If one wonders why the progress of renewables is lackadaisical (Max Priesemann, Letters Sept 22), it is because Governments have known for some time that getting to Net Zero is far beyond the capabilities of renewables. 

The discourse in the International Energy Agency has shifted from renewable to clean.  Governments accept that fossil fuels must continue and the great hope is that those fuels can be cleaned up by removing the carbon dioxide from their emissions.  In effect, Net Zero is a massive bet on carbon capture and storage.

The internet is awash with upbeat assessments of what might be possible, and reticent about the energy effects.  Carbon capture has been around for at least 50 years.  It is considered “successful” when the CO2 captured has economic value, for example to force more gas from wells.  As a waste product the process is akin to rolling a ball downhill for energy, only to push it back up while re-capturing the carbon, and is close to a zero sum game.  The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) describes it as “a pipe dream”.

The CEO of Eurasian Resources Group, a miner, says that 60 new lithium mines and 40 new cobalt mines will be needed in the next 10 years to keep up with demand for batteries.  He adds cheerfully that just for electric cars “we'll have to mine more material than there's ever been mined in the history of the world".  Ouch!

Net Zero appears to be on track to be more harmful than the climate change problem it seeks to solve.

Is it that our MP Steve Brine is not coming clean with us about delivering Net Zero, or is he simply struggling to grasp the issues?

James Anderson,

Wright's Close,

South Wonston,

Winchester

 

Send letters by email to letters@hampshirechronicle.co.uk or by post to Editor, Hampshire Chronicle, 5 Upper Brook St, Winchester, Hampshire, SO23 8AL.

All letters and e-mails must include full names and addresses (anonymous letters will not be published), although these details may be withheld from publication, on request.

Letters of 300 words or less will be given priority, although all are subject to editing for reasons of clarity, space, or legal requirements. We reserve the right to edit letters.