I have long argued the UK ‘s net zero policies are too dear, are losing us our industry and jobs, are losing us tax revenues and increase world CO 2. The last argument cuts through with more of the politicians and officials than the prosperity, tax and job arguments. It helped me and a few others persuade the last government to allow further exploration wells in the UK and development of new oil and gas fields. Mr Miliband has imposed a complete ban. It got the last government to delay banning new petrol and diesel cars, only for Mr Miliband to speed up the ban.
I also argued in a couple of short books that the twin drivers of the planned electrical revolution for consumers were not popular and would not deliver the change the net zero advocates wanted. Heat pumps are too dear, disruptive to install where larger radiators and more insulation are needed and can be dearer to run than gas boilers. Battery cars are dear, often lack range, can be difficult to recharge on long journeys and will gradually lose subsidies as some more people adopt them.
The latest work suggests a £4.5 tn cost to the planned transition just in the UK. I used a figure of $275 tn for the world plan in my “The $275 trillion Green Revolution” to show a very rough magnitude of the task, which appeared in various articles based on a McKinsey report. It might well cost more to replace all those coal and gas power stations, most petrol and diesel vehicles and all that fossil fuel space heating.
Now the US has renounced net zero policy, China believes in it for others but keeps plenty of fossil fuel use herself, and India says net zero has to come later, the UK and EU remain locked together with a disastrous dear energy policy. They then wonder as they blunder why they lose jobs, close factories and hardly grow. Net Zero policy is both self defeating and very destructive of prosperity.
January 14, 2026
Given the suicidal policies of Starmer’s Gang, both economically and culturally, it is hard to believe Russia is a serious threat. Why would any country risk the lives of their own people to attack a country alrady committing suicide? He wouldn’t and in any case UK has nothing that he wants. The Chinese are more subtle than Putin. They still follow Sun Tzu’s Art of War emphasising strategy, deception, and knowing yourself and your enemy, especially that the greatest victory is winning without fighting, achieved through careful planning, exploiting weaknesses, and appearing weak when strong. The Tories fell for it and so do Starmer’s Gang.
January 14, 2026
Unfortunately, this is only too true Peter
January 14, 2026
@Peter Gardner – as with @IanT , its the ‘Plan’ A Plan with the full backing of the majority in Parliament, they are the ones that chose the Starmergeddon gang and keep it in power, they are the ones fighting the people by maintaining this destruction
January 14, 2026
In fairness to the Chinese, though, they are still governed, from one degree to another, by the ethical values of the (brilliant) Lao Tau (老子) and Confucius (孔子) – as we should be governed by the ethical values of Plato, Aristotle, and above all, Christ.
(And Putin is checked by falling into outright despotism by Christianity that no Russian leader has ever been able to squash (it just springs up even stronger than before).
January 14, 2026
Correct but you say “I have long argued the UK ‘s net zero policies are too dear” well yes but any Net Zero cost to the tax payer, subsidies, red tape or policies would be too much as it conveys no benefit at all quite the reverse. Many £trillions of cost zero benefit.
Where renewables works and makes sense without subsidy or rigged markets fine. The idea we should have a war on CO2 the gas of life, plant, tree and crop food is insane. Even when we do Miliband’s and May’s mad policies just exports its production and the jobs with it. Killing the economy, industry, jobs and out defence systems.
January 14, 2026
@Lifelogic – and what happened to the means to pay. Why was that cancelled first?
January 14, 2026
Norway’s energy minister awarded stakes in 57 offshore oil and gas exploration licences to 19 companies in an annual licensing round, and said the country would further expand the acreage drilled over the coming year.
Meanwhile Britain continues to keep it in the ground.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/norway-awards-57-drilling-permits-offshore-oil-gas-exploration-round-2026-01-13/
January 15, 2026
Yes Glen, and Norway has more than 90% hydro electric power, they are using their oil to trade with other Countries, just like other oil rich Countries, meanwhile we keep ours in the ground for what ?
How daft can our Government get.
January 14, 2026
The mike Graham show yesterday Tues 13th showed what a mistake Reform have made with the pompous and wrong headed Zahawi. The man still does not even seem to recognise that his Covid Vaccine Programme as Vaccine Tzar was a disaster. The fastest vaccine roll out he says. But is was a programme that clearly did net harm Zahawi look at the stats mate. That was a stupid question he say a perfectly sensible question. About 7.20 then at 8.45 the excellent Dr Clair Craig.
The Covid vaccines did not prevent Covid infections, hospitalisations or deaths and did cause huge vaccine injuries. See her excellent book “Spiked – A Shot in the Dark”.
The sensible view is not pro-vax or anti-vax some vaccine do net good and some net harm I like the former and hate the latter even if it was the fastest roll out Zahawi. Covid vaccines were heavily in the net harm section. The government should release the honest figure and stop hiding the truth which is doing even more harm.
January 14, 2026
@LL. +1. Zahawi is the sort of pompous, arrogant person that we need fewer of in politics. Reform has become a refuge for some real greasy-pole climbers.
January 14, 2026
@Lifelogic – the hidden danger Reform (and boy does the UK need reforming) as other media commentators have noted is morphing into another faction of the Uniparty. The Country is tired by left-wing Socialist Group think it needs a Centre Ground Party. But looking at the greater majority of MPs in this Parliament, there is no centre ground grouping that wants to work with the majority of the nation. They are all off with the fairies living in cloud cuckoo land perusing the Socialist WEF Dream of destruction.
What is so hard about working with, instead of fighting and suppressing. I am sure achieving is a lot less work than grinding into the ground.
January 14, 2026
Oh for god’s sake give it a rest!
January 15, 2026
Well perhaps I will – once they publish (and stop hiding) the net harm heath statistics broken down by vaccine status, we know the truth from other countries anyway. Also when they giving the jabs and investigate what can, if anything much, be done for the very many appalling Covid Vaccine damaged! Many of whom had no need or any vaccine at all as young or already had dad Covid even had it been safe and effective!
January 14, 2026
Good morning.
Someone somewhere is making a ton of money out of this SCAM. And you would think that the political class would have smelled a rat, much like the rest of us, and steered well clear. But no, they have not.
As always, I tend to look away from the obvious and look into the less obvious when it comes to matters our political class can deal with (another being MASS IMMIGRATION) but refuse to do so. I mean, one cannot believe that they are all that stupid, naïve, ideologically wedded, or just plain corrupt. This the majority of European (and Western) countries, political parties, politicians, media, academia and just about everything else.
There has to be more ?
January 14, 2026
@Mark B – you don’t have to look much further than those that only exist as a result of huge taxpayer/subsidy handouts.
January 14, 2026
£4.5 trillion (UK) circa £150k per household is probably still an underestimate. EVs, more “renewable” wind and solar and back up, carbon capture, vast grid capacity increases, huge insulation increases needed, heat pumps for all homes, even this does not cover the additional subsequent damage done to jobs, industry, the economy, our defence systems caused by the higher energy costs and intermittency! Another doom loop insanity!
January 14, 2026
The world will of course not go for net zero only idiotic governments like the UKs will do so rendering them uncompetitive due to expensive energy the costs. This inability to compete will cause vast further costs above the £4.5 trillion. It will not even reduce CO2 worldwide just export it and kill the UK economy!
January 14, 2026
@Lifelogic – agreed, the future is cancelled. Seemingly not one of our MPs is questioning why out of all the UK’s competing Nations not one of them has also pressed the self destruct button
January 14, 2026
Net zero crap is going to kill off my town of Scunthorpe when they get rid of the blast furnace and replace it with a arch furnace, but then this as been happening for decades all over the U.K. to get rid of our heavy industry and blame it on some sort of climatic change
January 14, 2026
@Mick – as soon as enterprises fall into foreign ownership, the same foreign ownership that would be a competitor on the World Market contraction starts. Foreign owners, in fact all those that buy out competitors for the most part seek to remove competition its part of the game. That’s why there is a competitions authority (the CMA), that is a State organisation to block anticompetitive situations, that then gets overruled by the Government of the day. In terms of Foreign ownership there the only objective for them is to protect their home market.
As for Scunthorpe, the Conservatives cancelled it. They favoured buying quality steel for Defence and Infrastructure from France and other parts of the EU. The pollution still happens it hasn’t evaporated it now cost the taxpayer more and is increased by another magnitude. What is Scunthorpe, when personal religious, political ideology is at play?
January 14, 2026
Net Zero can only be achieved by tyrannical governance: by banning products which people want to buy and trying to force them to buy more expensive, less efficient and inconvenient, ones. And then rationing energy to avoid blackouts.
The Government seems to be quietly dropping the (nonsense) argument about “saving the planet” and has morphed to the “insulating ourselves from despotic oil and gas producing regimes” when we can look across the North Sea to Norway and see a perfectly acceptable, democratic country (aligned, but not in, their beloved EU) sensibly exploiting the reserves in the same sea we were – until the Eco Extremists banned it.
Whole industries and hundreds of thousands of decent jobs have been destroyed by the lunacy, with more teetering on the edge.
It’s a SCAM and we simply can’t afford it.
January 14, 2026
@Donna.+1.
It suits a tyrannical political class and is an element of the corporatist fascist system that has quietly taken over. Less a one -off scam, more part of how we are now controlled and enslaved. Fear-mongering, media control, removal of freedom of expression, social conditioning for the masses, profit and power for the ruling class and their agents.
January 14, 2026
The UK is the only country in the world ‘doing’ net-zero, while some are pledging to do net-zero, most of the world aren’t interested
January 15, 2026
Even the UK not really doing it just exporting much of out CO2 and jobs with it. An suicidal agenda for jobs, the economy, living standards, defence…
January 15, 2026
We ‘doing’ net-zero across every department of government, local government, quango and government funded organisations (universities nhs etc) every department has a net-zero boss, a plan, a document ….even businesses now have to write a section of net-zero into their business plan ….these are the massive hidden costs, that take resources away from where its needed (also DEI)
January 14, 2026
Climate change is the foundation stone for all the other scams.
Starmer reconfirmed that mass migration was caused by climate change.
Net Zero is to thwart Climate Change and save the planet.
This house of cards must fall. We can’t bring one scam down at a time. They all stay or they all go.
January 14, 2026
The climate “HOAX” or certainly vast exaggeration as Trump puts it must go asap.
January 14, 2026
Hurrah for cleaner, greener, cheaper energy. Wouldn’t we all love that, and to be self sufficient in such so as to be able to weather any hard times thrown up by world events.
However, such a thing cannot come about overnight and setting a date with urgency doesn’t change that. There has to be the technology to ease the transition if indeed it could ever be a possibility that the sun and wind could provide us with all our needs, in a cheap and environmentally friendly way as we are told the net zero agenda will make happen.
The glaring contradictions of the net zero gang are just another sign of their utter contempt for us mere mortals, they assume we are too in awe of them to notice things.
We’ve been stripped of our industries, our education system is more of a political training wing, we don’t train or employ enough of our own in essential areas such as health care, engineering etc.
Adding up all the destructive policies over decades, the net zero one is just another to ensure we are brought down and our alleged sins of the past are atoned for.
I’m sure many like to stick with the comfort of the pack and believe there is a more academic, intellectual or business reasoning for all this. Surely our political classes are just misguided?
I don’t believe so. I believe it’s all to do with pure hatred and a desire to bring us to our knees, it’s been in the making a long time.
There, I’ve said it.
January 14, 2026
Well CO2 is not dirty, no pollution, is vital for life and a bit more of it greens the planet nicely as it is plant, crop and tree food!
January 14, 2026
Many of our Politicians are wedded to the self harm of net Zero I am afraid, and that would not be a problem if it only affected them, but unfortunately it affects us all, because we have to pay for both the fix they like to take, and the so called expensive remedy to stop it.
Clearly they are not competent at simple mathematics, otherwise they would quickly realise their own mistakes.
The bigger worry is that they will not listen, so they will never learn, so the addiction continues and harms everyone around them.
January 14, 2026
The EU are Net Zero fanatics but it appears the individual countries in the EU aren’t as around 20 of them still use coal for power generation. Indeed Poland uses coal for 70% of its power generation and has no phase-out plans. Germany uses the most total coal for power generation. Still, as Miliband tells us, Poland and Germany will be so impressed by UK’s lead in this area they’ll follow us. But he also tells us that since Brexit we have no influence in the EU. It’s a puzzle.
Net Zero is fine – withdraw ALL subsidies from renewable energy projects, stop paying windfarms to stop generating, have renewable energy providers sell to the grid in a free market with no price fixing or pegs to the gas generation price, cancel all electric car mandates, cancel heat pump mandates and subsidies, and see what happens. If renewable energy and EVs and heat pumps are so super-cheap there will be a rush by companies to provide them and consumers to use them. Won’t there ?
January 14, 2026
Spot on Roy
January 14, 2026
The mistake had been to force the rate of change. I’m sure that EVs make good sense in some circumstances. I could charge a small EV on my drive and it would be a useful local vehicle but it would not be my main one. It’s been a long time since we were a two car (four including sons) family as we don’t need two cars since our retirement. For some, a local “runabout” is all they might need but not all, not us.
People have different needs, preferences and pockets. It would have been best to let the market decide and change would have happened naturally. Unfortunately, logic and good sense were replaced by a religious-like zeal and our politicians threw all caution (and logic) to the wind and tried to force change when neither the technology nor the markets were ready. We (and Europe) have lost our car industry as a result.
January 14, 2026
@IanT – personal choice would evolve and be less costly and nobody would notice
January 14, 2026
But Sir John, In renouncing net zero policies it is surely necessary to explain what to do about the impact of Global warning. There is no doubt that global temperatures are increasing, 2025 was the warmest year on record and there is no doubt that global fires and global floods are increasing year by year, the UK is not immune to these effects. Is it then your policy just to ignore these inconvenient truths?
Reply You need to pursue this with China, India, US and EU as the main producers of CO 2 given your view.
January 14, 2026
Unfortunately James Morley climate change is the biggest hoax of the last century. For over 40 years the message has been repeated that we will either burn up or be flooded, and every year it proves to be more false.
January 14, 2026
@James Morley – you really have to ask not just why JR says ‘China, India, US and EU’ but also why 95% of the Planets population is not perusing this destruction, all putting earning, wealth and funding a future their first and only objective. 95% of the worlds people/population are not engaged in self harm and destruction.
In scientific terms so-called Global Warming has yet to be proven and what there is of it what causes it.
January 14, 2026
Some say human activity is responsible for a change in climate, some say it’s happening naturally. Let’s suppose there is some truth in it, so as a precaution end the import of people from warm countries to ours where winter comfort depends on the burning of fossil fuels, and let’s stop importing all that stuff from China. Include imported goods as part of our carbon footprint and reduce them.
I’m quite sure the ending of the ice age wasn’t due to burning fossil fuels.
January 14, 2026
The small temperature increase is not unusual when considering the warming has been continuing since the end if the Little Ice Age. Temperatures have been much higher in the past before CO2 increased. 2025 was not the warmest year when using satellite data and the Met Office used land temperature measurement using sites which are low grade heat islands caused by built up environment. Fires and floods are not increasing but decreasing in some data. You should read WUWT for alternative information rather than BBC propaganda.
January 14, 2026
James
Can I suggest you view “Climate Change the movie”.
January 14, 2026
Excellent movie
January 14, 2026
Your “inconvenient truths” are the result of erroneous and manipulated data. Garbage in = garbage out.
January 14, 2026
“There is no doubt that global temperatures are increasing”
But there is doubt. Just watch Climate The Movie, and you will see how the data has been manipulated. Data has been collected from weather stations that don’t exist or ones that used to be in the countryside, which are now within a hotter urban sprawl. The planet’s climate is always changing. We are still coming out of the last mini ice age. Throughout my lifetime, the so-called experts have said that here I live will be underwater within the next decade. The sea levels haven’t increased. If you look at the history of Earth’s climate, there have been periods of much higher CO2 and temperature. This was before any manmade emissions. CO2 is good for plants, not bad.
If this Government was so concerned about climate change they would reduce immigration and not encourage people to have large families.
Take a look at the opposing evidence and consider that you have fallen for the propaganda being spread by the super-rich, like Bill Gates, who owns yachts and many houses yet preaches to us that we need to save the planet. None of it adds up until you follow the money and see that China and the billionaires are the only ones gaining from destroying Western civilisation.
January 15, 2026
James
“If you close a factory in the Midlands and move it to Asia where it runs on coal, then ship the goods on diesel ships — that’s not fighting climate change. That’s de-industrializing your nation.”
Chris Wright, US Energy Secretary
January 14, 2026
Everyone of independent mind that has looked at Net Zero options concludes Net Zero is unachievable and is unaffordable. With that fundamental truth out there for all who are prepared to see to see it, we have t ask who exactly is driving the closed minds of Net Zero zealots like Miliband.
We know the economics do not stand up to questioning.
We know the environmental issues Net Zero generates are unsustainable to many rare species of flying creatures.
We know industrialising our farmlands with solar arrays is as unproductive as any scorched earth plan yet devised and is again, destructive to wildlife that depends on open farming practices for survival.
The tragedy of solar panels in our latitude is the pathetic utilisation they achieve when compared to the installed maximum capacity. All solar arrays fail to achieve 20% utilisation in the UK. To put that into perspective to meet the current grid requirement arrays would have to be installed with over 300GWs of capacity and even then the dead periods at night etc. would hav to be covered by other technology i.e. fossil fuel powered stand by stations.
Net Zero is the route to economic collapse/ That maty be why Ed Miliband is so in favour of it…..
January 14, 2026
I do not recognise these figures. And in any case, data used by anyone with such a long history of support for the fossil fuel lobby will, by definition, be anti-net zero
Detailed University College London research released last November found that 2010-2023, windfarm electricity has saved UK bill payers ~£14.2bn compared to having to buy and use gas to generate the same amount of power
Had we not invested in wind, the costs of building enough CCGT plant to cover electricity demand and the necessary grid upgrades would have been ~£133.3bn. During this period, the costs of government support were a mere £3.3bn each year. Not much to pay for domestic energy security
Today Miliband has awarded 12 X 25 year contracts for 8.4GW of new windfarms at an average contract price of £90/MWh, Which is only slightly above yesterday’s electricity spot price of £81/MWh
Since September 2021, renewables that are operating under CfDs have been generating electricity below the market rate – and so have been paying £billions to the Treasury via the Low Carbon Contracts Company.
Source:
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2025/oct/wind-power-delivers-ps104-billion-net-benefit-uk-consumers
January 14, 2026
What is the real (percentage) efficiency of these windfarms SG? 38-41%
Out of 10,000 hours, for how many hours will they be effectively switched off – because there is too much wind, no grid capacity/demand or no wind? What is the cost of the (gas-powred) back-up required for when they are switched off? I don’t know the answers to these questions (or others I could ask) but I suspect that your ‘costs’ are not as straight foreward as you think.
If someone came to me and said, let’s invest in our own power and build windfarms, I’d ask them for a full breakdown on the overall cost of the scheme vs our existing one. What would be the capital costs, running costs, cost of emergency/alternate energy (and how often we’d need them) and the eventual replacement costs – but most especially for an overall comparison between our existing power provision and the proposed new scheme. In other words, I’d want to know when (and if) this investment was going to improve my business performance and my bottom line.
I’m pretty sure that Mr Milliband doesn’t know the answers to these questions or that (if he does) he’s keeping them very much to himself.
January 14, 2026
PS I’m currently paying 6p/Kwh for Gas heating – which (if my math is correct) is £60/MWh.
So my (retail) cost of Gas seems a good bit less than Millibands (wholesale) cost of £90/MWh for windpower.
I also wonder what that “£90” will actually cost by the time it trickles through to my electricity bill…?
January 14, 2026
If wind and solar is expanding and is so cheap, why are our bills going up far more than in other Countries. !
January 14, 2026
@ Berkshire Alan
It’s because the last administration financed the ballooning costs of the new nuclear power plants at Sizewell and Hinkley Point by using the Regulated Asset Base model. This method loads the bill-payers with the costs while the plants are still under construction
The extra electricity we need for the dozens of datacentres that are being built and the extra 4* hotels that we need to house the boat people need grid upgrades to transport the electricity to where its being used. The grid upgrades are being financed by the private sector but Miliband has also added a portion of these extra costs to the bill payers.
New nuclear and grid upgrades are not cheap. If this had been done ten years ago when interest rates were effectively 0% the costs would have been much lower
January 14, 2026
SG:
Hinkley Point C was not financed using RAB but using the Chinese at 9%. Professor sir Dieter Helm has said that it would have cost half the price if the government had borrowed itself at the rate at the time of 3%. Simple to check BTW, just use the Nationwide mortgage calculator. Sizewell does use the RAB method and consequently will be much cheaper.
January 15, 2026
SG
So Government decisions and Nuclear is the cost problem, not fossil fuels, which you wish to ban ?
January 14, 2026
And why do they still need subsidies and CfD contracts?
January 14, 2026
Sakara, do you have an issue with people who support the fossil fuel industry? If that is the case why are you against them?
If the fossil fuel industry did not exist not one of the wind turbines or any solar panel could begin to be made.
I personally want as many fuel options as we can muster as it keeps the costs down thanks to competition. Perhaps you are against competition too?
If battery powered cars can be produced that provide fully safe operating platforms with range and charging options that make them reliable all round transport that is fine by me. If wind turbines and solar panels can be produced that are not intermittent and thus do not need back up to stand by, ready to take over when the weather conditions don’t allow renewable energy to operate, that would be fine.
If government didn’t have to subsidise their chosen preferred option for domestic heating because the cost of their preferred choice was competitive that would be fine too.
There is a long way to go before those happy situations arrive don’t you think?
NB If renewable energy options were genuinely lower cost than fossil fuel, China would not be building ever more coal fired power stations. They would be devoting their manufacturing to domestic wind and solar parks wouldn’t they? Clearly, China has the lowest cost electricity in the World thanks to coal use, not because they utilise renewables. China makes renewable energy systems for export to the world yet employs coal to enable that to happen. Do you still say renewables are lower cost? If that were the case why would China not be using it?
January 14, 2026
SG: “Since September 2021, renewables that are operating under CfDs have been generating electricity below the market rate – and so have been paying £billions to the Treasury via the Low Carbon Contracts Company.”
If this is the case, why are CfD contracts still needed?
The weighted average (by installed capacity) of operating fixed offshore wind CfDs is currently £149/MWhr.
January 14, 2026
SG:
PS: The £90/MWhr for wind you quote does not include all the additional system costs such as grid upgrades, grid stability measures and either storage or gas generated backup for when the wind doesn’t blow. It’s akin to the man who calculates the cost of his commuting journeys by car based solely upon the petrol consumed and fogets to add depreciation, maintenance, VED and insurance.
January 15, 2026
OR
The price is also not fixed, it is tied in with inflation increases, so self raising !
January 14, 2026
@Sakara Gold saving the ‘bill payer’? When it is the taxpayer and other fuel users subsidising the prices, a spot price above an already high price through subsidies is not save money, it losses the consumer and the country money. The UK, its consumers, the householders and industry are paying well above the market rate against its major competitors because of these subsidies, that means all output in the UK is more expensive than elsewhere. There is a knock on here in that everything in the UK is forced higher if it wasn’t for political ideological interference. What little we do get to export cost more than our competitors as a result.
Your argument would stack up if the price per MWh was less than the free market price. The UK is paying 30% more than its nearest neighbour France and over twice the price of the USA consumer. It is the amount of subsidy that is for the most part causing the difference, subsidy is a cost that has to be carried, so a wind farm getting paid more than the going rate is a massive additional cost and never a saving.
The other part missing from your argument, these subsidies are for the most part being used to reduce the need to tax in the Countries were these State owned industries are based.
January 14, 2026
Which shows how useless UCL and other universities are. No wonder the Arabs are cancelling their students coming here, apart from all the lgbt and jihardi nonsense.
The wholesale price is much higher than it needs to be because it includes the carbon tax and gas stations have to close down whenever the wind blows or the sun shines. Gas prices have halved recently.
January 14, 2026
@Sakara Gold – As today reported in the media
“Miliband prepared to add £1.8bn to energy bills with wind farm blitz”
“Energy Secretary awards hefty subsidies to help fund six new offshore wind farms”
“Electricity under these subsidies will be some 50pc higher price than last year’s average price, and on 20-year inflation-linked contracts.”
“The UK now has among the highest electricity prices in the developed world and cost of living is at the top of voters’ concerns. A further expansion of wind capacity would be highly reckless and would make electricity unaffordable.”
By every measure the UK will pay more than its competitors, increasing costs and hurting earnings
January 14, 2026
Let’s have an opt-out. This should, be a 20 year lock in.
Mr Gold should be able to Choose Green energy which should be ringfenced. No subsidies. Normal costs offset from taxes paid.
I want to choose oil and gas and I’m happy with the world spot price and it’s fluctuations. No subsidies. Normal costs offset from taxes paid.
Such a sigining in exercise would also let the people express their considered preference.
Same for Halal/kosher killing v humane killed meat.
January 14, 2026
And when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine we need a reliable system to do the job for them.
Which means we might just as well have the reliable system to begin with and scrap the unreliable, intermittent bird mincers.
January 14, 2026
Recent governments have made the mistake of being swept along by recent fads, from recycling to “global warming”.
This has diverted them from dealing with environmental problems that are real and current, such as the depletion of insects in some areas and plastics in the oceans.
The one thing that works well is conservation. It is out of fashion right now but, as soon as we have a government that again allows a free market in most goods and services, the link between saving money and reducing environmental impact will again be restored.
If the public sector – from Ed Milliband’s silly policies to empty buses running through villages, to the BBC using thousands of taxis, to subsidies for a train services that expect people to use private transport to travel to and from them etc etc – were subjected to a proper environmental impact audit, I am sure the results would show that they have damaged the environment far more than any private sector activity could do
January 14, 2026
Oh Tony Blair DISCOVERED recycling.
Nobody had ever thought of it before.
January 15, 2026
Lynn
Yes he probably discovered it from his own parents like most of us, the second World War was the teacher for them.
Adapt and apply, Re-use or re purpose everything you can !
January 14, 2026
Global Co2 is 0.04% of the Earths atmosphere. The UK emits < than 1% of that (<0.004%) When Miilband has virtually destroyed the country and IF he reaches 'net zero' It will make absolutely no difference to global Co2 because China alone will take that up in weeks.
Meanwhile, we'll be relying on the wind blowing at exactly the right speed and the sun shining (not at night though! ) to produce enough electricity for our expanding population.
A policy of the madhouse. Which seems to be where this country is heading under the failing, incompetent Labour party, led by the chief half-wit Starmer.
January 14, 2026
Agree
January 14, 2026
Following Starmers latest U-turns (13 now I believe) I read a comment on Facebook that made me laugh out loud.
“The only thing Starmer hasn’t U-turned is the boats” 🙂 🙂
January 14, 2026
We need a few U-boats!
January 14, 2026
Your figures seem low, considering the official report I commented on yesterday, which was still underestimated but put the cost at £76trillion.
In any case both figures are well beyond what the country can afford – so why doesn’t that slow down the progress of this destructive scheme. Are we still following WEF guidelines?
To commit the country, as Labour did, to a project that at the time was uncosted yet we were expected to go along with it because they said so, was worse than pure ideological irrationality, it was criminal.
It still is and the plug should be pulled NOW.
January 14, 2026
Historically, CO2 has never been a problem to our planet. The truth is that without CO2 we would cease to exist as all plant life relies upon it to grow. As for dangers of global warming, I would point out that around a couple of thousand years ago the Romans grew vines along Hadrian’s Wall and made wine and “Greenland” was farmed by the Vikings. Neither are now applicable because we’ve cooled down. So what is the problem now, I wonder?
We’ll suffer much more when global cooling takes hold and the planet experiences another ice age.
Extra terrestrial objects and orbits are the cause of climate change and earthlings can do nothing to change it.
Net Zero – it’s a scam.
January 14, 2026
While gold rapidly approaches a once-unthinkable $5,000/oz, the real price of gold would be orders of magnitude higher – if it was needed to back the money already in circulation
What would the gold price be if it had to back the global money supply?
According to VanEck, if gold were to back M0 (base money), it would need to trade at $39,210 per ounce. If gold were to back M2 (broad money), it would need to trade at $184,211 per ounce. These figures represent the price required to ‘cover’ the outstanding money liabilities in a scenario where gold becomes the primary reserve asset again
Under the classic gold standard, paper currency was merely a claim cheque for physical gold in a vault. That link was fully severed in 1971, moving the world to a ‘fiat’ system where money is backed only by government decree
Developed markets are struggling with high government debt, forcing central banks to print more money to keep the system liquid. As the pile of paper money grows toward infinity, the value of the finite asset, gold, must rise to keep up
Gordon Brown sold the bulk of the UK’s gold at the bottom of the market 1999-2002.
Rock on, Mr Prudence
January 14, 2026
If the government had surplus cash, it would need it to pay down the national debt first, not buy gold.
Gold is good for a country when it goes to war, as it can use it to buy weapons when the value of its printed currency looks doubtful. In normal times, gold is useless.
January 14, 2026
Yes sadly the £ is no longer = to a lb of gold.
Such as our currency been debased.
January 14, 2026
You may recall that I also hold gold as ‘insurance’ SG – against currency devaluation and to offset $/£ movements but not as an “investment”. Gold has indeed done very well recently. It’s up 56% in 12 months but then a simple FTSE 100 Tracker has also risen 24% over the same period and delivered a 3.4% dividend (at a much lower TER). Some UK stocks have done very much better than Gold this past year.
But had you brought gold in the summer of 2011, you would have needed to wait until the autumn of 2019 to just get back to your 2011 purchase price and probably paid a 1%+ TER each year. So I advise my sons to have some gold but to be sure to have a lot of other (more productive) investments too. My house is insured against fire but (of course) but I hope to never make a claim against it. I think of gold in the same way…
PS But yes, I do expect inflation to climb again…
January 15, 2026
@IanT
Rolls Royce has indeed done well recently. It’s rare for a FTSE 100 company to produce ‘bagger’ returns but if you had bought RR at below £2 three years ago you would be pleased that yesterday it was over £12
January 14, 2026
“The last argument [net zero increases world CO2] cuts through with more of the politicians and officials than the prosperity, tax and job arguments.
Correct, Sir John. This is because the real, religious CAGW/Net Zero zealots believe that no expense, however enormous and including human lives, should be spared to save the planet. And for the Far Left, the sole purpose of the CAGW/Net Zero scam IS to sabotage the West’s energy, industry, economy and national security.
January 14, 2026
The real missing link or maybe the intended malicious punishment and intent. These projects cost money, lots of money, the largest expenditure the people of this country have ever been asked to pay for. But, Parliaments first move was to remove the means to pay, fund, this new future – they cancelled everyone’s future before unleashing their malicious retribution on the nation. Parliament the powers that be, deindustrialised the country as their first step, they robbed the country of its income. For what, nothing, zilch, we now have to pay more to import things we already had, paying more while denied the income to fund these imports. All the time they by design were adding by another magnitude to pollution they pretended to want to reduce. – Had they Parliament thought it through? or maybe they did and destruction was the aim.
Some just blame this Government, but we have had more than 10years of this attrition with pretend different Governments, yet it is Parliament in control, empowered and paid to hold their chosen Government to account. It is their Government, their leadership they chose it and own it.
Its a demonstration that those in Parliament our so-called MPs are not fit for purpose. We need our democracy back and that starts with constituents choosing and funding candidates, and having elections every 2 years to confirm the direction being taken. That is the real way of a democracy, its not about protecting MPs, its about protecting the people, the nation. Parliament its MPs need and have to be challenged, they should not be able to hide and do irreversible damage according to their personal ideological religion, they work for and are paid by us.
January 14, 2026
Today in the Media
Craig Guildford, the head of the West Midlands Police, admitted that his force had used AI to mislead MPs and as a way to find evidence of previous trouble with the Israeli team. The AI search found social media posts about a non-existent match! Persecuted people on a nothing event.
MPs use AI for their speeches, email etc. Then we get from the authorities, UK Police & Data from NSPCC confirm the top sites for recording sexual offences against children are Snapchat 54%, Instagram 11%, Facebook 7%, WhatsApp 6-9%, X 1-2%.
A commentator in the Telegraph yesterday admitted using regular AI on a photo of a friend to get the image to wear a bikini and the sent it to him. It clearly wasn’t real it was just fun!
You then get to ask is AI being used to support Global Warming, the type with personal political views, we know there no science is involved.
Then ask who does TwoTierKier want banned, is it his supporting AI or the AI that throws a spanner at his plan – on the pretence of keeping us(read Him) safe?
January 14, 2026
Labour has abandoned plans for compulsory digital ID for workers. ‘Workers’? not defined
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/13/labour-scraps-plans-for-compulsory-digital-id-u-turn-uk/
Is that another ‘U’ turn or was it like everything coming out of Parliament a finger in the air to see which way the wind was blowing?
January 14, 2026
Oh no ……how will he stop the illegal migrants without digital I.D.
January 14, 2026
Gotta blame something or someone I suppose for our stupid decision of ten years ago to bring us to this nadir and now against all the data and analysis collected by the worlds top scientists there are those who would still call it out, challenge it, like Trumpism they would push forward their own argument based solely on cost. And despite the warming climate all round staring us with spiking temperatures, increased flooding with more and more coastal erosion and rising sea levels and of course devastating fires here we have people of a Trumpian disposition nos being elevated to the Higher House who challenges the data like he alone knows best – Heaven help us all – it’s like the return of the Luddites
January 14, 2026
Net Zero is apparenyly all about saving the planet from extinction by reducing CO2 levels.
So can I ask, assuming the UK eventually achieves this ambition:-
1. How long is the estimated delay before the UK’s achievement results in a world tempersture reduction.
And…
2 How much will this temperature reduction be?
January 14, 2026
Your arguement that the cost of net zero is too high is true. But beyond that is the simple fact that Global Warming/Climate Change is completely natural, and has been happening for thousands of years. It has absolutely nothing to do with CO2, which is a beneficial gas for the Earth.
Until our MPs wake up and realise they are following a totally false prospectus, they will continue to spend money we do not have until they bankrupt the UK.
If Solar and Windmills were the answer, and genuinely cheaper than fossil fuels, then why do they need subsidies? I got no government subsidy on my mobile phone, yet I still bought one!
January 14, 2026
Electric car battery raw materials, worlds biggest mining countries.
Graphite – China
Aluminium – China
Nickel – Indonesia
Copper – Chile
Steel – China
Lithium – Australia
Iron – Australia (then China)
Cobalt – DR of Congo
Manganese – South Africa (then China)
China is the worlds biggest co2 emitter, and import many chinese branded EVs, tariff & duty free due to net-zero
January 14, 2026
I will let you into a little secret. Starmer using law to insist the big messaging apps reveal to the British government what each and every citizen has been saying to each other is a very risky move.
For lots of reasons, one of the main ones being that the people at the top of the messaging apps companies will also have access to Starmers, and other politicians, messages between themselves for years. Some of which would look interesting in the news at election time.
Starmer is picking fights with people who will win every time, it is madness.
January 14, 2026
This Government seems to have a policy of ‘carry on regardless’ of the damage it might do to our industrial base ,our economy, employment etc.
Why we can’t see that this policy will damage the UK, will hand business to other countries, will affect GDP and is somewhat naive and stupid I will never understand.
The direct consequence of such policies is that China, Russia, India, America, will all benefit at our expense.The UK is left with struggling industries, higher running costs, and buying products from outside the UK because we cant afford to compete anymore because of power/gas/oil prices which we now have to import from other countries at inflated prices.
All this to be the first to get to net zero when the rest of the World are talking a good talk but doing very little about it.
There seems to be a serious lack of brain cells in the Labour government!
January 14, 2026
2025 temperatures were lower than 2024 and 2023, global temperatures eased in 2025, falling back from the record-breaking highs of last year, according to new figures from Europe’s Copernicus climate service and the Met Office https://www.gbnews.com/news/world/global-temperatures-dropped-2025-scientists-admit
So why are we doing net-zero
January 14, 2026
looks like the Americans are going to finish off the Iranian regime, about time really
January 15, 2026
We banned smoking, coal, plastic bags, 30mph, light blubs, heavy industry, asthma inhalers, straws, fracking gas, north sea oil, fun etc ….and taxed everything else to death ….whats it all achieved, when’s enough enough
January 15, 2026
…and the endless recycling and the number of plastic wheeie bins
January 15, 2026
The EU has signed off on Germany’s plan for a new fleet of gas-fired power plants as they look to reduce power prices for their struggling industry. After trying intermittent renewables, Germany is building new gas plant
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-14/merz-says-eu-has-signed-off-on-german-plan-for-new-gas-plants?embedded-checkout=true&fbclid=IwY2xjawPWCcZleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETA4Qnh3amdvRGlvSXJaeFdkc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHjIQLSX4LK0tiRU3NL1lGzOgR5I5FGS5ILeEgWQk0sWZIo6fAnZicJN50JEZ_aem_X-rr150Oi3A1ftWTC9PzjQ
I tell you, we’re the only one’s doing net-zero