EU leaders brace for clash over astronomical cost of Net Zero plans 

Posted: May 24, 2021 by oldbrew in Energy, government, net zero
Tags: , ,

energy_cleaning_3057805‘All pain for no gain’ springs to mind. Will voters accept this pointless self-harm to their economic welfare indefinitely, or turn against it?
– – –
As the astronomical cost of Net Zero plans are becoming more evident by the day, EU leaders face the prospect of growing discontent and revolt over the relentless rise in energy prices and consumer pain, say The GWPF & FT.

After years of assuring voters that renewable energy will make energy cheaper and Europeans better off, EU leaders are now forced to concede that these plans will actually hurt consumers very badly.

The EU Commission is proposing a series of far-reaching measures that will drive up the cost of running a car and heating homes.

If it goes ahead, households will have to shoulder not only rising energy costs, but also the rising cost of Europe’s record carbon price in their heating bills and fuel pump prices.

It doesn’t take much to consider the political upheaval and public revolt once the pain of Net Zero is felt by voters.

EU leaders brace for clash on how to implement climate goals

European leaders are on a collision course over the looming impact of radical emission targets on their citizens and businesses as the cost of going green hits home across the EU. 

A summit in Brussels on Monday and Tuesday is set to be dominated in part by discussions on how to decarbonise swaths of the European economy so that the bloc can meet its goal of reducing CO2 emissions by 55 per cent by the end of the decade.

In particular, the summit may blow into the open the distributional questions at the heart of the green agenda as it will impact voters’ disposable incomes by driving up household energy bills, pump prices and food costs.

Officials expect a divisive debate that pits richer countries in western Europe against their poorer and more polluting counterparts in the south and east. In a sign of how contentious the debate may prove, ambassadors clashed on Friday over the meeting’s draft environment conclusions.

Full article here.

Comments
  1. Hasbeen says:

    I have been trying to explain to some of my car club mates that electric cars are not the future, but merely a stepping stone to eliminating private vehicles entirely. Get us all in electric vehicles, then reduce the availability of electricity. They will have us over a barrel. Many car enthusiasts just don’t want to believe we car owners are in the cross hairs of governments & elitists in general, & carbon reduction is a handy reason to use as their weapon.

    A spokesman for the UK joint committee nearly gave it away when he said that private ownership of vehicular transport was not compatible with decarbonisation plans. This quickly disappeared from the public view.

  2. Gamecock says:

    In the same vein, Hasbeen, heat pumps are not compatible with Net Zero, either. So, push you all into getting heat pumps, then reduce the availability of electricity.

    An alternative is the people fleeing from centralized production of electricity. The more government mucks it up, the more the people will pursue alternatives. Including moving. Privately produced electricity will be more expensive and more polluting, but more reliable.

  3. stpaulchuck says:

    gee, I wonder why no one could think this out and predict this. Oh wait…

    The issue is NEVER the issue.

    This is now and always has been about taking the people’s freedom. Getting rid of private transportation reduces our freedom of movement, pushing us into urban megalopolises where they can further reduce our freedom of movement while we live in matchbox flat powered by windmills and solar panels and methane pits full of poop. Eventually meat will go away (for us) and we’ll eat drek.

    In the meantime, the 1% live in massive estates out in the countryside like the 16th century lords. They will still have their private planes, limos, and such of course all powered by clandestine gas turbine power and/or small nukes like in the submarines or the newer thorium SMR’s.

    Getting from here to there will entail huge amounts of pain to the general public. Killing off a billion or so of us will be part of the process of course.

  4. tom0mason says:

    Net Zero depends on how large you spread the net.
    IMHO all UK politicians, everyone in the renewable industries, and all people employed in energy distribution industries must (ASAP) cut their net ‘carbon’ pollution’ by at least 80% within 3months and reduce to 100% (of their current value) by the year’s end.

  5. E.M.Smith says:

    All while China gets a Free Pass and even in some cases “subsidy” from “The West”.

    This is just a gimmick to make China the winner and The West the losers.

    Until and unless China (and other “3rd World Nations”) are held to the same requirements, it is only and can only be about transferring wealth and power from the “1st World Nations” (i.e. Europe and America) to the “3rd World” – mostly China.

    It’s a fraud on the Western Democracies and nothing more, with a good load of graft falling off the wagon into selected pockets on the way from The West to China. IMHO.

  6. oldbrew says:

    UK gov. has got cold feet over forcing people to switch from gas CH boilers any time soon.

    Government backs down on gas boiler fines after Steve Baker warns of consumer revolt
    Date: 25/05/21

    A source said the Government had ruled out the idea of fining those who refuse to get rid of their gas boiler.

    The 2035 target date will dismay hardline climate change campaigners, who argue that much swifter action is needed. But ministers fear a consumer backlash if they move faster.

    https://www.thegwpf.com/government-backs-down-on-gas-boiler-fines/
    – – –
    Getting re-elected beats ‘saving the planet’ 😆

  7. Chaswarnertoo says:

    You are the carbon they want to reduce.

  8. Graeme No.3 says:

    I wonder if the public “servants” have thought this thing through?
    Assuming they manage to impoverish the general population where will the tax money come from to maintain their continued employment and life style?

  9. Paul Vaughan says:

    “Will voters accept this pointless self-harm to their economic welfare indefinitely, or turn against it?”

    “turn against it” = Boris Johnson BOOMERANG right back at “voters”
    in canada there’s ford & otool — same thing — & ford is definition of lockdown freak

    The notion that climate and lockdown tyranny split left-right is ridiculous. Voting has nothing to do with tyranny.

  10. Coeur de Lion says:

    The GWPF said recently that European heavy industry cannot survive Net Zero. When will the news break that CO2 has negligible ECS numbers? It needs a brave ‘investigative’. (all spit) journo to make his/her name in history. Come on, somebody! Get it past your cowardly editor! Not the Guardian’s global heating maniac, of course.

  11. bonbon says:

    Former ECB chief Stark now warns of a financial crash. The numbers are astronomical. The energy branch of Davos, the IEA, demands full governmental lockstep to a green financial dictatorship. The sheer desperation is palpable – so what will the hapless politico´s do? Provide artificial respiration to zombie banks, or loot their citizens entire lives?

    Better to apply Glass-Steagall immediately and hold a new Bretton Woods Conference with China and Russia onboard.

    What lurks behind this insane rush to Zero, is utter desperation, parading as ¨confidence¨ , in face of that simple truth .
    And the epicenter of this Zero is the City of London, Brexit notwithstanding. For sure BoJo knows full well !
    So when someone mentions costs, have a look at the quadrillions in derivatives, the everything bubble, not just the price of solar PV.

  12. saighdear says:

    What Engineers “think” : Poll results How will the UK’s new emissions targets impact industry? https://www.theengineer.co.uk/poll-uk-carbon-emissions-industry/

  13. saighdear says:

    aand by the way, at “the engineer” comment guidelines says it all ‘Why has my comment ……….. you can appeal it here: comments@theengineer.co.uk ….
    Please note, we will only reply when an appeal is successful.’
    In some other words, with “Engineers” ‘nothing to see / comment here, move along now! ‘

  14. saighdear, the majority of engineers are poorly qualified “civil” engineers who have no understanding of subjects such as thermodynamics, heat & mass transfer, reaction kinetics and in even chemistry, electronics, control theory, etc. I have given talks to engineers about cement & concrete. I was initially surprised that most civil engineers know very little about the properties and know little about problems and failures. Engineers like Isambard Kingdom Brunel were real engineers that did research, testing, communicated with other engineers etc. Today’s civil engineers are no more that building supervisors (now called project mangers) who do not understand what they are putting in place and believe anything told to them. One hopes that Chemical, Electrical and mechanical engineers are more sensible but there are now many poor standard universities putting out graduate that have no initiative and hang on the words of people calling themselves as expert scientists. Back in my day at University, graduates made up only a few percent of the population. Now with something like 40% of the age cohort starting at a University standards have to be lower and that especially applies to civil engineering which makes up over 60% of all engineering.

  15. saighdear says:

    Cementafriend, indeed as you say. Other practicians also find similarities with other disciplines too: here found on ClimateRealists : https://twitter.com/i/status/1398643830161920006. “amongst your Peers” is not a phrase in my vocab of the vernacular, but it seems to rate highly in the chambers of Government and the MSM.

  16. Marvin Falz says:

    This is why I don’t get why they would want a Great Reset, unless there’s a second banking system, one that is independent from the central banking system, and they’re paid from the money of the second banking system. Also, they would need to be part of some sort of society within society, to be able to maintain their lifestyles, and not crash with the rest of society. Since this separation of a society within a society seems nonsensical to, I’d say our public “servants” (I’m writing from Germany btw.) don’t really know what they’re doing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s