Home » Posts tagged 'net zero'

Tag Archives: net zero

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai III: Catacylsm
Click on image to purchase

Post categories

Post Archives by Category

Imperialism in bright green

Imperialism in bright green

Voiced by Amazon Polly

The human ability to disconnect from and deny geopolitical reality lies at the heart of the “green” net-zero project.  Most obviously, those – like the current UK Prime Minister – who claim victories along the road to the Nirvana of net-zero must maintain blindness to the way in which the UK economy is integrated into a global industrial civilisation.  As a result, such measures as closing British coal mines and coal-fired power stations can be translated into lower national carbon emissions figures, even though all that is achieved is the outsourcing of UK emissions to other, less developed states elsewhere on the planet.  Aiding this sleight of hand is the international convention that we do not include emissions from shipping in anyone’s national data, giving the appearance that there is no difference between goods moved tens of miles by truck or train, and goods transported by ship from the other side of the Earth.

Nor is it only governments and politicians that get away with this dubious accounting trick.  Activists simultaneously demand the construction of thousands of wind turbines – manufactured on the other side of the planet – while denying the need for the materials from which wind turbines are made, deployed, and maintained.  Consider, for example, the recent outrage over the decision to extend the Aberpergwm anthracite mine in South Wales and the proposal for a new mine in Cumbria.  Both are intended to supply UK steelworks which, among other things, will produce the steel which is essential to the construction and deployment of thousands of wind turbines.  Activists have reacted as if wind turbines might otherwise magically construct and deploy themselves with the aid of the net-zero fairy, or – even less plausibly…

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Oilfield Approval Off Newfoundland Coast Would Undercut Climate Commitments, Harm Biodiversity, Experts Warn

Anxiety is running high in Newfoundland and Labrador as the province waits on a federal decision about a proposed offshore oil project about 500 kilometres east of St. John’s.

Equinor’s Bay du Nord project would open a fifth oilfield for the cash-strapped province, whose oil sector was hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic and crashing global prices, The Canadian Press reports. But there is mounting concern an approval from Ottawa would undermine federal climate commitments and send a message to other provinces that oil and gas is a viable industry on which they can hook their financial hopes.

“If we’re going to be serious about our net-zero commitment and our international commitments, then we cannot approve any new oil and gas projects,” said Debora VanNijnatten, a public policy expert and associate political science professor at Wilfrid Laurier University.

“And we have to have a plan to help those regions that we say ‘no’ to,” she added in a recent interview.

Oil accounted for nearly 21% of Newfoundland and Labrador’s GDP in 2019, according to its latest budget, which also forecasted a deficit of C$826 million and a net debt of $17.2 billion. With an estimated 800 million recoverable barrels of oil in the proposed Bay du Nord site, the project is “critical to the Newfoundland and Labrador economy,” said a statement Thursday from Energy Minister Andrew Parsons.

Meanwhile, Canada has committed to achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 and to doing its part to limit global warming to 1.5°C. Bay du Nord is also among the first oil and gas projects to be considered for approval by the federal government since the International Energy Agency declared in May there can be no investment in new fossil fuel supply projects if the world is going to hit net-zero targets by 2050.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Russia Puts The Blame On Europe As Energy Crisis Worsens

Russia Puts The Blame On Europe As Energy Crisis Worsens

  • The EU is reconsidering its position on extending long-term natural gas contracts.
  • Russia has maintained that the contracts are beneficial for Europe and moving away from them would be a mistake.
  • Russia even went as far as suggesting that Europe’s current energy crisis is its own fault.

The European Union (EU) is reportedly reconsidering its position on extending long-term natural gas contracts beyond 2049 as part of reforms in its natural gas market to meet the net-zero by 2050 goal.   Should the European Commission’s proposal be endorsed by EU heads of state and government this week, putting a timeline to the end of long-term gas contracts would open another rift with Russia, which provides one-third of Europe’s gas supply via pipelines under long-term deals.

The measure, if approved by the EU, would run against Russia’s position that long-term deals are beneficial for Europe and moving away from them and increasing reliance on liquefied natural gas (LNG) was and will be a mistake.

Some EU member states are wary of what they perceive as Moscow using gas as a political tool to influence geopolitics.

However, as it stands, especially with the low levels of gas in storage and surging gas and energy prices, supply from Russia and Russia’s willingness to provide additional volumes to Europe on top of its contractual commitments has been and will be a key driver of the gas market and prices at European hubs this winter.

Despite the current crisis, the EU’s executive branch, the European Commission, is reportedly drafting plans to quit long-term gas supply contracts by 2049. At the same time, it plans to enhance the security of its gas supply, Bloomberg reported this week, citing a draft document prepared by the Commission.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Net Zero by 2050? Here’s What It Takes To Get It

Net Zero by 2050? Here’s What It Takes To Get It

Net Zero by 2050

Here is what a reasonably objective study from the Geological Survey of Finland concludes on just how much more electricity generation will be required to retire natural gas and coal…

The answer: a stink load!

But you need batteries to provide power when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing. Here is an indication of just how much materials would be required to produce all these batteries:

We won’t hold these estimates against the author as there are a number of variables involved. But you get the basic point: there aren’t enough materials on the planet to achieve this dream. It’s a grand absurd delusion!

We wouldn’t worry about natural gas and coal being phased out just yet.

The Net Zero is Just Plain Virtue Signaling.

What is virtue signaling? A form of moral grandstanding in which a viewpoint or answer is calculated to “look good,” thereby making the object or speaker appear virtuous to others, rather than being chosen because it is strictly honest.

The 2050 net zero narrative is virtue signaling in its purest sense. Here is a small excerpt from Kopernik Global Investors’ recent report:

“It seems like virtually everyone from cities to countries to corporations is setting targets to reach “net-zero” emissions. Over 3,000 companies and countries representing 89% of global emissions have “committed” to reaching net-zero.

We put the word “committed” in quotes because that commitment can mean very different things to different people. Even the United Arab Emirates recently declared a net-zero pledge for the year 2050, but not before they increase oil and gas production by 20% first. Let me be green…but not yet.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Net-Zero Policies: Taking From the Poor and Giving to the Rich

Net-Zero Policies: Taking From the Poor and Giving to the Rich

It is too often overlooked in all the discussions about the “transition” to a net-zero emissions economy that the most consequential transition is that from democratic capitalism to feudal serfdom.

This is the conclusion of American demographer and “blue-collar Democrat” Joel Kotkin, who has highlighted that the supposedly well-intentioned green policies being adopted across the West come at enormous expense to the working- and middle-classes.

As Kotkin wrote in ‘Spiked’ earlier this year, “extreme climate measures have driven the loss of traditional blue-collar jobs in manufacturing, construction and energy, while other environmental regulations have boosted housing prices.”

Kotkin’s thesis is that the West is on the road to serfdom. Rather than maintaining our capitalist societies where a large, asset-owning middle-class underpin a stable democratic system, we are becoming stratified feudal societies.

Home and small business ownership are declining, especially among the young and the less well-off, a group of technocratic elites are establishing themselves as permanent rulers in the apparatus of the administrative state, and corporate oligarchs are coming to dominate both the economy and broader society.

Epoch Times Photo
People view artist Luke Jerram’s new ‘Floating Earth’ Debuts In Wigan, England, on Nov. 18, 2021. (Christopher Furlong/Getty Images)

This transition has been occurring for some time, but it has been accelerated by the COVID-19-inspired lockdowns and the zeal with which Western governments have thoughtlessly adopted net-zero emissions targets.

Both play out as an aggressive form of reverse Robin Hood asset stripping, taking from the poor and giving to the rich.

Australia is now officially committed to a net-zero emissions by 2050 target.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Wood for the Trees: rush to green hydrogen masks mammoth plans to wood-chip the forests

Wood for the Trees: rush to green hydrogen masks mammoth plans to wood-chip the forests

biomass, green hydrogen, logging, wood chips
Biomass projects entail wood chips. Image: @john_kinnander, Unsplash

Is green hydrogen yet another spin with catastrophic consequences for the environment? Sue Arnold looks behind the greenwash to find wide-scale plans for logging for wood-chips.

Dominic Perrottet and his new Treasurer, Matt Kean, enthusiastically unveiled their $3billion “world leading” green hydrogen strategy for NSW last month, with promises of $80 billion in private investment and more than 10,000 jobs created.

What the two politicians didn’t say was that NSW forests would be the source feedstock for the so-called “renewable energy”. Nor did they detail that this latest effort to convince the public their government is “serious” about net zero commitment, is in fact yet another massive money pit labelled “renewable energy”. A green light to the corporate cowboys waiting to cash in on the net zero train.

One of the first cabs off the green hydrogen rank is the old coal-fired Redbank Power Station near Singleton. It is now owned by Verdant Earth Technology, previously known as Hunter Energy. The project plans to convert the station into a 150-megawatt biomass plant to generate 1,00,000 MWh of green baseload power, equivalent to supplying 200,000 homes with net zero CO2 emissions.

Pending approvals, Verdant plans to be operational with 16 tonnes of hydrogen production per day by the end of 2023.

What exactly is biomass? ScienceDirect’s definition is useful:

Forest residues are a by-product from forest harvesting, which is a major source of biomass for energy. This includes thinning, cutting stands for timber or pulp, clearing lands for construction or other use that also yields tops and branches usable for bioenergy. On top, stands damaged by insects, diseases or fire can be an additional sources of biomass.

Killing trees is not curbing emissions

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Satirical video slices and dices deceit of governments’ “Net-Zero by 2050” COP-26 pledges

Satirical video slices and dices deceit of governments’ “Net-Zero by 2050” COP-26 pledges

Fact is, say scientists, that “Net-Zero by 2050” really means we’re “net-fucked by 2050.” —

CAUTION: Readers may find the word “fucked” in this piece offensive. Personally, I find the reference to “government deceit” far more disturbing.

“The latest satirical video from The Juice Media takes aim at humanity’s inadequate response to the climate emergency. Humanity is on a catastrophic global heating trajectory that will pass what scientists call the ‘net fucked by 2050’ point and is risking ‘irreversible chain reactions beyond our control’ just so billionaires can grow even richer. ‘Being honest isn’t an option for us. Which is why we’ve come up with the next best alternative: net-zero by 2050.’ No, that’s not today’s report out of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Glasgow, Scotland. It’s the latest Honest Government Ads satire video from the Juice Media. The Australian company has been producing boat-rocking political and social satire videos since 2008, and now they’ve got humanity’s woefully inadequate response to a potentially existential planetary emergency in their sardonic crosshairs; specifically, insidious ‘net-zero’ pledges that dangerously delay the immediate carbon emission reductions needed to avert a worst-case climate scenario.” —Common Dreams / The Juice Media

The Juice Media is an Australian company that produces contemporary political and social satire. The video series Honest Government Ads is a satirical take on Australian Government advertising. Each video targets a current social or political issue and highlights potential consequences of the Government’s position and policy on that issue.

My repost is presented in three segments:

  • First: Common Dreams’ abridged introduction to the video with my added subheadings and text highlighting. Excluded from my repost are copies of three tweets.
  • Second: my embedded 3:45-minute You Tube video of Australia’s Juice Media’s blistering satirical attack on governments’ “Net Zero by 2050” pledges pedalled at COP-26.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Janet Yellen Admits The “Net Zero” Grand Reset Price Tag Will Be $150 Trillion

Janet Yellen Admits The “Net Zero” Grand Reset Price Tag Will Be $150 Trillion

For years, the climate change lobby was laser-focused on just one aspect of the “climate change” crusade: the end – which supposedly is some world where the temperatures no longer rise due to fossil fuel emissions (because we now live in a world of global warming as scientists agree, not to be confused with the global cooling hypothesis that emerged in the 1970s, when many were even warning of a new ice age) justifying the means. Meanwhile the “means”, or the final cost to taxpayers of all that endless, tedious virtual signaling, was almost never touched upon for a reason – as we first explained three weeks ago, the bill for getting the world from point A to that mythical, utopic point B, was so high, it would be double global GDP.

For those who missed it, here is an excerpt of what we wrote back on October 14, shortly after Bank of America published the definitive compendium on climate change and the coming Net Zero (i.e., great reset) world, and which we discussed in depth:

“while it is handy to have a centralized compendium of the data, a 5 minute google search can provide all the answers that are “accepted” dogma by the green lobby. But while we don’t care about the charts, that cheat sheets, or the propaganda, what we were interested in was the bottom line – how much would this green utopia cost, because if the “net zero”, “ESG”, “green” narrative is pushed so hard 24/7, you know it will cost a lot.

Turns out it does. A lot, lot.

Responding rhetorically to the key question, “how much will it cost?”, BofA cuts to the chase and writes $150 trillion over 30 years – some $5 trillion in annual investments – amounting to twice current global GDP!

COP-26 is a global energy embarrassment

COP-26 is a global energy embarrassment

For 26 futile years, the net-zero maniacs have wasted fuel, energy, and taxpayers’ money to bite the hands that provide their food, energy, welfare, and public-sector jobs.

Led by E.U. and AUKUS dreamers, they destroy reliable energy from coal, oil, nuclear, gas, and hydro while forcing us to subsidize net-negative dreams like solar, wind, wave-power, CCUS, hot rocks, pumped hydro, and hydrogen.  All such speculative ventures should be funded by speculators, not taxpayers.

COP-Out-26 illustrates to the realists of China, Russia, India, and Brazil that the West has lost its marbles and is in terminal decline.  For Scott Morrison to surrender Australia to these green wolves betrays an army of miners, farmers, truckies, and workers in primary, secondary, and tertiary industries that support him and his Canberra pack.

The fakery of COP-Out-26 is well illustrated by the provision of diesel generators to recharge the batteries of 26 electric cars provided for show in Glasgow.  But that’s OK “because the diesels are run on recycled chip fat.”  Horses and covered wagons would be more reliable and appropriate, and dried horse manure could cook their fake meat on their green, chip-fired barbeques.

Neither E.U. nor AUKUS green dreamers can run their world on energy plans drafted by neurotic schoolgirls, clueless princes, deluded accountants like Ross Garnaut, and serial climate alarmists like David Attenborough.

China loves Net-Zero, using its growing coal power to manufacture the wind turbines, solar panels, electric engines, and rare earth batteries for the woke world.But the subsidy tap feeding green energy development in the Western world will run dry.  Fake energy will fade away, leaving a continent of jobless people with silent mills, refineries, and factories…

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Net zero policies are ’emperor’s new clothes,’ academics warn

Net zero policies are ’emperor’s new clothes,’ academics warn

factory pollution
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

Net zero targets are a “fantasy” that often just protect “business as usual,” a leading expert in environment and sustainability has said.

Dr. James Dyke, Assistant Director of the Global Systems Institute at the University of Exeter, criticized net zero targets as a “great idea in principle” but which “help perpetuate a belief in technological salvation and diminish the sense of urgency surrounding the need to curb emissions now.”

The excoriating critique is published in “Negotiating Climate Change in Crisis,” a new essay volume on the  featuring prominent social scientists and humanities scholars from around the world, co-edited by the University of Exeter Business School’s Professor Steffen Boehm.

In a chapter titled “Why net zero policies do more harm than good,” Dr. Dyke and his co-authors Dr. Wolfgang Knorr and Professor Sir Robert Watson argue that the discourse around net zero hinges on deploying potentially dangerous ‘fairytale’ technologies such as carbon capture.

Their essay looks at how projecting a future with more trees was first used by the US to “in effect offset the burning of coal, oil and gas now.”

They go on to argue that the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 degree Celsius emissions target allowed “untested carbon dioxide removal mechanisms” to be included in climate-economic modeling.

They describe Bioenergy Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) as a “savior technology,” saying “the mere prospect of  and storage gave policy makers a way out of making the much-needed immediate cuts to greenhouse gas emissions.”

The authors say: “It has been estimated that BECCS could demand an area of land approaching twice the size of India. How will that be achieved at the same time as feeding eight to 10 billion people around the middle of the century, or without destroying native vegetation and biodiversity?

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

EU fails to reduce dependency on fossil fuels amid soaring energy bills

EU fails to reduce dependency on fossil fuels amid soaring energy bills, 

As the global energy crisis intensifies, the EU is renewing its commitment to fossil fuels instead of investing in green energy

European Commissioner for Energy Kadri Simson speaks about European solutions to the rise of energy prices for businesses and consumers at the European Parliament, in Strasbourg, France October 6, 2021.

|

Jean-Francois Badias/Pool via REUTERS

As Europeans suffer surging energy prices, the EU is renewing its commitment to costly natural gas instead of investing in cheap renewables, it has been revealed.

A new investigation from Investigate Europe has found that lawmakers have paved the way for new cross-border pipelines, while EU auditors have highlighted a huge investment gap in green energy.

Since the beginning of 2021, wholesale gas prices in Europe have soared by more than 300%. As natural gas is often used to generate electricity alongside heat, consumers have felt the full blow of the increase. In Spain, electric bills have risen by a third so far this year. In Italy, they are expected to jump by 40% in the next quarter.

“Today’s situation underlines that we have to end our dependence on foreign, volatile fossil fuels as soon as possible,” Kadri Simson, the EU commissioner for energy, recently declared.

Natural gas accounts for a quarter of the EU’s power mix, second only to oil. As of 2019, the majority of natural gas comes from Russia (41%) and, to a lesser extent, Norway (16%). Although it offers a lower-carbon alternative to coal, it contains high levels of methane, which contributes to global warming.

The European Commission itself has admitted that its gas consumption is not compatible with its pledge to become climate neutral by 2050 and slash emissions by 55% before 2030. Its own assessment concluded that gas consumption must be “reduced to a fraction of current levels” to reach net-zero goals.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Here is The Hidden $150 Trillion Agenda Behind The “Crusade” Against Climate Change

Here is The Hidden $150 Trillion Agenda Behind The “Crusade” Against Climate Change

We now live in a world, where bizarro headlines such as the ones below, have become a daily if not hourly occurrence:

  • *TREASURY TO STUDY IMPACT OF CLIMATE ON HOUSEHOLDS, COMMUNITIES
  • *TREASURY LAUNCHES EFFORT ON CLIMATE-RELATED FINANCIAL RISKS
  • *BRAINARD: CLIMATE-SCENARIO ANALYSIS WILL HELP IDENTIFY RISKS
  • *BRAINARD: CLIMATE CHANGE COULD HAVE PROFOUND ECONOMIC EFFECTS
  • *MESTER: FED LOOKS AT CLIMATE CHANGE FROM VIEW OF RISKS TO BANKS
  • *FED IS TAKING THE RIGHT COURSE ON MONITORING CLIMATE CHANGE
  • *FED SHOULD CONSIDER CLIMATE-CHANGE RISK TO FINANCIAL SYSTEM

Now, in case someone is still confused, none of these institutions, and not a single of the erudite officials running them, give a rat’s ass about the climate, about climate change risks, or about the fate of future generations of Americans (and certainly not about the rising water level sweeping away their massive waterfront mansions): if they did, total US debt and underfunded liabilities wouldn’t be just shy of $160 trillion.

So what is going on, and why is it that virtually every topic these days has to do with climate change, “net zero”, green energy and ESG?

The reason – as one would correctly suspect – is money. Some $150 trillion of it.

Earlier today, Bank of America published one of its massive “Thematic Research” tomes, this time covering the “Transwarming” World, and serves as a massive primer to today’s Net Zero reality. The report (which is available to all ZH pro subs) is actually a must read, interesting, chock-full of data and charts such as these…

… and handy cheat sheets…

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

UK Energy Crisis Shows Danger of Net Zero Emissions Policies: Aussie Senator

UK Energy Crisis Shows Danger of Net Zero Emissions Policies: Aussie Senator

The push for Australia to legislate a net zero emissions target has spurred discord from some government officials who firmly believe the climate policy could harm Australia’s energy security and industry amid the UK’s own unravelling energy crisis.

Australia has faced criticism for not setting a 2050 net zero target—a goal already undertaken by many of the world’s developed countries, including the United States and the United Kingdom.

But Nationals Senator Matt Canavan suggested that the UK’s unfolding energy crisis is a direct consequence of its “net zero” emissions plans via a shift to so-called renewables and banning coal power.

“The UK has been trying to reach net zero. They’ve passed legislation to do that,” Canavan told 2GB radio. “They’re not there yet, but they’re on the path. And already down that path, they are seeing a situation where industry is being asked to shut down just to keep the lights on.”

Over the last 50 years, the UK has weaned itself of coal generation and become more dependent on gas as its primary source of electricity generation—much of which is imported from Europe.

Further, heavy investment into renewables over the last decade has also boosted wind output, contributing to 24 percent of total generation in 2020.

Epoch Times Photo
The United Kingdom’s coal, gas, nuclear and renewable energy consumption from 1965 to 2019. Source: Our World in Data. (The Epoch Times)

However, the UK has recently experienced a 400 percent spike in gas prices, and a 250 percent price rise for electricity after a confluence of unforeseen factors throttled the country’s supply—including record low wind levels, a fire at a major France-UK electricity interconnector, nuclear plant outages, and a gas shortfall sweeping Europe.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Climate scientists: concept of net zero is a dangerous trap

Sometimes realisation comes in a blinding flash. Blurred outlines snap into shape and suddenly it all makes sense. Underneath such revelations is typically a much slower-dawning process. Doubts at the back of the mind grow. The sense of confusion that things cannot be made to fit together increases until something clicks. Or perhaps snaps.

Collectively we three authors of this article must have spent more than 80 years thinking about climate change. Why has it taken us so long to speak out about the obvious dangers of the concept of net zero? In our defence, the premise of net zero is deceptively simple – and we admit that it deceived us.

The threats of climate change are the direct result of there being too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. So it follows that we must stop emitting more and even remove some of it. This idea is central to the world’s current plan to avoid catastrophe. In fact, there are many suggestions as to how to actually do this, from mass tree planting, to high tech direct air capture devices that suck out carbon dioxide from the air.


The current consensus is that if we deploy these and other so-called “carbon dioxide removal” techniques at the same time as reducing our burning of fossil fuels, we can more rapidly halt global warming. Hopefully around the middle of this century we will achieve “net zero”. This is the point at which any residual emissions of greenhouse gases are balanced by technologies removing them from the atmosphere.

Climeworks factory with tractor in foreground.
A facility for capturing carbon dioxide from air on the roof of a waste incinerating plant in Hinwil, Switzerland July 18, 2017. This is one of the handful of demonstrator projects currently in operation. REUTERS/Arnd Wiegmann

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Greed and Its Offsets

Greed and Its Offsets

Farmland shouldn’t be used to expiate the carbon guilt of the rich, argues Simon Fairlie.

Bill Gates’s recently published book on climate change tells us little that anyone who is averagely well read on the subject didn’t know anyway.1 As one might expect, he advocates technological fixes, most of which have been on the drawing board for a decade or two. The book has few references and often fails to examine all sides of a contentious issue. On certain matters it is plain wrong: for example when Gates states that the methane which cattle “burp and fart out every year has the same warming effect as 2 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide”. If he had done his homework he would know that the equation between methane and CO2 doesn’t work like that.

In fact the book is not really about global warming at all, it is about Bill Gates. Penguin would never have published it, and Radio 4 would not have serialised it, if it hadn’t been by him. It is written throughout in the first person, and begins with this mea culpa:

“I’m aware that I’m an imperfect messenger on climate change. I own big houses and fly in private planes – in fact I took one to Paris for the climate conference – so who am I to lecture anyone on the environment?”

At first sight this is a confession to forestall criticism, the equivalent of an ordinary mortal coyly admitting that they fly to Spain once a year or eat more than their planetary share of chocolate. But on the next page he writes:

“In 2020 I started buying sustainable jet fuel [sic] and will fully offset my family’s emissions in 2021. For our non-aviation emissions, I’m buying offsets through a company that runs a facility that removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Olduvai IV: Courage
In progress...

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Click on image to purchase @ FriesenPress