Bread and CircusesJul 25, 2023

In case you didn't already know, Net Zero is a scam promoted by the fossil fuel industry and their financiers to perpetuate Business As Usual for as long as possible...
_______________________

"Why Net Zero is not enough"

More than 4,000 governments and companies around the world have pledged to go Net Zero. This includes more than one-third of the world’s largest publicly traded companies.

That sounds like a step in the right direction, right? If every organisation “stops emitting”, our world will be great again.

Well, not exactly…

If we continue to be in a collective delusion that Net Zero is the solution, we will be proved terribly wrong.

In "Ending Fossil Fuels: Why Net Zero is Not Enough", Holly Jean Buck discusses the implications of chasing Net Zero from various frames — looking at it not only through an environmental lens but a social justice perspective as well.

Instead of telling us to do better, this book provides different stakeholders concrete steps for planned phase-out on top of sound arguments and justification for it.

Simply put, the framework of Net Zero and its concentration on emissions diverts public and policy attention away from the fundamental task of ensuring effective and lasting climate change mitigation, which requires an unwavering end to the fossil fuel sector.
_______________________

Always remember, Net Zero is NOT zero.

FULL ARTICLE -- https://archive.li/VQBar

#Environment #Climate #ClimateChange #ClimateCrisis #ClimateEmergency

Show threadmike805Jul 26, 2023

@breadandcircuses Has anyone pointed out, global warming is going to massively increase the consumption of energy?

A/C is now life support rather than comfort in a lot of places.

If solar gets cheap and good, everyone with no reliable grid power will want a solar system. Making that equipment will require a lot of energy.

If electric cars are cheaper to run than gas cars, people will use them more.

We need to figure out how make green tech with a small and decreasing amount of fossil fuels.

Show threadNebulous Menace (Sandy B.)

@mike805 @breadandcircuses

Some of your examples ("A/C is life support") are good.

Some are less so; the energy to make solar is repaid about 20x, over the life of the system. In other words, we already make green tech with a small and decreasing amount of fossil fuels.

Jul 28, 2023 at 5:12pmWeb
Show threadmike805Jul 28, 2023
@nebulousmenace @breadandcircuses That is good if the EROEI is that high.
Show threadNebulous Menace (Sandy B.)Jul 28, 2023

@mike805 @breadandcircuses

EROEI worries are, as far as I can tell, almost entirely fossil propaganda . There was a point where "solar took more energy to make than it would ever return" but that was, like, 1987.

There are a couple of terrible papers that often get brought up when this comes up.
There was a 2012 paper by Fthenakis -so old my bookmark doesn't work any more- giving an EROI in the 6-12 range. And there's a lot less [energetically very expensive] polysilicon in 2023 solar.

... tracked down what I think is the 2012 paper: http://www.clca.columbia.edu/241_Raugei_EROI_EP_revised_II_2012-03_VMF.pdf

If you use a generous definition you got an EROI of 19-38, that long ago! (solar panels were four times as expensive or thereabouts, financially.)