This article beautifully demonstrates the dangers of political lying. Beautifully.



For EVs make imminent sense in Europe. Not because of CO2 emissions (a political lie), but because of energy security. Given average distance traveled in Europe, compared to North America, Europe is where they make most sense.



A simple perusal of oil production data shows the following: if one wants to bring all of the people of the world to the same level of oil consumption as North America, world oil production needs to (roughly) quadruple. To the EU level, it "only" needs to double. Can it? Never underestimate the oil men, but methinks it is unlikely. And the new oil finds are not in places that are easy to get to, mostly in deep water or frozen places. Shale helps, but shale production is expensive which, translated into plain English, means that oil production numbers get to be misleading, since less and less of this oil is actually left for consumption. Never mind that this doubled or quadrupled oil production would have to be sustained. Indefinitely?



Electrification of transportation, combined with a new generation of nuclear power, supplemented by "green" technologies when appropriate, can provide the basis for European energy security for decades, perhaps centuries. This would be a rational solution.



Coming back to political lying. Global Warming (aka now Climate Change, aka Global Weirding) is a splendid example of propaganda campaign gone amok. Scientifically, this has always been a highly dubious theory, as it required complete reversal of accumulated knowledge, essentially claiming that climate is stable, with no major changes due to natural causes, save for CO2 emissions. The theory has always been dubious, but the last 20 years contradicted it quite decisively, as the temperature increases stopped while CO2 emissions continued unabated. When people finally get tired of being hectored by the CO2 activists, we can perhaps return the science to it's rightful place, namely seeking the best possible understanding of what does actually drive climate. A very important subject, to say the least, for the world of 7+ billion people, perhaps going on ten billion, who need to eat every single day.



In the meantime, good, rational economic solutions get tainted by their association with political lying. Ironically, the CO2 campaign did have tangible benefits, since EVs would not have made their commercial progress as fast as they did without CO2 motivated subsidies. Life is this way, few things are black or white, but rather exist in shades of grey.



So, let's ditch political lying, the old anticapitalist campaign disguised as a selfless concern for the environment and future generations, and return to positivist basics: we need to broaden our energy base. Or else. Modern civilization is a temporary pattern on the flow of energy. Take that flow away, and very bad things begin to happen. We have thousands of nukes ready to fire if we start wars over energy. It would be so much better to burn these warheads in nuclear reactors. No?