Net zero will cripple the West
Brenda Shaffer
Nikkei Asia
The transition to renewables is presented as an undisputed fact even though it is not only untrue but contributing to de-industrialisation, “squandering” economic resources and generating “national security hazards”, says Brenda Shaffer. China, which is selling us solar panels, electric vehicles and critical minerals, is “set to retain a huge competitive advantage” while the West moves to “more expensive, unreliable power sources”. As it does so, China (and Russia and Iran) continue to produce “cheaper, more reliable electricity from fossil fuels” along with more greenhouse-gas emissions. Today, “consumption of fossil fuels stands at 84% of global energy consumption, down two percentage points from 1973”. Renewables can’t replace fossil fuels. The new energy system is both more expensive and dependent on unsustainable subsidies. Traditional power plants are still needed to ensure stable electricity supplies. Renewables are too heavy for air transport. There is no non-fossil-fuel option to produce fertiliser, needed to feed eight billion people. The West should be investing in innovation that will lead to new energy sources that meet the world’s needs, not continuing to “support asymmetric policies” that benefit China.
Don’t fear the US debt mountain
Paul Krugman
The New York Times
The US may be more than $34trn in debt, but that figure is a “lot less scary” when put in historical and international context – the debt is essentially a political, not an economic problem, says Paul Krugman. Because the US economy is so huge, debt as a percentage of GDP is roughly the same as it was in 1945 and lower than it currently is in Japan. Almost every historical debt crisis has involved a country that borrowed in someone else’s currency, which left it “vulnerable to a liquidity crunch”. True, it’s not encouraging that debt as a percentage of GDP is set to rise steadily over the next 30 years, but remember that governments “never have to pay off their debt”. Second, it is estimated that we would have to raise taxes or cut spending by just 2.1% of GDP to keep the ratio stable. Since the US collects a much smaller percentage of GDP in taxes than other rich countries, “collecting an extra 2% would still leave us a low-tax nation and would be unlikely to hurt the economy”. The reason we don’t raise taxes is that “our deeply divided politics” won’t permit it: Republicans are doing all they can to cut
