1. First off, by waving their arms about the pending “climate catastrophe,” the alarmists are driving a generation of youngsters into depression. The reality is that energy helps mankind adapt to some very challenging conditions. Note that worldwide deaths from natural disasters have declined from over 500,000 deaths in the 1920s to less than 50,000 deaths from 2010 to 2020, according to ourworldindata.org, so mankind is getting better at dealing with an unruly nature. So please stop the fear mongering.

2. Their path to net zero doesn’t account for the fact the world needs more energy now. In 2017, less than 10,000 people died worldwide in natural disasters while over 1.6 million people died from diarrhea caused by poor sanitation, which takes energy to address. Further, clean burning propane could save millions more annually from dying of respiratory diseases by replacing the wood and dung they use to cook and heat.

3. Their path to net zero doesn’t account for the time it will take to more than double the capacity of our entire grid. Currently 40% of U.S. energy is in the form of electricity. If a net zero world is going to be 100% electric, then we need to more than double the 160,000 miles of transmission lines crisscrossing the country (EIA). But there are only seven major proposed transmission line projects in the works totaling 4,000 miles, some of which have been in the permitting process for over a decade according to greentechmedia.com.

4. Their path to net zero doesn’t account for the limited availability of rare earth minerals, especially lithium. With only 17 million metric tons of proved reserves, there is not enough lithium on the planet for a 100% renewable world. Electric cars alone would require 14 million metric tons, with a worldwide grid potentially requiring a ridiculous 2 trillion more. Looking at it another way, if the U.S. grid were 90% wind and solar and batteries were used for all storage, we would need 51 billion Kilowatt-hours (KWh) of storage on a daily basis compared to the .0016 billion KWh currently in use. While there are other storage alternatives, all have significant disadvantages and none are applicable on a broad basis.

5. Their path to net zero doesn’t account for the true intermittency of wind and solar power. There is not enough storage for a sunny, windy summer day, much less covering a three-day storm or accounting for the fact solar output in the winter is only a fraction of the summer. The bottom line is wind and solar will never be reliable and independent energy sources.

6. Ironically, their path to net zero doesn’t call for more nuclear, the only carbon-free energy source that has been proven to work reliably on a grid scale. If and when the call is made, the 2,900 bureaucrats at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission are ready with their rolls of red tape to make sure it doesn’t happen very fast.

In closing, it is clear the politicians’ mandated path to net zero by 2050 will not work, neither in that time frame nor down that path. You can’t mandate math and physics that don’t exist. The sooner we accept that absolute reality, the sooner we can set a realistic plan to move forward – hopefully one that continues to provide low-cost, reliable energy while not unnecessarily scaring the kids.