Here’s some good news to share: Net-zero climate policies are now wildly unpopular around the world.
The New York Times reported in September that many nations, not just the U.S., are also having buyer's remorse with fossil fuel phaseouts. They declared that “climate politics is in undeniable withdrawal…” That’s why many nations are sitting out on the United Nations COP30 summit happening in Brazil now, citing higher costs.
This souring of net-zero policies could inspire a Nexit movement–a global exit from net-zero directives. It takes inspiration from Brexit, the successful 2016 British “Leave” campaign to exit the European Union (EU).
Net-zero climate targets originated in the United Nations (UN) and were mainstreamed by the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement. A decade ago, the Paris Accords famously mandated nations to radically decarbonize their economies by 2050 to stave off 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming. As of winter 2025, a mere 15 of 195 signatories – or 8% – had updated their so-called decarbonization plans called Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Before COP30, the UN claimed 100 of 195 signatories have submitted NDCs to comply with the Paris Accords.
Ahead of COP30, an unlikely voice - Bill Gates - largely disavowed climate doomerism. Writing on his blog Gates Notes, Gates - a longtime supporter of climate alarmist causes- claims he’s seen the light: “Although climate change will have serious consequences—particularly for people in the poorest countries—it will not lead to humanity’s demise. People will be able to live and thrive in most places on Earth for the foreseeable future. Emissions projections have gone down, and with the right policies and investments, innovation will allow us to drive emissions down much further.”
The Biden-Harris administration’s “whole of government” climate policies to phase out fossil fuels, economy-wide, by 2050 echo the Paris Accords. Their policies, coupled with the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), led to a 30% spike in energy costs by spring 2024. The United States pulled the plug on this disastrous agenda on January 20th, 2025, when President Trump re-entered office. Since then, the Trump administration has championed a better alternative: energy abundance.
Despite energy abundance catching on, resisters like California Gavin Newsom and blue state governors insist their climate agendas will lower energy prices. During remarks at COP30, Governor Newsom tried to tie climate policies to affordability - despite California having the second highest electricity rates and most expensive gasoline prices in the U.S., respectively.
“While climate change may not resonate, I think affordability matters,” Newsom said to the S.F. Chronicle in early November. “When you talk about energy efficiency, you’re talking about saving money."
Net-zero climate policies have already failed to deliver affordability for energy costs. If you examine net-zero phaseouts at the state level, blue states tend to have higher energy and electricity costs. States belonging to the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) - mostly blue states in the Northeast - exhibit higher energy costs compared to non-RGGI states, per a new Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory study. Similarly, states with renewable portfolio standards (RPS) mandating a certain percentage of a state’s energy mix to be renewable saw, on average, 11% to 17% higher electricity rates compared to non-RPS states.
As I laid out in my new Independent Women report titled “Energy Abundance: How America Can Lead the World in Energy Production While Creating a Better, Cleaner Environment,” I outlined how producing more domestic energy will drive economic growth and strengthen our national security interests without destroying the environment.
Abundance calls for maximizing the production and consumption of reliable energy sources like coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, geothermal and deprioritizing subsidized part-time solar and wind. Intermittent part-time sources receiving decades-long subsidies have not been widely adopted by the grid. Now they must compete in the market. So far, they are unviable without government support. Shocker!
Instead of the government picking winners and losers, the free market will once again be the ultimate decider–especially with the advent of energy-hungry artificial intelligence (AI) data centers. Entities that previously peddled 100% renewables jargon have quietly erased or watered down their climate commitments. Instead, they’re now prioritizing natural gas, nuclear, geothermal, and even coal to meet rising electricity demand from AI data centers, air conditioning, technology, manufacturing, and other energy-hungry goods.
Europe–namely, the United Kingdom–is experiencing energy insecurity wrought by net-zero policies. Today, the U.K. has the most expensive electricity costs of any developed nation. Industrial electricity prices increased 124% between 2019 to 2024–or four times that of the U.S. That’s why even former Prime Ministers Boris Johnson and Tony Blair have changed their tune on this climate policy. Even British Labor Prime Minister Keir Starmer is quietly admitting the UK won’t meet its 2030 green targets, as they’re inviting higher prices.
People are rejecting climate policies altogether because it costs an outrageous $215 trillion to lower, at best, an infinitesimal amount of carbon emissions by 2100. Worse, reaching a net-zero target won’t occur until 2400—long after we are all dead. Little environmental gain for lots of economic pain. Ouch.
To our friends outside the USA: liberate yourselves from climate mandates and declare your independence from net-zero. You won’t regret it.
