Zero Emissions Foolishness
The Australian Climate Commission has pronounced that "emissions need to be reduced to nearly zero by 2050".
Imagine Australia with "zero emissions" - which means zero production of carbon dioxide from human activities and industries.
This would mean zero usage of coal, oil, petrol, diesel or gas, zero production of cement or steel and the closure of 92% of Australia's electricity generators.
Sunbeams and sea breezes cannot supply 24/7 electricity - the only feasible non-carbon options for Australian grid power are nuclear or hydro. Has the Climate Commission joined the nuclear power lobby? Or do they have a secret plan for big hydro developments on the Snowy, the Franklin and the Tully-Millstream?
And how do we keep our diesel-fuelled transport fleet operating? Using big, big batteries and even more nuclear or hydro power to recharge them at every roadhouse in the outback? (But once they eliminate our grazing animals and their emissions, we will not need road trains.)
And how do we keep planes operating? Are they suggesting that we divert most of our sugar production to producing power alcohol?
For cement and steel we could of course try to catch and bury every molecule of carbon dioxide produced, but in reality the costs involved in such stupidity would force closure of these industries, and cement and steel would be imported from more sensible nations.
Unless the Climate Commission can show us a realistic plan for "zero emissions", with cost benefit analyses, we know it is just more hot emissions from academic dreamers.
They must put up, or shut up.