I have long been putting the case that the main net zero policies being pursued by successive U.K. governments are damaging to our economy and add to world CO 2 output. I have pointed out that getting our own gas out instead of importing LNG saves a large amount of CO 2 whilst generating jobs and tax revenue at home. The last government accepted this view and proposed more domestic gas and oil, only for this new government to stupidly cancel the policy.
I pointed out that trying to phase out and then ban new diesel and petrol cars prematurely would damage U.K. car investment and production. It will probably lead to people importing nearly new petrol cars instead. More people buying EVs will increase CO 2 for their manufacture and lead to more gas being burned in power stations to recharge them. I have set out the damage heat pumps will do. The Ā last government did push back the ban on new petrol cars but failed to lift the penal and damaging tax on selling the wrong types of new car.
My critics say I should spend my time rebutting climate change theory. As an MP I did not see it as my job to change peopleās beliefs. I did not seek to make Muslims of Christians, Catholics of Anglicans Ā or atheists of all. I recognised I had two groups ,two powerful minorities on climate change, deniers Ā versus fanatics. My arguments were designed to tackle the practical issues and consequences of net zero policies. Pointing Ā out how absurd key policies are in CO 2 terms as well as the jobs and tax arguments was designed to win over moderate climate change believers, as it did partially with the previous government.
I will continue to make the case for urgent and important policy changes to arrest the damage to industry,jobs and investment the key net zero policies of this government are doing. This case is also environmental. I have always allowed freedom to both sides in the climate debate to state their case here. I have on various occasions raised important questions about climate change theory myself. The immediate need is to alter policy on power generation, EVs, electric heating and the accelerated run down of everything from steel to cars, from petrochemicals to nuclear power. That Ā requires maximising support from both sides of the climate divide. I will restate my thoughts on the weather issues tomorrow.
October 7, 2024
Good morning.
There are two things that are not being covered on this issue, although our kind host does mention one. The first is that we have never left the EU. The EU dictates our policy. If we had left the EU we could plot our own course. We need to have an honest admission that BREXIT has not happened.
The second is China. Isn’t it odd that all policies which either derive directly or indirectly from the EU seem to benefit China ? Wind turbines made in China. Solar panels made in China. EV Batteries made in China. And so on.
We need an honest open debate and accept that the political class has been captured by China, either directly or indirectly via the EU.
October 7, 2024
At one time there was a lot of talk about that countryās influence in āourāparliament.
All quiet about it now.
Not a word!
October 7, 2024
Chagos given effectively to China too.
Net Zero is clearly total insanity even if you quite wrongly think CO2 is a devil gas (that will give us a fiery hell on earth) the things being pushed EVs, heatpumps, public transport, road blocking, renewables, carbon capture, walking, cyclingā¦ make little sense as they save little or no CO2 anyway. Total insanity.
October 7, 2024
Correct. We are signed up to the EU’s (actually the UN/WEF’s) Net Zero policy. And we are not allowed to compete with our frenemies across the channel. It’s why Sunak moved the ban from 2030 to 2030 after the EU did.
Our best hope to end the destructive Net Zero lunacy is for the German people to balk at the loss of their totemic manufacturing base; the Italians to blatantly ignore “the rules;” the eastern bloc to refuse to go along with the madness and the French to riot.
October 7, 2024
Totally agree with your assessment ā¦.and if you read the labour manifesto on net-zero, the only conclusion one can draw is the destruction of the UK manufacturing and the collapse of the free working class under a command government
October 7, 2024
It’s interesting that you use the analogy of changing religion because that’s exactly what Net Zero is, a religion.
No basis of facts just a zealous pursuit of the impossible. The fact it is bankrupting us has no place in the religious discussion. I would have thought politicians should be calling out the nonesense especially when the majority of the public understand the stupidity.
As for changing Christians to Muslims, this is a work in progress with the daily invasion as can be seen in our cities with their weekly demonstrations.
October 7, 2024
That is absolutely NOT the case. The vast majority of the people believe the nonsense. They donāt have the time or inclination to research the matter themselves, so they believe what they hear, read and see in the media. The media is 100% supportive of net zero.
October 7, 2024
Good Morning,
There is no parallel between the CO2 dogma and religions of philosophy and deity. The CO2 dogma has become policy because we have leaders too lazy to follow the scientific soar ‘Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence’. Climate change is science, not very well established science and therefore open to abuse by charlatans and PPE graduates. Follow the money.
October 7, 2024
Indeed, and worse still, a religion tainted by zealotry on the part of its self appointed prophets and disciples, not a live and let live religion. Then add in the fact that one of the highest ranking zealots is Ed Miliband, the High Sparrow (in Game of Thrones terms) of the perceived only true word.
October 7, 2024
When there isnāt enough electricity to go round we will be rationed. The govt. will just do that āload sheddingā thing that they have been doing in SA for years.
And we will all have to poke up with it!
I think we all can see by now that there a lot of integrity involved in any of this.
October 7, 2024
**
thereās NOT a lot of integrity.
October 7, 2024
The electric companies are increasing the pressure for customers to install a smart meter. Both myself and my neighbour have been told our meters have to be checked to ensure they are working properly. What’s the betting we are told they need to be changed and only a smart meter is available. My meters, gas and electric, are only about 10 years old. Load shedding here we come. Stock up on candles and be prepared to live in a third world country .
October 7, 2024
Very few educated, sane, balanced people argue that climate does not change. The abundance of data from past geological time indicates that it has always been changeable. There is nothing to suggest that this will not continue. The main driver is solar activity with contributions from volcanoes, asteroid collisions, and continental shift. The fanciful idea that man can take this under control, short of all out atomic warefare, is for the birds.
The reasons that a small number of diciples of such thinking, leading to Nett Zero, promote it, must be looked for elsewhere. The desire to promote a new political philosophy, personal notoriety, or “Britains got talent” hall of fame. Their messaiantic drive must not be allowed to jeopodise a very real need to clean up our planet. This can, with the help of science and engineering, be achieved, without driving us back to the stone age. We can go a long way down this path as the UK alone without harming our quality of life. Even making a few bob out of it on the way. We can even mitigate against the effects of real climate change if we so choose. I’m thinking in terms of such as the Thames Barrier or growing more wine, but doing it under our own control, not a french champagne house.
There is only one political party that buys into my thinking, the majority are wallowing in a glut of snake oil in an electoral market that is fast drying up, because the taxpayer can not afford the luxury of unachievable Nett Zero.
So for the next 4+ years we can look forward more taxation, more industrial vandalism, less real investment , and a helter skelter ride down the slope of personal GDP, 21st place and falling.
October 7, 2024
Agree with all of your points, and add in population growth, the more people the more energy in all forms they consume, water, heat, light, power, infrastructure, homes schools, hospitals, roads etc etc.
October 7, 2024
I do not know anyone who argues that climate does not change of course it does, and mankind is one of millions of factors in this. Most factor like solar activity, volcanic activity, human activity are not very predictable anyway. The term Climate Change Denier is just evil abuse. Is there a human CO2 driven cliamte emergency almost certainly not. A bit more is actually probably a net good on balance.
October 7, 2024
Agricola,
An excellent post.
October 7, 2024
You ask simple questions John to which so far few politicians will give a sensible answer.
Perhaps we do not have enough politicians who will ask the right questions ?
October 7, 2024
With respect Sir John, ACC is not a religious issue (although its proponents act and speak with religious zeal). It is a matter of science.
There is not a single scientific study to support it, only computer modelling while there are volumes of real data and accumulated evidence that emphatically deny ACC. It has been cooked up by evil people with the intention of impoverishment and control of the whole World, imo.
I speak out with anger, not religious zeal. All the damage you meticulously point to is intentional, was kicked off in the Blair/Brown regime, continued in the Con regimes and now speeded up in the latest regime.
I recommend looking into yet another evil being inflicted on the World and that is geo engineering. No longer conspiracy theory and with the capability of doing immense harm, with some already done.
October 7, 2024
The whole thing has been a ghastly manipulation of green policies ( origins in German politics) by the world-dominating ambitions of Marxists.
The greens believed the Marxists to be honourable and allowed them into their Rainbow group.
The Marxists saw such potential for extensive power in promoting fears of a worldwide āproblemā like acid rain.
And then we were all imprisoned in our houses.
New Normal.
The End.
October 7, 2024
Trying to get my head around “As an MP I did not see it as my job to change peopleās beliefs”.
October 7, 2024
I wonder what contribution human beings make to CO2 levels – by simply breathing. We inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide all our lives. Given that plants (all plants or just trees?) do the opposite, I wonder what would happen to the climate if all 8 billion of us vanished.
October 7, 2024
I agree with your rationale especially outsourcing our gas, oil and electricity generation. We must be completely self sufficient to ensure we keep industry functioning, to provide jobs for working people and their families and to ensure our own energy supply is secure. Currently off shore wind turbines and LNG tankers are totally insecure. These crucial issues should be our number one priority rather than Co2. Having read IPCC reports I remain sceptical that their conclusions are based on solid verifiable data because computer modelling is so badly flawed. Add to this significant political influence once āguidance to policy makersā documents are issued leads me to conclude this is a political project rather than a true reliable verifiable scientific one. Your last sentence troubles me Sir John. Weather is not Climate and never has been. Climate is the analysis of weather studied over long time scales eg 20 – 30 years.
October 7, 2024
I suppose that it is all a bit like the long, long building of cathedrals in order to glory God.
Many lives lost in the dangerous work but much money changed hands and enriched some.
Now itās ugly windmills.
At least cathedrals are beautiful.
But both are seats of power.
October 7, 2024
Sunak deserves some credit for slowing down the insane rush to Net zero blackouts and job losses. The fact that he was only able to slow it down slightly, rather than stop it altogether, shows how powerful the forces behind the Green ideology were and are. As long as the public remain in thrall to billionaire influencers and their bought-and-paid-for media hacks, little of significant value can be achieved, in my view. There have been times in the past when British people put up with a lot of hardship because they thought it was a price worth paying to get a better world. It looks like we are seeing the same again. My impression is that there is now more, not less support for the Green agenda. A BBC report back in 2006 said that polling showed a high level of scepticism on Green taxes, but more recent polling suggests otherwise. I wonder how far rational argument is going to work against rampant eco-zealotry. It has become a dominant world-view – call it a religion if you like – and as such can only be defeated by giving people something better to believe in. That is how Martin Luther succeeded in winning hearts and minds. He was a Reformer, btw.
October 7, 2024
Follow the money
October 7, 2024
Sir John, earlier this year you reported on this blog that you had attended a lecture and book launch by Judith Curry, an eminent climatologist. Iāve read her book. Did you?
As Curry probably explained when you saw her, she was part of the so called scientific āconsensusā up to about 15 years and then stepped aside. She has been labelled a denier by the climate zealots, but she is not. Curry accepts the theory and evidence that man made CO2 is contributing to global warming, but not at the pace the zealots would have us believe.
Based upon her own analysis of the science and the latest reports of the IPCC, Curry asserts that we have until the end of the century to fully decarbonise the worldās electricity supplies. In the meantime, the most likely warming scenarios are, on balance, pointing towards beneficial outcomes.
So Curryās thesis is that we have time. Time for new technologies to deliver their benefits (without Governments distorting or forcing the markets) whilst still maintaining abundant supplies of cheap, abundant and increasingly clean energy – the future well being and development of the Worldās population depends on it.
As for the UK, not only do we have the highest electricity prices in the world, but also I understand that our consumption of electricity is lower than 20 years ago – a recipe for de-growth!
October 7, 2024
You can see the truth Sir JR, as can I and many others. But we are silenced and insulted by the zealots of climate religion. It needs voices in parliament to speak up, but who will do it? They cower on the green benches frightened to speak out.
Farage will probably try when given the opportunity. Reform though are a likely to be a voice in the wilderness of a political class who follow fashion not science.
October 7, 2024
Sir John,
I am a climate realist. That does not make me a climate denier. Too much use of the term Climate Denier has been the prime focus of the Climate Alarmists because it portrays their opponents as knuckle dragging morons.
I have never met anyone that denies climate change.
Climate is constantly changing, it is why we have the variability between ice ages and mild climate periods common throughout Earth’s history.
The unalterable (by man) climate variability is why the Climate Alarmists have utilised it to progress their deindustrialisation ambitions. The time we spend attempting to disprove a false premise is potentially endless, and they know that.
We have to be careful we do not adopt denigrating words that aid the Alarmists.
When someone uses the words ‘climate denier’, they are actually referring to those of us who are Climate Realists. The Alarmists won’t use the word ‘realist’ because they know, that bestows credibility to us and our position.
For the avoidance of doubt, Man made Climate Change is a hoax.
October 7, 2024
The zealots who infest the Establishment and the politicians who are “incentivised” by the Globalists to continue the Net Zero lunacy are impervious to debate. It has nothing to do with the climate and everything to do with reducing living standards; transfer of wealth and control.
What they’re not impervious to is civil unrest; loss of power/position because people refuse to vote for them; competition from upstart “populist” parties and possible replacement by them.
The treacherous British Establishment may be content to destroy what remains of our manufacturing industry but the German Government will not be able to sacrifice their automotive industry or their other totemic manufacturing and chemical companies. The same goes for whoever is attempting to govern France.
The politicians within the EU (and therefore the UK since we are “in lockstep” with the EU) will not be able to withstand the fury of millions of people who watch as their industries/jobs are destroyed and their communities are shattered to supposedly deliver the futile dream of controlling the climate.
October 7, 2024
When considering your piece about the weather, Sir John, please may I direct you to an article recently published in the Washington Post, not a climate change denying organ, which reported on modeling of the worldās climate over the past 485 million years. It would appear that we are emerging from an historically and unprecedented very low period of global temperatures: āScientists have captured the Earthās climate over the past 485 million years. Hereās the surprising place were we stand now.ā It appears that the planet might be returning to normal.
October 7, 2024
When considering your piece about the weather, Sir John, please may I direct you to an article recently published in the Washington Post, not a climate change denying organ : āScientists have captured the Earthās climate over the past 485 million years. Hereās the surprising place were we stand now.ā It would appear that we are emerging from an historically and unprecedented very low period of global temperaturesIt appears that the planet might be returning to normal.