Energy Secretary Chris Wright is Wrong to Call Net Zero Goals ‘Sinister’

     While I generally agree with Chris Wright’s energy assessments and was glad to see him get picked as energy secretary, I disagree with his depiction at the conservative Alliance for Responsible Citizenship forum in London (via video link) of net zero-2050 goals as ‘sinister.’ This is unnecessary demonization. The word ‘sinister’ should remain reserved for terrorists, criminal cartels, and oppressive regimes like Russia, Iran, and North Korea. It should not be used in disagreements about how fast and how much to decarbonize energy systems. I agree with Wright that net zero 2050 pledges and aspirations are likely unrealistic. That could change with technology breakthroughs, but I would not bet on it at present. Wright stated:

“Net zero 2050 is a sinister goal, it’s a terrible goal.”

“It’s both unachievable by any practical means [and] the aggressive pursuit of it — and you’re sitting in a country that has aggressively pursued this goal — has not delivered any benefits, but it’s delivered tremendous costs.”

     I have argued against the demonization of the fossil fuel industry by activists like Bill McKibben and politicized scientists like Michael Mann. I would apply the same argument against demonizing renewable energy and decarbonization efforts. Sure, there are a lot of aspects of these technologies and decarbonization efforts that can be validly argued against, but to call them ‘sinister’ is going too far. That said, there are a few cases where it could be called sinister such as denying poor countries help with developing their own fossil fuel resources due to emissions concerns. However, to call the whole idea of aspiring to reduce emissions with a date goal (achievable or not) sinister is not warranted at all. We have ideas and markets now for things like carbon credit trading and we have new technologies like CO2 capture, utilization, and sequestration that can help us toward that goal whether we can achieve it or not. My view is that no net-zero goal should be mandated. If it is mandated you could call it a terrible policy. It should rather be seen as a voluntary aspiration to help solve a developing societal problem that threatens to increase as time goes on.

So, yeah, that was a bad choice of word, Chris.

 

References:

 

Energy secretary blasts ‘sinister’ zero carbon emissions goal. Zack Budryk. The Hill. February 17, 2025. Energy secretary blasts ‘sinister’ zero carbon emissions goal