Great article, copied below, posing many of the key contradictions facing the decarbonisation-at-all-costs crowd, which generally masquerades as friendly, Net-Zero & ESG-obsessed consultants and/or concerned citizens.

At the end of the day, as countries pit their decarbonisation efforts against each other, while also horse trading energy exports, raw materials and technologies, all in a rapidly shifting geopolitical atmosphere, it is becoming clearer and clearer that there is no easy pathway forward for globally coordinated efforts to (helplessly, at least we think…) try to control the global climate.

Indeed, it also appears clear that many climate alarmists simply ignore such issues, and perhaps have a complete blind spot when it comes to war, rogue states and the darker aspects of geopolitics (or perhaps the latter is tautology?…).

Kind of like: “as long as a, b, c, x, y, and z countries pivot at some point and stop fighting, change their policies and somehow get on the front foot in relation to massive poverty across their nations, then we can all easily meet our (arbitrary) climate targets…”

Simple as that, right?

Anyway, the article is a great read – highly recommended by PvC, and worth bookmarking.


Global cracks complicate West’s energy transition


Rising costs of raw materials for green energy and electric cars will further slow the shift away from burning carbon. Given that previous transitions have lasted decades, if not centuries, the world will remain dependent on fossil fuels for the foreseeable future. In the past, oil companies responded to rising energy prices by boosting investment. But that’s not happening this time. The global rig count, currently at around 1,600, is less than half its level of 10 years ago, according to oil services company Baker Hughes.

Policymakers now face some hard choices. Will they help to ease the cost-of-living crisis by boosting the supply of fossil fuels, or will they continue on their current path to net-zero emissions? Furthermore, the West must soon choose between decarbonisation and deglobalisation: it can’t have both.