…Zero CO2 Emissions. A Dangerous Absurdity…
Climate extremists are doubling down on their efforts to get the world to cut CO2 emissions.
In April, a new global initiative called Mission 2020 was launched by Christiana Figueres, the former executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Its objective is to have all countries achieve zero CO2 emissions.
Can anyone with any engineering or scientific acumen truly believe that CO2 emissions can be cut to zero … at any time in the foreseeable future?
(Inserts describe results for when CO2 peaks: 2016 earliest peak requires less onerous cuts, while delay to 2025 requires drastic cuts.)
This chart from the Mission 2020 website shows that GHG emissions must reach zero, at some point in the near future.
As usual, they are proposing to tell people how to live.
They use a new study, which is published in the journal Nature Communications, “is one of the first to use the new FeliX computer model, which includes social and economic factors along with environmental ones.”
Once again, there is the use of unproven computer models to scare people.
The 100% Renewables claim:
Some advocates of cutting CO2 emissions will claim that wind and solar can completely replace fossil fuels, but that claim has been proven to be a pipe dream.
For example, two Google scientists, Ross Koningstein and David Fork, were put to work by Google in 2007 to establish how renewables, such as wind and solar, could replace fossil fuels.
They were enthusiastic supporters of Google’s move, known as RE<C, which was to develop renewable energy that would generate electricity more cheaply than coal-fired power plants.
Koningstein and Fork admitted in an IEEE Spectrum article in November 2014 that wind and solar, could not replace fossil fuels.
Another example is a recent paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences confirming the impossibility of renewables replacing fossil fuels.
The Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) claim:
Others will claim that carbon capture and sequestration will allow for the capture of all the CO2 from power generation and industrial processes, such as making cement, and thereby prevent CO2 emissions from entering the atmosphere.
Multiple studies have shown this to be an impossibility. The books Clexit and Nothing to Fear both summarize why CCS is not possible.
If these proposals are obviously impossible to achieve, is Mission 2020 proposing zero CO2 emissions for some other reason?
Christiana Figueres, while head of the UNFCCC, said:
“This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history. This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for the, at least, 150 years, since the industrial revolution.”
Clearly, the real reason for these proposals is to change the economic model, which is capitalism and the free market system.
Naomi Klein, another vocal proponent of eliminating CO2 emissions said,
“Forget everything you think you know about global warming. It’s not about carbon — it’s about capitalism.”
Earlier in 2010, Ottmar Edenhofer, co-chair of the IPCC Working Group III, said:
“Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated.”
(Emphasis added in each quotation. Quotations and appropriate references are from Nothing to Fear.)
These advocates for cutting CO2 emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050, or 100% by 2040, have voluntarily told the world their real purpose.
Shouldn’t we listen to what they claim is their real purpose?
It’s not about global warming, it’s about eliminating capitalism.