean Spicer would stop talking 😉 so Chris could be talking with you. Blessings of traveling mercies on your journeys.

    1. Great discussion with Chris. Was live and it appears he is not republishing them on line.

      1. Indeed it was a great discussion. So you were in the studio?Disappointing that he is not republishing the interview. Will inquire about where the replay is. Kayal and Company on 1210am WPHT (6AM- 10AM) or Dan Bongino on 830am WEEU (12 noon-3PM) are options. Would love for them to interview you. Will reach out to their programs. Thank you for all you do. You are truly a blessing.

        1. If you see it online, let me know and I will post. I very much enjoyed speaking with him.

  4. It is my understanding that the Serbian people are very concerned that the Western mining oligarchs are trying to buy up and control all of their country’s resources. They are correct. The West has lost Russia and much of Russia’s near abroad. They are clearly losing Africa and, maybe, South America. What they have very much in their hands is us and Western Europe. They think that they have the former communist areas of Central and Eastern Europe which, for the time being, is true, but, I think, not for long if little Hungary and Slovakia are willing to buck the power. We and Western Europe are all that they have fully in their control. The hard tyranny and looting is here, or as much as they can manage for now. Thank God and our ancestors for the 2nd Amendment, while it lasts.

    1. Excellent points. Here is a dialogue I just had with Charlie Stephens on the Rackets vs. the People.

      >>>
      >>>
      >>> Charlie:
      >>>
      >>> Funny how you and I keep coming to the same simple assessment from entirely different directions.
      >>>
      >>> We do have a “peak everything” problem – that is the more we mine, the further we have to go. We creamed off a lot of the easy pickings. I believe this is the same phenomenon as the declining EROIs. The central banking monetary inflation is designed to cover/paper over that story – and you have to admit the financial fraud has kept a lot of people employed in the bubbles. Crypto and Bitcoin offer lots new bubbles. Unfortunately the new bubbles are complete energy hogs.
      >>>
      >>> So that means we can not afford the rackets any longer so now the rackets have decided that we can not afford us.
      >>>
      >>> Its…… Energy Wars: the People vs. the Rackets
      >>>
      >>>
      >>> On 21/08/2024 3:21 pm, Charles Stephens wrote:
      >>>> Oh, I don’t know about that. There is a mixture here of physical resource accounting and financial accounting. The physical resource accounting is what matters the most – EROEI.
      >>>>
      >>>> The analyst(s) here seem to be focused only on undermining the rationale behind investments in renewable energy, and so don’t apply any of the principles they’re citing to any of the other primary energy sources. For instance, how much energy, of what types, does it take to build, operate, and maintain a coal-fired power plant or a nuclear plant, over what lifetime? Those generation types have EROEIs, too, and they’ve been in decline for many years. “Coal” is a good example. Is the coal we’re talking about anthracite (about played out in the U.S.)? Bituminous? Sub-bituminous? Lignite? This very much matters, as the amount of energy content per ton varies hugely. Lignite is slightly glorified dirt. The EROEI of a coal-fired power plant varies a lot based on what type of coal you feed it, how far it has to travel, by what means, to get to the power plant, and what one has to do to deal with the waste products (and I’m not talking about CO2 when I talk about waste – I’m talking about fly ash, which is produced by the millions of tons per year in the U.S. alone.
      >>>>
      >>>> Solar has a bit of the same problem as coal – what sort of solar are we talking about here? PV, I presume. But what’s the efficiency of the panels and inverters? The best we’ve seen in mass production so far is about 22 percent. But Boeing was producing 40 percent efficient panels more than 30 years ago. Somehow that technology hasn’t seen the light of day ever since. Not only that, but the amount of silicon required for those panels was fairly trivial, which dramatically reduces the embodied energy of the panels. I ran the numbers on such panels back when I worked for the Oregon Department of Energy and found that those panels would produce enough energy to repay their embodied energy in a bit more than 5 years.
      >>>>
      >>>> Then there’s the actual utility of having solar on the grid. Every day the load on the grid goes up dramatically, just like the sun rising, and every evening the load goes back down, just like the sun. If solar is powering a big fraction of the daily rise (to 3-4 times the nighttime load), storage isn’t an issue for that much capacity. If it’s attached to the grid, the load diversity on the grid ensures that the other generation sources – ones that can be turned up and down reasonably quickly during the daytime (like hydro and natural gas turbines) or run as baseload at night (like hydro or coal).
      >>>>
      >>>> And then there’s the money analysis, which is focused only on renewables like wind or solar. What about nuclear? Nuclear power has NEVER been cost-effective. If it weren’t for massive public subsidies and the public having the responsibility for paying for remediation of the accidents (nuclear power plants are uninsurable), it never would have existed in the first place. The whole “Atoms for Peace” thing during the Eisenhower administration was just to keep the nuclear weapons program going and supplied with enriched material. And somehow, in spite of no promise at all of future cost-effectiveness, the public is still being tapped for massive investments in nuclear power, way beyond the value of any electricity produced. So when will that stop?
      >>>>
      >>>> The first graph in the charts here is very telling. I can assure you that no human activity that has a graph like that – an activity that relies on supplies of a finite resource like fossil fuels, is sustainable. Why do we think the rackets are so determined to control places like Venezuela and Russia? The West is getting close to being tapped out when it comes to fossil fuels, and getting at what little is left will utterly destroy most of the places where it will be mined. Fracked gas and oil are a sign of desperation, and have a terrible EROEI. The cost of production is so high for fracked natural gas that blowing up the Nordstream pipelines absolutely rescued the American natural gas industry. The reserves of natural gas and oil in North America have been in decline for many years now, because discoveries over the last 30 years have slowed to a trickle. You can’t produce oil or gas you haven’t discovered.
      >>>>
      >>>> So once again, I come around to how we’re using the energy we consume. More than half is being used for the violence racket and the sectors of the economy that are poisoning us. Regenerative agriculture would cut the massive amounts of energy used for farming by about three-quarters. Most of the chemical industry should simply be shut down. With non-toxic, real food and no “vaccines” Americans would be healthy, and so all of the massive amounts of energy used by the medical and pharmaceutical rackets would go away. With these things gone, almost half of the commercial building floor space in the country would be empty and could be depowered.
      >>>>
      >>>> If the transportation rackets actually used a good design for our roads, we wouldn’t need to rebuild them every 7 or 8 years, saving an immense amount of fossil fuels and wear-and-tear on our vehicles. The parts of our transportation infrastructure that are transporting toxic chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and industrial agriculture commodities would go away, too.
      >>>>
      >>>> The rackets decided long ago that either a lot of humans would have to die or they would have to radically alter their predatory economic system, doing away with most of it. They chose to work on killing us all off and keeping their rackets. To the extreme consternation of the Club of Rome, modeling we did back in 1970 and 1971 showed that the Earth could support over 8 billion people, with the standard of living of middle class Brazil at the time, but not if the rackets continued. Population was never the problem – it was always the rackets. Charlie
      >>>>
      >>>>> On Aug 21, 2024, at 9:04 AM, Catherine Austin Fitts wrote:
      >>>>>
      >>>>> That about says it all….
      >>>>>
      >>>>>
      >>>>> ——– Forwarded Message ——–
      >>>>> Subject: Fw: EPG Flash Alert: Wind and Solar will Never Lower Demand for Oil & Gas
      >>>>> Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:50:32 0000 (UTC)
      >>>>> From:
      >>>>>
      >>>>>
      >>>>>
      >>>>>
      >>>>>
      >>>>>
      >>>>>
      >>>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad
      >>>>>
      >>>>> Begin forwarded message:
      >>>>>
      >>>>> On Wednesday, August 21, 2024, 9:29 AM, Energy Prospectus Group wrote:
      >>>>>
      >>>>> Fun Fact: “The energy it has taken to create the wind/solar infrastructure is more energy than they will ever provide. (The energy required to create it includes energy to build/create all the components of the windfarms, solar farms, associated grid, and storage infrastructure, plus the maintenance of all of it).”
      >>>>>
      >>>>> Take a few minutes to look carefully at the charts below and then read the text.
      >>>>>
      >>>>> The Green New Deal, the Paris Climate Accord, and all of the propaganda put out by the Climate Change Wackos is a lie. Net Zero is unachievable. Every country that pursues Net Zero will go bankrupt.
      >>>>>
      >>>>> Demand for oil, natural gas, and even coal, will continue to increase.
      >>>>>
      >>>>>
      >>>>> Daniel M. Steffens, President
      >>>>> Energy Prospectus Group
      >>>>> Houston, Texas
      >>>>> 281-435-8874
      >>>>>
      >>>>> From an Investor Village Energy message board. Charts, then analysis at bottom.
      >>>>> Energy – an overall look at sources, funding and consumption
      >>>>> The main source of data is from the IEA – but some is from other sources.
      >>>>>
      >>>>> The world consumption of energy is increasing quite rapidly. Since 2000, the overall amount of energy consumed has increased by ~28%.
      >>>>> The amount of energy from renewable sources remains over all fairly small.
      >>>>> The renewable category has increased from ~0.2% to about 4.5% overall since 2000. Just on wind and solar, more than $4 trillion US dollars have been spent. Overall, on renewable energy, the spending is even higher and is more than $16 trillion US dollars.
      >>>>>
      >>>>> Current spending on fossil fuels versus renewables has inverted since 2015 to more spending going towards wind/solar than fossil fuels.
      >>>>> Investment in the power grid is very interesting.
      >>>>>
      >>>>> Renewables and storage get the lion’s share of investment. Most storage investment should be considered part of renewable energy because the increase in storage is due mainly to the investment in solar/wind. Both are intermittent sources of energy and require large amounts of energy storage to increase their efficiency. Unfortunately, the efficiency increase is marginal. Even though there are only marginal gains from storage, and renewable energy investments are not as cost effective as other energy sources, most are mandated by government agencies. The power companies are forced by law/regulation to invest in this manner.
      >>>>> The last main chart is on fuel supplies.
      >>>>> Summary of charts – what do they mean?
      >>>>>
      >>>>> A free-market capitalist looking at the charts can see that despite the huge amount of spending on renewable sources, the energy returns are extremely low compared to the investment. So low, that just from the charts, it is apparent that other than hydropower, they appear to be very uneconomic.
      >>>>> How is this apparent? It is apparent because despite the enormous investment, energy production is not going up very fast. The world energy consumption from 2000 to now increased by ~28%, but even with the vast amount of spending on renewable energy, production of renewable can’t even keep up with the growth. Yet, with far less investment, coal power not only remained stable but increased more than renewables. This is astounding due to the fact that most of the investment in coal would be just to maintain the large amount of production. Yet, production still increased.
      >>>>> In the past, I’ve done analysis that show that overall, the energy it has taken to create the wind/solar infrastructure is more energy that they will ever provide. (The energy required to create it includes energy to build/create all the components of the windfarms, solar farms, associated grid and storage infrastructure plus the maintenance of all of it).
      >>>>> The charts reflect that despite huge investments in renewable energy, there is not the corresponding large increase in energy. Even spending more on it than we do on coal, oil and gas, it can’t keep up with the growth in new demand for energy.
      >>>>> In the EU and North America, there are the increasing strident demands for, ‘net zero’.
      >>>>> What is net zero? It means that all the CO2 produced is somehow removed by man. Therefore, they want to build plants that remove CO2 from the atmosphere.
      >>>>> I find it difficult to understand how anyone can be for net zero who understands a bit of math and has worked the numbers on wind and solar. If I want to burn coal to generate electricity or maybe refine steel, it produces an amount of CO2 proportionate to how much is burned. If the CO2 is then removed, the cost of doing so and storing the CO2 would mean the efficiency of burning coal would decrease. Almost all the energy from the coal would be used during the process of getting the CO2 out and storing it. Who can afford to use coal if the efficiency is close to 0? Answer, no one.
      >>>>> If you want to produce the power from wind/solar, it takes a huge amount of industrial activity to create the wind/solar which produces CO2. Since as I’ve pointed out, overall, the power needed to produce power from wind/solar is not as much as is used to get the power, then how can it be used to power for example a facility to remove CO2? It would be like trying to create a perpetual motion machine. Or like trying to power a car by having a trailer on the car that has a small fan on it that drives a generator. As the car drives faster, the fan goes faster generating power. Use the power to drive the car. There are people who in the past thought that this is a way to power their car. They would not need gasoline. But it does not work – just as other perpetual motion machines won’t work.
      >>>>> Overall, trying to implement ‘net zero’ as many politicians have been doing is essentially impossible. A key foundation of any modern nation is energy. The more energy people have available to them, the wealthier they are and the better lifestyle they can live. The less energy per person that is available, the less wealthy they people are and the poorer their lifestyle. Those pushing the idea of ‘net zero’ do not seem to realize that it is impossible to get to their net zero goal using any of the methods that they want to use. All they can do is waste money, impoverish people and destroy the economic foundations of nations.

      1. The problem with most of the energy discussion is that it is completely backward looking when we have amazing advancements in the cost of solar with the price per watt coming down at a pace faster than Moores Law for the last few decades. There also have been significant advances in material usage so that panels can be made on thin film and even created with an inkjet printer. There are even new cells that are made from exploiting the boundary layers of water. The cost of solar is a fraction of a dollar pet watt and many panels will last 20-30 years.

        Here are some links:

        Inkjet panels have their own Wikipedia:

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inkjet_solar_cell

        This is 2 years old – so it has progressed even more but a good overview of tech in new solar:

        https://youtu.be/tQmFVcD-Mbo

        Solar for most homeowners in the southern US is likely a positive investment. The biggest hurdle is usually the regulations around installs and connecting with the grid.

        Also the whole CO2 business confounds everything because it is a complete fraud. We could install plenty of solar for all the money spent on all kinds of fraudulent green energy schemes. But the point of CO2 is energy control not sustainability which is why they don’t hand out free solar panels – which would be the easiest and likely most cost effective thing to do. They just want people energy poor, so they are poor – and can tax people for breathing.

        1. Yes, I believe solar has potential. But if you look at how it is currently being used and sold, does not look to me like we are there yet.

      2. There is a lot of wisdom in the above. I remember seeing a 19th century photograph of two men sitting on a solid copper “nugget” that they must have needed a ladder to surmount. Oil in many places could be scooped up with a bucket. I’m not sure of this designation of oil as a “fossil fuel”. My understanding is that the new thinking on this is that oil is constantly created as a result of friction in the earth’s crust. This seems to be born out by the phenomenon of old wells coming back into production. Short of depopulation, it would take millennia for the vast pools, now depleted to reform. Hmmm?
        This net zero phenomenon is a sort of new age feudalism. Many people, especially traditional Catholics morn the demise of feudalism because Europeans lived a much more rich spiritual and cultural life in the Middle Ages. This is true, but, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, I would say that suffering will do that for you. Seriously, I agree that that period did see people in a much more stable societal condition much of the time, but those who wish for its return, whether Catholic or New Age psychopath, in my experience, generally see themselves as lord of the manor rather than the poor sod mucking our stalls.

  5. THE GREAT STEAL IN FLORIDA – I received a notice a few days ago about a state park near me. A public meeting was scheduled only a week after the announcement. The announcement said that they are planning to convert 1,000 acres of the park into three golf courses. Seeing that there are said to be about 50 golf courses in the vicinity, this is BS. Plus this was never the purpose of the park.

    The notice said that that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection was doing this under the directive of Governor Ron DeSantis. It turns out it was not just our state park, but many other with the same meeting date and time, but in different counties and different parks. This is a state wide planned theft, in my opinion.

    The wording in the notice said it was a management plan amendment to convert the 1,000 acres. This makes me wonder if it is somehow connected to the proposed NAC (Natural Asset Companies) proposed by the SEC.

    Does anyone have any information about what could be going on?

    Push back on the local level is good. I expect a big turnout at my county meeting and a petition which was posted received over 75,000 signatures in a few days.

    If you live in Palm Beach County Florida, you can sign the petition on the link below.
    https://www.change.org/p/protect-jonathan-dickinson-state-park-stop-the-golf-courses?signed=true

    1. Good god. Would love to know more about what you find out.

      Our city council in Hickory Valley just turned over our town commons to the state without telling us.

      1. Catherine, I keep thinking that this is part of the NAC wall street plan. The first announcement we received said “Governor Ron DeSantis, has announced management plan amendments to convert 1,000 acres . . .” The word management is used. Below is a cut and paste from an article on NACs, again management.
        “Numerous sites would be eligible for NACs, including national wildlife refuges, national parks, conservation areas on federal and private lands, endangered species’ critical habitats and wilderness areas. In other words, should something like this proposal eventually pass, U.S. conserved lands could fall under the ownership of some of the world’s richest people, who could make decisions about their management.”
        I was wondering how they get their foot in the door, now I know. Your Plunder story and the park land-grab attempt that we just witness in Florida, point to a few ways they gather everything up in the NACs.

  6. First time commenter. On the wind energy issue there is a lot of bad info on what it is, what it means, what it can do. We are the world’s second largest producer of wind power behind China at 151GW of installed capacity from about 72,000 turbines, all on land. It is still only 12% of the electrical energy generated in our country. The turbine size is ~1.5 – 2MW and has grown to 4.5MW turbines today, for land based energy. Offshore wind is the industry I’ve been making a living from since 2010. I have worked for a developer, then a turbine maker, and now a marine supply chain services company. The offshore wind is a better means of producing power as the resource is more consistent by not being blocked by terrain or buildings, and the turbine size has grown from 0.5MW in 1995 to 15MW today and getting bigger. The EU has been the primary mover in this industry with >5,400 turbines installed. The US offshore wind industry is in it’s infancy with a supply chain that is just getting started. The NE states from VA to ME have committed to buying new electrical capacity from offshore wind sources of generation. Coal and nuclear plants are aging out and not being replaced. There are various reasons why this is the policy in the various states and we can debate the pros and cons of those policies, not all of which I agree with. After all, I am a ratepayer in NJ and have seen electrical prices increase 50% by moving from MD back to NJ. Which drove me to look into wtf is going on as the electrical utility in MD, DP&L, is owned by the same entity, Exelon, as the one in south Jersey, AC Electric, with Exelon being the holding company. After researching the charges on my electric bill I discovered that I was paying a non-utility generation charge, in essence the 4 EDC’s in NJ have to buy SREC’s (solar renewable energy credits) so they can keep buying fossil fueled generation to keep the lights on. I was paying for my neighbors solar panels. So I covered my house in 57 solar panels, traded an electric bill for a finance charge to buy the system, sold SREC’s to the tune of ~$3,500/year and my system will be paid off in 9 years, which is 2 years from now. And I only have a service charge to stay grid connected. If I install a battery system I can power my home if the grid goes down.
    Offshore Wind
    What it is: It is electrical power generation. And yes you have to mine minerals to fabricate the components, they don’t come down in yesterday’s rain or mysteriously appear out of thin air, not even oil & gas pipelines, refineries, tank farms, platforms, drill rigs, or transport vehicles appear out of thin air. It uses a renewable resource as the fuel, the wind, to turn the blades that turn a generator. There is no need for fresh water for cooling or heating into steam, there are no pipelines or tanks for fuel storage, they are unmanned structures that operate remotely, and it doesn’t stop climate change. It makes electrical power with no emissions to the air or water. It does help keep the air clean and is non-polluting. It is more expensive offshore than on land by a factor of 2. But not more expensive than nuclear. Offshore wind capacity factor is ~45%, nuclear power ~90% so it takes 2x wind power to reach the same capacity factor as a nuke plant. However, nuclear power today is ~$16 million per MW based off the current nuke plant being built in GA. Whereas offshore wind is ~$4.5 million per MW, and even at needing twice the wind power to match a nuke, it is still cheaper at $9 million/MW. And you don’t have all of that contaminated cooling water or waste to store somewhere. Still an issue at Fukushima. Combined cycle gas is a cleaner means of making electricity and should still be part of the mix. Coal burning is why we have mercury in seawater and warning labels on canned fish. We should avoid new coal fired power plants. I don’t care that China is building one coal plant per week. They’re also outbuilding the world on offshore wind. That too will change.
    What it means: It means that we have a clean non-polluting source of electrical power. It doesn’t mean we should cover every square mile of seabed with them. We, the US, are 4.5% of the global population and we consume 25% of it’s energy resources. We consume an immense amount of energy, which is part of why we are a rich nation, no complaints here, BUT being we are the biggest consumers of global energy we have a responsibility to look for alternative sources and methods of producing energy. And I don’t mean by sending our government agencies and military around the world overthrowing countries that have what we want to burn. Fracking is not the answer, I know because I come out of the offshore oil & gas industry where those wells that require stimulation were plugged and abandoned as inefficient and uneconomical. Mining resources, processing them, transporting them, and burning them to make electricity, is a wasteful use of resources, including billion and billions and billions of gallons of fresh water. Cost of oil production: Saudi Arabia $4/bbl, Russia $7/bbl, USA $50/bbl. I was taught that in the world of global commodities, which oil & gas are, victory goes to the low cost producer. And when it comes to domestic energy production we are not low cost. We are energy independent! If I hear that one more time I’m gonna puke. Tell me how in the USA 12mbpd production and 20mbpd consumption equal energy independence? The math doesn’t add up. And we are exporting crude oil because fracked oil is too clean to refine in our old style refineries, and try to get a permit to build a new refinery, anywhere. So we will continue to import energy to keep up with our 25% global demand.
    What it can do: It can lead to other future technologies that make electricity in a clean and efficient way. For instance, perhaps we should be demanding for the release of the more then 5,000 energy patents currently under national security order restrictions. Bruce DePalma’s N-machine for starters. The N-machine achieved over unity power generation with rotating copper disks inside of a field of permanent magnets at 16,000 rpm. It achieved a 4x – 5x power out to power in. In other words for 1kw input he achieved a 5kw output. This is the holy grail of power, the alchemy of turning lead into gold. Most electrical generation is 40% efficient at best, i.e. 1kw in and 0.4kw out. Imagine a wind turbine using the N-machine technology to generate electrical power.

    I’ve been on this journey for 14 years and not for climate change, or CO2, or any other ornament the climate change church is throwing on the renewable tree. When you think about a “local” source of energy, you don’t get any more local than electrical energy. Just look at your cell phone. Same thing happened in computing with the PC. Put the source of energy in the hands of the user. That’s what I did with residential solar. We live in an electric universe. Just ask Tesla if you can channel him. The N-machine pulls power out of the ether, as the ancients called it. That’s what we should be pursuing. Not mining more “stuff” to burn. Fire, Air, Water, Earth, Ether (space). These are 5 elements of the material world. Why are we mining the earth, burning minerals to make fire, using air for combustion, then cooling it all down with water, to make energy? Solar uses the fire in a photon of light, thank you Einstein. Wind uses air to turn a generator. There has to be better ways to make energy, and the universal energy available is electrical, not gasoline.

  7. Electricity — there are a lot of crypto mining farms in Iceland and, to a lesser extent, other cold countries. The mining rigs need a lot of cooling.

    1. Yes. The geothermal is a serious resource for any energy intensive activity.

Comments are closed.