Floods, droughts, hurricanes, bushfires, coral bleaching, algae blooms off South Australia, you name it, rascally climate change is behind it. It is now established science that almost all extreme weather-related events in recent decades are due to climate change which, in turn, is due to burning fossil fuels and other human and bovine activity.
There were very few extreme weather-related events before climate change. There will be few extreme weather-related events once we have achieved net zero and beyond. We are living through a unique era of multitudinous extreme weather-related events, proving without doubt that achieving and then bettering net zero is the greatest moral challenge of our time. We don’t meet it, we’re dead. Quod erat demonstrandum.
I was thinking about how this modern delusion, only modestly caricatured, has infected minds when perusing the results of a poll of 40 so-called “top economists” conducted by The Economics Society of Australia. The economists were given a menu of answers to choose from in response to some loaded questions on the power supply. As follows:
♦ What do you believe is the most important and second most important of three goals in transforming Australia’s energy system? Achieving net zero by 2050 or ensuring reliability of the power supply or minimising the cost of generation and distribution.
♦ What would be the optimal mix of energy resources in 2040 among coal, gas, renewables and nuclear?
♦ What should be the policy instrument employed to achieve the optimal energy mix? Cap and trade carbon pricing or firm commitments not to extend the life of coal plants or subsidies for preferred forms of energy or an extension of the safeguard mechanism to most industries and firms or tax concessions for preferred forms of energy or direct government funding of preferred forms of energy.
It is without surprise, in these weather-threatening times, that 18 of the 40 economists polled put achieving Net Zero as the most important goal. Fifteen have no coal at all in the optimal mix by 2040. Over half have renewables accounting for 75% or more generation. Risibly, Professor John Quiggin (Queensland Uni) has 95% renewables. On average, across all of those polled, renewables contribute 69% to the optimal mix by 2040. Forget about the reliability of supply if that average came about, never mind the outliers. On my count only 8 contemplate nuclear in the optimal mix.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Ruth King
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, http://www.ruthfullyyours.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.
