Sticking your head in the sand and trying to convince yourself it is all a conspiracy, – or worse an opportunity to take cheap political points at your opponents is not going to provide a strategy for our nations security in the next 20 years time. Rather than point-scoring, what is the Conservatives policy on CO2 emissions for 2020, and where would one find your energy security policy.

I was also at the Lords lunch that you attended, and totally agree with your comments about the lights being unecessarily being left on. But the purpose of such meetings is not to score political points, but rather to enlight and seek to inform those in a position of power. Your comment on this blog does little to enhance your reputation.

Reply: I was not point scoring, but stressing that those who want to curb emissions have to make changes in their approach. My message is that greenery should begin in the public sector – instead this government seems to think government can waste all it wants regardless. I would hope you would help me change their minds, as you are clearly friendly to the present government.

Perhaps some civil service jumpers are in order

Climate change is not proven.

Some would say …good idea, if its money well spent , but I was wondering what a stern economist like Mr. Redwood might be thinking..hmmm?

Dark thoughts perhaps ?

Penny for them….

Climate changed again from the 20′s to the 50′s, (upwards) it changed again from the 50′s to the 80′s, (downwards), it changed again from the 80′s to recently, upwards) and is now changing again downwards.

Anyone who takes the trouble to look at the data will see that this has all happened without reference to carbon dioxide although carbon dioxide has risen contemporaneously.

Human emissions of CO2 pale into insignifance compared to natural sources, as evidenced by the Hawaian volcano video footage. Incidentally, that is where the “official” atmospheric CO2 measurements have been recorded since 1958.

Funnily enough, there is a very strong linkage between temperature and the sun’s activity, but no, heaven forbid, it can’t be the sun warming the earth.

From the 50′s to the 80′s, temperature fell whilst CO2 rose. That should be end of story, but no, there is too much tied up in the theory in terms of funding, reputations and a convenient peg to hang “green taxation” on.

What a pity also, that the opposition are totally signed up to the IPCC/NGO/Government line and we will see no change in approach. Contrary science is ignored, as with this just one example of many:

International Journal of Climatology, 2002 Royal Meteorological Society:

The absence of significant changes in intraseasonal and interannual variability of TMEAN, TMAX, TMIN and DTR is additional evidence (besides the average temperature) that in the Arctic in the period 1951-90 no tangible manifestations of the greenhouse effect can be identified.”

Yet this was at a time of rapid increase in CO2. We are told the Arctic is melting, but this Spring, sea-ice is back to levels not seen for decades.

We are glibly told by scientists and NGO’s that there has never been a clear North West Passage, yet history shows otherwise:

THE NORTH WEST PASSAGE BEING THE RECORD OF A VOYAGE OF EXPLORATION OF THE SHIP “GJOA” 1903 – 1907 BY ROALD AMUNDSEN

“We encountered no ice with the exception of a few narrow strips of old sound ice, carried by the wash. Of large Polar ice we saw absolutely nothing.

Between the ice and the land, on either side, there were large and perfectly clear channels, through which we passed easily and unimpeded.

The entire accumulation of ice was not very extensive. We were soon out again in open water.”

Where were the 4 x 4′s and Hummers then?

In terms of energy security, we have nuclear, we have coal, we have North Sea Oil and Gas with more retrievable, but resources are being wasted on ineffective but highly expensive
so-called “renewables”. The Climate Change Bill will go through and we will be condemned to decades of expensive energy.

I despair.

By having Whitehall more reliant on renewable energy Government’s carbon footprint would be lower & it would have to buy less energy as it was reliant on its own solar power . The start up costs might be a bit pricy but the long term savings to the taxpayer and lower co2 emmissions might justify that . If a Tory government was slashing QUANGO’s , axing consultants , freezing civil service recruitment , tackling welfare dependency and lowering our EU contributions then any extra costs of solar energy start up costs could be met that way !

As a positive idea rather than a tiresome & predictable rant how does that sound ? Why not give Whitehall its own green energy supply to help the environment & cut costs as well as turning the lights off ?