Claim: Chemtrails are Coal Ash

[Steve Funk]

This 12 minute video by someone calling himself "HAARP Report" claims that the source material for chemtrails is coal ash or fly ash. Some of his reasons: It has substantial percentage of aluminum oxide, a welsbach material. It is extremely common as a byproduct of coal burning; it is commonly and openly transported. The particle size is 10 to 100 microns, consistent with the Hughes Patent.

PDF of presentation: https://www.metabunk.org/sk/Chemtrails_are_Coal_Ash.pdf

Some problems with this idea: He claims the percentage of aluminum oxide is about 30%. Wikipedia puts it at 5 to 35%. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fly_ash This would leave a lot of extraneous material to process out ahead of time or carry as dead weight. The percentage of al2o3 in fly ash is not that much higher than in the earth's crust to begin with. Rocks on Mount Shasta contain about 15% al2o3.
The main ingredient in fly ash is silicon dioxide, which is normally in the form of sand. This would probably fall out of the atmosphere almost immediately.
The narrator recommends using using this material in the form of a water slurry. However, fly ash is used as a substitute for Portland Cement. It is a binder. (Wikipedia uses the word Pozzolanic). It would quickly coagulate and fall to earth. And carrying large amounts of water as a mixer would create an additional drastic reduction in the available payload of Welsbach materials.

 

[Mick West]

It's a nonsensical idea, almost reads like a hoax, or some kind of misguided attempt to indirectly get chemtrail enthusiasts to focus on coal power plants. It's such a stream of things that are wrong that it's hard to know where to start - or even if it's worth addressing at all.

Basically it starts out with this premise:

Since the mid 1990's, persistent jet trails have appeared in the sky, and have increased year after year

And then proceeds from there.

One can point out numerous problems with the theory - like the fact that spraying a highly abrasive powder through the engines would destroy them, and the fact that the optical density of the trails would require more mass than than planes could carry, and so must be water from the atmosphere. Then there's the fact that the trails persist and spread like contrails do, whereas a sprayed powder would quickly dissipate.

But these are objections that have been ignored before, and the fundamental point here is they are trying to fit an explanation to a misunderstanding (contrail persistence). So it's somewhat pointless to address this silly theory, and it would be better if we could get back to addressing the persistence of contrails.

In a way you'd think it would be easier if this becomes canon. You could just explain how nonsensical it is, and people would see the whole chemtrail thing as being based on misunderstandings. But then you've got equally backwards things like the high bypass engines not creating contrails (when they actually make more).

There's no evidence in this document and video. Just baseless speculation. Fly ash contains those elements, but then so does dirt.

 

[Balance]

I wonder if it's a conspiracy to manufacture evidence of it being linked to Artic soot http://www.livescience.com/25326-greenland-ice-soot-melt.html as already inferred by a certain person that looks up a lot tying in with evidence of the "black" contrails he filmed.

 

[Efftup]

I thought it was relatively simple. Debunkers have said "Where is this "chemtrail" Material manufactured? Where does it come from? and so they had to try and find somewhere.
Flowable fill is a highway construction material. not sure why "they" are labelling chemtrail material as flowable fill component except it suits the needs of the conspiracy.

Actually I think he has a point here. If people DO track all the cars from coal ash reprocessing plants, they will see that none of them ever arrive at any airbase. Then we can see that NO chemtrail bases exist.

 

[WeedWhacker]

If I may "chime in"? Coal ash, by its very nature, would be extremely heavy.

Here is a simple on-line calculator source (one of, I suspect, many):
http://www.aqua-calc.com/calculate/volume-to-weight/substance/cinders-coma-and-blank-coal-blank-ash

I believe the community of thinkers here can see the problem immediately, once it is "translated" into the problem of aviation, and the "lofting" of such weights, by aircraft. (AS has been previously pointed out, and discussed).

 

[Steve Funk]

Even some of the chemmies are questioning this:

Uniting For Our Planet - Redding, CA
February 2 at 12:03pm ·


Members - there is a new video out from The HAARP Report, titled "Chemtrails are COAL ASH." Until the background sources on it are disclosed, I do not want it posted. I have sent the following message to the man that makes these - "_____ what is your source of certainty on this? Where are the "secret bases" you refer to? This video leaves many questions.
Also, I don't know any "career activists", as you said " I am pretty upset with the "career" activists, who never bothered... to do this detective work. Oh, well, I guess they are not as devoted to saving our planet, as I am." I do know many people who work hard long hours and days for the good of all life on Earth, and are very devoted. Appreciate everyone working hard. They shouldn't be put down. The only career individuals any of us know are working from the other side - geoengineers, scientists, gov. officials... If you unlocked a secret and a solution here, good. Tell us where you came up with these facts please. Viral status should have verification before it's worthy of serious attention. I'm not trying to sound ugly - these are real questions."~ Cori
*Here is my primary concern. This information isn't sourced. If activists start to watch/photo/try to gain entry to power plants they could be mistakenly taken as someone who is suspect for potentially interfering with the nation's grid. That as you know, is a serious offense. This worries me. We all want to find the source of the materials and operations serving the geoengineering aerosols, but this piece (video) is reckless in my opinion. He needs to show proof this is the smoking gun.
**As of 1PM MST 2/2/15, he has still not answered my questions.

 

[Whitebeard]

Its a bit 'techy' but this article describes what happens to the ash from coal fire powerstations...
http://www.engineerlive.com/content/23803

Fly ash is the waste product generated from burning hard coal at coal-fired power stations. It comprises the heat-treated constituents of coal itself, the major ones being alumino-silicates, iron oxides in the form of maghemite and carbon in the form of char. All fly ashes vary in their percentage of these three components but together these three account for 100 per cent of fly ash residues. Approximately 1-2 per cent of the alumino-silicates are hollow glass spheres known as cenospheres.

The utilisation of fly ash by the construction industry is regulated by technical standards, such as the EN450 standards in Europe, the ASTM C-618 standards in the USA and their equivalents in Asia. Various methods have been attempted to improve the quality of fly ash in an effort to make it more suitable for industrial applications. The most simple and commonly applied process is to grade the fly ash by particle size, which categorises it for a range of cementitious applications. This is referred to as Classified Ash. Additional improvements are made by the removal of some carbon in an effort to bring the overall Loss on Ignition (LOI) content below the 7 per cent demanded by BSEN450 Category A & B for use as a CEM I replacement in ready-mixed concrete.

 

[David Fraser]

I will post the link later but fly ash is used to augment and condition soil as well

 

[Eric the Green]

This 12 minute video by someone calling himself "HAARP Report" claims that the source material for chemtrails is coal ash or fly ash. Some of his reasons: It has substantial percentage of aluminum oxide, a welsbach material. It is extremely common as a byproduct of coal burning; it is commonly and openly transported. The particle size is 10 to 100 microns, consistent with the Hughes Patent.

PDF of presentation: https://www.metabunk.org/sk/Chemtrails_are_Coal_Ash.pdf

Some problems with this idea: He claims the percentage of aluminum oxide is about 30%. Wikipedia puts it at 5 to 35%. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fly_ash This would leave a lot of extraneous material to process out ahead of time or carry as dead weight. The percentage of al2o3 in fly ash is not that much higher than in the earth's crust to begin with. Rocks on Mount Shasta contain about 15% al2o3.

The video includes some charts about rainwater content in a few locations, including Chico CA. I have no idea who conducted these tests or how valid they are. Anyone know more about these tests, or if they mean anything?

 

[Jay Reynolds]

You can ask the anonymous source of the video about the anonymous sources who made the alleged tests.
Why anyone would believe some random person on youtube is a social phenomenon.
Par for the course in the chemtrails world is lack of documentation for their claims.
Just Look Up is enough if you Believe......

 

[MikeG]

Even some of the chemmies are questioning this:

Uniting For Our Planet - Redding, CA
February 2 at 12:03pm ·


Members - there is a new video out from The HAARP Report, titled "Chemtrails are COAL ASH." Until the background sources on it are disclosed, I do not want it posted. I have sent the following message to the man that makes these - "_____ what is your source of certainty on this? Where are the "secret bases" you refer to? This video leaves many questions.
Also, I don't know any "career activists", as you said " I am pretty upset with the "career" activists, who never bothered... to do this detective work. Oh, well, I guess they are not as devoted to saving our planet, as I am." I do know many people who work hard long hours and days for the good of all life on Earth, and are very devoted. Appreciate everyone working hard. They shouldn't be put down. The only career individuals any of us know are working from the other side - geoengineers, scientists, gov. officials... If you unlocked a secret and a solution here, good. Tell us where you came up with these facts please. Viral status should have verification before it's worthy of serious attention. I'm not trying to sound ugly - these are real questions."~ Cori
*Here is my primary concern. This information isn't sourced. If activists start to watch/photo/try to gain entry to power plants they could be mistakenly taken as someone who is suspect for potentially interfering with the nation's grid. That as you know, is a serious offense. This worries me. We all want to find the source of the materials and operations serving the geoengineering aerosols, but this piece (video) is reckless in my opinion. He needs to show proof this is the smoking gun.
**As of 1PM MST 2/2/15, he has still not answered my questions.

But has this skepticism changed since Herndon's article was published? It seems that the folks in Redding are now embracing the idea.

 

[Eric the Green]

Where can I read "Herndon's article"?

 

[deirdre]

Where can I read "Herndon's article"?

You can use the search box at top of page to search Metabunk. For instance "chico" or "Rainwater test" or "Herndon"

Herdon has 2 "coal ash" papers. Youll see the links in blue in the first post here https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-j...es-in-current-science-india-and-ijerph.t6456/

 

[Eric the Green]

The HAARP Report guy told me that the source of his measurements of aluminum and barium are from rain samples collected by geoengineeringwatch.org in other words Mr. Wigington. I imagine I will read about debunking of this here.

 

[deirdre]

The HAARP Report guy told me that the source of his measurements of aluminum and barium are from rain samples collected by geoengineeringwatch.org in other words Mr. Wigington. I imagine I will read about debunking of this here.

yes its discussed somewhere on here already. maybe search "bottom of pond" since Dane took mud from the bottom of the pond. If you have a question about something in a video it is most helpful if you give us a timestamp so we know exactly what you are referring to. Makes it easier to guide you to further reading.

 

[NoParty]

But has this skepticism changed since Herndon's article was published? It seems that the folks in Redding are now embracing the idea.

My soul wants to believe that "some of the chemmies are questioning this" and they "...do not want it posted..."
because of a newfound reverence for truth, and reflection upon the horrible damage that can be done to society by those
who constantly scare people irrationally...never mind the guilt re. charlatans stealing the dollars of society's most gullible.

But my cerebral cortex just answers that adopting "coal ash" theory now would simply mean too much adjustment,
and admitting that most of their other assertions were wrong.

 

[MikeG]

I was curious to see if any of Herndon's theories appeared at the August 14th, 2015 meeting sponsored by Geoengineeringwatch.org at the David Marr Auditorium In Redding, California.

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/...event-will-expose-global-climate-engineering/

Mark McCandlish, a "Former Defense Industry Technician," highlighted aluminum oxide as a key component of geoengineering. It was an interesting departure from the "aluminum in free form" argument that has surfaced in earlier public forums, such as the Shasta County supervisors meeting last summer.

"Former military meteorologist" Allan Buckman briefly mentioned a "slurry" (at about 6:31 in his presentation) that was responsible for cloud formations, but did not go into any detail.

But nothing about Herndon or coal ash. Interesting.

 

[Jay Reynolds]

I was curious to see if any of Herndon's theories appeared at the August 14th, 2015 meeting sponsored by Geoengineeringwatch.org at the David Marr Auditorium In Redding, CA.

But nothing about Herndon or coal ash. Interesting.

Possibly because Herndon put his skepticism of anthropogenic climate change in the paper. That essentially puts Herndon in the dump the way Dane Wigington sees things.

 

[skephu]

Possibly because Herndon put his skepticism of anthropogenic climate change in the paper. That essentially puts Herndon in the dump the way Dane Wigington sees things.

But Dane still hailed Herndon's paper as the first peer-reviewed publication that proves the ongoing geoengineering.

 

[Jay Reynolds]

But Dane still hailed Herndon's paper as the first peer-reviewed publication that proves the ongoing geoengineering.

Dane's hypocrisy has limits......