COP 29 is immoral

Originally published: November 13, 2024

COP 29 seeks net-zero—rapidly eliminating fossil fuels—in the name of protecting us from climate danger.

In reality, net-zero would radically increase climate danger and ruin billions of lives.

Good people should condemn COP and embrace energy freedom.

• The COP 29 climate conference has a consistent theme: previous COPs have done an okay job of restricting fossil fuels in the name of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but this one needs to eliminate fossil fuel use far faster so as to reach net-zero by 2050.

  This is 180° wrong.

• COP 29’s goal of rapidly eliminating fossil fuels to reach net-zero is deadly because:

  1. Fossil fuels are making us far safer from climate along with improving every other aspect of life
  2. Even barely implementing COP’s net-zero agenda has been disastrous.

Fossil fuels are making us far safer from climate.

• The justification of COP 29’s net-zero agenda is that fossil fuel use is causing an escalating “climate crisis.”

  But if we look at the full effects of fossil fuels on climate danger, we find that overall fossil fuels have dramatically reduced climate danger.

• Myth: Climate danger is higher than ever because of fossil fuels' CO2 emissions.

  Truth: We have a 98% decline in climate disaster deaths due to our enormous fossil-fueled climate mastery abilities: heating and cooling, infrastructure-building, irrigation, crop transport.¹

• Myth: Mainstream science shows that rising CO2 is an “existential threat” that will soon cause global catastrophe and then apocalypse.

  Truth: Mainstream science shows that rising CO2 levels will lead to levels of warming and other changes that we can master and flourish with.

• For the full story on how fossil fuels overall make us far safer from climate and will continue to do so, read this:
  The climate safety denial movement

Even barely implementing COP 29’s net-zero agenda has been disastrous.

• While COP 29 leaders bemoan how slow their restriction of fossil fuels in pursuit of net-zero has been, even “slow” restriction has caused a global energy crisis.

• Myth: Net-zero policies are new and exciting.

  Truth: Net-zero policies have caused catastrophic energy shortages even with minuscule implementation. Just by slowing the growth of fossil fuel use, not even reducing it, they have caused global energy shortages advocates didn’t warn us of.

• Minuscule net-zero policies causing huge problems:

  US: frequent power shortages after shutting down fossil fuel power plants.

  EU: deadly fossil fuel dependence after restricting their domestic fossil fuel industry.

  Poor nations: can't afford fuel due to global restrictions.²

• If just restricting the growth of fossil fuels in a world that needs far more energy is catastrophic, what would it mean to reduce CO2 emissions by the 50% many “climate emergency” advocates want by 2030 and the 100% they want by 2050?

  Global misery and premature death.
  Every "net zero by 2050" myth, refuted

COP 29’s net-zero agenda harms poor nations most of all.

• The net-zero movement led by COP is particularly dangerous to Africa and other poor regions.

  Consider: 1/3 of the world uses wood and animal dung for heating and cooking. 3 billion use less electricity than a typical American refrigerator.

  Only fossil fuels can provide the energy they need to develop.³

• Every prosperous country has developed using fossil fuels.

  No poor country has been able to develop to the point of prosperity without massive fossil fuel use.

  Development requires energy, and fossil fuels are a uniquely cost-effective and scalable source of energy.⁴

• Fossil fuels are so uniquely good at providing low-cost, reliable energy for developing nations that even nations with little or no fossil fuel resources have used fossil fuels to develop and prosper. E.g. South Korea (83% fossil fuels), Japan (85% fossil fuels), Singapore (99% fossil fuels).⁵

• The obvious path for African development and prosperity is to use fossil fuel whenever it’s the most cost-effective option, which is most of the time, and certainly to responsibly produce the significant fossil fuel resources that exist in Africa.

  Yet COP tells Africa to forgo fossil fuels.

• COP 29 is fundamentally immoral because its goal of “net zero by 2050” would deprive billions of the energy they need to prosper.

  Good people who care about energy and human flourishing should condemn COP and net-zero can champion energy freedom instead.

The path forward: reject net-zero and embrace energy freedom.

• The path to global prosperity and increasing climate safety is energy freedom: allowing us to use all forms of energy so we are prosperous, resilient to climate danger, and in the long-term innovate new, truly cost-effective alternatives to fossil fuels.

• Rejecting net-zero and embracing energy freedom means scrapping the Paris Agreement, whose pursuit of net-zero is committing virtually all nations, including the world’s poorest, to rejecting the fossil fuels they need to prosper.

• While many at COP are saying that a US withdrawal from Paris by the next administration would be irresponsible, it is the only responsible action to take given that Paris commits us to banning most of the fossil fuels that we and our allies need.

• Rejecting net-zero, including the Paris Agreement, and embracing energy freedom requires collaboration among pro-freedom countries like the US, developing nations such as African nations, and any reasonable energy companies.

• Developing nations, above all African nations, need to reject net-zero and embrace energy freedom: the freedom to produce and use all cost-effective sources of energy—including, essentially, fossil fuels—which means rejecting all net-zero targets. Here’s a blueprint for doing it.
  My Message to Leaders at Africa Energy Week 2023

• The energy industry and obviously the fossil fuel industry should condemn COP and its net-zero goal. Appalling, ExxonMobil and others are actually calling for the US to stay in the net-zero Paris Agreement!

  Here’s why this is both immoral and impractical.
  The lesson of fossil fuel advocates' failure at COP 28

• Any attendee of COP 29 should thoroughly reject the conference’s “net zero by 2050” goal and instead proudly advocate for energy freedom and climate safety through climate mastery.

  If they do that, they have a real chance at stopping the conference from ruining the world.

References