NetZero versus Prosperity
A review of how we get to a more realistic policy set for the management of climate change versus the prosperity of our citizens.
In the review of my book Take Back Manufacturing by the news and technical media I explained that North America and other western nations must focus on policies to undertake the reshoring and localization of our over-extended supply chains and support the ailing industrial and resource sectors. In this way they will avoid the growing geo-political risks and recapitalize on the opportunity to have a far more balanced economy of resources, manufacturing, and services, and so recover national prosperity for all their citizens.
I went on to explain that this national recovery of our prosperity can only be realistically and economically undertaken with the increased use of the existing fossil fuel technologies, and that our biggest impediment and distraction is climate alarmism that has forced the western nations to undertake a NetZero journey to reduce our emissions of CO2.
CO2 is not a pollutant, and is not a significant driver of climate change, so any mitigation such as NetZero is unnecessary, technologically unattainable, economically unviable and extremely foolish. It will lead to failed, expensive, and futile efforts at CO2 mitigation, and the wasteful and dangerous suppression of fossil fuel use.
The only action needed is very manageable localized adaption to what is now predicted to be mild climate change. Such adaption can only be accomplished with the continued and expanded use of fossil fuels.
Awareness is growing … Climate change is mostly natural, it’s not an emergency, and it’s not us.
When the IPCC scientific reports are separated from the UN political rhetoric its clear we do not have an emergency. But we still get propaganda and nonsense from the climate scare hoax even if it does not have scientific data to support the position. This is because they keep confusing natural weather transients with climate change.
We need to dismantle the climate emergency industrial complex that has been funded by the gullible government of the day and ensure our new governments cancel and redeploy efforts to other much more useful initiatives.
Wind and solar is not a reliable solution for the main energy grid although it does have some off grid applications, and certainly wont support industrial activity. The best next generation source of electrical energy is nuclear power.
EVs are far from viable due to the difficulty in supporting the supply chain for the materials that is also proving to be far less green than fossil fuels. Also, the need for a new recharging infrastructure and the redeployment of road taxes currently borne by the traditional fossil fuels will soon invalidate EVs as a future transportation choice.
Also, everyone must realize that fossil fuels are needed for many other requirements outside of just electrical energy and without it we will have an economy more like the 1900s.
Further the emerging economies are forging ahead without the nonsense our western policies are creating, so they will get stronger while we in the west get weaker due to our rank stupidity.
In summary,
We now have recent scientific updates and facts that strongly suggest we STOP the NetZero journey.
Many people are waking up to the reality of this climate emergency scam.
On every metric the facts show that a warmer planet with more CO2 is good news, and that we should welcome the current climate change…. not fear it.
Its very clear that the citizen population when confronted with a choice between improving prosperity or undertaking a costly NetZero journey will vote for prosperity well into the majority.
We must continue the unimpeded use of fossil fuels, and only focus on selective climate adaption to a naturally warming planet.
In the longer term we can plan the transformation to cleaner energy sources, but only as they become viable, such as natural gas and nuclear power supporting the generation of green hydrogen.
A more detailed article is linked here...
https://www.brainzmagazine.com/post/take-back-manufacturing-climate-realism
Nigel Southway is based in Toronto Canada and is an independent business consultant and the author of Take Back Manufacturing: An Imperative for Western Economies, and also Cycle Time Management: The Fast Track to Time-Based Productivity Improvement, an early LEAN thinking textbook.
He consults and educates worldwide on Business Productivity Improvement, LEAN business practices, Advanced Manufacturing Engineering, Future Supply Chain Management, Industry 4.0, National Sustainability, Global technology transfer projects and joint ventures and more.
He is a past chair of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers and the leading advocate and spokesperson for the Take Back Manufacturing Forum, and the North American Reshoring initiative in Canada.
No ‘BAU’?
‘Most’ ‘economic thinking’ is ‘short run’ and ‘redundant’?
‘It’ ignores the ‘supply side’?
‘Growth’ {and ‘civilisation’} depends upon ‘cheap’ F.F. – those so called ‘halcyon days’ are ‘over’. ?
“The crisis now unfolding, however, is entirely different to the 1970s in one crucial respect… The 1970s crisis was largely artificial. When all is said and done, the oil shock was nothing more than the emerging OPEC cartel asserting its newfound leverage following the peak of continental US oil production. There was no shortage of oil any more than the three-day-week had been caused by coal shortages. What they did, perhaps, give us a glimpse of was what might happen in the event that our economies depleted our fossil fuel reserves before we had found a more versatile and energy-dense alternative. . . .
And this is why the crisis we are beginning to experience will make the 1970s look like a golden age of peace and tranquility. . . . The sad reality though, is that our leaders – at least within the western empire – have bought into a vision of the future which cannot work without some new and yet-to-be-discovered high-density energy source (which rules out all of the so-called green technologies whose main purpose is to concentrate relatively weak and diffuse energy sources). . . . Even as we struggle to reimagine the 1970s in an attempt to understand the current situation, the only people on Earth today who can even begin to imagine the economic and social horrors that await western populations are the survivors of the 1980s famine in Ethiopia, the hyperinflation in 1990s Zimbabwe, or, ironically, the Russians who survived the collapse of the Soviet Union.” ?
https://consciousnessofsheep.co.uk/2022/07/01/bigger-than-you-can-imagine/ https://www.facebook.com/cosheep
No ‘green’ solution?
“The problem with both visions of the future – and the spectrum of views between them – is a fundamental misunderstanding of the collapse which has begun to break over us. This is that each assumes the continuation of that part of industrial civilisation which is required to make their version of the future possible, even as the coming collapse wipes away ALL aspects of industrial civilisation. Most obviously, nobody had developed even an embryonic version of the renewable energy supply chain which is the essential first step to turning non-renewable renewable energy-harvesting technologies (NRREHTs) into the envisioned “renewables” upon which the promised techno-psychotic future is to be built. That is, until it is possible to mine the minerals, build the components, manufacture and transport the technologies without the use of fossil fuels at any stage in the process, then there is no such thing as “renewable energy” in the sense which the term is currently promoted. “
https://consciousnessofsheep.co.uk/2023/07/19/our-predicament-re-stated/?fbclid=IwAR3VlY4z4EV1kM6nTSv2FjmBAmvCEGjqqhiwuc1zQtSn3sIcGDGdqiNaN0Q