The UN has called for world leaders to declare a climate emergency. For hundreds of millions in the developing world, this agenda is threatening continuing energy poverty.
A declaration of climate emergency (as per the UN’s emission reduction requirements) will dent the developmental goals and increase energy prices.
Besides, it will also result in the taxpayer-funded transition to a less reliable energy system, a recipe for a potential economic collapse.
A precursor to the COP26 meeting in the UK next year
Speaking at the Climate Ambition Summit to mark the 5th anniversary of the Paris Agreement, UN chief Antonio Guterres implored, “Today, I call on all leaders worldwide to declare a State of Climate Emergency in their countries until carbon neutrality is reached.”
He further clarified that “We need meaningful cuts now to reduce global emissions by 45 percent by 2030 compared with 2010 levels. This must be fully reflected in the revised and strengthened Nationally Determined Contributions that the Paris signatories are obliged to submit well before COP26 next year in Glasgow.”
UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson committed 11.6 billion pounds of the UK’s overseas aid to support green technology. Pakistan’s prime minister Imran Khan pledged not to build any new coal plants in the country.
Support for the UN leader’s call also came from the Chinese President Xi Jinping. He said China will cut down carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP by over 65% by 2030, in comparison to 2005.
Given its status as the leading coal consumer and empowerer of fossil fuel technology in other developing countries, it remains to be seen how President Xi will reconcile his 65% commitment with Beijing’s fossil ambitions and energy-intensive industries.
Speaking at the same event (virtually), the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that India will reduce emission intensity by 21% in comparison to the 2005 levels.
Earlier this year, Modi had indicated that the country is aiming to reduce carbon footprint by 30% to 35% and increasing the use of natural gas, without setting a deadline for the same.
Even as per its ambitious scenario to reduce emissions, India will not be able to achieve a 45 percent reduction in CO2 emissions compared to 2010 levels without compromising on its aggressive energy policy that has enabled the country to achieve an energy surplus in recent years.
Studies on the relationship between GDP and energy growth indicate that “It is very difficult to reconcile reductions in carbon dioxide emissions with continued economic growth, especially in poor and medium rich countries,” as most of the world’s primary energy comes from fossil fuels.
A call for a 45 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emission will be suicidal for the energy sectors in the developing world, most of which depend on coal, oil, and Natural gas.
84% of the world’s primary energy comes from Fossil fuels (2019) and just 11% coming from Renewables.
Though the share of fossil fuels in global energy consumption may appear as reducing by a small margin each year, the absolute value of consumption keeps increasing each year.
Despite the rapid addition of renewable technology globally, the year-on-year change in primary energy consumption value for both renewable and fossil sources were almost the same in 2019, i.e., an increase consumption of around 960 TWh for both the sources.
The actual fossil fuel consumption has technically increased and will continue to increase in the future, as developing economies are wary of falling back into the dark ages of energy poverty.
Riding on the renewable energy myth
A developing nation’s precaution with green transition has a reason. Guterres claimed that “Renewable energy is getting less expensive with every passing day.”
But the claim is disputed, at least as per the current state of renewable technology, their backup mechanisms, and the evidence from the existing green grids.
Data from renewable energy dominated states like California and from countries like Germany and the UK show that excessive investment and dependency on renewable energy has actually resulted in increased electricity prices.
Renewable energy like wind and solar, which in many instances is installed with subsidies from taxpayer’s money, ends up charging the taxpayer more for their electricity use, thus technically costing the taxpayer not once but twice.
Read rest at GWPF
How about if the United Nations went totaly for Renewbiles lets see them use renewbiles but in Moscow not New York
How many square miles of Australian farmland will need to be covered in solar panels (complete with chemicals no farmer here would be allowed to spread on the land even in minute amounts) to replace just one coal-fired power station?
And that’s in hot, sunny Australia. Added to that, too, is the pumped hydro storage needed to convert that solar electricity dictated by the availability of the sunshine into as-needed power for the nation at large.
The UN has found a climate hero in India who has come up wit an engineering innovation to avoid burning agricultural waste. The UN says that it reduces emissions and moderates climate change.
https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/12/17/climate-action-pyrolysis-of-agricultural-waste/