“Net Zero is a nebulous term; it means nothing,” Dan McTeague said in September. “It’s a marketing term. There is no scientific definition of ‘Net Zero.’ It is a scam, a marketing scam. ‘Net Zero’ means whatever the people using it want it to mean, whatever helps them push their new idea to frustrate consumers.”
On Thursday, writing in the Western Standard he explained why he believes Net Zero will fail – in part because achieving it would be unimaginably expensive.
“But the fact Net Zero will ultimately fail doesn’t mean attempting it isn’t going to negatively affect your daily life,” he warned. “The implications of Net Zero are broad and overreaching. And they will have the effect of fundamentally affecting our quality of life.”
Net Zero emissions by 2050. Have you heard this line? It is increasingly hard to miss. Every trendy business, bank, corporation and government boasts about their commitment to it. But what exactly do they mean by it?
In short, Net Zero by 2050 means our country either emits no greenhouse gases or offsets whatever it does emit through measures such as buying carbon credits or investing in carbon capture technology.
Net Zero has been a central project of groups such as the World Economic Forum, the United Nations and other globalist institutions. They’ve spent the past several years pressuring governments around the world to commit to Net Zero and to make those commitments legally binding, so it will be difficult for elected officials to roll them back in the future.
That’s what’s happening here in Canada. This has been a major priority for Justin Trudeau. The Liberals have spent years championing the push to Net Zero, mandating it by law in 2021.