top of page

Energy Policy, Net Zero: Make Sense? (Vol. 101)

It is Nonsense. How about Common Sense instead of Platitudes?

A platitude I like is ‘Look before you Leap’. Think about what your goal is, and what is the practical way to reach it, then set your policy. Make sense? To me it does.

But thoughtless, stupid bureaucrats and politicians would rather spout out stupid platitudes that ‘Sound Good; Feel Bad’. Energy Policy is a great example.

A policy of ‘Net Zero’ by 2050 ‘sounds good’. So let’s take a closer look at what that means.

It would cost an estimated 50 trillion dollars to try to do that. Where is that money going to come from? Is it even necessary? More importantly, does that do the job if it is necessary?

In a word - NO. The impact on world climate would be negligible. Emissions in developing countries will continue to increase as those countries’ focus is economic growth for their citizens, not permanent economic misery to “save” the climate.

Technology will change, just wait as the entrepreneurs develop new technologies that might actually work on a large scale. But today’s technology will not get us there. Go for wind and solar, scrap nuclear, disincentivize fossil fuel, forbid gas driven cars. Great ideas? Ask Germany or California how that is working out. In Germany, they now use dirty coal instead of clean nuclear to meet their needs. Does that make sense? Not to me.

All electric vehicles present these problems. One, we haven't discovered enough material to make the lithium ion batteries to do that, and as we discover more, supply and demand for those rare earth materials will drive the already expensive cost of cars even higher (along with the millions of other products made from these materials). Two, where are we going to get the energy to charge them? And why are we spending tax money to build charging stations for the country? Won’t business do that if there is consumer demand? Didn’t businesses build gas stations when we developed gasoline powered vehicles?

We have had predictions of doom forever. It hasn’t happened, and the environment and CO2 is a problem (I have heard scholars on both sides of that issue, it is not quite so clear as some would have you think). But does it require hysteria and stupid policy that does not work? Come’on Man - let’s look before we leap for a change.


There is no reason to commit economic suicide for policy that doesn’t work and will certainly collapse under its own stupidity. All ‘wind, solar, stored power’ may sound good, but is absolutely impossible with today's technology. So are all electric vehicles impossible today.

When we have technology that is practical and actually will work, then we can go for it. In the meantime, continue with a policy of consumer choice, energy self sufficiency, expanded nuclear and other clean energy that works, along with fossil fuel, supplemented by wind and solar where practical.

I support sound environmental policy that makes sense, I am not in the ‘How Dare You’ doomsday camp of histrionics appealing to emotion.

Look Before you Leap. Be rational, use common sense, and develop sound policy that works.


6 views0 comments


bottom of page