Climate change - how different are the positions?There are far more differences between “planetary renovation back to 350 ppm CO2” and “net zero emissions and everything will be fine again” than there are between “drill baby drill”.I am currently drafting my presentation for the CORP conference in Graz. Political positions are difficult to categorize in a very limited left-right spectrum. However, the positions on how much CO2 mankind will, can and should emit in 2040 or 2060 are completely different. This can be classified very precisely in gigatons of CO2-equivalent emissions. 
There are those whose attention has still not been drawn to the price development of renewable energy. Let's call them the "drill baby drill" group with 60 Gt/a CO2 emissions. Next up are the usual climate change deniers at 40 Gt/a. Immediately after the climate change deniers comes the "net-zero emissions and everything will be fine" group, who are at 20 Gt/a. Then there is also the Group real zero emission, as the name suggests, they are at 0 Gt/a.
All these positions have one thing in common: no approach to returning to a stable state at 350 ppm CO2. There is a website called 350.org, but there is nothing on how to get back to 350 ppm CO2. One big question is how to get the CO2 out of the atmosphere and what to do with it. Filtering and recycling require the most energy. For filtering, 1.5 kWh of electricity per kg of CO2 is realistic. Recycling, i.e. splitting it into carbon and oxygen, is estimated at 4.5 kWh/kg. The mildest position here is on WWW WorldWide Prosperity -15 Gt/a. The hardest position can be found on climate.pege.org with -50 Gt/a. That is an opinion spectrum of 35 Gt/a. But if you look at the annual figures, there is not much difference. On climate.pege.org -15 Gt/a is reached around 2054. On WWW WorldWide Prosperity, -15 Gt/a is set as the target for 2060. In 25 years, we will know much more about how much CO2 nature will be emitting and absorbing in 2050. We can then decide whether the mild -15 Gt/a scenario from 2060 is sufficient or whether much more is needed.
Between climate change deniers and "net zero emissions" and everything will be fine again, only 20 Gt/a. Between "net zero emissions" and the mildest position of PEGE, on the other hand, 35 Gt/a. The "net zero emissions" group is therefore much closer to the climate change deniers than to PEGE.
However, there is a drastic difference in the method used to achieve the goal: saving, cutting back, doing without or global prosperity. Net and real zero emissions want to achieve their goal with general impoverishment. "You will have nothing, but you will be happy" is the totalitarian motto of a self-appointed elite that is firmly convinced that it can only maintain its own wealth by impoverishing and reducing humanity. Citizens who rebel against this must be held down. See the loss of freedom of expression in the EU. Whether "Drill baby, drill" or WWW movement WorldWide Prosperity, such approaches are strictly rejected as destructive and misanthropic. What does Elon Musk have to say? Musk has criticized carbon offsets as "feel-good solutions" and advocates for technologies that remove CO2 from the atmosphere. He has also emphasized the importance of large-scale change, such as switching to renewable energy. In other words, it is in the area of negative emissions, planetary cleanup. So how did a collaboration with "Drill Baby, drill" come about? Because the "Drill Baby, drill" fans are not in favor of fossil energy, but are actually only in favor of prosperity through cheap energy. You just have to show them that renewable energy is cheaper than fossil energy. That's a relatively simple task compared to convincing a "save, restrict, renounce" fanatic of the futility and evilness of his actions.
EIKE - European Institute for Climate and Energy is one of the worst things there is for self-proclaimed "climate protectors". As proof of my above thesis, here is my second article published on EIKE.
CORP has been in existence since 1996. CORP stands for Competence Center for Urban Planning and Regional Development. There is a CORP conference every year, otherwise 2025 would not be the 30th conference. This year the CORP conference is from April 14 to 16 at FH Johanneum Alte Poststraße 149, 8020 Graz. ATTENTION: Program change Here is the program of the conference. On page 32 in the left column below you can find my presentation. This is on Wednesday, April 16 from 15:20 to 16:00 in Auditorium 1. Since there are 4 talks in this column, I think my talk will be at 15:20. Energy Optimised Settlements — Enabler for Necessary Civilization Targets Is the title of my contribution. Please let me know who would like to come. I should send the organizer a list of my participants.
Net zero emissions means reducing greenhouse gas emissions to a level that nature can supposedly absorb for a long time. For the rich, this means Maintain poverty, cause poverty, so that enough emission rights remain for the rich. See the architect and her opinion that Africans don't need roads.
Planetary cleanup back to 350 ppm CO2 means about 47,000 TWh of electricity to filter 1 ppm CO2 from the atmosphere and recycle it into carbon and oxygen. Who can afford that? Only a rich human race, 10 billion people in prosperity can do it. One million km² of energy-optimized settlement areas alone should contribute 150,000 TWh for the necessary electricity for world-wide prosperity and planetary restoration.
It's not about whether the shares will be worth 10 times or 100 times more in 20 years' time or whether they will only be worth a few cents. It's about the future of us all. Will there be a big showdown between eco-fascism and yesterday's fossils, or will it be possible to overcome the deep divisions in society and inspire supporters of both sides to work towards a great new goal? Global prosperity and planetary restoration instead of saving, restricting, renouncing and climate catastrophe or peak oil and a little more climate catastrophe. Both sides must be convinced that they have no solution that is even remotely viable. On the one hand, it must be shown that net-zero emissions are a completely inadequate target and that the goal must instead be a planetary clean-up back to 350 ppm CO2. The other side must be shown that solar power enables a higher standard of living than fossil energy. It's about survival! The social situation in 2025 compared to 2005, extrapolated to 2045, is a horror world! If we are successful and your shares are worth 100 times more, this is just an addition to all the other achievements. One new shareholder said "I with my very modest investment", but €4,000 times €1,000 is also €4 million for all investments up to the opening of the settlement in Unken as a starting point for global expansion. There is a reward program for recommending the share to others. Two of the new shareholders have become shareholders through this reward program. Here are the details.
The situation has changed fundamentally since this company visited Slovakia. Necessary investment volume reduced by around 90%. Time to marketable product shortened by around one year. The 90% reduction in investment volume also means that each shareholder has significantly more shares. |
