There was an interesting article on the various ABC organs last week from their economics writer, Alan Kohler....http://tiny.cc/gwyd001

Not so much interesting for what it said, but for the fact that the ABC was publishing what used to be heresy.

Essentially he's saying that net zero is dead, can never be achieved and will never be achieved. Saying that even a year ago would have been a firing offence on the oh-so woke ABC.

Kohler is pointing out that, with the US now abandoning all the climate hysteria, combined with the developing world continuing to ignore all attempts to reduce CO2e emissions, the world can never achieve net zero in 2050, or any other time for that matter.

The question now becomes when will the Australian polity catch up or catch on. Clearly both major parties are wedded to telling the populace that the now unachievable remains achievable, one side via renewables the other through nukes. It just becomes a question as to when one or t'other will break ranks and announce that they've abandoned net zero. That it will happen is a given but the when remains unknown.

As electricity prices continue to soar with up to 9% increases slated for later this year, the government's capacity to keep a lid on it via 'one off' hand-outs will diminish although we can expect massive subsidies being announced next week.

But a party going to the electorate with a promise to abandon all the climate hysteria including net zero and pushing for the cheapest form of power rather the politically correct form of power, would garner massive support from a wearied and worried electorate.

Its just a matter of time.

(You might also find this instructive... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN_ARfPY9rY)

It's being said more and more in the rest of the world. Trump has given Net Zero the flick. Unfortunately, we in Australia seem to have particularly pigheaded and stupid politicians on both sides of the fence.

All will be well, with a couple of forum old farts employed to shovel plutonium into the boiler down at Dud Duttons nuclear reactor plant.

Why are you octogenarians so concerned about the year 2050 (the youngest of you will be 105 by then)? Climate Change is with us here and now in 2025, that's what we should be concerned about!

I still stand by my original position.
I wholeheartedly support things that are better for the environment, but I don't think we should cut our noses off to spite our faces.

I think China had the right idea, for years they had a smog haze hanging over some of their cities and people were wearing masks just because of the air quality, but they built themselves up to something better, effectively 'powering out of it' slowly moving towards cleaner energy.

In 2023, fossil fuels accounted for 61% of China's total electricity generation, with coal being the primary source. While coal remains dominant, its share of the electricity mix has been decreasing, with a record-low 53% share in May 2024. As of February 2023, China has 55 plants with 57GW in operation, 22 under construction with 24 GW and more than 70 planned with 88GW.

We were already struggling to be competitive, and what do we do, let the climate change mob and those advocating international treaties and those beholden to large investors like Blackrock dictate the path forward, we shut all the coal plants down, drove electricity prices up, and made ourselves even less competitive.

China has drastically improved air quality in its cities.
'You don't get rid of the old without having the next better thing ready'.
We cut our noses off to spite our faces, and why?
- Because we're a nation run by idiots.

mhaze,

You’ve been calling net zero “dead” for years, yet the world keeps moving towards it anyway.

You've misrepresented Kohler’s argument. He’s not saying net zero is impossible - he’s saying the current approach isn’t working fast enough. That’s a call for better policy, not surrender. If anything, his piece demands more effective climate action, not less.

Your claim that the US has abandoned climate "hysteria" is premature. The Inflation Reduction Act represents the largest climate investment in U.S. history, and the transition to renewables is now market-driven. Even if political winds shift, big business isn’t walking away from clean energy.

The old “but China and India!” argument is outdated. China leads the world in renewable energy investment, and India is expanding solar and wind at an astonishing rate. Yes, they still use fossil fuels, but they’re transitioning - just like everyone else.

Abandoning net zero wouldn’t just be bad for the planet, it would be economic suicide. Businesses and investors are already shifting toward renewables because they’re cheaper than coal and gas. You can shout “bring back coal!” all you want, but the market isn't listening.

Blaming renewables for rising electricity prices doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. The main driver of higher costs has been the volatility of fossil fuel prices, particularly gas and coal, which have surged due to global events like the war in Ukraine. Conversely, renewable provide a more stable and increasingly cheaper source of energy. The best way to reduce costs over time is to accelerate the transition away from expensive, unpredictable fossil fuels.

Polls consistently show Aussies want net zero, with frustration actually being with its implementation being too slow. The only people obsessed with killing net zero are those treating energy policy as a culture war.

You can keep calling net zero “dead,” but the facts don’t support you. Renewables are getting cheaper, fossil fuels more expensive, and the market has already shifted. The real question is how much longer we’ll waste time indulging people who still think fighting renewables is a winning battle.

It’s just a matter of time.

Theodor Herzl's famous quote (in origin regarding a Jewish state): “If you really want it, then it is no fairy tale”

Yes, If you really want it, then it is no fairy tale:
Nukes can achieve net zero - just vaporise all humans!