Shove Your “Net Zero”

WEF Demands Global Ban on Homegrown Food to Meet ‘Net Zero’

The World Economic Forum (WEF) is demanding that global governments enforce bans on members of the general public growing food at home in order to supposedly lower “emissions.”

The globalist organization claims that homegrown food contributes to “climate change.”

The WEF argues that banning homegrown food will help governments comply with their targets for meeting “Net Zero” by 2030.

In order to comply with the WEF’s “Net Zero” targets, governments must drastically reduce “carbon emissions” by 2030 and completely eliminate them by 2050.

According to so-called “experts” behind a recent WEF study, researchers apparently discovered that the “carbon footprint” of homegrown food is “destroying the planet.”

As a result, the WEF and other globalist climate zealots are now demanding that governments intervene and ban individuals from growing their own food in order to “save the planet” from “global warming.”

Globalists insist that allowing citizens to grow their own food will undermine efforts to meet the goals of the “Net Zero” agenda as dictated by the WEF and the United Nations (UN).

The research indicated that garden-to-table produce causes a far greater carbon footprint than conventional agricultural practices, such as those on rural farms.

This research, conducted by WEF-funded scientists at the University of Michigan, was published in the journal Nature Cities.

The study looked at different types of urban farms to see how much carbon dioxide (CO2) was produced when growing food.

On average, a serving of food made from traditional farms creates 0.07 kilograms (kg) of CO2, according to the study.

However, the WEF-funded researchers claim that the impact on the environment is almost five times higher at 0.34kg per portion for individual city gardens.

The paper’s first author Jake Hawes, said:

“The most significant contributor to carbon emissions on the urban agriculture sites we studied was the infrastructure used to grow the food, from raised beds to garden sheds to pathways, these constructions had a lot of carbon invested in their construction.”

The study recruited 73 urban agriculture sites around the world.

Those farms included some in Europe, the United States, and the United Kingdom.

The researchers say they conducted a comprehensive life cycle assessment on the site’s infrastructure, irrigation, and supplies.

Hawes and his teammates grouped urban agriculture sites into three categories: individual or family gardens, including allotments; collective gardens, such as community gardens; and larger, commercial-orientated urban farms.

The researchers also found other factors that they claimed are “hazardous” when it comes to impacting the alleged “climate crisis.”

Poorly managed compost and other synthetic inputs contribute to “global warming,” they warned.

They further advised that fruit was 8.6 times more “eco-friendly” when grown conventionally compared to in a city.

Vegetables, meanwhile, were 5.8 times better for the environment when left to the professionals, they claim.

Moreover, two-thirds of the “carbon footprint” of allotments is created by the garden itself, as per their data.

Nevertheless, they insist that people should be limited when it comes to keeping plants inside their homes, as well as growing food in their gardens.

Urban gardeners used to have no qualms about greening their indoor spaces.

For one, this reduces city living anxieties and emotional stress.

Also, being able to take care of plants inside their offices and homes could be part of interior design and a slight improvement in air quality.

However, climate alarmists are not going to give city dwellers peace of mind.

According to the WEF researchers, greening indoor spaces can also come at an environmental cost.

They cite “carbon emissions” from the trucks that transport plants, plastic pots, and synthetic fertilizers.

These, they said, are made from petroleum, and the harvesting of soil components like peat can “tear up slow-forming habitats.”

Susan Pell, the director of the U.S. Botanic Garden in Washington, D.C., downplayed the narrative.

Pell argues that members of the general public should at least still be able to grow potted plants at home, even if they can’t buy them.

They just need to consider the “environmental harm of indoor gardening,” she claims.

The news comes amid a growing war against the food supply to supposedly fight “global warming.”

14 major American cities have set a “target” to comply with the WEF’s green agenda goals by banning meat and dairy products by 2030.

The agreement also seeks to ban private car ownership and place other restrictions on public freedoms to meet the WEF’s “Net Zero” goals.

The U.S. cities have formed a coalition called the “C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group” (C40), which has established an “ambitious target” to meet the WEF’s goals by the year 2030.

To fulfill the “target,” the C40 Cities have pledged that their residents will comply with the following list of mandatory rules:

• “0 kg [of] meat consumption”
• “0 kg [of] dairy consumption”
• “3 new clothing items per person per year”
• “0 private vehicles” owned
• “1 short-haul return flight (less than 1500 km) every 3 years per person”

The news comes as the WEF ramps up efforts to demand governments crack down on the freedoms of their citizens.

As was reported earlier this year, WEF members unveiled plans for permanently mass-vaccinating the general public “every six months.”

During the WEF’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, in January, globalists announced plans for bi-annual mass vaccinations with “long-acting” mRNA “vaccines.”

The plan is purportedly part of an effort to supposedly tackle multiple diseases.

During panel discussions at the meeting in Davos, WEF members laid out plans for tech-driven precision medicine, “long-acting injectables,” “climate-sensitive” vaccines, and mRNA therapeutics for non-communicable diseases.