“Net zero” is predicated on the assumption that rising carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from burning fossil fuels cause “dangerous” global warming.
There is no physical evidence to support that assumption.
Rising CO2 in the atmosphere is produced, in part, by rising temperatures. That’s because the ocean holds about 50 times the CO2 in the atmosphere. [emphasis, links added]
Cold ocean water contains CO2 more than warm water. Rising temperatures cause some of that CO2 to leave the water and go into the atmosphere.
In one sense, “Net zero” has cause and effect backward.
Planet Earth is now in an interglacial period. Global temperatures are about 10°C cooler than in much of the past 600 million years during which life thrived.
So global warming is not so “dangerous.”
“Net zero” aims to remove CO2 from the atmosphere by carbon capture and storage. That is, capture CO2 emissions at the source and send it via pipeline to underground storage areas—a very expensive process.
Electric vehicles are a spawn of “net zero.” Electric vehicles (EVs) have short ranges, require long refueling times, and require almost twice the copper, cobalt, and lithium as regular vehicles.
Hence, CO2 emissions from mining and manufacturing are about twice that of vehicles run by fossil fuels.
“Net zero” also aims to reduce the use of fossil fuels.
Hence the rise of electricity production by wind and solar generation, both of which cannot respond to supply and demand, require fossil fuel backup, require huge expanses of land, destroy habitat, kill millions of birds and bats, and require the production of millions of batteries.
It is simply impossible to provide enough energy storage to make renewables reliable.
A better solution would be to build many small nuclear reactors to produce electricity.
From H. Sterling Burnett:
A large-scale power grid consists of two segments: baseload power and peaking power. Baseload power is the minimum amount of energy needed for normal daily operations, which requires a fairly constant flow of power. Coal, nuclear, hydro, and to a lesser but growing extent natural gas have satisfied the country’s baseload for the past century because they operate full-time, providing a steady flow of power.
Peaking power is the additional power needed when the system is faced with unusual amounts of demand, as in July and August in Texas or Arizona, when air conditioner use soars, and in December and January in Minnesota or North Dakota, when the furnaces kick in. Natural gas has commonly served to provide peaking power because it can be cycled on and off quickly, as needed. (link)
Bottom line: “Net zero” will have no effect on climate, but it will have very high costs and drastically reduce our standard of living.
Guest post submitted by WryHeat
The atmospheric proportion of CO2 is 0.04%
Of that, manmade is c.3.8%
So there is only a vanishingly small amount of manmade CO2.
c.70% of the planet’s manmade CO2 comes from nations whose fixed policy debars significant decarbonisation.
Net Zero might as well try turning Lead into Gold and Water into Wine then to achieve anything as ridiculous as Net Zero
We need to remember that Al Gore’s original Inconvenient Truth showed that on a geological time scale temperature and carbon dioxide levels followed each other. What he wasn’t smart enough to know is that the temperature lead the carbon dioxide level, so temperature was the controlling factor. I’m sure that has been pointed out to him since but climate alarmists simply ignore anything that doesn’t fit their narrative. As the article pointed out, as the oceans warm they release carbon dioxide. The same is true of bogs and mud flats.
Net zero is like nailing a blancmange to a barn door.
Almost impossible and completely pointless.
My family members always say that I am wasting my time here
at net, but I know I am getting knowledge everyday by
reading thes fastidious articles or reviews.
whoah this blog is wonderful i really like reading your posts.
Keep up the great work! You recognize, lots of people are searching round for this info,
you could help them greatly.
My brother recommended I might like this blog.
He was totally right. This post truly made my day. You can not imagine simply how much time I had spent for this information! Thanks!
Nice post. I learn something totally new and challenging on websites I stumbleupon on a daily basis.
It will always be interesting to read through articles from other authors and use a
little something from other web sites.
Having read this I thought it was extremely enlightening.
I appreciate you taking the time and energy
to put this information together. I once again find myself personally spending a lot of time both reading and posting comments.
But so what, it was still worthwhile!