Net Zero is a con. I agree. But that's not entirely my point. If net zero is what the country is supposedly aiming for, whether in the UK or here in NZ, then even under these terms then continuing to explore for oil, or reduce incentives for BEVs etc, it won't work
The con isn't zero. It's the "net", because all of these "nets" rely on 1) planting forests - which is of dubious benefit 2) using biofuels 3) CCS totally unproven.
But if instead of actually taking action in regard to the climate, he proposes continued use of mining coal ,then he's an dangerous idiot. Net zero does not "Damage to poorer end of society" That's a lie. The only thing that damages the poorer end of society is the government and control that runs that society. If renewable energy is more expensive (though we know that compared to the existential cost of global lwarmig that's definitely not true) then any government or society worth its salt can deal with it, insulation, energy efficiency, better public transport, progressive taxes and taxes on wealth etc.
Are there lots of poor people now ? Of course, but did the wind power in the North Sea make them poor, of course it damn well didn't, - it's the UK's hollowed out industrial base, austerity and neoliberalism and Tory and Labour misrule and anti-social behaviour. Don't blame looking after the planet for our social problems, that's absurd.
Responses
« Back to index | View thread »