There’s another day gone, another day closer to Net Zero 2050, and another budget to choke on.
So, no Greenhouse Gas emissions (GHG) on or before 2050. This means that fossil fuels will, by then, be replaced by alternative modes of energy to facilitate, or should I say, allow manufactured goods to be transported to the consumer.
This is a global agreement, right? I’m not sure, but… oh well, what can any of us say or do about it?
All I know is the year 2050 is a long way away and could get more distant if we look at the current affinity consumers and governments have for the vilified fossil fuel industry.
Just look at the latest supply and demand numbers as issued by the U.S. government and led by a president who is theoretically leading the charge (pun intended) to the electrification of the USA.
Crude oil levels have dropped by 7.5 million barrels and gasoline fell by 2.9 million.
This is partly because refineries are emerging from their spring maintenance, which is increasing demand for crude. There are also clear indications that consumers want and need more crude refined as demand for all grades of gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel increased last week. And the driving season is still two months away.
Call me naïve but the only way to go to Net Zero 2050 is to get to Net Zero DEMAND by 2049! Chances of that happening approach net Zero!!
There are two ways politicians of similar leaning in the U.S. and Canada aim to accomplish this. One uses a carrot, the other a stick.
President Joe Biden has opted for the carrot, giving subsidies to encourage development and use of viable alternatives for his cost-conscious electorate. Want to buy an Elective Vehicle (EV) but need a reliable infrastructure to get from A to B and maybe C and D? No problem! Here’s $7.5 billion to set up a national EV charging network!
North of the border, our approach is a bit different: knock out demand by intimidating the consumer with ever increasing carbon taxes. The purpose of the carbon tax is to lower GHG emissions and encourage development of alternative fuels, or more to the point, discourage the use of fossil fuels.
Yet, since its inception the carbon tax has resulted in little, if any, meaningful reduction in GHG emissions.
It has accomplished one thing though: since the the U.S. doesn’t use a carbon stick, and doesn’t apply a carbon tax, it has truly succeeded in making Canadian manufactured goods less and less competitive with our best friends to the south.
They couldn’t wish for better friend.
While sometimes I wish we could!
– Roger McKnight – B.Sc., Senior Petroleum Analyst