Net Zero is Coming Apart Before Our Very Eyes

The collectivist Net Zero political project is starting to come apart before our very eyes. Making everyone poor, cold, hungry and confined to small living territories was always a tall political ask, but decades of green virtue-signalling, backed by a ‘settled’ version of science that cannot be debated in polite society, has kept the show on the road. Writing in the Daily Telegraph last Wednesday, Sherelle Jacobs said there comes a time when the sacred mythology that underpins an orthodoxy simply crumbles. She was writing about liberalism in general, and the pieties behind mass illegal migration, but she could easily have been referring to Net Zero.

The recent decision by the European Union to allow the sale of internal combustion cars after 2035 was a small sign that reality is starting to intrude on those overseeing the destruction of Europe’s industrial base. There was a fig leaf in the announcement to hide the blushes suggesting that the cars must be run on carbon captured from the air and mixed with hydrogen produced from ‘green’ energy. As always with such hypothetical green technologies, one is inclined to discount those based on pure wishful thinking. The U.K. is still committed to banning the sale of internal combustion cars after 2030, but developments in Europe may produce a rethink.

The hard politics behind this decision is that Germany has enjoyed 70 years of unprecedented prosperity based on heavy industry reliant on cheap energy, recently secured from Russia. Its car industry is one of the most innovative and competitive in the world, and faces near destruction in the move to battery cars. This fate of course is likely to be shared by most European countries including the U.K., with China monopolising both the production of electric cars and the refining of vital minerals.

Writing recently in the Daily Sceptic, Andrew Montford, the Deputy Director of Net Zero Watch, said that inhabitants of the Westminster Village were happy to hype up fears of climate purgatory and fib about the cost of the renewable road to redemption. “Once the public understands the depth and extent of the deception, and the damage done to the economy and the prospects for our children, the trickery over Covid is going to look decidedly peripheral,” he added.

There have been few more egregious Net Zero deceptions than the suggestion that wind and solar power is far cheaper than fossil fuel. This canard has finally been put to bed with the recent news that Net Zero Watch has established through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request that Contract for Difference (CfD) instruments are little more than taxpayer-funded guarantees that no matter the price of electricity, wind farms will always win.

Recent auctions have seen wind farms drive down the price at which they say they will supply electricity to the grid. This price is then guaranteed with a CfD under which the taxpayer picks up the tab if the wholesale electricity price drops lower. If the price rises past the guarantee, the wind farm pays the excess back to the taxpayer. That is the theory, and it is the basis of countless headlines in mainstream media and academia. “Offshore wind is now so cheap it could pay back money to consumers,” reported Imperial College in 2019. The reality, of course, is different.

Net Zero Watch says its recent Energy Department FOI “revealed that offshore wind farms and other generators are under no obligation whatsoever to take up their CfD options”. The Government has no power to enforce them. When electricity prices soar, as numerous restrictions on fossil fuels make likely, the wind farms ignore their options, and sell their power on the open market. While this racket continues, the British taxpayer pays total annual renewable subsidies of around £13 billion for a power source that still only accounts for barely 5% of total U.K. energy needs. Meanwhile, huge costs are incurred in providing energy back-up to compensate for the irregular nature of renewables. As more renewables come on stream, the more costly back-up is required.

Elections are always tricky when attempting mass collectivisation projects like Net Zero. The science can be settled and admirable ecological objectives can be hijacked, but when the electorate twigs that it is their holiday, their car and their beef steak that is under threat, they can cut up rough. Last Sunday’s ‘Berlin Climate Neutrality by 2030’ referendum failed to secure the 608,000 votes to pass, despite a massive and well-funded campaign by media, celebrities and activists. Reporting on the results, the German website No Tricks Zone noted that Berliners had been harassed for months by activists blocking traffic. Berliners were said to have seen the folly of the initiative, “and the high costs it would entail politically and financially”.

The German online publication Pleiteticker noted that members of the upper middle classes had declared war on the lower middle classes with their destructive climate measures. For years, these groups have been spreading their ideas “in a self-righteous, arrogant and sometimes aggressive manner”. It suggested that outside the Berlin political bubble and other urban feel-good oases, there is not much support for these causes.

Certainly there doesn’t seem to be much support for giving up food. Over in the Netherlands, recent farming protests were translated into spectacular electoral gains in the upper Senate for the farmer’s citizen movement (BBB). The Dutch Government plans to reduce nitrogen emissions by massively cutting livestock farming and buying up thousands of farms. The Netherlands is a massive food exporter, the industry being worth a reported £80 billion. Green activists are increasingly targeting food production, using the argument that nitrogen fertiliser is emitting nitrous oxide into the atmosphere.

David Legates is a Professor of Climatology at the University of Delaware, and he notes that if you want to stop N2O in the atmosphere, you have to stop agriculture. In the atmosphere, the gas is just 334 parts per billion. Because of margin of error considerations, Legates observes, climate models do not actually calculate any warming effect.

Guardian activist George Monbiot recently called for an end to animal farming. It is difficult to know when this madness will end. The academic economist Ralph Schoellhammer recently noted in an article in Newsweek that climate activism isn’t about the planet – it’s about the boredom of the bourgeoisie. It might be argued that pampered and indulged elites have had it easy for so long that they have lost all track of understanding how food, warmth, shelter and security from the ravages of nature are both produced and secured.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.

Subscribe
Notify of

To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.

Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

25 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
FerdIII
3 years ago

Delingpole and others early on understood quite well that the Eco-Greenism is just another totalitarianism. Climate Fascism is just the bastard offspring of Nazism+Communism. The anti-science of these idiots is astounding. Nitrogen and Plant Food which allows life, are now toxins? Farmland is bad? The cow is to be exterminated? No milk, beef, or other meat products? Plant food causes weather but not Gaia’s 95% emission, just the 5% of the human emissions of the 400 parts per million?

If you eliminated humans, all civilisation, all cows, all farmland, not a god damn thing would change with the weather, or the 4 seasons. Not a fracking bloody thing. Little brains in very small people who wish to be dictators. We are ruled by retarded midgets. F’em all.

Jon Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  FerdIII

We certainly have a fight on our hands..
And a fight it shall be.

Castorp
Castorp
3 years ago
Reply to  FerdIII

They are not retarded. They are evil psychopaths.

ebygum
3 years ago
Reply to  FerdIII

Absolutely…..I haven’t worn a balaclava since my gran knitted me one in the 50’s..but I will don one again if I have to! LOL!

One of Neil Olivers’s best monologues…last Saturday…..(from @ 7 mins in)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBPcDcwK20o

RTSC
RTSC
3 years ago
Reply to  ebygum

I might invest in a burkha. That will make me untouchable…..protected species don’cha know.

huxleypiggles
3 years ago
Reply to  ebygum

I have just checked ebay and full face balaclavas cost between £3.50 – £5. Various colours so everyone can be accommodated.

Welshp
Welshp
3 years ago
Reply to  FerdIII

Bravo

varmint
3 years ago

NET ZERO = IMPOVERISMENT. ———-An unsuspecting public could never imagine in a million years that their own government would want to impoverish them. —–They ask WHY? Why would they want to impoverish us all? Surely it is total nonsense and that people who say that are all just conspiracy theorists. ———–Well, there is indeed a conspiracy, but that conspiracy is on YOU.—— Everything that is useful to in this life is to be removed. It will cost you more and more each year simply to have less of everything. Cheap energy is being removed. Your car is being removed, Your central heating is being removed. Your meat is being removed. Your ability to travel is being removed. Basically your standard of living is being taken away, and WHY?— To fight climate change.————— But since the UK is only 1% of the emissions of CO2 that are alleged to be causing it what is the big rush? Why does it all have to be done by 2050 when most of the rest of the world is not also doing that? ———That is where the politics steps in. The politics of Sustainable Development, which wants the wealthy west to stop using the… Read more »

RTSC
RTSC
3 years ago
Reply to  varmint

Correct. It’s the UN’s method of creating “a fair world” – level down the developed western economies to the poverty levels of the undeveloped.

huxleypiggles
3 years ago
Reply to  varmint

And running alongside all this is the depopulation agenda. Poorer people will be sicker people. A poor country will no longer be able to support even a piss poor organisation like rNHS.

Net Zero = Nil humanity.

Lockdown Sceptic
3 years ago

Sadly, despite being the most Eurosceptic country in Europe, our Government follow EU rules to the letter. Germany, supposedly the most Europhile country, breaks the same rules more than any other country whenever it suits.

The same is true for the Climate con. They want to introduce a £100 charge for anyone using a gas boiler

****
Monday 3rd April 11am to 12pm  
Yellow Freedom Boards 
Junction Broad Lane & 
A3095/A322 Bagshot Road 
Bracknell RG12 9RA

JohnK
3 years ago

At the moment, we are facing a batch of re-announcements for many things, by the usual suspects. Lot’s of local elections in May, of course.

That said, the latest one was to do with the concept of energy security. As with lots of issues, there is no shortage of obsessives, and single issue organisations. Setting aside the panic of alleged human input to natural climate variation, there is no real shortage of stored energy that can be extracted, in addition to developing renewable schemes. E.g. this oil field might be useful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosebank_oil_and_gas_field No shortage of cash for Scotland there. And as most know, there is still a lot of coal underground.

Not that I’m against the concept of using renewable sources, especially local ones. A couple of decades ago I had a solar hot water system installed in my place, and went for a PV electric one nine years ago, under the Feed-in Tariff scheme. It has been a good investment personally, especially given the import day rate price hikes recently, and the fact that the generation export rate is contractually linked to RPI each year, until May 2024.

RTSC
RTSC
3 years ago

” Elections are always tricky when attempting mass collectivisation projects like Net Zero.” Which is why the Globalists are imposing it through Supranational Organisations which don’t have to concern themselves with the awkward business of getting a mandate. If one of their tame puppet Prime Ministers and Presidents is voted out, they have a replacement ready to step into the breach – providing the electoral system deprives the electorate of any real choice. Which is why the Dutch Farmers and the rioting French have the right ideas for their respective countries. In the Netherlands, the Dutch could break the electoral system with a new party opposed to the lunacy. Watch this space. In France, they can’t so they’re taking direct action. Also, watch this space. In the UK, it is incredibly difficult to use the electoral system but not impossible. The tipping point, where an insurgent party with around 15% of the vote could shatter one of the Globalists’ Parties, tends to focus minds. And there is also the option of (non-violent) direct action, which we are seeing in London and various cities/towns where the Councils are attempting to impose 15 minute ghettos. The electorate needs to send a very… Read more »

BurlingtonBertie
3 years ago
Reply to  RTSC

Reform is just another branch of the Uniparty. Richard Tice is a bought & paid for shill. They are an illusion of democracy. Only by voting for an independent will the uniparty be broken.

ebygum
3 years ago

The brilliant Geoff Buys Cars nails it…If the rest of the world..who are not going down the electric route, buy cars…they will all come from China…while the ‘big’ European names go under….
Its all so very obvious..why don’t they see it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW969byCfO4

ebygum
3 years ago
Reply to  ebygum

….also did you know it was energy security day today? LOL! You will if you watch the clip!! Excellent….

JohnK
3 years ago
Reply to  ebygum

Quite a few of them already from China, e.g. the MG range, including the all-electric ones.

MTF
MTF
3 years ago

When electricity prices soar, as numerous restrictions on fossil fuels make likely, the wind farms ignore their options, and sell their power on the open market. While this racket continues, the British taxpayer pays total annual renewable subsidies of around £13 billion for a power source

The “subsidy” is primarily the negotiated fixed price. So it won’t be a subsidy if producers opt out and decide to sell their electricity on the open market. What is really significant is that the latest agreed fixed price is around £45 per MWH. So the producers must be confident they can generate electricity for significantly less than that.

Tyrbiter
Tyrbiter
3 years ago
Reply to  MTF

The problem is that average wind speeds are about 25% of peak speeds, so the installed generation capacity is almost always unable to provide all the generation that the capacity suggests. Add to that the problem that sometimes the wind is almost zero for weeks on end in the winter and the need for 100% backup generation capacity comes in. Once that is necessary, and it is, why bother with intermittent and unreliable generation?

MTF
MTF
3 years ago
Reply to  Tyrbiter

That is a different issue. Even we assume your figures are correct and that storage technology does not advance there is good reason to have intermittent renewable sources. They reduce the overall need for non-renewables and thus lower our dependency and on them and lower the price.

huxleypiggles
3 years ago
Reply to  MTF

Obviously your comment is based on The $cience.

JayBee
3 years ago

What finally tipped the balance was none of this though.
It was when they started to come for our houses and the cost and technical idiocies became obvious even to the so far asleep laymen.

LaptopMaestro
LaptopMaestro
3 years ago

None of it is optional for the plebs…..

Less government
3 years ago

Net zero = National Suicide facilitated by our Government, the enemy of the people.
vote Reform.

Welshp
Welshp
3 years ago

The best writer for this publication by far. Proper scepticism without any sign of conspiracy theory nonsense like the owner and Mr Jones.