"This phoney promotion of an EV revolution is the technological poster-child for ‘net-zero by 2050’, the strategy, also set in 2015, supposed to prevent us exceeding a 1.5°C (above pre-industrial) global temperature rise by 2100.
The industry forecaster ‘Future Market Insights’ predicts further massive growth in these numbers, including, crucially for the fossil-fuel VIO, the used car, repairs and parts sectors (virtually all ICEs), due to double again by 2033."
Plus of course, there are the several trillion dollars the oil industry makes from fuelling ICEs and at least another trillion in the auto insurance and finance sectors and more still in infrastructure, auto-racing, advertising and embedded auto-journalism.
More than a hundred million work more or less directly in the auto sector and many millions more livelihoods depend on these people,
Even most of those paying attention are enmeshed, practically and psychologically, in the delusional narrative of a techno-future powered by ‘renewables’.
"the fantasy of a ‘transition’ to EVs sustains nothing except the auto industry. It’s not the only human activity we need to drastically reduce, but it is a significant one; doing so would represent our species taking this threat seriously at last."
I'm not aware of anyone saying EVs will prevent exceeding 1.5C. EVs are simply better for the climate and air quality than ICE vehicles. There is little debate about that. As I have said often transit is far better solution for mobility, preferrably powered by electricity.
Jackson's alternative to the status quo is "radical reductions in all human ‘economic’ activity — i.e. all non-essential consumption" He is silent on how this could be accomplished and says nothing about the potential human impacts of doing so.
https://substack.com/@jacksondamian/p-148002958 Selected quotes from this excellent essay.
"This phoney promotion of an EV revolution is the technological poster-child for ‘net-zero by 2050’, the strategy, also set in 2015, supposed to prevent us exceeding a 1.5°C (above pre-industrial) global temperature rise by 2100.
The industry forecaster ‘Future Market Insights’ predicts further massive growth in these numbers, including, crucially for the fossil-fuel VIO, the used car, repairs and parts sectors (virtually all ICEs), due to double again by 2033."
Plus of course, there are the several trillion dollars the oil industry makes from fuelling ICEs and at least another trillion in the auto insurance and finance sectors and more still in infrastructure, auto-racing, advertising and embedded auto-journalism.
More than a hundred million work more or less directly in the auto sector and many millions more livelihoods depend on these people,
Even most of those paying attention are enmeshed, practically and psychologically, in the delusional narrative of a techno-future powered by ‘renewables’.
"the fantasy of a ‘transition’ to EVs sustains nothing except the auto industry. It’s not the only human activity we need to drastically reduce, but it is a significant one; doing so would represent our species taking this threat seriously at last."
I'm not aware of anyone saying EVs will prevent exceeding 1.5C. EVs are simply better for the climate and air quality than ICE vehicles. There is little debate about that. As I have said often transit is far better solution for mobility, preferrably powered by electricity.
I disagree with the assertion that moving to renewable energy is delusional. He is wrong about 100% renewables being impossible and have covered it here. https://leahy.substack.com/p/100-renewable-energy-for-the-world?utm_source=publication-search
Jackson's alternative to the status quo is "radical reductions in all human ‘economic’ activity — i.e. all non-essential consumption" He is silent on how this could be accomplished and says nothing about the potential human impacts of doing so.
His essays are unhelpful.