This subject dovetails well with your "cookin' with gas" article. Our problem is governments' stated objective to kill the oil and gas sector as fast as they can... and there go our productivity gains.
The published government objective is carbon-zerol by 2050. At some point, and it might not be farther away than the next election, the people will revolt against increasing prices, carbon taxes, lowering real wages, and rising unemployment. Inflation is beaten by slowing demand on everything including labour, and/or raising production efficiency, and government is busy fuelling inflation by raising costs on everything (see carbon tax, increased cost of energy, etc. in your previous article).
Taking the reluctance of people to accept a lower standard of living into account, can we increase productivity in 'green' technologies (manufacturing windmills, solar panels and batteries, building a modern electrical grid etc.) enough to offset the loss of our oil and gas and coal industries?
We are planning to destroy the fossil fuel industry... are we nurturing a realistic replacement?
I prefer "phasing out" rather than "killing" the O&G sector.
The reality is, we have to slow (ideally reverse) GHG emissions. That is a fact (regardless of what some might believe). Having those external costs finally somewhat included in the cost of the product (carbon tax) is simply good economics. Sure it is painful (for some more than others) but that doesn't mean it isn't needed.
Having said that, we will need oil and gas for long after we have gone "net zero". Plastics, pharmaceuticals, and all the chemical building blocks, etc. will still be required in a net zero modern economy. We will just need for less of the raw material (most of a barrel is burned as fuel at the moment).
This subject dovetails well with your "cookin' with gas" article. Our problem is governments' stated objective to kill the oil and gas sector as fast as they can... and there go our productivity gains.
The published government objective is carbon-zerol by 2050. At some point, and it might not be farther away than the next election, the people will revolt against increasing prices, carbon taxes, lowering real wages, and rising unemployment. Inflation is beaten by slowing demand on everything including labour, and/or raising production efficiency, and government is busy fuelling inflation by raising costs on everything (see carbon tax, increased cost of energy, etc. in your previous article).
Taking the reluctance of people to accept a lower standard of living into account, can we increase productivity in 'green' technologies (manufacturing windmills, solar panels and batteries, building a modern electrical grid etc.) enough to offset the loss of our oil and gas and coal industries?
We are planning to destroy the fossil fuel industry... are we nurturing a realistic replacement?
I prefer "phasing out" rather than "killing" the O&G sector.
The reality is, we have to slow (ideally reverse) GHG emissions. That is a fact (regardless of what some might believe). Having those external costs finally somewhat included in the cost of the product (carbon tax) is simply good economics. Sure it is painful (for some more than others) but that doesn't mean it isn't needed.
Having said that, we will need oil and gas for long after we have gone "net zero". Plastics, pharmaceuticals, and all the chemical building blocks, etc. will still be required in a net zero modern economy. We will just need for less of the raw material (most of a barrel is burned as fuel at the moment).