The climate apocalypse is a progress haters dream

The current fossil fuel civilization is doomed to collapse within a maximum of 8-10 years. In the footsteps of Greta Thunberg even the philosopher and economist Jeremy Rifkin launches into doomsday predictions. Due to the rise in temperature, the entire present civilization will be turned upside down. Perhaps billions of people will die, there will be exoduses of entire peoples from regions that have become inhospitable because they were invaded by the waters or sands of the deserts, towards more livable lands. We must do something now to stop greenhouse gas emissions. But what are we to do? No one knows with precision, especially if goals are set so close as 2030 as to be unrealistic. Indeed, many suggestions that come from the most varied environmental organizations risk causing more damage than they would like to correct. No one has been able to count on the effects that the suggested policies may have on consumers and on States which, also thanks to the European policies of the Next Generation EU, are called to invest enormous sums with zero or at least uncertain returns.

Two recently released books can offer a guide on how to deal with the green transition rationally and without the anxiety caused by radical ecologism which pushes citizens and political decision-makers to make unconsidered decisions. The first is by Michael Shellenberger, a rational environmentalist, who published for Marsilio "The apocalypse can wait" and the second is Bill Gates, the famous founder of Microsoft who, with his rich foundation, is also dealing with climate change and who has written for the Nave di Teseo a volume which, confirming his positive and entrepreneurial spirit, he decided to entitle "Climate, how to avoid disaster".

Both refute the theses of catastrophic environmentalism and state very clearly that the solution to the global warming problem cannot be solved by blocking economic growth and thus condemning millions of people to remain poor, just above subsistence levels. Even in developed countries, halting growth would cause social and political upheavals that are difficult to control. After all, serious analyzes show that as income increases, pollution and CO2 emissions decrease. To have greater growth it is necessary to invest in research, and to develop all the technologies that we do not yet possess in order to have the availability of clean energy. At the end of the reasoning, both relaunch nuclear power, the new generation one based on small and widespread plants on the territory, because it is the only source of electricity that does not emit greenhouse gases and that supplies energy continuously and reliably, as opposed to PV and wind which depend on the weather conditions.

Shellenberger's book, a person who knows the environmentalist world from within for having been part of it, dismantles many clichés on which it is based the "green terrorism" starting with the protection of whales and sea turtles (both saved by the discovery of oil for lighting and plastic for making combs), to refute the alarmist information on fires and water storms by demonstrating that in the past there have been far more serious disasters. Burning wood is much more polluting than using gas, using glass bottles instead of plastic ones requires greater energy consumption. Photovoltaic and wind are certainly clean energy but how much energy is consumed to produce them and how much will have to be consumed to then dispose of them once they have reached the end of their production cycle? A calculation that for the moment no one has done with precision. And what about thehate against cars which represent just 8% of total emissions but which require huge investments that risk representing a waste of capital that could be better used in other ways?

Yet Bill Gates' book contains precise and interesting calculations on how much it would cost to use green products compared to current ones, generally based on fossil sources. The effort we will have to make, says Bill, is to develop research and engineering in order to be able to obtain energy at costs comparable to the current ones. It won't be completely successful, and then we will have to ask ourselves the problem of in developed societies how to cope with the costs of the ecological transition. In some cases, but they are limited for now, the innovations allow savings and therefore the possibility of transferring an advantage to consumers. In most cases there is an increase in costs. What will be the reaction of consumers to this rise in prices? So far, for example, the high cost of renewables in Italy has been absorbed by consumers in their electricity bills. It is a "tax" of over 13 billion a year which certainly reduced the purchasing power of households and therefore contributed to depressing domestic demand.

The requests to the States are increasing. Many ecologists believe that the world is falling apart because of capitalism and the market. But overloading policy makers of too many tasks can be dangerous as well as most likely, inefficient. It will be necessary to borrow money to increase green investments (such as the eco-bonus on home renovations), it will be necessary to finance the social transition from energy-intensive sectors to green ones, it will be necessary to help third-party countries to consume less energy while offering them the opportunity to achieve higher levels of well-being. States risk not making it. To maintain the internal front there is the risk of having to set aside certain democratic freedoms. We need a clear, courageous and farsighted policy. First of all it will be important to spread a pragmatic and realistic culture of the problems we have to face. And the two books by Shellenberger and Bill Gates are an excellent starting point. 

Spreading terror will solve nothing. Policymakers will have to look for a way to steer and cooperate with market forces by focusing on investment, and education. Bill Gates does not deny that the challenges we will face are enormous. But he is optimistic. We will be able to pass this test if we combine individual will with a spirit of social cohesion. And above all we must not listen to false preachers of impending doom.