Renewables and Degrowth: Net Zero Nerves?

Instead of degrowth, we need good growth. This means government actively involved in  building cities and regions that do not use fossil fuels but are totally dependent on renewables.

By Peter Newman AO, Professor of Sustainability at Curtin University

Climate politics in recent weeks has focussed on two things:

1. The National Party opting for removal of Net Zero. As outlined below all the utilities and most homeowners know the future energy transition is favouring net zero options as they are cheaper and better than other new power sources. The removal is likely to continue the decline of Australia’s right wing.

2. Whether the ALP consider it is sensible to have environmental legislation with a climate responsibility or just leave it with the Safeguard Mechanism. As also outlined below climate responsibility needs to be part of all portfolios, and certainly Environment. The Safeguard Mechanism applies only to large industries not to natural resources and cities. So, without it much of the transformative innovations happening at Federal level could be undermined.

What has this got to do with our topic of Renewables and Degrowth?

I believe that there is far too much ‘net zero nerves’ around our politics and we should proceed with confidence about the net zero transition being our next growth focus.

I have a new book Net Zero Cities with Sustainability: A Practitioner’s Approach, that makes a strong case for net zero growth as:

1. It’s cheaper and better for the economy, especially in our cities where 80% of the GDP is created. It is in fact a major wave of innovation that is now globally unstoppable and we are a leader in how it can be delivered.
2. Federal responsibility for net zero is real and legally required after the Paris Agreement and the International Court of Justice confirmation. So, it’s part of all development projects especially anything that touches natural resources and cities.
3. It is entirely feasible to ensure that climate assessments are managed through other elements of Federal responsibility but the Environmental Act should ensure this is clear on large projects and not simply say Safeguard will manage climate.

My new book also uses two other popular books that relate to renewables and degrowth issues:

1.  Juice by Tim Winton that is set in 2100 and shows what can happen if we do not continue with net zero as it will destroy civilisation, global warming will destroy cities and agriculture, people will need to live mostly underground and there is no real economy left. Degrowth has happened and it’s not fun.
2. Abundance written by two American journalists Ezra Kleinand and Derek Thompson, and recommended to Cabinet by Jim Chalmers. It starts in 2050 by showing what it’s like when we reach net zero and global cooling is underway, as well as solving homelessness, health and productivity problems. How?

It suggests we need a ‘combination of socialism and libertarianism’ – more government on what matters in the net zero transition and less government on the rules of the past that are getting in the way.

It illustrates why degrowth is not going to solve climate change, we need to create a new economy with cities and regions that do not use fossil fuels but are totally dependent on renewables. We must build the kind of cities and regions that enable this!

If we try to freeze change as implied by degrowth, we are likely to encourage fossil fuel companies to continue with BAU as they want us to be passive and nervous about change.

We need good growth not no growth. The Table below shows what I want to see us focus growth around and what not, as well as how and what would be the impact on GDP.

We need net zero regeneration of our cities and regions through 100% renewables and this is the fundamental growth required plus lots of other good things that are in short supply. This is the next wave of development, and it needs us to ‘creatively destroy’ the old economy as Schumpeter suggested during the 1930’s.

They are also increasingly coming from householders and businesses paying for the energy, so its just up to grid managers to put in the smart systems to manage it all. More than likely there will be a reduction in the need for new transmission lines as our cities do more and more to provide for the transition. This is being shown most of all in the SWIS servicing the Perth region.

Each month it seems to me that the transition is more and more certain through net zero technologies and systems. We should not lose confidence.

Uncertainty about the future will lead to Juice. Overcoming our nerves about change will create Abundance for our planet with Net Zero dramatically accomplished along with greater sustainability in housing, health and productivity.

Table: What I want to see from growth and degrowth…

Growth	Degrowth (and disappear)
Renewables	Fossil Fuels
Batteries	Plastic
Electric vehicles	Traffic congestion based on automobile dependence
Public transport esp. trams	Waste unrecycled
Local biodiversity regenerated
Indigenous Housing built and owned
Virtual Power Plants like Plico
Net Zero industries
Net Zero concrete from recycled mine waster
Net Zero mining
Recycling all waste old and new
How? Create...	How? Remove...
New rules and regulations.	Old rules and regulations.
New subsidies.	Old subsidies.
New institutions relevant to the list.	Old institutions relevant to the list.
Impact on GDP...	Impact on GDP...
All increase GDP as people jobs are needed to do this.	All increase GDP as people jobs are also needed to do this (but many less and not long lasting jobs).

Header photo: Renewable energy _UN.org

 _{[Opinions expressed are those of the author and not official policy of Greens WA]}