The folly of net zero:
One would need to be fairly isolated to not know what these three somewhat cryptic terms refer to. From October 31 to November 12 the 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference will be held, this time in Glasgow. A major goal is net zero carbon emissions by 2050. And after some initial hesitancy, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison will be tagging along.
What has concerned many is the new found green religion of Morrison, his dogged commitment to net zero, and his gallivanting off to yet another gabfest which rich and pampered people will roll up to, having flown over in their carbon-emitting private jets to tell us peons how we must all tighten our belts in order to save the planet.
And all this is putting Morrison at odds with his Coalition partner, the Nationals, especially Barnaby Joyce, Matt Canavan, and Bridget McKenzie who are quite opposed to all this. Morrison is saying he will bypass them if he cannot get full agreement. Hmm, trouble ahead.
A number of things can be said about ScoMo’s embrace of this grand green scheme:
-Australia is one of the few countries in the world that is keeping its carbon agreements. We contribute less than 1.3% of total global emissions, and nothing we do will change things globally. Our commitment to net zero will not change global temperatures one iota.
-The big boys when it comes to carbon emissions are being let off the hook. China for example is considered to be a ‘developing country’ (despite hosting the Olympics, sending rockets into space, etc), so it can do whatever it wants until 2030 – that is, keep spewing out over 30% of the world’s carbon emissions. It produces more emissions in 16 days than we do in a year. And the Chinese leader Xi Jinping is not attending the November gabfest. It is not Australia that should be targeted, but nations like China.
-Consider Britain under Boris Johnson who has also gone full-tilt greenie. The UK relies on renewables (wind, solar) for over 40% of its energy, but these are unreliable and need to be backed up. Right now, like some other parts of Europe, they are experiencing a major energy crisis. They have little gas left and domestic supplies are dwindling – gas and power prices are soaring as a result. Boris wants coal gone by 2030 and only green energy by 2035. However, with this crisis he has had to fire up and reuse two old coal-powered plants. Even though Britain contributes 1% of global carbon emissions, their average energy costs are now up by 25%. So much for renewables.
-The real issue that no one is talking about is the cost. Back in 2017 a report said that the cost of transition would be $1 trillion. But no one really knows the actual costs. Who pays for all this? We do of course – the taxpayer. It will cost us plenty, including lost jobs, lost income, lost opportunities, lost prosperity, and lost economic growth. It is a massive con job.
-Recall back in February 2017 the then Treasurer Morrison gave a speech in Parliament using a lump of coal. He said back then: “On this side of the house you will not find a fear of coal.” And the last federal election was a miracle win for Morrison: it came about because the Libs rejected the Labor/Greens nonsense on climate alarmism that would have cost jobs and ruined the economy. So what has changed? Morrison has forgotten all that it seems. Now he wants to go further than what he rejected a few years ago!
-The truth is, Australia is a fossil fuel superpower and the world wants our resources: gas, coal, uranium. We should deliver practical opportunities to our people, and to the rest of the world. We should not be crushing our most successful industries. That is national suicide.
-And this will certainly handicap our major industries. Our biggest export is iron ore, followed by coal. But today we are targeting coal – methane and gas and offshore oil will be next. What then? If the radical greens get their way, things like red meat will be banned. There is a never-ending hitlist here by greens and lefties. And agriculture has emissions too – do we get rid of that as well? Most things emit, so will we have to offset them also? There are 2.1 tonnes of methane emissions given off by every cow a year. Will we ban cows next?
-The way forward to achieve such environmental goals is nuclear energy. It is emissions free. Indeed, if we used 100% nuclear we would remove all emissions. The truth is, Australia needs energy independence – we need to utilise our coal, and our uranium as well. And the mood against nuclear here is shifting – big time. Only 27% of Australians are now firmly against it – most are for it.
-We need to ask: who benefits from all this? The globalists. The elites. The banks. They will all make a lot of money out of this. The Libs, like Labor, are now aligning with Big Banks and Big Business. Small business should be our focus. Big Gov is not what conservatives stand for. Big Gov will tell you what energy you can use, what food you can eat, how you will be allowed to travel, how to heat your home, and so on. Um, that is called communism.
-All this is just a meaningless gesture: even the International Energy Agency says we do not now have the technology to get to net zero. This is more feel-good posturing by the elites and by those who can afford such radical changes to our economies, our lifestyles, and our very future. Small business, the rural sector, agriculture, mining, and countless workers who live by these things will be the ones who will suffer the most. Economic modelling done a few years ago showed a 45% reduction in emissions would smash the economy and see 336,000 jobs lost – not to mention radically put up our electricity bills!
-And now they want zero emissions! But guess what? Many of us, including ScoMo, will not be around in 2050 to face the music. It will be our children and our grandchildren who will have to pay the costs. Many of us will be dead and gone by then, but we owe it to those who follow us not to destroy their very way of life in such a reckless fashion, just because movie stars, elites, globalists and others want to radically change our economies and way of life.
-The left, the Marxists, and the Great Reset crowd absolutely love all this – but it will be disastrous for us mere peons. Plenty of commentary can be appealed to here. A piece written last month in the UK offers some good summary points about where we are headed with all this. The closing paragraphs of Janet Daley’s piece, “Green Warriors Are On a Mission To Stamp Out Prosperity As We Know It” are these:
The “planet” (always spoken of as if it were a sentient being in danger of “dying”) is suffering the consequences of their self-indulgence and profligacy. Answer: make sure, by strategy or edict, that either they are unable to afford their irresponsible behavior or are actually banned from doing so.
Make no mistake, this is the moral core of the militant environmental cause: there is too much wealth, too much “waste”, too much choice, and too many people living too long. (Since the pandemic cut a swathe through the elderly population of the West, they have gone rather quiet on this last point.)
A damaging confusion at the heart of this doctrine is the role that capitalism and the industrial revolution – its twin evil in the eyes of the environment lobby – played in the lives of the great mass of the population. The current version of Marxist mythology casts them as being the joint causes of the victimization of the poor.
Marx himself did not see it this simplistically: he understood that industrialization not only created more diversified wealth (which was previously tied to the ownership of land) but liberated the rural population from what was effectively agrarian serfdom.
But that message does not suit the self-flagellating version of the fable which seems in a rather inchoate way to long for some purer form of existence, not just pre-industrial but even pre-agricultural, at one with the Earth (in its role as a spiritual companion) and Nature (whose own ruthless imperatives are never explored).
This odd mix of childlike sentimentality and economic illiteracy makes no room for the obvious truth: that industrialization and market economics transformed the nasty, brutal and short lives of most people into something that at least approached the comfort and security that were once the sole property of those who were the inheritors of privilege.
This is the quite shamelessly blatant refrain of the most aggressive elements of the climate change lobby. Insulate Britain says, in no uncertain terms, that it is happy to prevent people from pursuing their livelihoods since commerce itself is the enemy.
You may well believe that climate change is urgent enough to justify virtually any step that is taken to address it. But be quite sure about what you are endorsing and the sacrifices it will involve – for you and for people less well off than you.
This campaign, as it stands, is opposed to mass prosperity, self-determination, and ultimately to social equality. Gas bills are just the start. https://www.climatedepot.com/2021/09/29/green-warriors-are-on-a-mission-to-stamp-out-prosperity-as-we-know-it/
Quite right. The massive energy crisis taking place in the UK right now is NOT the sort of thing we want to see in Australia. By way of action, a petition urging ScoMo not to go to Glasgow is found here: http://www.peopleforscientificintegrity.com/
[1634 words]