I wrote an article for the Telegraph showing how the government target to decarbonise our electricity system by 2030 was looking more and more unlikely. I pointed out that on their own numbers the government needs £44 bn a year for six years of investment in renewables and extra grid. Over the last year a number of leading green energy shares have been poor performers. Hornsea 4 a 3.2 GW wind farm planned for off the Yorkshire coast has been put off. Most of the investment needed has to come from the private sector given the state of the public finances.
Most of the readers comments were very critical of net zero policy and saw the dangers and implausibility. One complained I had only just worked this out! Strange when I was against the 2009 Climate Change Act and refused to vote for it, and went on to write various articles and short books in recent years explaining why consumers will not buy into heat pumps and battery cars on the scale envisaged.
Most interesting in the current government plan is how little extra electricity they propose for 2030. If their other plans for a large expansion of heat pumps and battery cars took off as they wish they would need a very large increase in power output. In this respect their plans seem more realistic .
The pace of deindustrialisation is the main way they are getting UK CO 2 down, relying on imports which boost world CO 2 whilst reducing ours. Inviting in large numbers of extra people is incompatible with faster reduction of UK CO 2 but that does not seem to bother them.
August 25, 2025
One symptom of mental disorder can be the belief in the unreal. Red Ed shows all the indications in his messianic wide eyed delivery, on the rare occasions he surfaces to explain himself. There is little that is honest in his approach to achieving none polluting power. Nor is it backed by good engineering and scientific principals. In a business sense what he is doing to the UK economy is an unmitigated disaster. It is a destroyer of industry. Combine it with Rachael from accounts complaints handling of the economy and you have complete disaster or a pathway to the door of the IMF.
August 25, 2025
Agricola, you are correct that the current Labour zealots are following lunatic policies. Net zero, immigration, benefits profligacy, etc. The problems have been well documented by Sir John and others. Sensible solutions have also been well aired.
Which brings me back to the base question. How do we elect MPs with the calibre and foresight to take the right decisions for the country?
August 25, 2025
In reply PeterB.
Choose your aspiring MP using much the same criteria you would use in engaging a hip replacement surgeon. Qualified, track record of success, recommendation, and do we trust whoever on meeting. Specific to MPs I would demand success in their chosen career, such that the salary is of no great importance, ie.one that does not govern the size of mortgage they can get. Adequate, legitimate, publicly accounted for expenses should be significant. There are more than enough risks in being an MP.
August 25, 2025
Unfortunately I can only choose from those on the ballot paper. Few will meet the criteria you set out.
August 25, 2025
Reply from the IMF, following application from Starmer, et al, for a emergency loan.
Dear Prime Minister,
We acknowledge your request for a loan for the UK. Upon review of your economic policies we believe the lack of adequate financial resources is entirely of your own making, and therefore will not be prepared to provide funds until you make the following policy changes:
1. Cancel your plans to achieve ‘Net Zero’, by any future date. The science is not fixed nor universally agreed.
2. You need to re-open your gas and oil fields to reduce costly imports. Try taking product instead of royalties to keep a steady, low cost supply of energy.
3. Stop paying money to foreign governments for no benefit to the UK economy.
4. Stop importing foreign nationals who are an expense to the economy.
5. Reduce the cost the the Civil Service by 30%.
6. Restructure the NHS, eliminate all D.E.I. and similar jobs and remove 50% of ‘managers’.
We look forward to hearing from you again when the above has been achieved.
August 25, 2025
Pw
If only !
August 25, 2025
We watched ‘yes Prime Minister’ recently. It was made between 1982 and 1988.
The cost of the NHS at that time was £12 billion pa.
August 25, 2025
Indeed would be good if the government did not spend so much doing actual net harms too. Net Zero, dangerous Covid Vaccines, Lockdowns, HS2, payments to encourage ever more feckless to be idle, payments to augment low skilled immigration, soft loans for largely pointless worthless degrees…
August 25, 2025
I like it !
August 25, 2025
Indeed the policy is insane in so many ways.
1. A bit more plant, tree and crop food is a good thing on balance anyway as is slightly hotter (and it would only be very slightly hotter even if atmospheric CO2 doubled if you do the physics/maths).
2. All the government “solutions” pushed to decrease CO2 output do not really work they just export the CO2 and damage the economy in the process.
3. Even if the above two were not true (they are) you would still need world wide cooperation and that will never happen.
As you say “If their other plans for a large expansion of heat pumps and battery cars took off as they wish they would need a very large increase in power output.” Indeed and the expansion of heat pumps will also create a huge extra winter demand just for the very few cold days (this is when heat pumps are also least efficient).
So you might well need 10 times the electricity capacity on these days as on summer days. You therefore need huge and very expensive extra grid and generating capacity just to cover these few days. This large capital investment in grid and generation is largley wasted for circa 90% of the year. Plus a grid conecting thousants of windfarms (often offshore) an solar farms to users is vastly more expensive than one just connection a few gas, coal or nuclear power stations to users. Then we have the back up issue no sig. solar in winter so you need gas back up for when the wind does not blow so them 20 times generating capacity is needed again wasted for most of the year.
Note a gas power station to electricity then a grid to deliver this energy to the users then heat pumps to warm buildings save no CO2 over just heating with gas when accounted for properly. Plus with the latter you do not have the huge extra winter demand issue and grid issues.
August 25, 2025
Do these classics, law and PPE graduates ever discus their bonkers plans with a competent and honest engineer or physicist?
August 25, 2025
Reply to LL.
Problem is, political parties choose candidates, not the electorate. I see political parties as one of the biggest problems. The current party in government prove the point daily. They govern for the party and survival, absolutely not for the country. The situation we enjoy is writ clear as a result.
August 25, 2025
Yes, David Cameron’s A-List for example. I still recoil when a certain former candidate of his appears on Sky’s Press Review. She’s returned to the law for a living now (thank goodness) but what a miserable, embittered person she comes across as…
August 25, 2025
Indeed and baroness Warsi as Tory chairperson!
August 25, 2025
Indeed but even if the electorate had more say in the candidates they still would not do as instructed once elected plus the blob, judiciary, quangoes, int. quangoes… would stop them even if they tried too. Direct democracy is the only real democracy. A vote every five years for mainly manifesto liars or people who can be bought or are just on the make is not democracy in any real sense. You can change the faces but not the policies!
August 25, 2025
Actually they do.
Been there, done that.
August 25, 2025
Even if some of this large extra winter electricty demand does comes from wind you still have all the energy needed to construct, connect and back up these wind turbines. So it makes little sense even just in CO2 terms – let alone in economic terms. It is just industrial, economic and even defencive suicide from Tomb Stone PPE Oxon. Ed!
August 25, 2025
@Lifelogic – stop being logical and sensible. The UK Parliament, its Government don’t want that.
The other bit you missed was the demand, by Government and Parliament for the large data stores to help them monitor us all. The daily power they need along with those you mentioned at a guess outstrips the power consumed this century and more.
August 25, 2025
Good morning,
Which results in a lower tax take, higher unemployment and benefits bill, and an increase in the National Debt, and less money to spend on services.
What is obvious to many here, including our kind host, seems to be lost on those in the driving seat. But zealots and fanatics are like that.
August 25, 2025
It does not even reduce worldwide CO2 either! Bonkers in every way you care to look at it!
August 25, 2025
They just look at the continuity of very rich people in the world and suppose they haven’t gone far enough. Then they discover the wealth of the mega-rich is beyond HMRC reach and tax working people instead.
August 25, 2025
@Mark B – the hidden costs. The forced deindustrialisation without thinking it through doesn’t stop the need for the goods and services. What it does do is increase World Production, World emissions and the forced removal by Parliament and Government of the ‘UK’s wealth’ to foreign usually State beneficiaries. The UK Taxpayer is being forced to fund the World.
What it doesn’t do is cause NetZero
August 25, 2025
Should UK reach net zero, it will result in a lowering of atmospheric co2 by 4 PPM (parts per million)
Well worth the loss of our remaining industry/covering fields with solar panels/the land and sea with turbines. All at a cost of trillions.
Though that 4 PPM will of course be taken up by China as it supplies us the things we used to make.
Virtue signalling at it’s finest …….
August 25, 2025
Old Albion – agreed
August 25, 2025
Milliband doesn’t even seem to know his brief. Recently Lee Anderson asked him a straight question in parliament – What would be the temperature difference be if the UK achieved net zero tomorrow. He ignored that and told parliament a lie. He said 60 other countries were already following what we are doing, but did not name one. If the Speaker/Assistant speaker cannot force Ministers to answer the question and be truthful, what is the point of that expensive office? It’s all a sham to try to fool the paying public in my opinion. Never has parliament sunk so low, not just with poor MP’s but also poor quality Speaker and Deputy Speakers.
Reply The Speaker is the servant of the House which proceeds by majority vote. The Speaker cannot make a Minister tell us something but he can take action if a Minister lies.
August 25, 2025
to reply Well get the Speaker to get Miliband to list the 60 countries and then decide whether he has lied or not.
August 26, 2025
And that is impossible to do, so on and on it goes, the public constantly gets short changed and the Ministers carry on with their fantasies.
August 25, 2025
Milibrains is the most dangerous man in Britain. He is being allowed to destroy large swathes of industry in his messianic pursuit of an unachievable goal.
He is throwing money at Carbin Capture and Storage which has never been successful at the same time destroying the North Sea industry.
Yesterday asi pointed out windmills were supplying omly 2% of demand, today it’s 5%.
We must hope for massive and prolonged power cuts this winter to stop this idiocy in its tracks.
Even the big unions have woken up to the fact there’re no well paid jobs in renewables, only in China.
August 25, 2025
@Ian wragg – is he? Or is he just the mouthpiece of a collective responsibility cabinet and PM. All acting with over 50% approval from Parliament. The money of ours he is throwing at things first comes from the Chancellor and once more with the approval of Cabinet and Parliament.
I think he is a nutter a religious zealot bu the system doesn’t let him act alone. Even if he does say or do things without asking those behind him the Cabinet, Parliament have the right to stop him, dismiss him. His noises reflect the state of the UK Parliament
August 25, 2025
“The pace of de-industrialisation is the main way they are getting UK CO 2 down, relying on imports which boost world CO 2 whilst reducing ours.”
That’s because it has nothing whatsoever to do with the climate and everything to do with de-industrialising the west; lowering our living standards and transferring wealth from the industrialised western nations to Asia and Africa. It is being driven by the UN and they effectively admitted several years ago that it is a SCAM.
U.N. climate chief Christina Figueres “the true aim of the U.N.’s 2014 Paris climate conference was to change the [capitalist] economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”
Ottmar Edenhofer, lead author of the IPCC’s fourth summary report ““One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth.”
The British Establishment and the Westminster Uni-Party are fully signed up to UN Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 (as is Charles Windsor) and they are imposing de-industrialisation, job destruction and impoverishment on the British people – to, supposedly, save 1% of global CO2 emissions.
It has nothing to do with the climate.
August 25, 2025
I totally agree with you, Donna.
They are destroying our environment on the altar of a deluded aim to cut a gas that isn’t causing an issue yet, at the same time polluting our rivers and seas and allowing overfishing; constantly increasing the UK population; building on productive farmland, and putting more vehicles on the roads. None of this makes sense, and I believe they have other motives, none of which are Green. Punishing the British people for not buying into their plans will not end well for them.
August 25, 2025
@Donna, @Christine – agreed.
‘climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth’ who’s wealth? The creators? This is the Globalist Socialist WEF doctrine of ‘The Great Reset’ writ large. The intention is for the wealth to permeate to the new authoritarians, the new lords with the minions by decree as their slaves – nothing changes. Socialist live in fear of people thriving, becoming resilient and self reliant and use every trick in the book to enslave them in their own personal view of a World order
August 25, 2025
+1 a psycho-ops attack – another one!
August 25, 2025
An interesting, and on-topic, article in The Daily Sceptic “Green Jobs Make Us Poorer.”
https://dailysceptic.org/2025/08/24/green-jobs-make-us-poorer/
Two snippets:
“The total number of green jobs in 2023 is alleged to be 690,900 up from 513,300 in 2015. Of these, 45,200 people were employed in environmental charities, 17,700 in environmental consulting and a staggering 19,400 were employed in “managerial activities of government bodies”. The lanyard class in action.”
“We can see that each offshore wind job cost £264,000 in subsidy, each onshore wind job cost over £309,000 and solar nearly £100,000. The average across all three sectors is over £192,000 per job.”
So British households are being forced to pay for lucrative “public sector” (inc Charity-Quango) jobs pushing the Net Zero nonsense …. and to massively subsidise the relatively few real jobs they lead to in the highly-visible “intermittent energy” industrialisation of our countryside and seascape.
August 25, 2025
Well researched. Again Milibrains exhortation about green jobs is seen to be another taxpayer funded scam.
Fortunately Rachel from complaints is going to have to phone th IMF soon and all these non jobs and subsidies will evaporate.
Let’s hope this forces a General Election.
August 25, 2025
I suspect economic woes will cause her to resign, to be replaced by another idiot who decides to push up income tax against their manifesto promise. They will claim it’s been forced on them, because of Brexit.
August 25, 2025
Add to that the 500,000 who work in HR departments! A non-job if ever there was one.
This can’t go on.
August 25, 2025
….and every local/national government building has security guards, DEI staff and every department its own H&S ….but no one employed to do actual WORK
My regional authority is busy with a regional photo competition and building more useless cycle-lanes; god forbid they’d repair a pot-hole
August 25, 2025
….and thats why Rome burned
August 25, 2025
+1 of course they do. They are a government grant farming scam!
August 25, 2025
John, I can only assume that most politicians are aware that the current net Zero polices are actually de-industrialising the UK.
If they are aware, why do they think de-industrialising at home only to import from abroad what we have lost, is a good idea ?
Do you think the majority of our MP’s are aware of the true cost of Net Zero, the need to expand and modernise our complete grid system, with not only more capacity, but more of our own connectors to the various mixed sources of generation and the locations of such.
I find it difficult to understand why they seem to want to continue with the chaos, expense, and loss of jobs that net Zero is causing.
Can you shed a light on their thinking, and why most are going along with it, surely they must have a clue, or do they.
I ask the above because you used to circulate with these people on a regular basis in years past, so may be able to shed a light on their thinking, or is it just blind subservience to their leaders.
Reply I spent years explaining this madness to some of them. Most of them were bound into the Treaty/scaremongering/Climate Change Committee propaganda and said polling told them most of the public agreed with the establishment.They did notvwant to challenge the establishment or listen to too many inconvenient facts. They just traded back the establishment sound bites.
August 25, 2025
So the ‘nudge unit’ is the only branch of government that is successful.
What does it think it’s doing? Does it think it will survive when we are all defeated?
August 25, 2025
Any UK government has a major problem.
The Met Office, a government-owned agency, sponsored by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) is quite unequivocal that “the evidence is clear: the main cause of climate change is burning fossil fuels such as oil, gas, and coal. When burnt, fossil fuels release carbon dioxide into the air, causing the planet to heat up”.
So what does any government do? Do they disband this agency and state everything they say is nonsense? do they say they will ignore them? do they say, probably correctly, that climate change is a natural process but pollution could be tackled more vigorously, but here again there is a problem as CO2 is classed as a pollutant and even endorsed as such by the US Supreme Court as an “air pollutant” under their Clean Air Act?
It has virtually become an unsolvable conundrum for western nations as they are presently constructed.
And all the while there are thousands of people making huge amounts of money out of it and thus continuing to perpetuate the argument.
August 25, 2025
“Climate – The Movie” is necessary viewing for some sanity on this issue. How many scientists have to state that the CO2 level increases in response to increasing temperature, not causing it? The refusal to debate dissenting climate specialists and even actively to censor them shows the untruths being foisted on us. It’s a repeat of the falsehoods of the Covid debacle. Why can’t people question what authorities tell them? We’re heading towards a time where any dissent will be punished severely.
August 25, 2025
Reply to Reply : You are correct, Sir John, A majority of the public have been brainwashed by the far left educational establishment and the BBC into believing that because CO2 is a greenhouse gas, not nearly as big as water vapour BTW, and emitted by burning fossil fuels, that we are responsible for every bad weather event and hence the “something must be done” is the UK’s Net Zero goal. They know their “science” is false which is why they refuse to allow any discussion on the BBC on this subject for fear of being proven to be wrong. Interestingly, however, I have been watching a recent ES&NZ Select Committee oral evidence session where a researcher (human geography) and pollsters were saying that the public’s acceptance of CAGW & Net Zero is waning.
August 25, 2025
I chose not to write with evidence for that particular topic. But I did make other contributions on nuclear and the general cost of energy. I was slightly surprised when a researcher for the ESNZ SC wrote to me asking me to contribute to a separate topic on nuclear planning and regulation – which I happily did. I guess my earlier contribution (which explained how the French were able to build a nuclear dominated grid at low cost, and highlighted some of the mistakes politicians from the 3 parties to have had energy ministers made) attracted some attention. It appears that at least in some quarters there is concern that there should be a plan B, since wind doesn’t seem to be working out too well. Applications to join the AR7 CFD round close on the 27th: with the rate of withdrawal from projects internationally it is far from certain that there will be a decent volume of bids when the auction takes place later. Ørsted is in serious difficulties; Equinor have withdrawn from all offshore projects in Australia; BP and Shell are reducing their renewables exposure; RWE wants to sell stakes in UK wind, etc. On top of which we have been having another year of low wind speeds on average, with increasing concern that Global Stilling might be a real element of climate change.
August 25, 2025
Well surely they are either ignorant & deluded fools who actually beleive in this mad religion or fraudsters on the make for consultancy fees, investment returns or for promotions? Any other explanations?
August 25, 2025
The cynical government method of championing Net Zero by importing an increasing amount of our energy including electricity, is typical of our political class both Left and Right, well Left and slightly less Left anyway.
Yesterday 40% of our electricity was coming via interconnectors plugged into France, Holland and Scandinavia.
We are forced to import col to enable the last vestiges of steel making because extracting our own resources is considered environmentally negative? We are forcing oil companies to leave UK controlled offshore waters by taxing them out of existence while importing the very same oil from the same companies this government is determined to close down?
We now import natural gas via liquified supply which is as crazy as it gets. Why? Because we have blocked extraction of our own indigenous supply that would be a permanent secure winter stock without having to purposely store imported liquified gas stock.
The impact of these energy policies which includes the slow build of nuclear and the purposely slow decision making regarding mini nuclear developments is to hollow out the UK’s manufacturing capacity and loss of native skills in all industries.
Why does the Uniparty in Westminster want to downgrade the UK’s industrial capability?
If anyone knows the answer to that question please let us know.
Reply There is no uniparty. Conservatives and Reform both oppose the oil and gas bans, the high energy taxes and prices and the de industrialisation. Reform condemns the whole net zero idea and backs the government over steel nationalisation. Conservatives condemn the net zero policies and says prosperity and the economy comes first, without attacking climate change theory.They are not in favour of unlimited subsidies for UK steel given the state of the national finances.
August 25, 2025
To reply:- Real Conservative perhaps condemn the Net Zero policies but not the Conservative party and not “engineer” Kemi. May’s Net Zero was nodded through without even a vote!
“Climate change theory” – the climate has always changed for billions of years and for thousands of reasons and will continue to do so. We cannot even predict many of the factors that affect this – like volcanoes, wars, meteor impacts, genetic plant variations, populations, solar storms… CO2 even doubling (all other factor being equal) will make is only a tiny warming difference and there are negative feedbacks too. But more CO2 plant food and slight warming is a net good anyway!
The deluded Climate change religion need debunking. Trump will hopefully get a red team to do this. The myth that the Covid “Vaccines” did net good will also be shown to be drivel too. The Japanese stats are truly appalling the UK is hiding waht will surely be similar figure!
Reply Badenoch and Couthino have come out against net zero policies and pro our own oil and gas.
August 25, 2025
John, If Kimi has stated the Conservative Party would make it policy to repeal and remove the Net Zero legislation currently driving us all mad and forcing economic destruction on British businesses, if she had agreed to do that simple thing, I would have remained a Tory member. No such commitment was forthcoming.
Reply She will need to repeal. the targets as she has made clear she thinks it too dear and difficult to hit them
August 25, 2025
Not only is it too dear it is also pointless. If UK Net Zero was actually achieved, which could be done by simply shutting down all activity and accelerating the pursuit of poverty, which our current political class seem focused on progressing. Even if all that was done, the impact on world climate would be less than the instruments in use to detect it.
In other words it is a waste of our time and money claiming to be world leaders in something that can not even be measured!
August 25, 2025
Less than the instruments in use ‘capability’ to detect it.
August 26, 2025
Reply to reply. The Uni-Party was fully functioning – until the blue branch was almost obliterated in 2024. The remnants of the blue branch are now desperately attempting to (persuade an exasperated electorate that they will) carry out a handbrake U-turn on most of the policies they were enthusiastically promoting only two years ago.
August 25, 2025
Sadly the Government do not have the courage to change direction and face the truth.
August 25, 2025
Group think deluded lunacy is hard to turn round!
August 25, 2025
Yes – group think of the 650 deluded and the 1000 in the pay of the deluded
August 25, 2025
Reply – Reply
Thank you, so not thinking it through themselves then, which is probably the same with most policies which they just vote through. Just like sheep following a leader, if the leader gets lost he gets them all lost.
This is the problem with group think (not thinking at all) which is why the Country is going down the drain.
We have too few competent and independent thinkers in Parliament who are prepared to challenge the “Party Line”.
August 25, 2025
It was very obvious from the outset that the net zero policy was not achievable within the timelines of 2030/2035 being set by both Conservative and Labour governments, if achievable at all.
The UK as always is a country that takes issues like net zero so seriously to the extent that we are prepared to see our own core manufacturing industries including steel and car production fail in order to decarbonise leading to massive job losses which for any government,especially a Labour government, is bizarre.
By doing so we have benefited the rest of the world who don’t see net zero as critical as we do and prefer instead to protect their industrial businesses and the revenues from them, but at the same time turn up to the annual COP conferences to nod their heads in support and promise to do this and that, but never do.
In the process the UK are looking rather stupid to the rest of the world who are now exporting to the UK at inflated prices, what we were producing ourselves.
A lot of this is to do with our government’s desperation to be seen to be major players on the world stage on almost everything.We are not able to keep our noses out of other countries business and yet we are at the same time ignoring the effect it’s having at home and prioritising other countries problems before those of the UK.
We never really see the PM addressing issues such as illegal immigration, the effects of net zero, loss of industry in the UK ,and all those issues on which he was elected, but we hear a great deal about his involvement with Ukraine,Israel and Gaza,Trump and leading the coalition of the willing.
Like Tony Blair, the current PM wants to be on the World stage but we have a lot of problems in the UK to sort out first.
August 25, 2025
Sir John
Lets suppose for the sake of the discussion that pursuing ‘NetZero’ should be a thing. The Government, Parliament with all their advisors and talent would have outlined the costs, believed now to be trillions of pounds. As such this would be additional money, on top of the costs of our Parliaments duties to keep us safe and secure, along with evolving a modern infrastructure to meet the Nations needs. So a plan would be in place to earn these additional funds, logical and sensible, also that would have been the sane course of direction. A direction those empowered and paid to keep us safe would have considered
However, what happened? Everything but what makes sense, banning and cancelling things before viable alternatives. leading to more costs and decline. Then to compound the situation the maliciously wrecking of the Country they (Our Parliamentarians) have banned the means, the capability, of earning the wealth to fund this very personal dream of theirs. Are the insane?
Anyone that believes this Parliament has a place needs there heads testing. It needs replacing top to bottom. Lets start with finding and electing people that believe in the Nation(something we haven’t seen in a generation), not some idealogical Globalists Religion foisted upon them at their yearly pilgrimages to the Socialist WEF ‘love in’. What these so-called Socialist WEF believers have missed is they are being sold a pup by snake oil salesmen that are manipulating them their disciples for personal profit. What the religious nuts haven’t seen is at home they are getting poorer and declining – yet the ones filling them with this religious clap-trap are getting richer and more entrenched.
August 25, 2025
Professor Michael Kelly, the Prince Philip Professor of Technology at the University of Cambridge, has said we do not have the money, the manpower or the materials to achieve Net Zero. Of course the far left know this, which is why they’re so keen to attempt to implement it to destroy the UK’s economy. Just as Stalin used the false science of Lysenkoism and collectivisation the far left are now using the false science of CAGW and its Net Zero “solution” to impose expensive chaotically intermittent energy and the subsequent rationing of energy, food, heating and transport to de-industrialise, impoverish and control. Table 12 in Chapter 12 of the IPCC’s Working Group 1 (“The Science Basis”) report shows there to be no signals for climate change (precipitation, droughts and storms) other than some mild warming, which UAH satellite data since 1979 shows to be just 0.16 degrees C per decade and which together with increasing CO2 and fossil fuel produced fertilisers is increasing crop yields. Happer & Wijngaarden have shown, using the IPCCs own radiative warming theory that doubling CO2 causes little, if any, additional warming because of a phenomenon known as saturation, a phenomenon endorsed by the Royal Society. And Shula & Ott have a very compelling argument that no greenhouse gases cause radiative warming at the planet’s surface because of thermalisation.
August 25, 2025
Your answer to Berkshire Alan shows the utter stupidity of our MPs. It is not hard to work out that climate change is a scam, so why do they not do the research and prove it? The climate has changed over thousands of years and will continue to do so. The media, especially the BBC, are equally stupid and dishonest in constantly pushing the false narrative of climate change caused by CO2.
Sir John, do you not know one MP who will listen, learn and oppose this nonsense? Why has Kemi Badenoch not set up a task force to examine the evidence and totally reject the climate stupidity? Any new government in 1929, or hopefully before then, will need to save serious money fast and abandoning all the Net Zero nonsense will one an immediate money saver.
Reply Current Conservative MP s led by Badenoch and Couthino have identified net zero policies for major state spending reductions and agree oil and gas bans, reliance on imports, high energy costs and taxes are wrong.
August 25, 2025
212 criminals were illicitly shipped, into the UK yesterday on the 24th August from France…… Nice day trip for the bank holiday weekend
Ps. SirJ, I fully endorse your comments today
August 25, 2025
The French are treating the UK as their Rwanda plan, except that we’re paying them to do it. The first and immediate step is to refuse to collect illegal migrants in boats who have been given lifejackets and are accompanied by the French navy as these boats are clearly not in any danger. The French navy are not going to abandon them mid Channel are they?
August 25, 2025
This is down to John Prescott’s carbon offsets.
There is no carbon offset, carbon is either the devil or it’s not. If it is then we should be trying to reduce total consumption not offset our own. If it’s not then it really does not matter how much we produce.
Typical politicians flagellating our country to look good on the world stage. The rest of the world thinks they are clowns.
August 25, 2025
It is not dirty “carbon” that is the devil or not it is odourless, clean, harmless, CO2 that we all breath out with every breath. Plant, crop and tree food and the gas of life! It is not a devil but a net good on balance!
August 25, 2025
I always thought that the purpose of HoC Select Committees was to scrutinise government plans and legislation. But this is certainly not the case for the ES&NZ Select Committee. Whilst you might expect its chairman and members to be in favour of a Net Zero using renewables it is very disappointing to see that this committee never, ever take evidence from anyone or any organisation that is also not religiously dedicated to this aim. As a result the unreality of our Net Zero policy is never questioned as DESNZ continues to dig us into an ever deeper energy and economic black hole. It is time that the public should be allowed to add their comments to Select Committee publications.
August 25, 2025
In the Telegraph today
“Ed Miliband has repeatedly claimed that renewables are cheaper than gas, are more reliable and insulate us from geopolitical risks (despite the fact that most of the components for building them come from China).”
“But it seems probable that the latest round of government subsidies for renewable energy will cost taxpayers more than it has previously.”
Says it all in this Parliaments dream world the hard press UK Taxpayer is forced to send more money to Foreign Regimes, before it is allowed to fund itself. This money never returns, it is not an investment it is a taxpayer money drain.
If Green Energy was as good as Parliament pretends it wouldn’t need subsidising it would be profitable on the open market from the get go
August 25, 2025
What cannot be will not be.