Connect with us

Economy

Net Zero Part One: Defining the Terms

Published

5 minute read

Article from Canadians For Affordable Energy, AffordableEnergy.ca

“Net Zero by 2050” is all over the news these days.

Countries, international organizations, corporations, cities and other entities are making grand commitments to the idea.

My view is that Net Zero by 2050 is a dangerous idea, and I am alarmed by how it is taking hold. I plan to write several blogposts on Net Zero by 2050 over the next few weeks to explain this view. This introductory piece lays the context for that series.

First, let me provide a quick definition of Net Zero by 2050. In simplistic terms, any entity abides by the goal of Net Zero if that entity emits no more greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions into the atmosphere than it draws out of it. Net Zero by 2050 means that the year 2050 is the target for achieving that emissions “balance”.

That sounds straight forward, but it isn’t.

Is the starting assumption – that we can achieve this kind of balance – a fair one given the earth’s complexity?

Is the fact that CO2 levels have been significantly higher in the past (before industrialization) not a consideration? The earth has seen higher and lower levels of CO2 before there was any significant human activity. So why should we assume that a “balance,” as we define it, is necessary?

And how do we assure that balance when there are all kinds of things we can’t control – like emissions from natural events like volcanoes, or windstorms?

What about the fact that the science on emissions is changing?

How do we factor these things in?

And if we do commit to this kind of balance, what measure of government control does this represent? What will the cost of that control be? Should we not have some sense of that before we commit to it?

These are just some of the many questions that come to mind when discussing the idea of Net Zero by 2050. But it is really hard to get answers to these questions. More often than not what you do get is some version of “the sky is falling”. Politicians, business leaders, environmentalists say things like “we have to act now” or “time is running out” or “our future depends on it”.  But people have been using that kind of rhetoric about the environment for decades, and yet by virtually every environmental measure things are getting better.

But no matter. Net Zero by 2050 is the latest version of the environmental scare tactic of forcing consumers to accept things like Trudeau’s carbon taxes, or green energy plans, or any other policy madness that really means expanding government control, enriching special interests, and hurting consumers.

We at Canadians for Affordable Energy find this really alarming: we think Net Zero by 2050 will definitely mean one thing: less affordable energy for Canadians.

Over a series of blogposts we want to shed some more light on Net Zero by 2050.

Net Zero Part 2 will be published on Todayville Sunday, June 6

Click here for more articles from Dan McTeague of Canadians for Affordable energy

Dan McTeague | President, Canadians for Affordable Energy

 

An 18 year veteran of the House of Commons, Dan is widely known in both official languages for his tireless work on energy pricing and saving Canadians money through accurate price forecasts. His Parliamentary initiatives, aimed at helping Canadians cope with affordable energy costs, led to providing Canadians heating fuel rebates on at least two occasions.

Widely sought for his extensive work and knowledge in energy pricing, Dan continues to provide valuable insights to North American media and policy makers. He brings three decades of experience and proven efforts on behalf of consumers in both the private and public spheres. Dan is committed to improving energy affordability for Canadians and promoting the benefits we all share in having a strong and robust energy sector.

 

An 18 year veteran of the House of Commons, Dan is widely known in both official languages for his tireless work on energy pricing and saving Canadians money through accurate price forecasts. His Parliamentary initiatives, aimed at helping Canadians cope with affordable energy costs, led to providing Canadians heating fuel rebates on at least two occasions. Widely sought for his extensive work and knowledge in energy pricing, Dan continues to provide valuable insights to North American media and policy makers. He brings three decades of experience and proven efforts on behalf of consumers in both the private and public spheres. Dan is committed to improving energy affordability for Canadians and promoting the benefits we all share in having a strong and robust energy sector.

Follow Author

More from this author

Business

Trump declares he will impose tariffs on Europe, says EU was formed to cheat America

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Doug Mainwaring

Trump said in his first cabinet meeting that his administration will soon begin placing tariffs on products from the countries of the EU, accusing the European Union of cheating the US.

President Donald Trump blasted the European Union during the first cabinet meeting of his new administration, saying that “The European Union was formed in order to screw the United States. That’s the purpose of it.” 

“I love the countries of Europe,” Trump began, “but the European Union was formed to screw the United States.”  

“Let’s be honest. The European Union was formed in order to screw the United States,” he reemphasized. “That’s the purpose of it.” 

“And they’ve done a good job of it,” he said, before warning: “But now I’m president.”  

 

Trump said that his administration will soon begin placing tariffs on the products of the countries of the EU.  

Asked if he expected the EU to retaliate if the U.S. imposes stiff tariffs, Trump said: “They can’t. I mean they can try, but they can’t.” 

“We are the pot of gold,” he explained. “We’re the one that everybody wants, and they can retaliate, but it cannot be a successful retaliation, because we just go cold turkey, we don’t buy any more, and if that happens, we win.”  

Continue Reading

Business

Carney’s plan to balance the budget missing one thing, a plan to balance the budget

Published on

By Franco Terrazzano

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is criticizing Liberal leadership front-runner Mark Carney’s fiscal plan for having no credible plan to balance the budget or cut spending.

“Carney wants to run on his economic credibility, but he has no credible plan to cut spending or balance the budget,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “The next time Carney releases a plan to balance the budget, he should remember to include the plan to balance the budget.”

Today Carney released his “approach to federal budgeting.” Carney’s backgrounder acknowledges “the federal government has been spending too much,” but Carney’s plan does not include a plan to balance the budget or cut spending.

Carney plans to separate the government’s operating and capital budgets.

“A Mark Carney-led government will balance the operating budget in three years,” Carney’s backgrounder states. “At the same time, we will run a small deficit on capital spending.”

“Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told Canadians he would balance the budget after a few small deficits, but instead of balancing the books he ran massive deficits and doubled the debt,” Terrazzano said. “Carney needs to go back to the drawing board and come up with a credible plan to balance the budget and cut spending.”

The federal government ran a $62-billion deficit last year. That’s $20 billion higher than its promised fiscal guardrail.

The Trudeau government doubled the debt in less than a decade. Interest charges on the debt are costing taxpayers $54 billion this year. For context, the government is wasting more money on debt interest charges than it sends to the provinces in health-care transfers.

“A balanced budget means the government stops adding to the debt, but Carney’s plan would continue to rack up debt and waste more money on interest charges,” Terrazzano said. “Carney acknowledges the government has a spending problem and now he needs to find concrete ways to save money, balance the budget and cut the debt.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X