It is not credible that by 2030 we can do without fossil fuels. It is not by raising the objectives beyond measure that we will be able to reach important goals
L’
The most commented image of these days of Milanese meetings on the climate portrays Greta Thunberg casting an incredulous look above her mask to our Minister of Ecological Transition. Indeed, Roberto Cingolani almost seems to kneel in front of the young Swedish activist. The summary, judging by the many comments, only one: young people do not believe the promises of governments. And they do well. Thousands of girls and boys paraded through the streets of Milan. They besieged the places of the conference that prepared the summit (COP 26) in Glasgow, chanted their slogans. Some, along with Greta and Vanessa Nakate, attended the official meetings, bringing not only legitimate concerns, but also ideal enthusiasm and anxieties. In addition to the dream (which for now remains such) of a world that, in the middle of the century, reaches the neutrality of emissions and manages to contain the temperature increase below 1.5 degrees. Activists and heads of state and government, ministers, spoke to each other. And this is already an extraordinary result. In other eras, on more ideological and less apocalyptic issues, dialogue was non-existent. And the violent and bloody clash in the squares. These young people are to be thanked for their commitment. They are better than those, more rebellious, than the generations of their fathers and grandfathers. But they should not be deceived with promises on environmental protection that those who have government responsibilities – and know the complexity of the energy transition – know they cannot to maintain.
–
How, just to give an example, that by 2030 we can already do without fossil fuels. Not credible. Oil, coal and natural gas still account for 80 percent of energy needs and 65 percent of electricity generation. By not raising the objectives beyond measure, it will be possible to achieve ecological goals that are as important as they are vital. Nor by underestimating the enormous transition costs to address which the European Union has allocated huge resources to. The indispensable transition to renewables revolutionizes entire production chains (just think of the car), creates new businesses and closes others. It has winners and losers (the latter will not feel martyrs for a good cause). And, above all, it affects the weaker classes the most.
–
The socially unequal transition. Being aware of it does not mean fueling skepticism and detachment, n uncritically defend a production system that is no longer sustainable. Far from it. The fight against global warming needs transparency and realism, not utopian impulses and the conformity of good intentions. Some data should make us think. In 15 years the world has already invested 3 trillion 800 billion in solar and wind energy. To get to cover an overall share of renewables on the total of 10 percent. In 10 years, subsidies amounting to 130 billion have been disbursed in Italy, which families and businesses pay on their bills. Our country has managed, in the last thirty years, to reduce harmful emissions by 19 percent, but to achieve the goal (Net zero emission) of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan – which in Italy for some reason we already take for granted – we must increase the abatement speed by four or five times and multiply the power of renewables installed each year by ten. We can do it? We are behind. Obviously, in these conditions, protesting because a plant disfigures the landscape will be more difficult and contradictory than the necessary green spirit.
–
While the Milanese meetings followed one another, between summits and processions, something absolutely new and unexpected happened in the energy market. Events compared to which the oil crises of the seventies (some will remember the useless Sundays on foot) appear reduced. Gas prices have exploded as never before. The government intervened twice in 3 months for a total of € 4.7 billion (partly subtracted from renewables) to mitigate the impact on electricity and gas bills, which however increased as never before. It actually subsidized, it couldn’t do otherwise, fossil fuels. The exact opposite of what Milan was asked of all governments. The paradox that coal, which we would laudably want to erase, at the highest prices. Green Germany used 40 percent more coal in the first half of the year to produce electricity (which powers its new zero-emission cars). China has 18 coal-fired power plants planned. Beijing is the biggest polluter in the world, but per capita we Europeans are more so. Without the agreement with the Asian countries, the environmental challenge lost at the start. The European Union is responsible for only 8% of emissions.
–
The goal of neutrality in 2050 is not only ambitious, it is vital. Without new technologies we will not make it. Among these there is also the new generation nuclear power, which is safer. But woe to mention it. And we will not be under the illusion of continuing to live at high energy intensity, without having to change our habits. An electric car saves neither the planet nor the conscience. On the other hand, greater civic education can do a lot, a great deal. In reducing food waste, in better recycling waste, in adapting buildings and regulating mobility, in containing our ecological footprint. We Italians are the first in Europe for per capita consumption of water (220 liters per day). Maybe we can do something more. Even coming out of the misconception that digital is zero impact. Each mail has a carbon foot print equivalent to 0.3 grams of CO2. It must be multiplied by billions. And so the photos we keep on mobile phones thinking that they have no energy consequences. Someone will say: okay like the hummingbird that puts out the fire. Sure, but it does its part. And not a little.
–
October 2, 2021 (change October 2, 2021 | 21:37)
© REPRODUCTION RESERVED
–
—
