NET ZERO
Is Net Zero even possible?
Net Zero insists that we rapidly eliminate fossil fuels, replacing them with “renewable” energy such as wind and solar by 2050. The goal is to have our carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions balance measures that draw CO2 out of the air, meaning that we will cause no net increase of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Yet as explained by econimist Robert Lyman, Net Zero is not possible by 2050 or any time near that. We have spent over $14 trillion worldwide on emission reduction programs since 2015 with no effect on GHG emissions. Putting more funds to achieving this unreachable goal will only succeed in leading us to poverty.
The So-Called Renewables
Why are we being told that solar and wind are a "booming" industry? Although wind and solar production is growing, we need to put it into perspective. In reality, they form a small portion of Canada’s total power supply, as seen in the graph below. To think that they can replace conventional power any time soon is hopelessly naïve.
And when it comes to power generation, the picture is even more dismal. For instance, 2077 wind turbines would be needed to provide 9,098,136 megawatt-hours of electricity per year compared to a single nuclear power plant that can provide the same electricity. This can be seen in the graphic below.
Robert Lyman explains that “spending $1 million on utility-scale wind turbines or solar panels will each, over 30 years of operation, produce about 50 million kilowatt-hours (kWh) – while an equivalent $1 million spent on a shale rig produces enough natural gas over 30 years to generate over 300 million kWh.” That is a 6-fold times greater power from conventional sources for the same cost. Do we have that money to spare?
A 2021 study by Simon Michaux of the Finnish Geological Survey studied the capacity renewable energy would require to replace fossil fuels worldwide. Their findings include:
-
The additional capacity needed is about 37,671 terawatt hours. This would require 594 new power plants (five times as many as are currently in place).
-
For electric vehicles, we would require 282.6 billion tonnes of lithium beyond current global lithium reserves.
-
Battery storage would require five times global nickel reserves, 11 times global cobalt reserves, and four times global lithium reserves.
These transitions are unprecedented in history, and should only be undertaken if the advantages of the new energy source make up the cost. Yet clearly, they do not.
Next Step...
The Science
What scientists really say about the climate
