EPA: Too Many Black People Will Soon Be Cooking Food in Africa unless We Stop Them

The EPA is claiming that black people having children are a threat to the climate and our environment.

Thanks go to Infowars because their video showed up in my Twitter feed and sent me looking for the story:

The US environmental protection agency is going to spend $1.5 million of your tax payer dollars on a stove intervention in Africa. Suddenly the cooking method humans have been using for millennia is now an existential threat. Meanwhile, the President will be flying to the arctic to lecture the world on climate change on a journey that’s equivalent to 12,045 African meal preps.

Do we really need to waste tax payer dollars on yet another getaway for the absentee president and a useless stove-study in a foreign country, all so the climate change cult can allegedly “save” the 4.5 billion-year-old planet from human destruction?

The Environmental Protection Agency could not be more blatantly eugenicist unless they put a swastika on their logo.

They claim, as the reason why we need to spend millions of dollars on a study overseas, that the number of black people is “projected to continue to grow at alarming rates.”

Alarming rates? Why?

Because traditional cooking over fire allegedly increases “global warming.”

Allegedly human cook fires are contributing to climate change and must be stopped.

This is reported at the Free Beacon,

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is spending $1.5 million to bring a “stove intervention” to Africa.

The project, conducted by the University of Colorado, is attempting to change how people living in the Sahel of Africa cook and light their homes to be more energy efficient.

The EPA grant argues the project is necessary because the population in this region, which lies between the Sahara Desert and the vast Sudanian Savanna, is “projected to continue to grow at alarming rates,” meaning more carbon emissions from when Africans cook.

“For this study, we will leverage an existing stove intervention study of 200 households in the region; randomly selected rural households received pairs of improved wood cookstoves,” the grant said. “We expand that intervention study to assess stove use behaviors and emissions for an entire year and add urban households and commercial cooking activities.”

The project also seeks to change the types of garbage disposals Africans use.

“In addition, we will assess other non-cooking combustion emissions, including lighting, heating, and trash disposal,” the grant said. “Household surveys will be given at multiple time points to assess use of, demand for, satisfaction with, and impacts of cooking and lighting technologies across the intervention as well as the urban area.”

The researchers will then analyze carbon emissions from “actual cooking events.”

If you had any doubts that climate change policy is going to be used to impoverish and keep down the poorest people on the planet this should be a wake-up call. The “improved” stoves we give a few aren’t going to reduce the carbon imprint unless we assume that we can keep Africa poor and prevent them from expanding their electrical grid and getting air conditioning in most homes.

But much, much worse is the fact that this grant is articulated on the premise that we have a direct national interest in preventing Africans from having babies. There is no way to deny it. The basis for the grant is that these Africans are engaged in “alarming rates” of reproduction.

This isn’t about giving women more opportunities; it is about discouraging them from motherhood.

sanger weeds

It isn’t about helping black people in Africa; it is about reducing the number of black people in Africa.

This is the kind of thinking behind Michael Bloomberg’s and Planned Parenthood’s (and Jeb Bush’s) push to get rid of anti-abortion laws in other countries. It is a rationalization for intervening in their private affairs and their domestic laws to make sure they stop having (so many) babies.