Over the past few weeks and months, I have read about the pros and cons of the Net Zero policies of different governments worldwide. There are consistently two schools of thought regarding its positive and negative impact. The following – from yesterday’s Financial Post is one such example:
Joe Oliver: The perils of rushing to net-zero electricity (msn.com)
With last week’s release of draft Clean Electricity Regulations (CER), Steven Guilbeault, minister of environment and climate change, supported by Jonathan Wilkinson, minister of energy and natural resources, set a policy table groaning with threats and only a few inducements. They specifically decreed that no new unabated natural gas facilities should be commissioned after 2025, i.e. without carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS), which will make the transition exceptionally difficult. The regulations reflect a government willing to fracture national unity, violate the constitutional division of powers, damage the economy and increase the cost of living of the public it was elected to serve.
In the context of the above excerpt, consider the following points, and tell me who is right and who is wrong:
Silent Victims – https://bit.ly/3pcqW5f is an eye-opening piece by Iain Campbell McKenna on the juxtaposition between the benefits of EVs and how the minerals are mined to build the batteries.
How about Nimi PrincewillElla Nilsen‘s CNN article: As the West surges toward electric cars, here’s where the unwanted gas guzzlers (May 21st, 2023) https://cnn.it/3NKw2iN. Do we now say to these poorer countries who finally have access to the affordable transportation we have enjoyed for the last century that you can’t use fossil fuel cars because it is bad for the environment? Of course, does it really matter if the ozone layer is gone in someone else’s part of the world but not yours? I mean, did the eruption of Mount St. Helens affect anyone outside of Washington State?
Maybe we should all take the time to read (or re-read) John Elkington‘s Cannibals With Forks and his reference to the Triple Bottom Line?
Sound thinking requires us to ask the question – what if we are wrong about climate change and zero carbon without being fearful of the answer, regardless of what the answer would be? In short, we need wisdom and knowledge to address these competing viewpoints.
As someone trying to figure out which road to take, what is the correct answer – Cue the song “Stuck In The Middle With You” by Steelers Wheel!
Procurement Insights 
Colin Cram
August 23, 2023
The evidence for climate change is overwhelming – in temperature and other measurements, shrinkage of the worlds glaciers, the northern movement of the treeline, huge reductions in sea ice. CO2’s physical properties include much greater retention of heat than gases such as oxygen and nitrogen. Despite the small amount in the atmosphere, it keeps global temperatures about 16 degrees C (29degreesF) higher than they would otherwise be. Increase it, and the temperature rises. Climate predictions of the impact of increasing levels of CO2 have overall proved remarkably accurate.
A further problem is that because the oceans absorb much of the CO2 produced by human beings, they are gradually becoming more acidic. Some time before the end of this century the increase will make it difficult for shelled creatures to exist, including plankton. In which case the ocean food chains will break down.
Human beings have existed for a mere 200,000 years of this planet’s 4,500,000,000 year history – just 0.005% of it. There have been several mass extinctions in this planet’s history. If we make ourselves extinct, we won’t be missed.
piblogger
August 23, 2023
As always, Colin, A well-researched and thoughtful response. Thank you.
On the other side of the debate, what are your thoughts regarding the CNN article talking about the growing number of fossil fuel cars heading overseas and the impact of conflict minerals on building the batteries for EVs?
piblogger
August 28, 2023
REPLY FROM COLIN CRAM:
We know what the problem is. The solution is difficult. I suspect that the solution will be technology,
financial and some behavioural change. In my experience, African cities have tremendously busy
roads – in Nairobi and Accra it is often fractions of an inch from other vehicles. In many places in
India, the rule is to look after your vehicle when you are driving – use your horn alot and then you
should be OK (mostly).
After a while, as electric cars become the main vehicles used in western nations, the older electric
models will be exported to Africa. So, there will be a natural change. Battery technology is a
problem. We need better batteries with a much longer life. However, the technology and
manufacturing will improve in the next few years.
Re conflict minerals, procurement people should be flagging this up. Ultimately if the marketing
people can state that the minerals come from places where there is no conflict, there is no child
exploitation and that people are given a good wage, that ought to be a selling point – fair trade.
However, that means that the batteries would cost more and most people (and businesses) don’t
like paying the extra that fair trade costs. So, sourcing and developing alternative sources of supply
and engineers, scientists and procurement personnel finding ways to use non-conflict materials may
be potential solutions. However, what happens then to those people in conflict areas who would
lose what little income they have?
There are supply chain risks from using minerals from conflict areas. However, there are risks from
oil and gas. 25 years ago, oil cost around $13 a barrel. Now it is about $82 a barrel, the high price
being maintained by OPEC producers reducing production. So, oil has been a driver of inflation, and
of poverty in many nations, and we are at the mercy of OPEC. The Ukraine war has shown that oil
and gas supplies can be weaponised to damage national economies and they are therefore a
national security as well as a commercial issue. So, the quicker we become less dependent on oil and
gas the better. However, things won't change overnight.
Finally, other technology is potentially interesting, e.g. hydrogen fuelled vehicles. They could prove a
much better option than electric ones – and water provides an inexhaustible source.
Colin Cram
Tel: +44 75251 49611