Renewables VS Reliables VS Clean Energy

We need to use technology like hemp batteries but the globalists prefer Congolese children digging up cadmium with their bare hands. And electric schoolbuses that explode;

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-28770876

https://www.energytech.com/energy-storage/article/21177341/will-hemp-make-ev-batteries-better

Wind and solar is not geographically compatible with most population centers. Why does Brazil get a pass on removing rainforests which process CO2 out of the atmosphere?

You're right - the climate change narrative/agenda is BS. There are good alternative energy sources but we're not allowed to use them (hemp biofuel, even free energy). Wind turbines and solar panels are (intentionally) useless and harmful to the environment

Yep too true, I have been using solar power and batteries for over 30 years. As an Engineer, I have no issues setting these up. The thing is solar is great during the day, as are wind turbines to a lesser extent. The thing is these cost 5 to 10 times more than reliable power. If they are sincere, the only option for day AND night power is Nuclear. I dont give a toss if the power goes out after dark, but 95 percent of the population may find that they should go for Reliables, or just accept load shedding and brown outs.

What is really stupid is a government that forgets how water powered America back in the day, But in order to stay stable in the energy sector, a majority of options are going to be needed. Pluss one guy made his car run on water, why all this time waisted on very mineral intense options... The only issue would be water running out because it would be known as the new fuel.

I guarantee you that you have either misunderstood or been mislead about the guy running his car on water. That is completely impossible.

So your telling me steam powered locomotives didn’t exist, and nothing can run on steam even if some fuel is involved to make steam, it still reduces the amount of pollutants and fuel needed to keep a engine running.

Steam locomotives were coal power.

Steam is not and never has been a fuel, ever. I'll telling you it's impossible. If you dig deeper into it, you are going to find you've made a mistake, either in your own understanding or in who you chose to listen to.

Well if you want to become a engineer and develop new alternatives to fossil fuels and non renewable energy sources, you can gladly use Stanley Allen Meyer inventions, because his patent has expired. Even if the government said he lied, you can make replicas of his inventions for your self. I understand a engine running on steam needs a fuel source to heat the steam, but once the steam is heated the engine runs on it.

I DID become an engineer, actually. And I am TELLING you, STEAM IS NOT A FUEL AND NEVER WAS. You do not understand what "runs on" means. Steam is the transmission fluid that transfers energy from the coal to the cylinders but the trains ran on coal. If you say that a car runs on water because it has water somewhere in it, cars have ALWAYS done that!!!!!!!!!!!

Stanley Allen Meyer's machine was a perpetual motion machine. The government didn't say he was lying, PHYSICS said he was lying and the court simply listened to the physics. His machine is impossible.