How many times have we heard the view that there is no trade-off between pursuing zero net and economic growth? This argument is at the heart of the country's economic, climate and environmental policy debate. [emphasis, links added]
Energy Minister Ed Miliband repeats the mantra in every opportunity – “Clean energy and cleanliness equal good employment and economic growth” – in the entire industry (in the public and private sectors), he responds to his meaning in this article of faith, whether through opportunism or through opportunism or belief, they are accompanied by the driving force of clean energy.
But what if they are all wrong?
The debate has anime for years and poured into cultural wars, with doubts about environmental consensus being the cornerstone of populist and rebellious parties.
Now more than ever, you need a cooler head, especially because The decisions made today (really made five years ago) will determine our future prosperity.
Fortunately, Kallum Pickering, chief economist at Peel Hunt Investment Bank, conducted a forensic analysis of the net zero policy landscape, and his findings deserve widespread attention.
Pickering lowered the root cause of the UK's productivity problem to 2006, when power supply began to decline. Since then, it has dropped by 21%.
This fall is attributed to the decommissioning of coal, oil and nuclear production facilities.
Coincidentally, this is also when Britain began to become a net importer of oil and gas.
Crucially, demand for electricity continues to grow and intentionally supply supply, prices are rising – especially for businesses, and also for consumers.
Pickering pointed out that the UK is now “the highest domestic electricity price in China in advanced world.”
Pickering points out that turning this problem into the real world, While the United States is growing its living standards (per capita GDP) while trying to keep its energy consumption stable, the United Kingdom's living standards are basically fixed with the decline in energy consumption.
This is the food for thinking.
But, at least, have we made a meaningful contribution to reducing global CO2 emissions? Pickering said that it is not true, although our own emissions have been cut in half, This accounts for one percent of the world's total.
He came to the conclusion “So far, decarbonization in the UK has resulted in weak economic growth, high energy prices and stagnant productivity, with no significant impact on global emissions.”
Of course, politics is about choice, but it should also be about evidence and reflection on recognizing when and where policy needs to change reality.
Read more on Oilprice
