Thoughts on Bill Gates' book
For Bill Gates, the case for net-zero is “rock solid”. The science is settled, and he is convinced that “the only way to avoid disastrous outcomes is to get to zero”. For readers already convinced of the “climate crisis” and the imperative to go to “net zero” by 2050, his book holds no surprises. For those more skeptical of popular discussions of climate change, what is most striking is that Gates – among the world’s most celebrated and successful data scientists — is so curiously unaware or indifferent to data that challenges many of the presumptions contained in his book.
Thus, for example, while Gates is aware of the low energy density and intermittency of solar and wind power (when the sun sets and the wind does not blow) and the prohibitive costs of batteries to store electricity at grid-scale, he nonetheless finds it imperative that we have policies “to force an unnaturally speedy transition”. Net-zero “requires the US to build as much wind and solar we can build and find room for”. Indeed, it would seem that Gates’ optimism sees nothing but promise in affordable decarbonization. Getting the US electricity system to zero-carbon would increase retail rates by 1.3 – 1.7 cents per kWh, roughly 15% more than what people pay now or an $18 per month premium for a household – “pretty affordable”. He cites a European trade association that suggests that decarbonizing the power grid by 90 – 95% would cause average tariff rates to go up about 20%. Again, this seems “pretty affordable".
One looks in vain for Gates to assess the actual evidence to date regarding the experience of countries and states that have done precisely that, “forcing an unnaturally speedy transition”, such as Germany, California and South Australia. There is no attention paid to the deleterious impacts of shutting down coal and natural gas plants on electricity prices. Nor does Gates find it necessary to engage with substantive arguments in well-researched published work by well-known environmental skeptics such Bjorn Lomborg and Michael Schellenberger (the best-selling author of “Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All”).
Either Gates is not aware or finds it inconvenient that the very authorities he consults with hold views at odds with the assertions made throughout his book. “Following the science”, as understood by Gates and his fellow Illuminati, presents a clear way forward. The diversity of scientific views on every aspect of climate change which one would have expected Bill Gates to be conversant with are not to be found in this book. Indeed, he dismisses contrarian arguments as products of “small and politically powerful groups not persuaded by the science”.
Comments
Post a Comment