Ben Pile: The Impossibility of Net Zero
By Ben Pile

Rishi Sunak could not have done less to correct the Net Zero mess. But what he has done is a good thing. And it includes setting a trap for the eco-catastrophists. The more they howl and wail, the more they will expose their utter contempt for ordinary people.
Rishi Sunak’s ‘watering down’ of certain Net Zero targets is the first time that the green policy agenda has had ANY scrutiny of any consequence, despite many failures, starting with the ruinously expensive Renewable Obligation, extending into the totally failed CfDs that allowed wind farm developers to lie to achieve planning consent over rival generators and technologies. Not one part of the green policy agenda has lived up to any promise to deliver good to the British public.
It was the mildest possible reversal. It is in fact an attempt to save Net Zero, not roll it back.
Complaints that it has left Britain without an ‘industrial policy’ or has left ‘investors’ without ‘confidence’ are for the birds. It has put the UK in the same policy position as the EU (more on which in a bit), and there is no evidence of green policies having delivered any significant industrial development to these shores. No green jobs. No green growth. No green industrial revolution. Not even a BritishVolt. It is a farce.
Politicians, who know nothing of the subject in fact, have been misled into believing that strong climate targets encourage domestic manufacturing. That is a lie. The main beneficiary of UK & EU climate laws has been China, of course, which benefits from cheaper energy prices (among other things) precisely because China does not have energy policies like ours. Strict targets are not industrial policy. Nobody was looking to develop ‘Gigafactories’ in the UK for the fact of the UK having the earliest ICE car sales ban. It’s a nonsense.
Sunak has taken stock of the simplest elements of green policy failure:
1. No politician has any clue how to realise Net Zero targets. To understand this, you need to drill down into the Climate Change Committee’s (CCC) advice to Parliament, and advice from wonks and academics to the CCC itself. They speak more candidly the deeper you investigate. The promises of upsides are simply lies. There are no drop-in replacements for the things that make our lifestyles today. That is why the CCC told Parliament that up to 62% of emissions reduction is going to come from ‘behaviour change’, which is to say that Net Zero requires government to use the criminal law and price mechanisms to regulate what people can do. That is what Sunak means when he says that previous governments have not been straight with the public. It is fact.
2. The green lobby has LONG promised lower prices and greater energy security but has failed to deliver. There have been many claims that the costs of wind power have fallen based on low ‘strike prices’ offered by wind farm developers since the Contracts for Difference (CfD) scheme was introduced in 2017. None of those miraculous strike prices have been achieved. The wind farm developers simply reneged on them. They were never going to take them up. They calculated that they would never have to. This came to crunch in the latest auction, when the government removed the wind farm operators’ ability to walk away from the contract — they called the wind sector’s bluff. No bids were offered. The major promise of renewable energy has been utterly debunked by the green lobby’s own actions.
3. Behind the scenes, the failure of both global and national climate policy has been known for a long time — since the Paris Agreement (PA) at the latest. The PA is not in fact a ‘global agreement’; it allows countries to determine their own commitment. And all that has done in turn is reignite the talking point that beset global climate policymaking in the 1990s and 2000s: the ‘free rider’ problem. Some emerging one-time ‘developing’ economies, are now booming, whereas much of the West/G7 is stagnant and facing deindustrialisation, precisely as critics of climate policy had argued, decades ago. This is why there has been so much emphasis since the PA on LOCAL government, such as LTNs/ULEZ/CAZs, using ‘air pollution’ as a proxy battle in the climate war. This was encouraged by central government, which accelerated this fake ‘localism’ during lockdowns by making large grants available to local authorities to restrict private car use. Sunak has seen the robust response to this in London, in Wales, and in cities that have adopted them, and has realised that the public has been setting down its own red lines. The green agenda is now visible to all and politically toxic.
Comments are closed.
“There are no drop-in replacements for the things that make our lifestyles today.”
The most critical thing that everyone needs is transportation. And there are no replacements for fossil fuels in the vehicles that are making the transition to renewables and EV transportation.
Ben Pile always tells it like it is. He should be working for the Telegraph and the Spectator.
I’ve always been a fan as well. On those rare occasions I disagree with him I find enough sound sense to make me stop and think.
Net Zero is a nebulous concept anyway, isn’t it? Or perhaps someone could explain to me how it’s defined.
netzeroclimate.org say it’s ‘the state at which global warming stops’.
It would seem that netzeroclimate.org believe in the fantasy of a static climate where there is no change. The Net Zero concept is simply that if you produce CO2, some how you remove some from the atmosphere. Ignoring the idiocy of why this is necessary in the first place, the problem is that the removal of CO2 is very difficult and very expensive, which explains why Net Zero will destroy your economy. Even if you try not to produce CO2 in the first place, the means to do this are more expensive, less efficient and worse.
You don’t even have to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, you simply have to prevent some from possibly being emitted. For example it’s highly likely that eroded peat moorland emits CO2, the alleged amount per hectare has had a figure put on it. Therefore if a company pays to restore so many hectares of moorland it can claim carbon credits that help it appear carbon neutral. Similarly a company only has to do something that may remove CO2 way in the future to offset current emission even if the scheme fails. This has happened many times when carbon offsets have paid for mass tree planting in developing countries, the wrong type of tree has been planted in the wrong place and a few years over 75% of them had died. There’s plenty of other examples of how claims of carbon neutrality or being carbon positive are just a scam or virtue signalling based on a pack of lies.
The one thing that these B’stards are relying on is that THEY are organised and WE are not. Sunak is a horror story and in no way can be trusted. “Broadlands” is 100% correct.
“WE” have to do what Jim Malone states” He pulls a knife, you pull a gun, he sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That’s the Chicago way.”
WE are a long way behind the 8 ball – I have considered that WE in the UK are far too comfortable to take action against these Ultra Far Left Woke b’stards. WE now know EXACTLY what these B’Stards intend and how they threaten OUR way of life. Time to consider the unthinkable – “it IS war Jim, but not as WE know it”.
As YOU can tell , I have had enough of this Marxist Leninist CCP sh** .
Well said, mate.
Then again, there is the impossibility of ANYTHING zero.
This is a simple guide to what is wrong or may be not with the Planet. I might be a littel too sophisticated for politicians. But have a chuckle.
Why does nobody talk about renewable energy storage? Currently we have about 30 gigawatt hour capability. Ralph Ellis suggests we need 19,000 gigawatt hours. Our biggest battery delivers a minute or so of current demand. A modern Dinorwig might deliver 30 gigawatt hours, but cost £5 billion, and there aren’t many suitable sites. The Royal Society talks of more wind farms used to produce electricity to make green hydrogen, which would be stored in thousands of salt caverns under East Yorkshire, and then burned (at 41% efficiency) when needed. But we are decades away from this, and until we crak this problem, the only way to deliver net zero is nuclear.
GBN had Ross Clark on just now up against climate trougher Jim Dale – no, not the talented actor and Carry On star – of British Weather Services and sadly was not very convincing. A shame as of course he was talking sense while Dale spouted climate religion. Ross needs to brush up his presenting. Funny isn’t it that GBN got a complaint on ‘balance’ from Ofcom when Ester & Phil interviewed Jeremy kHunt when ‘balance’ is not a word in the dictionary of the BBC, and no doubt C4 and Sky, and would never have given air time to Ross.
@gezza1298
I agree totally about Ross Clark not being very convincing – or, maybe, not speaking out strongly enough in an interview/debate situation. But he is a very good writer. But that marks the difference: good writers rarely are good speakers as well. Out of many I could name, that of James Delingpole comes to mind. To be a good and strong speaker takes a special talent. To my mind there is no-one quite as good as Nigel Farage. But how many of those are there?.
Farage is the Curate Egg in trousers. He made a gross mistake the week before talking about how to check what Euro status your vehicle is – go to a website etc; I emailed GBNews saying “LOOK AT SECTION 8 OF YOUR V5″…
He has done everyone in the UK a big favour with his Ulez and “Debanking” missions but he missed by a country mile the chance to completely skewer Dame Alison Rose – she admitted, repeat admitted she broke FCA regulations; he SHOULD have had an expert FS compliance person on explaining the precise FCA regs she broke, how she was subject to a much higher standard of FCA regs (SMR), the seriously unprofessional nature of her actions as a 30+ year career person in a regulated FS business and the implications with any professional body of which she is a member as far as adherence to the Code of Conduct to say nothing of the problems she has as a Director . If he was restrained by Lawyers and Editors, so be it; if NOT …..a massively big missed opportunity. The FCA will not stick it to her given the whitewash interim report unless there is a greater public revealing of her “crimes”, and the NatWest Board have already shot themselves in their feet, but she still gets £2.4m….maybe.
Every time he has a AWG/CC subject, the balancing Ultra Left Wing Woke person is never questioned from the start exactly why CO2 is a polluting gas to be eradicated and “how low will you go , what you ideal ppm number”.
He is no Mark Steyn…..as my School reports said “Must work harder”.
The problem with Farage during Brexit was his failure to know the details of our relationship with the EU. When it comes to the global warming scam, I totally agree that CO2 has not been proven to be a problem but I don’t think it is the best idea to bring this up when there are gaping holes in all the proposals for Net Zero ‘solutions’. I think raising these easy targets such as expensive unreliables, lack of global resources such as copper, cobalt, lithium etc to deliver the all electric world, the huge costs of heat pumps and the ongoing costs of using electricity, the cost of rebuilding the grid etc. These are all things that the ordinary people can relate to.
I wonder why my comment is taking so long to moderate?
Sorry!!