The Case Against Net Zero – a Third Update
Unachievable Disastrous Pointless
POSTED ON 08 JUN 24
BY ROBIN GUENIER
In October 2008, Parliament passed the Climate Change Act requiring the UK government to ensure that by 2050 ‘the net UK carbon account’ was reduced to a level at least 80% lower than that of 1990. (‘carbon account’ refers to CO2 emissions and ‘other targeted greenhouse gas emissions’.) Only five MPs voted against it. Then in 2019, by secondary legislation and without serious debate, Parliament increased the 80% reduction requirement to 100% – thereby creating the Net Zero policy.i
Unfortunately, it’s a policy that’s unachievable, potentially disastrous and in any case pointless – and, importantly, that’s the case even if it’s accepted that human carbon dioxide emissions are contributing to a rise in global temperature.
1. It’s unachievable.
Many vehicles and machines (used for example in mining, mineral processing, agriculture, construction, heavy transportation, commercial shipping and aviation, the military and emergency services) and products (for example cement (and concrete), high-grade steel, plastics – all needed for the construction of renewables – fertiliser, pharmaceuticals, anaesthetics, lubricants, solvents, paints, adhesives, insecticides, insulation, tyres and asphalt) essential to life and wellbeing require the combustion of fossil fuels or are made from oil derivatives; there are no easily deployable, commercially viable alternatives. Our civilisation is based on fossil fuels; something that’s unlikely to change for a long time.ii
https://cliscep.com/2024/06/08/the-case-against-net-zero-a-third-update/
