🌎 'Net Zero' Lies ~ The Incompetence and Insanity of Democrat Politicians in Washington State
A ONE TRILLION dollar “pie in the sky” blunder that achieves ZERO impact on the average global temperature
Source: Peter Halligan on Substack
“Lawmakers in Oregon and Washington State have passed ambitious legislation to combat climate change, aiming to eliminate fossil fuels and rely solely on zero-emission electricity sources, such as solar and wind, by 2040 and 2045, respectively. In the following documentary below, Ken Peterson explores the devastating economic consequences of this legislation. He explains that electricity prices will increase to exorbitant rates, that the demand for electricity will exceed the abilities of the electrical grid, and that the resulting decrease in global temperature would only be 0.003 ⁰C. ‘Net Zero What Does It Cost?’ draws heavily from a report by Jonathan Lesser and Mitch Rolling, which you can review HERE
In this 37 minute video, the methods for calculating the costs of “net zero” and “absolute zero” using heroically low-ball assumptions on transmission costs are detailed:
No account is taken of the opportunity cost of the 25-30% land use for forests of wind farms and plantations of solar panels – nor is the impact on the previously beautiful scenery of Washington State.
Neither is the emerging fact that wind turbines do not last 20-25 years, but closer to ten years.
Financing costs, the “permitted return” on equity, depreciation and transmission build out costs etc are in the overall one trillion-dollar cost by 2050 with other 2030, 2040 and 2045 “absolute zero” and “net zero targets for Washington and Oregon.
The report does not take account of the source of the materials and their environmental impact. It takes tons of rock to produce the materials needed to make a Tesla battery and a multiple of that to make a “battery storage” facility. The “rare earth” components are a small part of the mining effort – copper, zinc and other metals have to be mined also -using fossil fuels to extract and process.
Rare earths are particularly “environmentally hostile” to extract, polluting millions of acres of land – in China.
The cost of “junking” the entire fleets of cars, buses, trucks, planes and trains, al the back-up generators for hospitals etc, currently in use and their disposal in landfills is not reflected in the estimated costs in the report.
Even without these actual costs from “junking” and NIMBY pollution, the average household energy bills will more than double in the next few decades.
More realistically, household energy bills will rise by at least a factor of ten – for a “net zero” impact on global temperatures. Double 0, triple 0, eff all blank.
There are lessons for the entire planet in this report, which is confirmed by research from the UK. UK estimates come in at 7-10 trillion by 2050 – around £250,000 to £400,000 per household. The UK has around 5 times the number of households as Washington State’s 5 million
Scaling Washington State 5 million homes to the USA’s 130 million gives a US cost of 26 trillion bucks. This is what would have happened had Kamala Harris been elected.
👉 📝 ARTICLE: ‘Net Zero is a Scam, Built on the Myth of Climate Change’
As you watch the opening of the video, check out the zealotry of the “net zero” bigots. Their faces infused with the complete ignorance of their failure to recognize key facts and opportunity costs.
Politicians should not be allowed anywhere near 25-year plans that impact their constituents.
Remember these “progressives” are rolling out policies that hit those least able to afford their insane follies - the poor, the sick and the elderly – “energy poverty”.
If there was a better way, people would adopt it. Being heavily taxed into a fake solution is not the answer and politicians that pursue such tactics will be sacked by their voters – sooner or later.
We must have net zero life on planet Earth. Make the Earth a pristine atmospheric vacuum.