Wrecking Ball: Net Zero CO2 Emissions Targets Guarantee Economic Armageddon

Driven by climate alarmists and rent seekers ready to profit from the wind and solar subsidy scam, net zero carbon dioxide emissions targets are just the latest woke wheeze to grip our political betters.

The idea that modern economies can function without the energy generated by fossil-fuels (whether consumed by motorcars or in power generation) is up there with living on Mars and perpetual motion machines.

In a move that first perplexed and then thoroughly alienated those who voted for him in May 2019, Australia’s PM, Scott Morrison signed Australia up to a net-zero carbon oxide gas emissions target to be reached by 2050.

At Australia’s polling booths today, the big winners from that move will be Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party and Big Clive’s United Australia Party who will attract plenty of disgruntled former Liberal voters.

The Liberals, once a notionally conservative party, have not only abandoned their base but treated them with utter contempt, in a futile effort to hold onto a few Green-tinged inner-city seats.

Whatever the counting shows tonight, the Liberals have lost all credibility on energy policy. Recovering that credibility requires a thorough cleanout of their ‘greens-in-Liberal-clothing’ woke wonders and the return of characters capable of standing up for the national interest, starting with energy.

One standout from the Liberal’s Coalition partner, the Nationals is Queensland Senator, Matt Canavan, who has long been a champion of reliable and affordable coal-fired power and one of the few with the wit and temerity to promote nuclear power, ludicrously banned under Federal legislation which remains in place.

Australian power prices are rocketing out of control – wholesale power prices have jumped 140% so far this year; and power consumers in Queensland have just been whacked with power bills double those suffered last year. All thanks to the chaos caused by heavily subsidised and intermittent wind and solar.

Tragically, whichever side forms government, there is no end in sight for Australia’s power pricing and supply calamity.

Net zero by 2050? Be prepared for $100 steaks
Daily Mail
Stephen Johnson
15 May 2022

Australians face giving up red meat under a net zero by 2050 climate change target – as much of the developed world questions if the goal is too ambitious.

That’s the grim warning from Queensland senator and former economist, Matt Canavan, and BAEconomics managing director Brian Fisher if the country proceeds with that environmental ambition, despite Australia’s carbon emissions representing a miniscule 1.4 per cent of the global total.

Both Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Labor leader Anthony Albanese have committed to either eliminating or offsetting carbon emissions by 2050, despite much of Europe walking away from the same target in the face of rising energy costs, after heavily relying on Russian gas.

Australians could be making big sacrifices for nothing, in a bid to curb sea level rises, as other major economies shirk their responsibility to alleviate global warming and keep temperature rises to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

Senator Canavan, a Nationals backbencher who is based in the beef cattle city of Rockhampton, said that under net zero by 2050, meat would become a luxury item.

‘I don’t think people would vote to have red meat banned,’ he told Daily Mail Australia.

‘Welcome to your net zero world where you’ll only be able to have a steak, chips and salad once every three weeks or so.

‘If you’re going down to your local RSL, there just won’t be red meat on the menu.’

Food prices would also surge, beyond already high inflation levels, as agricultural fertilisers were phased out.

‘I don’t think they’d vote to have their food prices skyrocket if modern fertilisers were banned – but they come from natural gas,’ Senator Canavan said.

‘What happens to our food supply?’

Senator Canavan, who is often a lone voice opposing net zero on the Government backbench, said those calling for more ambitious action on climate change often lived in wealthy electorates.

‘This is the hypocrisy here: the inner city people are championing net zero policies; they’ll be fine, they’ll just pay the extra prices for the eye fillet,’ he said.

‘Steak prices in Melbourne restaurants will be $100 and people will pay it.

‘It’s those that continue on with a high consumer lifestyle, and probably create more emissions than the average person through flying and travelling, who want everybody else to suffer.

‘So many of the “loud Australians” are based in inner-city electorates, and they tend to have a bigger megaphone.’

Climate change independents are polling strongly in inner-city, harbour-view Liberal Party seats in Sydney, including Wentworth in the eastern suburbs and North Sydney, and the wealthy inner-Melbourne electorates of Kooyong and Goldstein.

Dr Fisher said both major parties had failed to explain the cost of achieving the net zero target in less than three decades.

‘If you spend enough money on it, you can probably do it, but it’s really not that far away 2050,’ he told Daily Mail Australia.

‘The transformation we’re talking about to get to net zero is absolutely huge.

‘Basically, what you’ve got to do is you’ve got to turn around the Australian economy which has been dependent on fossil fuels forever, basically.’

Dr Fisher said a net zero by 2050 target would also mean banning methane gases from cows, unless carbon sequestration technology was developed to store those carbon emissions underground.

‘If you look at methane, that means you’ve got to deal with burping livestock,’ he said.

‘That’s actually probably going to turn out to be pretty hard.

‘I don’t think the world’s population is going to turn vegetation overnight frankly.

‘I just don’t think that’s realistic so that means to get rid of those emissions, then you have to offset them somewhere.’

While Australia is one of the world’s larger greenhouse gas emitters per capita, the 494million tonnes it produced in 2021 is only a fraction of China’s 11.9billion tonnes, International Energy Agency figures show.

China produced fewer emissions for every resident, compared with Australia, but it was still responsible for a third of the world’s carbon emissions last year, as its carbon pollution increased in 2020 and 2021 following a strong economic rebound from the pandemic.

Senator Canavan, a former Productivity Commission economist, argued the net zero by 2050 goal was effectively dead because the likes of Germany and Italy were reviving coal-fired power stations to be less reliant on natural gas from dictator Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

The United States, which also has a net zero by 2050 target, is battling even higher inflation than Australia.

‘That doesn’t mean to me we should do nothing but it definitely means we shouldn’t go anything unless other countries are doing it too,’ Senator Canavan said.

‘There’s pretty much no-one going towards net zero right now because Europe’s having to fight Putin, America’s trying to control its inflationary pressures.

‘About the only country in the world that’s moving towards net zero is Afghanistan and they’re not doing it because they’re installing a lot of renewable energy.’

Dr Fisher said Europe’s dependence on Russian gas made achieving a net zero climate change target ‘extremely difficult’.

‘This has to have some impact on the speed with which we make progress towards net zero,’ he said.

‘Whether the targets are dead, that’s probably an overstatement but there’s certainly going to be some modification in terms of various countries in Europe’s ambition.’

Senator Canavan, a former resources minister, said adopting a net zero target in less than three decades would also make it harder for Australia and other democracies to defend itself against a more aggressive China.

‘It’s about trying to find a correct balance between reducing our carbon emissions and maintaining an industrial economy that can defend our nation, defend our democracy and I don’t think we’re getting that balance quite right in the West right now,’ he said.

The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is calling for net zero by 2050, or a 45 per cent emissions cut by 2030 to keep temperature rises to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

‘The kind of action we’d need to keep to that just won’t happen in an environment where China and Russia and India are not fully co-operating with the rest of the world,’ Senator Canavan said.

Both Labor and the Coalition have ruled out introducing a carbon price, after former Liberal leader Tony Abbott won the 2013 election in a landslide by campaigning to scrap ALP prime minister Julia Gillard’s hated carbon tax.

Dr Fisher said companies would be unlikely to phase out the use of fossil fuels, like petrol and coal, unless a carbon price of $200 to $300 a tonne was imposed – a level more than 10 times the short-lived $23 carbon tax that existed in 2012 and 2013.

That would also mean passing on the cost on to consumers, which in turn would mean incredibly high inflation.

‘When you start to mitigate those things, you’re going to add costs, there is no escape from that,’ Dr Fisher said.

‘When you start to inject those sorts of costs into the economy, effectively everywhere, because the economy is dependent on energy, it’s dependent on fertiliser, it’s dependent on agriculture where methane is a major greenhouse gas.’

Former Labor prime minister Kevin Rudd in early 2010 abandoned plans for an emissions trading scheme, with a floating price on carbon, after the Greens voted against it in the Senate with the Coalition.

But his successor Ms Gillard imposed a carbon tax, with a fixed price, after Labor lost its majority at the August 2010 election, forcing it to rely on the Greens and regional independents to form a minority government.

Political calculations about the cost of living could potentially see a future government abandon a net zero by 2050 target ahead of an election.

‘If you’re going to hit net zero, it’s costly regardless of what politicians tell you and as a consequence of that, there’s going to be a whole lot of political juggling to mitigate some of those cost pressures on certain parts of society,’ Dr Fisher said.

Senator Canavan said despite the political slogans, very few people would be prepared to make sacrifices to achieve net zero emissions, even in wealthy cosmopolitan postcodes.

‘The actual number of people that truly understand this or advocate this in such a radical way is quite small, I don’t think there’s a large-scale support there in the community even in inner-city electorates for this type of radical action,’ he said.

Then there is the issue of mining rare earth minerals like lithium, used for electric car batteries, along with nickel, cobalt and copper.

‘There’s a real question about whether those resources actually even exist and that hasn’t been addressed,’ Dr Fisher said.

Australia’s share of global carbon emissions, from domestic use, stood at just 1.4 per cent in 2017, a report by the German-based Climate Analytics group showed.

‘The science says Australia can’t change the temperature of the globe on its own,’ Senator Canavan said.
Daily Mail

Matt Canavan: last of the common sense politicians.

About stopthesethings

We are a group of citizens concerned about the rapid spread of industrial wind power generation installations across Australia.


  1. Methane is a ultra minuscule fraction of the amount of carbon dioxide in the air and like carbon dioxide it also does nothing. The climate freaks have lost their minds throwing physics to the wind, they should start with something simple such as by 2050 accomplishing net zero crime and net zero petrol based fabric for clothes (no more polyester or nylon meaning no permanent press) and net zero wiring for their alleged “smart” systems and computers that rely 100% on petroleum based plastics before they dismantle efficient life giving carbon systems of everything such as industrial farming that relies on petroleum and fossil fuel based systems that produce fertilizers that provide ample food supplies and energy systems that prolong life that include meat for solid protein. Atmospheric “gasses” such as life giving carbon dioxide that Mother Nature recycles and burps all by her self most efficiently is in the air at a ratio of 400 parts per million which is 1/2500 which is like worrying about a missing penny out of a $25.00 weekly allowance. Methane (a saturated hydrocarbon HC4 with one hydrocarbon atom bonded to 4 hydrogen atoms) is in quantity in the air at 1866 parts per BILLION so worrying about methane in an atmosphere being “a threat” is like worrying about 1/535905th of yearly income of $100,000 which comes out to be 18 cents. Even if methane doubled it would be like missing 36 cents out of that $100k. So basically we have climate and energy freaks and hustlers telling us there is an existential threat to our lives as the books show a deviation of 18 – 36 cents and they claim investing 700 trillion dollars will fix “the problem”, money which is of course all created not out of methane air, it’s all created using fossil fuels and cannot at all be produced using solar and breezy movie set power in the theatrics of Green Renewable Electric Energy Development (GREED).

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 )

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

%d bloggers like this: