How Likely is a Net-Zero 2050?
3 months ago world leaders met in Glasgow for the 26th Conference of Parties climate summit where they talked about net zero by 2050. Making countless headlines in the press, and getting plenty of attention on social media.
In the short time since (only 90 days). The overarching issue, and the solutions proposed to solve it, have taken a backseat in public discourse.
And it wouldn’t be the first time that happened. Since the UN Framework Convention on Climate change in 1992 – emissions have risen by over 60% globally.
Who knew?
You likely heard Scott Morrison, along with President Biden, Johnson, Macron ect – virtually every leader in the so-called “developed world” has made the same pledge.
“Carbon Neutrality by 2050” or “Net-Zero”
But what does this actually mean beneath the surface?
Well…
Right now coal is responsible for 54% of all energy in the country, natural gas comes in at a not so close second, making up for 20%.
Solar takes out 3rd place totalling a measly 9% of Australia’s total electricity (https://www.energy.gov.au/energy-data/australian-energy-statistics/electricity-generation).
In order to develop an economy without fossil fuels, electricity production will have to double. That’s a catch 22.
Over the last decade, the production of green energy in Australia has doubled. Which sounds like a great start, on paper.
The rise and rise of Tesla, along with the EV market, has significantly reduced direct consumer consumption, of fossil fuels.
Though, are our new “environmentally friendly” toys really so great, if we’re feeding them “dirty” electricity. The answer is no, not really.
The good news is that technology is on our side with this one.
Improvements in tech are far from linear, advancements grow exponentially.
Basically, we won’t see 100 years of innovation in the 21st century it will be closer to 20,000 years. The birth of artificial general intelligence would blow these already obscene statistics out of the water. Make of that what you will.
Many prominent public intellectuals weigh in on the topic, see Sam Harris, Lex Friedman ect.
My point being, that we need drastic advancements in creating green power, and there’s a case for optimism.
Locally, Australis Energy LTD is awaiting planning approval to potentially begin construction on an “ocean wind farm” about 20kms north of Bunbury in 2024.
If constructed the project will have a generation capacity of 300MW the equivalent of up to 200,000 WA homes.
There are 23 other similar projects underway, of which none are currently operational.
Feeling optimistic? I certainly am writing this, but one must consider the role of other countries in the increasingly globalized world we live in…
Currently, the service-based economies of the US, European Union, UK and Australia have pledged to carbon neutrality by 2050.
China (which pollutes more than every other country in the world combined) set its goal for 2060.
Indian prime minister Modi has explained that he wishes to reduce India’s carbon emissions but sees little use in discussing “arbitrary” future targets.
Ultimately, developing nations are the world’s factory. Producing nearly all of the consumer goods we find ourselves addicted to.
I can say with relative certainty that; you likely have no clothing item in your wardrobe; nor tech gadget on your desk, that was crafted or assembled on these shores.
In our globalised world, nation-states imposing stricter and stricter environmental regulations does not necessarily achieve the desired goal on a global level.
Greenpeace has reported fashion conglomerates such as Calvin Klein, Adidas, H&M, Puma (the list goes on, and on) continuing to use textile suppliers that pump toxic chemicals, (which have been found to possess hormone-altering properties), into the already catastrophically polluted Yangtze River near Shanghai.
But as long as we wear clothes, drink from plastic bottles, wrap pallets in plastic… ect. The supply will always meet the demand.
Manufacturing goods releases carbon. That’s just fact. Whether it be pouring steel, refining plastics or fabricating textiles.
Multinational corporations hold no moral obligations to humanity, only their investors and anything that affects the bottom line.
Contrary to the narratives created by their PR teams.
Tech companies and banks alike, take great pride in explaining their “pledges to sustainability” and achieving “carbon-neutral status across all operations” (J.P Morgan 2020). Meanwhile, investing over 300 Billion dollars in fossil fuels over the past 4 years (Tulipshare).
As an enjoyer of the natural world and all its beauty, I sincerely hope the goals set for 2050 come to fruition. I’d love for my children to experience the world at its beautiful best.
I’m optimistic they will.
However, the tough questions must be asked.
Saying is one thing, doing is another.
With the rise of the international corporation, the direct power of the nation-state has dwindled.
In 2022, capital markets know no borders, dollars are no more than pixels on a screen.
Expecting poor developing countries, where so many are without access to food, clean water, or stable infrastructure, to reduce their economies, and increase energy prices, is just naive.
The outcomes would be catastrophic.
Corporations have exported labour, to pay pennies on the dollar in the name of profit margins, for decades.
I merely propose that It may be ignorant to assume, similar tactics will not be employed to combat the costs of tightening environmental regulations in the years to come.
