Net Zero is not and never will be the saviour of humanity. It is a myopic journey to humanity’s impoverishment, lowering of prosperity, and desecration of businesses.
Ed Miliband is leading the plunging economic descent in the UK. He doesn’t listen to facts, science, or fiscal common sense. He is the most dangerous politician in Great Britain and risks irreversibly damaging our economic livelihoods.
Talk Net Zero to the average person, and their eyes glaze over with the question, "What the hell does it mean to me?"
Most of us are sleepwalking into a foreboding and gruesome spectre of having no choice but to pay massively for an undemocratically driven political pipedream.
According to a McKinsey study, reaching zero by 2050 will cost world economies an extra $3.5 trillion annually.
Ignoring facts, science and common sense - Ed Miliband is our most dangerous politician - Howard Cox
GB News/Getty Images
Net Zero is nothing but a scaremongering plan to allegedly ‘save the planet’ promoted by well-off, out-of-touch-with-reality politicos wanting to lead the world into an economic abyss. Most of these are of the left in terms of political persuasion.
The nebulous concept of "Net Zero" refers to balancing the amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced and the amount removed from the atmosphere. Climate crisis-claiming zealots focus on one naturally produced gaseous pariah: carbon dioxide.
Let’s pause to understand how this critical greenhouse gas helps trap heat in our atmosphere, which is crucial for maintaining the protective blanket of Earth's atmosphere. It is pivotal in oxygen delivery to cells and maintaining blood pH. It is exhaled after every breath and is used by plants for photosynthesis. Plants take in CO2, and they emit oxygen.
And guess what? The atmosphere contains just 0.04% CO2 as a proportion of all the gases that envelop the earth. That is 2500th of the air we breathe. In fact, for optimal chlorophyll-based plants and the crops that feed us all, we need more CO2, not less. Big greenhouse fruit and vegetable suppliers must buy artificially created carbon dioxide to ensure maximum yields. Go figure!
The UK generates just 1% of the damaging emissions on planet Earth. Those gases allegedly increase global temperatures to Greta Thunberg's hysterical doom-and-gloom “how dare you” proclamations.
The back of a ‘fag packet’ goal to mitigate climate change below a worldwide temperature increase of 1.5% target subjectively was launched in the Paris Agreement 2015. A treaty in which 195 nations blindly pledged to tackle climate change. The agreement aims to limit global warming to "well below" 2C by the end of the century and "pursue efforts" to keep warming within the safer limit of 1.5C.
America's withdrawal from the Paris Agreement has signalled a sea change in the Western world’s economically suicidal journey to Net Zero. Businesses and manufacturers are, in the main, breathing a sigh of relief that draconian green target edicts could be lifted or put on ice worldwide. But sadly, Ed and his ignorant Cabinet colleagues will, I fear, ignore such common sense for the chance of adoration from the lefties and green leaders in the EU.
Donald Trump's withdrawal from The Paris Agreement signals a movement away from Net Zero madness.
Getty Images
Moving to renewable energy sources, upgrading infrastructure, and changing industrial processes will be costly and off-the-scale in terms of how even the wealthiest economies can afford them and still stimulate real prosperity.
These green fantasy costs already lead to higher consumer energy prices and will impact industries that rely heavily on fossil fuels. This means job losses and importing energy, products, and goods from other countries.
Blighty has rich gas, oil, and coal reserves, energy sources that would drive up GDP and individual prosperity for decades to come. Growth taxes will rocket too, to fund the NHS and essential public services.
Yet this Government seems hell-bent on economic Armageddon. The UK Labour government is increasingly under pressure from unelected environmentalists to reaffirm its commitment to the energy transition after a judge ruled permissions for controversial North Sea oil and gas fields are to be scrapped.
The decision could dramatically shift the focus on the North Sea transition from the economy to the climate, despite warnings that up to £1 billion of private investment could be lost and hundreds of jobs would be put at risk if the projects were scrapped.
Sectors like oil, gas, and coal will face significant job losses, requiring substantial government support or retraining programs, which will further strain public finances.
There is also the reliability and scalability of so-called renewable energy technologies like solar and wind. They are intermittent and require significant advancements to ensure a consistent energy supply. Storage solutions like batteries are still not fully scalable or cost-effective for widespread use.
We are now hearing more than 10 per cent of farmland in England is to be set aside with swathes of the countryside to be used for solar farms and wind turbines.
Of course, as founder of the successful public affairs campaigning group, FairFuelUK, I am particularly interested in supporting the UK’s 37 million drivers.
UK Drivers have always been the easiest fiscal targets for successive Governments. In the last decade, mainly left-wing national and local governments have launched restrictive and costly road user policies by the score, including 20mph limits, congestion charges, ULEZs, tolls, LTNs and punitive fossil-fuelled parking costs.
If we don’t comply with the undemocratic push to go electric, we are made to feel guilty as we go about our daily grind to survive in an economy on the brink of recession.
More than 10 percent of the UK's farmland is to be set aside for solar farms and wind turbines.
Getty Images
Despite economists, leading banks and big businesses queuing up to warn Labour that the journey to NetZero will cripple UK PLC, the EU and the UK remain doggedly wedded to scrapping diesel and petrol cars.
Even though the highly respected Centre for Economics and Business Research claimed that the virtue-signalling 2030 Diesel/Petrol Ban, for example, will cost at least five times the alleged environmental benefits, the Labour Government is happy to bankrupt the economy with far from foolproof EV technology.
Ed Miliband should show us the actual cost of Net Zero against the alleged benefits. He can't because there aren’t any!
The production of renewable technologies requires resources like rare earth metals and vast volumes of precious water supplies, which can lead to environmental degradation in mining areas and the use of child slaves to make Western businesses wealthier.
Due to financial constraints, developing countries will also find it challenging to transition, potentially leading to an uneven global playing field regarding economic development versus environmental responsibility.
Choosing between a minuscule increase in air quality and more poverty is an immoral choice for these countries, which simply want what the West has enjoyed for centuries.
Market Distortions: Subsidies for green technologies might distort markets, potentially leading to overproduction or inefficient resource use.
Understanding these disadvantages does not negate the importance of achieving Net Zero. Instead, the West should immediately scrap draconian target bans and focus on letting clean fuel technology evolve organically.
Above all, let existing fossil fuels continue to drive up economic prosperity. And in the UK, let's remove the arrogant belief that what we do by making our people poorer to try and change the climate will not make any difference to global warming.
