Many people are concerned about our changing climate. A sizeable proportion believe that there is a climate emergency. Possibly even some people in our campaign group. However, in this post I want to ask whether the billions of dollars being spent globally on projects like Net Zero in the UK, could be better spent on adapting to climate change.

Given the annual cost of net Zero is £30bn (based on official OBR figures), why aren’t we instead investing in climate adaptation which would be cheaper, at around £10bn per year, and more achievable?

The answer is not obvious unless you accept that Net Zero policy faces no serious scrutiny. The driving forces behind it, the Climate Change Committee (CCC) and the National Energy System Operator (NESO) are both wedded to Net Zero at any cost. Essentially, there is a monopoly on not only the policy making but also the sourcing of expert opinion driving that policy making. Unless and until this monopoly is broken there is no serious prospect for change.

I explore this topic in detail in my article Adapting to climate change won’t cost the earth. If you prefer to listen, here is the video discussion link.

A request

Please share this article with people you know who are concerned about climate change and if you can please let me know how they respond:

1. How many accepted the request to read this article?
2. How many rejected it without reading?
3. How many rejected the arguments after reading?
4. How many read the article and agreed with some or all of the arguments?

Please share your feedback using the contact form.