The USA and China avoid all specifics on decarbonisation

The worldā€™s two largest producers of CO2 met to discuss what to do about many governments backing net zero. Both governments now believe that man made carbon dioxide is the worldā€™s most pressing problem. Both now commit their countries to reach net zero, the USA by the fashionable 2050 and China by the more laid back 2060. Both commitments mean little and are cheap to promise.

This year the EU, the U.K. and other global hawks on the topic are out to pin countries down to meaningful targets for reducing CO2 by 2025 and or 2030. These are more meaningful as they require immediate actions to wean people and business off petrol and diesel vehicles, get them out of fossil fuel planes, change their coal oil and gas heating and change their diets away from meat and dairy. The USA has promised a credible plan by November for COP 26, the big UN conference for pledges. China is not yet ready to commit, still reserving the right to mine more coal, burn more fossil fuel and expand her industrial reach further for a few more years.

It is most important that the U.K. does not sign up to a one sided deal which leaves countries free to take our business away by continuing with the cheaper fossil fuel option. Take steel for example . How does it help if we close down all our blast furnaces and fossil fuel based capacity, only to import steel from countries that do not do the same?

173 Comments

  1. Mark B
    April 19, 2021

    Good morning

    It is most important that the U.K. does not sign up to a one sided deal which leaves countries free to take our business away . . .

    Too late !

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/27/contents

    1. Lifelogic
      April 19, 2021

      We are clearly governed largely by virtue-signalling fools, deluded climate alarmists and crony capitalists who are looking after their vested interests. I can see no other explanation.

      1. turboterrier
        April 19, 2021

        Lifelogic
        Has it not always been about delusions, vested interests and secret agendas?

        1. Lifelogic
          April 20, 2021

          Yes buy when they were spending under 10% of national income not so bad now nearly 50% mostly wasted too.

      2. MiC
        April 19, 2021

        Meanwhile, the Tories avoid all specifics on just about everything, for which a normal country would hold them responsible.

        Particularly on “dodginess” as Derek Skinner would have called it.

        1. MiC
          April 19, 2021

          *Dennis, even!

      3. Mike Cross
        April 19, 2021

        I applaud your view.
        True science shows that all of the climate alarmism is misplaced and that the climate is doing very well, thank you!
        Very rarely are governments driven by truth rather than ideology and the ideology is all lies.
        Only India and China seem to understand that it is industrialisation that produces wealth, and all western economies have grown rich powered by fossil fuels driving industry.
        Why do governments think any differently.
        Things will change only when economies tank and the poor starve. That is where ā€œzero carbonā€ and other fairy stories are heading.

        1. glen cullen
          April 19, 2021

          Agree

    2. Hope
      April 19, 2021

      Mark,

      +100. It is election time. This can be the only excuse for JR.

      What about the Paris agreement! Climate Change Act!! Another ridiculous FakeTory propaganda blog.

      A bit like the immigration blog! More people prosecuted for not having BBC tax licence than illegal immigration. How come goods and animals must be verified but not people!! Especially WA and NIP sellout by Johnson.

  2. Lifelogic
    April 19, 2021

    Very sensible indeed of the USA and China. In the UK we should abandon this insane job destroying, job exporting, worse than pointless, expensive, unreliable energy agenda now. Boris needs to go back to being the sensible climate realist, small state, classical liberal he used be (or perhaps pretended to be) and stop obeying silly Carrie with her theatre studies expertise. We need to scrap the climate change act and fire the absurd Committee on Climate Changes headed up by Lord Debden (a history graduate). Interesting to read all his

    1. Lifelogic
      April 19, 2021

      Interesting to read all of his registered interests. Why do we accept that merely registering these vested interests is sufficient?

    2. Nig l
      April 19, 2021

      The usual rude opinionated rubbish. Your obsession with Carrie sums it up. As I said previouslyā€™inviting contempt. Three posts already, how sad.

      1. Peter
        April 19, 2021

        ā€˜Three posts already, how sad.ā€™

        Six out of eleven posts now.

      2. Lifelogic
        April 19, 2021

        Well perhaps it is not Carrie that has turned Boris from a climate realist into a climate alarmist loon. But what else could have done so? Clearly not the science or logic. Nor politics.

        The politics forcing expensive heat pumps, expensive job destroying, unreliable energy, and electric cars onto people is a political disaster in the making – worse than the poll tax.

        1. steve
          April 19, 2021

          LL

          “The politics forcing expensive heat pumps, expensive job destroying, unreliable energy, and electric cars onto people is a political disaster in the making ā€“ worse than the poll tax.”

          ….yep, I’ve said it before – this is what will get the tories kicked out.

      3. Lifelogic
        April 19, 2021

        Surely ā€œopinionsā€ are what is wanted. Little point in a comment saying ā€œI have no opinion on this topicā€.

        1. jerry
          April 19, 2021

          @LL; Our host asks for a Comment, not someone’s alternate daily (running) personal blog!

          At least so far today you have mostly managed to remain on-topic … and yes many, myself included, also go astray at times, raising off-topic issues and concerns, but not on an almost daily bases.

          When I criticise our PM’s partner, I tend to use the euphemism “pillow talk”, somewhat more polite, less vulgar, but then I do not denigrate those who have studied the Humanities either.

          If “registered interests” meant such people could not involve themselves in the politics of an issue it would indeed have far fetching repercussions, many I suspect you would not want, had such rules been in place many a highly experienced person would have been banned from holding office or position, never mind speaking on the Floors of the Houses – our host included, perhaps…

          1. Peter
            April 19, 2021

            Jerry,
            ā€˜@LL; Our host asks for a Comment, not someoneā€™s alternate daily (running) personal blog!ā€™

            Agreed.

          2. Julian Flood
            April 19, 2021

            “Leman” is a word that needs to be revived.

            JF

          3. Lifelogic
            April 20, 2021

            I do not denigrate those who have studied the Humanities either. I just do not want my energy systems, aircraft, bridges, cars, medical care, transport systems, defence systems, building or the economy … designed by them in general. Though a few are indeed capable of valid contribution. We saw that all but a tiny handful of MP voted for the climate change, act so totally deluded were they.

          4. jerry
            April 20, 2021

            @LL; You do denigrate those who have studied the Humanities, you did so above, immediately after saying you do not! Just because someone studied the Humanities doesn’t meant they can not, do not, have either valid opinion or experience in other fields.

        2. Fedupsoutherner
          April 19, 2021

          Absolutley right Life Logic. There are some of us here that are interested to read your comments and I’m sure it’s not me but haven’t some of the comments on here got rather personal and very rude? It’s totally unecessary. I notice it’s the same people. I’m sure you are more than capable of ignoring it all.

          1. Peter
            April 19, 2021

            Fedupsoutherner,

            ā€˜Iā€™m sure you are more than capable of ignoring it all.ā€™

            Sadly there is no ā€˜ignoreā€™ button on this forum. So some of us just have to recognise a posterā€™s name and then move on swiftly.

      4. Lifelogic
        April 19, 2021

        If you disagree with my opinions fine but why not explain your reasons?

    3. Lifelogic
      April 19, 2021

      Excellent piece by Prof. (of Risk Management) Philip Thomas on the Spectator website yesterday

      Need we fear a third wave after lockdown ends?

      Spoiler – not all all we should fear collateral damage far, far more.

      1. No Longer Anonymous
        April 19, 2021

        The latest from a Professor is that the new normal cannot be anything like the old or ‘…30,000 will die a year.’

        We didn’t do this for flu.

        When do we get to vote on these changes in our lives ? Masked up and social distancing. People are already ignoring the government.

        1. Lifelogic
          April 19, 2021

          Which Prof.is this ?

        2. steve
          April 19, 2021

          NLA

          “When do we get to vote on these changes in our lives ? ”

          Next general election mate.

          1. Lifelogic
            April 20, 2021

            But with only bad options available to you. Who will not do as they promise anyway.

  3. DOM
    April 19, 2021

    Climate change. It’s like the burning of the Reichstag all over again. If a reason doesn’t exist to impose oppression then simply invent one.

    1. Lifelogic
      April 19, 2021

      +1

      1. Ian Wragg
        April 19, 2021

        +2
        Lemmings the lot of our PPE government. The worst kind of virtue signalling possible.
        We’re bankrupt by 2030 whilst China, India and all sensible countries power on.
        We really do need some sensible people in government and there will be an almighty backlash when people eventually see they are being conned.
        Renting of private jets has quadrupled during the pandemic as those that can afford it continue to travel unimpeded.
        Nor for the peasants though. 0

        1. Lifelogic
          April 19, 2021

          +1

        2. Dave Andrews
          April 19, 2021

          We’re bankrupt already, and the children have been sold into debt slavery.

          1. Mitchel
            April 19, 2021

            Precisely…and all the debt the globalist bankers will print to finance the climate measures will keep us that way.Indeed we were already way beyond the point of no return even before the Covid splurge.You can’t taper a ponzi scheme!

            No wonder the Chinese and Russians are building an alternative financial system unencumbered with these problems.When the $ goes as reserve currency,the third world beckons for the west.

        3. Hope
          April 19, 2021

          +1

    2. Everhopeful
      April 19, 2021

      +a huge amount.
      Nail on head as ever!

    3. Richard
      April 19, 2021

      +1 agreed. Government by deception.

    4. jerry
      April 19, 2021

      @DOM; “Climate change. Itā€™s like the burning of the Reichstag all over again”

      Perhaps more akin to the storming of the Bastille, or perhaps the uprisings against the Bolsheviks…

    5. glen cullen
      April 19, 2021

      +1 climate change = weather change (it happens daily but one sounds more alarming)

  4. Lynn Atkinson
    April 19, 2021

    You think itā€™s OK for the U.K. to sign up, without the authority of the people, to ā€˜wean people and businesses off petrol and diesel …. and change their diets away from meat and dairyā€™?

    Life would not be worth living.

    Letā€™s see Boris wean himself off the pies, then we will decide if he can advocate the rest of us living on pap and vitamin tabs.

    Reply I have never proposed these ideas

    1. Nig l
      April 19, 2021

      Yes re meat and dairy but agriculture accounts for 25% of greenhouse gases across the world and increasingly reports are focussing on the need for change however the politics to achieve that is beyond reach. Nevertheless something has to happen. As an example China has had to drag 750 million people out of poverty in the last 20/30 years many of them farmers. Would they have accepted their lot maybe for ever ā€˜to save the planetā€™? Certainly not.

      I guess all,the manufacturing processes, phosphates, machinery etc will eventually come from renewables as will the tractors/combines etc switch. China already has a national fleet of electric buses so farm equipment might be a short step.

      As for life not worth living. A thought for the philosophers. No life (we kill the world) or some life?

      1. Richard
        April 19, 2021

        We live in a CO2 desert, satellite data shows that the increase has made the Earth greener (NASA 2016).
        Limestone & chalk layers miles thick are sequestered CO2, constantly created faster than volcanoes can return CO2 to the atmosphere.
        CO2 logarithmically effects temperature & we currently experience 7/8 of the maximum per IPCC formula.
        No increase in atmosphere water vapour since 1980 per NASA data. Etc

      2. steve
        April 19, 2021

        Nig 1

        “agriculture accounts for 25% of greenhouse gases across the world ”

        Then how much is caused by China with it’s population of about 1.3 Bn ?

    2. Everhopeful
      April 19, 2021

      Reply to reply.
      But surely MPs have some duty of care to us? And are they and their families immune?
      These measures WILL result in and already HAVE caused many deaths.
      Can MPs REALLY wash their hands of these globalist ā€œeternal longingsā€?

      1. Andy
        April 19, 2021

        How have solar panels caused ā€˜many deaths?ā€™ Do people fall off the roof while installing them or something?

        1. Everhopeful
          April 19, 2021

          Certainly workers die when installing solar panels.
          Not to mention the danger from toxic chemicals.
          But more people will die when the sun donā€™t shine and we freeze to death.
          Solar power is very limited ..ruled by the weather.

        2. Peter2
          April 19, 2021

          Everhopeful never mentioned solar panels andy
          Are you OK?

          1. Everhopeful
            April 19, 2021

            +1

    3. nota#
      April 19, 2021

      @Lynn @ Reply – does that mean we no longer live in a Democracy?

    4. Fedupsoutherner
      April 19, 2021

      Well said, Lynn, LL, and Ian Wragg. My feelings exactly.

    5. Hope
      April 19, 2021

      JR, You are a member of the party that is in govt. when will you do anything substantive?

    6. glen cullen
      April 19, 2021

      Agree – Its the direction of travel with this government

    7. Dennis
      April 19, 2021

      Reply to reply – you have never proposed these ideas – could mean you have supported them, agreed with them and even voted for them. Your vague replies leave open all interpretations just like a good politician to get out of a sticky position.

      Reply No. I did not vote for the Climate Change Act

      1. The Prangwizard
        April 19, 2021

        Still not making yourself clear as usual, Sir John. Did you vote against? I am presuming you didn’t, so correct me if I’m wrong.

    8. Ed M
      April 19, 2021

      Getting obsessed by diesel (either pro or against) isn’t healthy.
      Diesel isn’t the same as meat. You can’t eat petrol. But you can eat meat. And meat is delicious and good for you.
      ‘Life not worth living.’ And there is far, far more to life than diesel (for or against). Swimming off a boat in the Greek Islands. Shakespeare’s The Tempest. Laughter with friends. Elephants. Storks. Orange sunsets and the warm sun on your skin. Burgundy wine. Gauloises cigarettes. Mozart. Surfing. Skiiing. Salzburg. Salisbury Cathedral – GOD (at least exploring His existence). Best.

      1. Ed M
        April 19, 2021

        ‘at least exploring His existence’

        – Leading, please God, to a joyful, transforming with The Almighty. I did aged 17 in an extraordinary way. The experience was like Caliban’s dream in The Tempest, ‘The clouds methought did open up and show riches ready to drop upon me that when I wak’d, I cried to dream again’ and like Scrooge waking up from his nightmare,’`I don’t know what to do.’ cried Scrooge, laughing and crying in the same breath; and making a perfect Laocoon of himself with his stockings. `I am as light as a feather, I am as happy as an angel, I am as merry as a schoolboy. I am as giddy as a drunken man. ‘

        One of an infinite amount of heresies is that The Almighty wants to make us miserable or something. HERESY. He wants to fill us with JOY (and peace / love / sense of beauty etc). Real joy. I know. I experienced it various times (including miracles). Nothing special about me. But I did explore The Almighty and ask Him for help etc. And He more than delivered. ‘Be joyful at all times’ Bible says. How true.

        1. Ed M
          April 19, 2021

          No-one can escape suffering but The Almighty can and does transform our suffering (if we ask Him0, giving it meaning, purpose and efficacious power (this is one of the great JOYS of traditional Christianity).
          So there is the joy in suffering. And the joy in non-suffering. Amazing.

  5. Lifelogic
    April 19, 2021

    So Boris has come out against the European Super League. Surely in a democracy the fans will decide which teams & matches they want to support, watch and pay for. I suspect they will go for the Super League.

    My daughter tells me that after having had Covid in Oct 2020 with a positive test she has been forced (so far) to have 21 further CV19 tests by her university. Why exactly, have the Gov. nothing better to do with the money? They could have, for example, have saved over 1000+ this year just by adjusting the vaccination or for gender risk while saving Ā£ billions too though rather late now.

    1. Lifelogic
      April 19, 2021

      1000+ lives that is.

    2. Stred
      April 19, 2021

      If the university is using lateral flow tests which cost the government Ā£4 to buy, why do travellers have to use the unreliable PCR tests at Ā£120 discounted to Ā£60 for some? How much is the NHS paying for the PCR type? If the universities have used PCR for students, where covid is relatively frequent, they will be spending around Ā£3000 or the fees for one term.

      1. Lifelogic
        April 19, 2021

        A mix of both about 50/50.

      2. jerry
        April 19, 2021

        @Stred; It is the Lateral flow test that was thought to be unreliable, and is still not proven to be as good as the PCR test that is highly accurate.

        1. Stred
          April 19, 2021

          Lateral tests were held to be inaccurate because they failed to show as many positives as PCR . Critics of the PCR reckon that up to 95% are false positives, which would account for a lot.

          1. jerry
            April 20, 2021

            @stred; There were concerns that the lateral flow tests were more likely to show a false negative, on the other hand the PCR test is likely to show a false positive, the former is a wrong-side failure, the latter is a right-side failure in risk analysis. Of course for those who do not care about risk, only the ability to make money…

    3. Sea_Warrior
      April 19, 2021

      I was disappointed to see Boris leap into an issue that should be of no concern to the government.

      1. Everhopeful
        April 19, 2021

        He does a lot of that though…pretending to be ā€œon our sideā€. ( Elections, elections, elections).
        He must really support the ā€œGreat Resetā€ of football …the destruction of all the poorer, small teams.
        Just like he has supported the destruction of small businesses.
        All in absolute favour of big corporations.

    4. beresford
      April 19, 2021

      A lot of hysteria today about this. If a group of businesses wish to try a different business model, the American ‘franchise’ system rather than promotion/relegation, it is nothing to do with the Government. They should be expelled from the Football League, but there is no reason they cannot remain in the FA, and explicitly barring their players from international football may be against European law. I suspect that it will not be the success the clubs hope for, because they get their winning records by beating up smaller teams and in the Super League the ‘goats’ at the bottom will be some of the big boys themselves. In time they are likely to fall back to parallel status with the domestic leagues, as fans choose Everton vs Newcastle over Liverpool vs Inter Milan. What must not happen is appeasement by an offer to the big clubs of a larger share of league revenue to make it even harder for other clubs to compete with them.

      1. jerry
        April 19, 2021

        @beresford; It is the FA, via UEFA, who appear to be calling for expulsions (it will be interesting to hear what FIFA have to say), Ministers appear to be repeating what others have said, and far enough if the FA or UEFA consider a break-away will have broken their rules them so be – a similar situation occurred in Cricket when a Australian media magnet set up competing series in 1976.

        What annoys me is how Govts treat professional sport as if part of a countries culture, in the UK being over seen by the DCMS when in nowadays, away from the grass-routes and amateur game, professional sport should come under the BEIS.

    5. jerry
      April 19, 2021

      @LL; “My daughter tells me that after having had Covid in Oct 2020 with a positive test she has been forced (so far) to have 21 further CV19 tests by her university. Why exactly”

      The Lateral Flow and PCR tests look for the actual virus, not antibodies.

      Having had Cv19 doesn’t necessarily mean you can not be re-infected, perhaps with a variant strain, and -importantly- could infect others, whilst being perhaps totally asymptomatic yourself. Thus be a higher risk in some situations, such as Colleges, Universities & close contact work situations.

      1. Philip P.
        April 19, 2021

        Having had a positive result to a PCR test means very little. As the WHO have admitted, it depends on observing proper guidelines re the PCR cycle threshold, and then publishing the corresponding figure for each test, which this country is not doing.

        The idea that asymptomatic people could infect others with a virus from which they themselves are not suffering is regarded as a very marginal possibility, and was disproven in the only large-scale study so far conducted. But without it, and without the PCR test fakery, the fear campaign collapses like a house of cards.

        1. jerry
          April 20, 2021

          @Philip P.; Yours is the typical dangerous, unproven, opinionated, nonsense so often repeated by the right wing, especially in the USA – hence little mask wearing, little social distancing, the highest death rate due to CV19 in the world.

          Reply The highest deaths rates per million people are on the European continent in countries that followed global guidance.

          1. jerry
            April 20, 2021

            @JR reply; Sorry but Europe is a landmass, not a country (yet), if you want to consider rates per million in such a way then surely you should also consider Canada, Mexico and the USA as a single entity. The fact is, currently, the USA has the highest rates followed by Brazil.

            Reply NO. I am taking country rates. All the top rates in deaths per million are European countries.(not the UK)

          2. jerry
            April 20, 2021

            @JR reply; “All the top rates in deaths per million are European countries”

            Well yes some are, the Czech Republic & Italy stand out, but most do not, and the UK is 13th, with a higher rate per million than the USA, Brazil, Portugal & Spain, followed by most of the other major EU member States.

            But, like most I suspect, I live in the real world, not a statistical parallel universe. The USA has the highest number of actually counted deaths (565,289), Brazil is next (365,444) … as far as Europe is concerned the UK comes top (127,438) with Italy next (115,937).

            Figures as of 16th April, from Johns Hopkins University

            Reply The EU is top for deaths sadly at 645,000

          3. jerry
            April 21, 2021

            Sir John, this has become a circular argument, as I pointed out way-up, the “EU” is not a country (nor a continent), how ever many times you care to pretend it is!

    6. G Wheatley
      April 19, 2021

      Yes I heard all that guff on BBCR4 too….. with the Housing Minister commenting on something that should really have been addressed by the member for Hertsmere /DCMS !

      1. jerry
        April 19, 2021

        @G Wheatley; “the Housing Minister commenting on something that should really have been addressed by [another Minister]”

        Indeed, it would be nice if a/. Minsters only ever commented on their own brief, b/. the MSM would not try to entrap Minsters by asking questions beyond the interviewees brief, c/. hypercritical plebs would stop expecting the MSM to entrap their political foes but pussyfoot around their heroes! šŸ˜›

  6. agricola
    April 19, 2021

    That the World needs to clean up its act is not disputed, just on the grounds of hygene and health. That the great satan is CO2 is highly debatable. After all it is plant food and there are far more noxious emmisions escaping. I want to hear a much more extensive debate on the subject from both sides of the argument using informed opinion rather than emotive political opinion. John Kerry is for sure a decent person with an admirable career of service to his country, but what does he know about the satan CO2 except what he has been told.
    Nobody in the current argument on changing climate, undisputed in my mind, ever mentions the sun . Nobody ever quantifies the effect of the sun as a percentage in the process against the effect of CO2. Can anyone quantify it historically from ice cores. The process should be there to read but I suspect that is too science based and not political enough to sell. The sun has been at it for billions of years, I see no evidence that it has stopped and handed it all over to CO2.
    I am all for cleaning the planet and taking steps to mitigate climate change, but we should pause before rushing headlong into changes to our power systems that are not based on good engineering, science, and economics. Solutions need to be creative rather than politically emotive. I do not see the current leap in the dark as anything but panic that will cost us dearly. Politicians should state what they wish to achieve clearly, then with help and encouragement leave science and engineering to come up with workable economic solutions, just as they did with Covid.

    1. agricola
      April 19, 2021

      Sir John, your moderation is really incomprehensible today. I post before 07.00 and get ignored while one contriburor posts nine times at my last count and gets the lot published. I do not claim that my contribution is any more valid than anyone elses but the end result is odd to say the least. Maybe it is time for one of you homilies on posting with similar direction as that of Mr Speaker.

      1. SM
        April 19, 2021

        It sometimes happens to me, agricola, and I think depends on the length of our responses. We should all try to remember that our host does actually have a demanding job to do, which takes precedence.

        1. jerry
          April 20, 2021

          @SM; Indeed, and anyone can check the HoC Call list now, via the HOC website, our host was down to speak twice yesterday, he needs to prepare for each and do his usual constituency and research work, never mind (perhaps) write the next days website blog. Frustrating, but that is how it is!

      2. Peter
        April 19, 2021

        Agricola,

        It is at a stage now where I imagine the probable contributor as one of the ā€˜Two Ronniesā€™. He is introduced at a party and expounds at length about green issues and university. Either of these two fine actors could play the leading role. Currently my favourite for the part is Ronnie Corbett.

    2. turboterrier
      April 19, 2021

      Agricola
      Cleaning the planet

      Before they start anything else these leaders ought to sit down and decide how they are going to unite to clear up the waste and pollution that is slowly choking the natural world. Proper safe disposal of wind turbine blades, obsolete solar panels, EV batteries light bulbs to name but a few. De-forestation affecting the Brown Spotted Owls population in British Columbia Canada. Only three wild birds left in the wild and a desperate captive breeding programme to reverse the situation.
      Everything being carried out at what appears at breakneck speed to satisfy a few dodgy computer findings with little or no consideration to the cause and effect. Another classic area where the world leaders are all urinating before they have their flies open, installing such grandiose suicidal plans with no consideration to the infrastructure to support such programmes and more importantly how much tax payers will be expected to pay.

    3. Everhopeful
      April 19, 2021

      It isnā€™t about climate change.
      It is about snaffling all the assets on the planet. And probably population reduction.
      Like the enclosure acts.
      And all of the eliteā€™s filthy wars.

  7. oldtimer
    April 19, 2021

    This looks like an attempt by the USA and China to set their own agenda and bypass COP 26 and it’s multiple lobbyists or to present it with a fait accompli. In short to kick the can down the road. If it achieves that objective and slows down the mad rush of the Johnson government to the economic disaster he plans then it is to be welcomed.

    1. Lifelogic
      April 19, 2021

      +1

  8. turboterrier
    April 19, 2021

    To pin countries down to targets.

    It is never going to happen in reality.
    Those countries will talk the talk but not walk the walk. Whatever helps them with real progress, better GDP, better services and more exports will come a long way in front of addressing Climate Change. Play around at the edges maybe but in real terms actually do three fifths of naff all.
    Yet we produce so little to the overall statistics of CO2 but we seem hell bent on destroying the very sectors that will give us a little less than even odds of ever really be successful enough to survive and compete in the new frightening world that appears to be coming.

    1. Lifelogic
      April 19, 2021

      +1 a self inflicted economic disaster (& a political disaster too).

    2. Narrow Shoulders
      April 19, 2021

      If consumers want it this will happen. If they don’t it won’t as they will buy cheaper from elsewhere (China and the US it seems).

      You can’t buck the market. Conservatives used to know that.

      As an off topic aside, more House inflation and money creation with the 5% mortgage guarantee scheme to fuel the housing ponzi bubble.

    3. Pauline Baxter
      April 19, 2021

      Interesting turboterrier. That’s what gets me mad – that my country seems to be going out of it’s way to destroy itself.

  9. George Brooks.
    April 19, 2021

    If you set stupid target dates very few, if any, will believe you or take any notice. That is exactly what has happened to date and if the government persists China and the US will shut this country down.

    Set realistic dates to allow fossil fuels to be replaced and which perform better than what we have today Don’t cripple the country for our grand children.

    1. Andy
      April 19, 2021

      You did that already with Brexit. Tackling climate change helps your grandchildren. Seriously, talk to them about it. If they are older than about 7 they will be able to explain why your position is absurd.

      1. No Longer Anonymous
        April 19, 2021

        Then they must give up their laptops, phones and all fripperies. And when they get a little older they must remember to clear up their litter when they leave a park or beach and not take a disposable tent to a festival.

    2. Dennis
      April 19, 2021

      Why would China and the US shut us down when they make money and prosperity from selling stuff to us?

  10. Sharon
    April 19, 2021

    Iā€™m sick of reading about zero carbon. Itā€™s absurd- we need CO2 to live or goodness sake.

    China are lying, I read some months ago that their scientists believe that around 2060, a period of cooling will occur, hence them building more and more power stations.

    We British are behaving like complete idiots thatā€™s fallen for Arthur Daleyā€™s con.

    After reading Charles Mooreā€™s and Lord Youngā€™s articles in DT yesterday, the sooner we start changing out idiotic mandarins, the better. They are doing and have done so much damage to our country. And we need a strong leader to address this.

    1. Lifelogic
      April 19, 2021

      +1

    2. nota#
      April 19, 2021

      @Sharon – I am not really comfortable pigeon holing people with titles, but when one fits – ‘Snowflakes’, those that are less-resilient than others have a sense of entitlement, and are un-able to deal with opposing views. They are this Government targets, everyone else gets to pay out of their pockets because this Government is frightened of offending and standing up for common sense and the majority

    3. Lifelogic
      April 19, 2021

      A strong leader with a working compass that is. We have not had one of those in my lifetime so far. Even Lady Thatcher destroyed many grammar schools (following the dire Shirley Williams agenda) failed to sort out the appalling communist monopoly NHS, buried us further into the EU, failed to cut taxes sufficiently and even fell for climate alarmism.

    4. Richard
      April 19, 2021

      Grand Solar Minimum 2020-2055 will be increasingly unmistakable. TPTB know this. Hence authoritarianism to retain power.

      1. hefner
        April 19, 2021

        GSM is the reduction possibly to zero of the number of sunspots. It is being observed by various satellites, including NASAā€™s, since about a year.
        So now please can you tell us how this is affecting the spectral distribution of the incoming solar radiation at the top of the atmosphere? If it has an impact, will this be an increase/a decrease in the ultraviolet part of the solar spectrum? Or in the visible range? Or the near-infrared part of the solar spectrum? Depending on the wavelength of these potential modifications in the solar radiation, which layer(s) of the atmosphere might be affected? the thermosphere, the stratosphere, the troposphere, the amount of solar radiation getting to the surface?

        It would really be interesting to know more about such things as some details might be important if only to know whether Iā€™ll have to buy a snowmobile or a convertible in the coming years, EV obviously.

  11. Sharon
    April 19, 2021

    Canā€™t send, thinks itā€™s a duplicate, trying again.

    Iā€™m sick of reading about zero carbon. Itā€™s absurd- we need CO2 to live or goodness sake.

    China are lying, I read some months ago that their scientists believe that around 2060, a period of cooling will occur, hence them building more and more power stations.

    We British are behaving like complete idiots thatā€™s fallen for Arthur Daleyā€™s con.

    After reading Charles Mooreā€™s and Lord Youngā€™s articles in DT yesterday, the sooner we start changing out idiotic mandarins, the better. They are doing and have done so much damage to our country. And we need a strong leader to address this.

    1. Lifelogic
      April 19, 2021

      CO2 – plant, sea weed, crop and tree food is greening the planet very nicely and increasing crop yields. The source of the oxygen we all breath in too. Long live CO2.

      1. hefner
        April 20, 2021

        And what about the cyanobacteria?

    2. Narrow Shoulders
      April 19, 2021

      It seems the site was correct. Worth reading about Arthur Daley twice though.

    3. DavidJ
      April 19, 2021

      Agreed Sharon; I’m sick of it too but consider the aims of the globalists for a massive reduction in world population and we see the real reasons behind it and a truly Orwellian future.

  12. Nig l
    April 19, 2021

    7 million tonnes plus per annum against Chinaā€™s 800 million. Value to the economy only 5 billion,(single figure percentage of GDP) total employment including supply chain 100, 000. World over supply.

    You seem obsessed with this but hardly important in the context of how much you will pee down the drain if you donā€™t sort out the City, post Brexit.

    Fintech, biotech, renewables these are the future. I wonder if the politics of the red wall is influencing your thinking.

    As for the influence of China and America, oil and gas companies have recently announced 20 times more investment in low carbon technology than in their traditional areas, Banks are increasingly coming under pressure from their investors etc not to support fossil fuels, investment companies like Blackrock with trillions under management are demanding the effects on climate change are managed by companies they invest in, large companies like Vodafone are going carbon neutral etc so there is evidence the ā€˜worldā€™ is moving faster than some of their governments.

    1. forthurst
      April 19, 2021

      What replaced steel and when did it happen? You have highlighted the need for Company law changes to allow companies to block undesirables from their share registers. Investment managers should not be able to use other peoples’ money to support their own agendas especially when they are about deliberately destroying jobs and wealth and reducing people to poverty based on a lie.

  13. The Prangwizard
    April 19, 2021

    We, the people who will suffer the must, must work harder to stop this dangerous ideology. Politicians who think debate is enough need to change. Demands must be made. Yesterday John Kerry, the USA’s international climate change authoritarian was in massive extrapolation mode, talking about the world being ‘beyond catastrophy’. His theorising got us to a warming of up to 4% or maybe more if the people and our lives are not more severely controlled. This talk is clearly intended to frighten the innocent and is inexcusable.

    These dictatorial global elites must be removed somehow.

    1. Andy
      April 19, 2021

      How exactly will you suffer?

    2. Fedupsoutherner
      April 19, 2021

      Agree. I remember seeing a film at Disney World and I think Al Gore was something to do with the production of it – you know, he who lives in a lovely house next to the ever rising seas? Well, that was 31 years ago and apparently we only had 10 years to save the world then or we would all be washed away. Don’t make me laugh.

      1. Alan Jutson
        April 19, 2021

        Indeed, and people still pay a large premium to live next to the water !

    3. DavidJ
      April 19, 2021

      +1

  14. Stred
    April 19, 2021

    China wil not be cutting coal in a few years. They will be building coal stations weekly and then using them for the nect fifty. India will also be expanding coal. China is expanding the use of Siberian gas and, like the UK, will use gas in 90% of houses when we are chucking out boilers and installing heat pumps and hydrogen costing over three times as much as methane. We are to ban the mining of coking coal for steel, importing it and creating more CO2. We have only two new nuclear stations planned to be working in nine years time. This is the advice of Gummer and his academic colleagues with the civil servant in charge who was doing the same in Scotland when employed in a similar job. Only a few MPs are not in favour of this policy. What does this tell us about the state of scientific education in the UK?

    1. Narrow Shoulders
      April 19, 2021

      The reason we could not thrive in the EU is our public school prefect-like insistence on being seen to abide by the rules, however inane or damaging.

      The UK should never sign up to any protocols as they always disadvantage those who stick to them. Ie climate change reductions and carbon offsetting, NATO payments, 0.7% International aid payments, EU rules, NIP, pledging aid for disasters. We do what these things demand and make a show of it (foolishly), other countries pay lip service.

      We should be more like 1974 UK giving ABBA null points.

    2. turboterrier
      April 19, 2021

      Stored
      What it also tells us that those in power and their self opinionated advisors have still got the grandiose ideas that where this country leads the world will follow.
      It hasn’t happened for years and it sure ain’t happening now. Non so blind as those who will not see. Their place in history will be for all the wrong reasons.
      Not one shot fired and we were destroyed on a mandate of ignorance, incompetence and arrogance and the people never voted for it.

    3. SecretPeople
      April 19, 2021

      Maybe China will come after our coal next – ‘international investment’.

    4. Mitchel
      April 19, 2021

      Russia has largescale new developments underway in the Arctic for gas,oil and coal to supply China and India-it will be impossible for them to be blockaded-particulary where China is concerned,given the developing rail,road,bridge and pipeline infrastructure in the Russian Far East which allows overland passage between the two as well as delivery by sea from the Northern Sea (arctic) route.I note that the Russians recently produced drone footage of a tanker making the Arctic crossing in February – the first time a tanker has done so this early in the year.

  15. Alan Jutson
    April 19, 2021

    I think 2025 and 2030 are completely unrealistic targets for zero carbon emissions, especially as so far we still have arguments by so called experts about the so called reason for climate change, (man-made or not) we only ever seem to hear one argument, as all discussion with so called experts with alternative views seems to be shut down.

    If the two largest so called polluter Countries are not going to try to reduce or limit emissions in the same timescale as everyone else, is there actually any point. Trail blazing in business is always very risky, and always very expensive, sometimes it pays off, but usually it does not, and ends up crippling a company financially for years.

    This time we are risking Countries and whole populations, without in my view even having a proper argument or sensible plan.

  16. Everhopeful
    April 19, 2021

    I think we now know that our government has no compunction about harming us.
    Thus it will take away all the much discussed carbon producing staples of our lives.
    We also know from recent unmasked photos,meals in Paris, planes zooming overhead and openly reported holidays that they have little intention of following their own rules.
    At what level do the ā€œuseful idiotsā€ cease to be useful and share the fate of the sheeple? Anyone below cabinet minister ?

  17. Andy
    April 19, 2021

    ā€œIt is most important that the U.K. does not sign up to a one sided deal which leaves countries free to take our business away.ā€

    Letā€™s hope David Frost isnā€™t put in charge of the UKā€™s negotiating team then.

    1. Fred.H
      April 19, 2021

      You always seem pleased that all this ‘trade’ imbalance with the EU is a good thing.
      Buy more from EU, buy more from China, buy more and provide work to India, sell weapons to anyone, especially the Arab countries….our country has gone to the lunatic asylum.

  18. nota#
    April 19, 2021

    Good morning Sir John

    worldā€™s two largest producers of CO2 Did anyone believe any different? Is the EU really pinning down any of their own block or is at as always, their rules are to be applied to others. The EU’s aim is to maintain their internal protectionist zone from competition.

    The Greenest cars made in Germany are produced and delivered to market in the most CO2 producing way.

  19. nota#
    April 19, 2021

    Only the UK Government with its dictatorial approach to its 67million citizens believes that their punishment in tax and subsidies will be a beacon to the 7.7 billion others that reside on this planet.

    After all appeasing a few local Snowflakes at the expense of the economy is a sure way to induce poverty on a Nation. A sure fire way to ensure the UK taxpayer is the most punished, therefore beholden and controlled section of the human race.

  20. Lifelogic
    April 19, 2021

    Only a few MPs are not in favour of this policy. What does this tell us about the state of scientific education in the UK?

    Indeed driven by a mad religion, political deluded group think, almost total ignorance of real science, a desire to have an excuse for ever more taxation, crony capitalism and vested interests.

    1. John C.
      April 19, 2021

      That sums us up nicely.

  21. jerry
    April 19, 2021

    “Take steel for example . How does it help if we close down all our blast furnaces and fossil fuel based capacity, only to import [cheaper?] steel from countries that do not do the same?”

    But the UK has been doing that since long before the ‘climate emergency’, and would likely be doing it anyway had the ‘Global warning’ idea never existed, how convenient to blame past Govt policy errors, the need often sold to the electorate on environmental concerns (acid rain for example)…

    Me thinks our host is trying to sell a massive (domestic) industrial policy U-Turn here, if so, about time!

  22. Christine
    April 19, 2021

    This Government is out of control. It is taking this country on a suicidal path to oblivion. There is no opposition to their mad policies from the majority of politicians or the media. The British people are mainly ignorant of the future planned for them. Anyone would think that the Chinese are pulling the strings of the Western world. They are the only ones to benefit from this Green agenda.

    We need more politicians, like Sir John, to speak out and question these policies before itā€™s too late. Unfortunately, our MPs are of such a poor quality nowadays they just go along with the Green religion.

  23. oldwulf
    April 19, 2021

    So the world’s major players do not wish to play the game. I take our host’s point that we should not have “a one sided deal which leaves countries free to take our business away by continuing with the cheaper fossil fuel option”

    What do we and the rest of the world do ?
    1. If you can’t beat them, join them (a solution until we reach 3 and 4 below ?)
    2. Refuse to buy anything from them (yeah right)
    3. Sort out the efficiency/economics of renewables, preferably without the need for taxpayer subsidies (how long will this take ?)
    4. Look to science to (ecomomically) clean up the use of fossil fuels, preferably without the need for taxpayer subsidies (how long will this take ?)

    An interesting article, with our host’s permission
    https://www.brookings.edu/essay/why-are-fossil-fuels-so-hard-to-quit/

  24. Iain Moore
    April 19, 2021

    It is particularly sickening to have this green propaganda force fed to us by the BBC , any hint of impartiality as been forgotten about as they make out like some religious climate change zealots. Of course the likes of John Kerry, Biden’s Climate Change representative is given an easy time, no questions to him if he will be scrapping his personal private jet, no its only the plebs who will be expected to pay the price of this zealotry. On BBC R4 they even had the nerve to raise the Maldives again, no embarrassment there that the Maldives had failed to sink below the waves as predicted.

    These Climate Change zealots see an opportunity that in the wake of the Covid terror receding they are now trying to replace it with the Climate Change terror, Rt Hon. the Lord Deben being very blunt about the ‘opportunity’ Covid has given them.

  25. Bryan Harris
    April 19, 2021

    More propaganda – When the democrats come together with the Chinese communists it couldn’t be anything but a fudge to make them both look good.
    It’s another false tale to get us all enthused about giving up our lifestyle to dogma, should we ever get out of lockdown.

    Do ministers really understand what they have put into law with the climate change act 2008:

    It is the duty of the Secretary of State to ensure that the net UK carbon account for the year 2050 is at least 100% lower than the 1990 baseline.

    I doubt they even care as they will not be in office to see how our society suffers being dragged back to a time before energy was plentiful. They simply follow the lemming approach because it earns them kudos with fellow leaders.

    If we can just imagine for a second the amount of lost opportunities we have racked up due to being driven down the green climate change path… Instead of fighting a mythical dragon, research and innovation would have gone into making our world a beacon of prosperity and something to be proud of.

    As it is our world is a nightmare, disputes and wars ruin our potential, but these are brought about because our green leaders are so focused in one direction. Yes, we have been fooled and now look forward to a twisted future that will not improve.
    You see the greedy taking advantage of alleged climate change to get rich, that includes both 3rd world countries as well as politicians.

    The people have a right to be angry for it is not just our future that has been stolen, our leaders have allowed our world to be overrun with every possible last evil from the doctrines of socialism.

  26. Colin
    April 19, 2021

    “How does it help if we close down all our blast furnaces and fossil fuel based capacity, only to import steel from countries that do not do the same?”

    Well, it helps China, which seems to be the objective of most public policy these days.

    1. glen cullen
      April 19, 2021

      +1

  27. Martyn G
    April 19, 2021

    There is no irrefutable, incontrovertible scientific peer reviewed and agreed evidence that carbon dioxide causes global warming. Nor is there any solid, proven factural evidence of an emerging climate emergency, or, indeed, any other descriptive term proving that that the world is facing disaster. All is being planned on climate modelling, much of which has proven already to be flawed and each and every past prediction of disaster (no snow, floods, increasing hurricanes, forest fires etc) have failed to come true and in some cases have already been proven wrong. And for this we face wrecking the entire country and taking it back into a new dark age.

    1. Pauline Baxter
      April 19, 2021

      Agreed Martyn G

    2. hefner
      April 19, 2021

      MartynG, Ever had a look at the Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, the Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences (American Meteorological Society), the Journal of Geophysical Research (American Geophysical Union)? They are available in most university libraries, they have been around some (QJRMS) since the end of the 19th c, and they have published peer-reviewed papers of results of observations related to climate change.

      But I guess it is much easier for you to write the type of vacuous statements ā€˜publishedā€™ here than to try to go to your nearest academic institutions and look for information.

      1. Martyn G
        April 20, 2021

        The IPCC has stated ā€œThe climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possibleā€.

        1. hefner
          April 21, 2021

          MartynG, Indeed the climate system is such a system, and long-term prediction of future climate states might only be possible in a statistical sense through an ensemble prediction approach. Maybe you could brush up on such a topic, particularly on what chaotic means for a non-linear system of coupled differential equations.

          Furthermore this does not prevent any hindcast study of, say, the last 150 years with similar climate models from being run and checked against the meteorological observations of the last hundred years. When such studies are performed the results are far from being meaningless.

          1. Martyn G
            April 21, 2021

            150 years is an infinitesimally short period of time. It takes not into consideration that receding ice caps have revealed tree remains, from a warmer period of time. I do not say that the climate does not change, because all evidence points to the fact that it has, does and will continue to do so. But in reality, knowing that it is generally recognised the humankind CO2 global emissions amount to circa 4% of the total in the atmosphere and that Mother Nature produces the remainder 96% of the total, I do wonder why it is that we should panic about a climate emergency. Face it, UK emissions amount to circa 0.0004% of the global total and if the UK emissions fell to zero today, Mother Nature wouldnā€™t even notice the difference. Anyone who thinks otherwise is clearly deluded or, these days, more likely financially benefitting from propagating the alleged climate emergency.

          2. hefner
            April 26, 2021

            MartynG, 150 years are indeed a very short period of time but includes the period of industrialisation and the period with an increasing number of meteorological observations. I also agree that 4% of the total of CO2 looks very small compared to the natural sources. But you are surely aware that the CFCs, when they were found to be at the origin of the ozone-destroying photochemical reactions in the 1980s had concentrations in ppb, not ppm, so about four-five orders of magnitude smaller than that of CO2 concentration. So the concentration per se might not be the overwhelming factor, more likely the additional radiative impact of this additional CO2, together with that of other greenhouse gases, N2O, CH4, HFCs replacing CFCs is the main factor.
            I would also agree that the present UK emissions are very small related to those of China, the United States, India, …

            I am afraid that anybody calling ā€˜Mother Natureā€™ to help their argument looks a bit feeble to me. For my part I prefer to keep an open mind, keep reading on both sides of the argument, and have also stopped calling deluded people who do not share my views, like you (anyway you are very far from being the worst on this blog).
            As for benefitting from the ā€˜alleged climate emergencyā€™, looking at what the ā€˜free marketā€™ proposes today to investors, I get the feeling that a non-negligible number of pension schemes (some of them potentially benefitting the people most opposed to any idea that humans have anything to do with the climate) are at least partially on-board this ā€˜deluded trainā€™.

  28. formula57
    April 19, 2021

    The real climate crisis is a crisis of political and scientific candour, so has said Steven Koonin, a long time academic at Caltech and chief scientist of the U.S. Energy Department during Obamaā€™s presidency. Reportedly he states in a forthcoming book that what is typically said about climate science by many from the infotainment industry and by politicians and activists has drifted so far out of touch with the actual science as to be absurdly, demonstrably false.

    Whilst chief scientist he said that the world is not going to be able to reduce CO2 emissions enough to make much difference. Some forty per cent. of the CO2 emitted a century ago remains in the atmosphere and any warming it causes emerges slowly. Accordingly, reducing emissions can yield only a small and distant benefit. Koonin along with others foresee a slow, modest effect, not a runaway warming and evidently if that prediction proves wrong, we do not have the tools needed to address appreciably faster warming.

  29. formula57
    April 19, 2021

    Meanwhile, all is not as it seems in the Evil Empire in respect of its mandate that thirty per cent. of all its expenditures be allocated to green projects.

    The Evil Empireā€™s Commission classifies investment in terms of 0%, 40% and 100% green content (so far so commendable) but thereafter opts for outrageous cheating by always rounding up the numbers to the next higher target. So 1% becomes 40%. 41% becomes 100%. All too typical form over substance whilst never ceasing to bleat about its own virtue.

    Projects that are very far from green will nonetheless be so labelled throughout the Evil Empire as it continues to be a major contributor to global CO2 emissions. Should the U.K. not consider sanctions against products from such projects and encouraging America and China to do the same?

  30. P. Else
    April 19, 2021

    Does anyone remember the old Star Trek episode where they described various life forms as carbon based? Well that’s us and every other living thing on planet Earth. Decarbonising the economy, or anything else, is an impossibility and a massive scam.

  31. piglet
    April 19, 2021

    From the New Scientist, May 2007:

    “A simplified summary is that about 50% of the greenhouse effect is due to water vapour, 25% due to clouds, 20% to CO2, with other gases accounting for the remainder.”

    So why this obsession with CO2?

    1. Lifelogic
      April 19, 2021

      Indeed and the sun and its variable sun spot activity is the main influence.

      1. hefner
        April 22, 2021

        Variations in sun spot number within a 11-year solar cycle contribute to about 1 Wm^-2, i.e. 0.1% of the total solar radiation incoming at the top of the atmosphere, between 1365.5 and 1366.5 Wm^-2. To put things in perspective the seasonal cycle, between perihelion (around 3 January) and aphelion (around 3 July) sees a variation of about 7% in the radiation available at the top of the atmosphere.
        Variations in sun spot number are more likely to be linked to variations in the Sunā€™s magnetic field. And, surprise surprise, radiation field is not the same as magnetic field. Despite recent efforts (by anthropogenic climate change sceptics) the link between cosmic rays, changes in the Sunā€™s magnetic field and the climate (via cloud droplet size distribution and cloud cover) is very far to be proven.

        To make a long story short LL is more likely than not to be talking through his hat.

        NB: GWPF 15/07/2019 ā€˜New Science: Clouds and Solar Cycles Play Role in Climate Changeā€™.
        Please note the last line ā€˜This paper has now been retractedā€™…

    2. hefner
      April 19, 2021

      piglet, Could it be because both water vapour and clouds are parts of the hydrological cycle (evaporation /condensation /precipitation) with a recycling time of about five days where as the other greenhouse gases have a much longer lifetime (CO2: 20 to 200 years, CH4 about 12 years, N2O about a century).

  32. glen cullen
    April 19, 2021

    Are China or the USA banning the internal combustion engine fuelled by petrol or diesel or banning domestic gas boiler central heating ? NO
    Are China or the USA planning to stop using coal fired power stations or stop building new ones ? NO
    Weā€™re the foolsā€¦..and its going to cost us

  33. Fred.H
    April 19, 2021

    OFF TOPIC.
    BBC report.
    Two men were killed after a Tesla car crashed into a tree and caught fire in Texas, and police believe there was nobody present in the driver’s seat at the time of the accident. The 2019 Tesla Model S was travelling at a high speed when it failed to negotiate a curve on a winding road. The victims, both in their 50s, were found in the front passenger seat and in the back of the vehicle.
    Tesla did not respond immediately to the BBC’s request for comment.
    Evidence suggests that ā€œno-one was driving the vehicle at the time of impact,ā€ said Mark Herman, Harris County Precinct 4 constable, adding the case was still under investigation.

  34. G Wheatley
    April 19, 2021

    China are waiting for everybody else to commit themselves irreversibly….. and they will then just walk-in and take over.

    The USA know that, and are playing along with the feint.

    1. glen cullen
      April 19, 2021

      Thats happening before our eyes

  35. DavidJ
    April 19, 2021

    When will this “green” nonsense be recognised for what it is? Seriously flawed pseudo science and manipulated / fraudulent data designed to change life as we knew it and ensure subservience to globalist inspired governments.

    It has to be stopped.

  36. G Wheatley
    April 19, 2021

    Thames Frost Fairs anyone?
    Mini Ice-age, anyone?
    Famine, anyone?

    All highly probably if we reduce the CO2 levels too much. CO2 is plant food. They need it! And we need them.
    Gates’ plan to seed the upper atmosphere with light-blocking Calcium Carbonate wil accelerate all those.

    “Roll-up, roll-up, getch’yor ready-made disasters ‘ere – only $2 trillion. I’m feeling generous today madam and I’m robbin’ me’self but I’m offerin’ you a buy-one-get-one-free ! “

  37. G Wheatley
    April 19, 2021

    …oh…. and not forgetting that – during Roman times in Britain – the Governer was castigated by the Forum in Rome for not ordering enough wine from central stocks…….. because they were growing their own grapes on the South Downs. Just sayin’ like…….

    1. Pauline Baxter
      April 19, 2021

      I read that grapes were being grown a lot further north than the South Downs. Somewhere in Yorkshire if I remember rightly. South facing slopes of course.

    2. Fedupsoutherner
      April 19, 2021

      They are still growing grapes along the south coast and indeed in Shropshire too and very good the wine is too.

  38. Mark
    April 19, 2021

    Our best hope is that for once the politicians obey Greta and defer COP26. Permanently would be ideal.

  39. john waugh
    April 19, 2021

    Formula One is developing sustainable fuels.
    They are a testbed for the automotive industry as well as sport.
    ICEs powered by sustainable fuels still have a future.

    Noticed Lithium shortage concerns now being reported.

  40. John McDonald
    April 19, 2021

    Dear Sir John,
    Please can you get your Governments advisors to dispute the following:
    In fact, carbon dioxide, which is blamed for climate warming, has only a volume share of 0.04 percent in the atmosphere. And of these 0.04 percent CO2, 95 percent come from natural sources, such as volcanoes or decomposition processes in nature. The human CO2 content in the air is thus only 0.0016 percent.
    Should be a piece of cake to challenge if untrue.
    What is true is the climate is changing and the CO2 levels are increasing. The earth is warming up, but why, and what part are Humans playing in this. More CO2 will be released as the earth warms.
    Is our 5% of 0.04% causing climate change?
    I am sure we have an hand in it but is it our CO2 generation, or the general pollution and industrial scale destruction of the environment ????. Don’t forget there is a layer of CO2 around the globe. It will reflect some radiated heat back to earth. But as it gets thicker so will it reflect the suns heat back into space. The question is will it get colder or stabilise at a higher temperature then now ?
    We are causing more pollution going green /carbon neutral than if we invest in clean coal fired power stations just generating CO2 to feed a vast forest planted around them šŸ™‚ I won’t mention nuclear šŸ™ Just leave that to the French so they can supply use more and more electricity as time goes by to charge our monster car batteries. We could think about Hydrogen fuel and invest in that rather than just wind turbines and solar panels.

  41. Paul Cuthbertson
    April 19, 2021

    It is all total BS being pushed by the Globalists. Just look at the individuals in the UK let alone the globe promoting this agenda. Say no more. World Economoic Forum Great Reset. Control of the masses.

  42. acorn
    April 19, 2021

    Did you know that the UK imports 42% of its CO2 emissions on “Consumption-Based Accounting terms”? The UK produced (2018) 380 million tonnes of CO2; but, it consumed 540 million tonnes. 160 million tonnes came embedded in all the stuff we imported. Stuff made in countries that burn coal to make the electric that makes all the bits for your imported goodies.

    China was a net exporter of 1,000 million tonnes of CO2, 10% of its production. The USA was a net importer of 350 million tonnes of CO2, 6.5% of USA production. There are some good interactive charts at https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/united-kingdom?country=USA~GBR~CHN

    1. Peter2
      April 19, 2021

      Is that double accounting?
      China adds up its total CO2 output and then you then add the CO2 of our imports from China and add them to the total for the UK.

      1. acorn
        April 20, 2021

        No, globally it is a zero sum equation.

  43. new flowers
    April 19, 2021

    I like the flower pix. Beauty is important. Well beauty and truth.

  44. Original Richard
    April 19, 2021

    Anthropological global warming is a scam as evidenced by the fact that the Earth has been gradually warming since the last Glacial Maximum 22,000 years ago and long before our industrialisation.

    It is driven by 3 groups.

    The first group believe in unilaterally destroying our industry and democracy for much the same reasons as they believed in unilateral nuclear disarmament back in the 1950s.

    The second group are able to make fortunes based upon the legislation that are involved in making. I would have thought this was illegal but then I was extremely surprised to learn that employees of private companies can also hold civil service jobs at the same time.

    The third group are the MSM who have found that frightening the population does wonders for their viewing figures and wish to follow up the pandemic with an Earth destroying crisis.

  45. Pauline Baxter
    April 19, 2021

    IF the Earth’s climate is warming it is probably because we are recovering from a ‘little ice age’. Or because there are natural fluctuations in the sun’s output of energy.
    IF we are producing more CO2, it may be because there are more people breathing it out than there used to be.
    Carbon Dioxide is essential to all plant life. ALL plant life, not just rain forests or other trees. The grass on our green fields and road verges stay green through Winter. Every blade (leaf) of grass is photosynthesising – absorbing CO2 and giving out Oxygen.
    I could go on but let’s just say the whole ‘Reduce Carbon Dioxide’ the world is heating up ‘THING’ is one great SCAM.
    It is, like you say, MOST IMPORTANT THE UK DOES NOT SIGN UP to any deal or pledge or target of any sort.
    I hope you have some way of preventing U.K. from doing that, because it certainly would enable other countries to steal what is left of our productive capacity.
    It also threatens UK with being unable to keep warm in Winter, to produce it’s food, in fact to survive in anything like it’s present form.

  46. jas
    April 19, 2021

    Any person who has a conservatory will confirm the difficulties of keeping their conservatory cool in summer and warm in winter.
    In the recent decades past all over the globe glass cities have sprung up . A city of glass needs to be heated when the temperature is cold, a city of glass needs to be cooled when the temperature is hot, all of which are contributing to Co2 in the atmosphere . Officers in Parliament and Brussels inflict on us all sorts of rules telling us to use this light bulb or drive this type of car or use that type of insulation, or burn this type of fuel for our heat. How hypocritical governments and the officers within are when they are complicit in the construction of these glass buildings.

  47. Julian Flood
    April 19, 2021

    Sir John, do you know what can most truthfully be described as ‘the lungs of the planet’? No, not the Amazon. The microscopic life that teems throughout the oceans. Have a look. Then read about the carbon fixation pathways that plankton (they’re talking of pico-plankton now) can utilise. Note their ability under stress to be less discriminatory against C13 and how, if we have moved their preferred mode from C3 to C4 (or in the case of diatoms ‘C4-like’) they will be leaving a light carbon signal in the atmosphere which is assumed to be caused by fossil fuel.
    The oceans, polluted, abused, poisoned are changing. Their CO2 signal is changing as well. It dwarfs the contribution of fossil fuel burning. Betcha.

    JF

    1. hefner
      April 20, 2021

      I look at two 2006 and 2007 studies and the papers related to in-situ experiments in 2013, 2015 and 2020, all related to these planktons. So what are your conclusions? Are these nano- & pico-planktons accelerating or slowing down the uptake of atmospheric CO2 by the oceans? Or do the oceans actually emit more CO2 because of increased temperature? Will this bring a benefit to the atmosphere? to the oceans? Is a potential pH reduction of the ocean water important or not?

  48. Fedupsoutherner
    April 19, 2021

    Peter, well I suggest you ignore certain posts and stop moaning.

  49. Iain Moore
    April 19, 2021

    Your lunatic leader Johnson has made another stupid virtue signalling promise on climate change . I think I said here that we couldn’t trust him to not damage us some more between now and the Cop26 , and he has , and there is still months to go for him to damage us some more.

  50. Lindsay McDougall
    April 19, 2021

    The whole world needs to stop burning raw coal in power stations PDQ. Emissions from gas fired power stations are only half of these from coal fired power stations, so as an alternative and back up to renewables gas is acceptable. Also, several countries including China are still manufacturing CFCs so the ozone hole has stopped closing. Unless it is fully closed, we don’t know why global warming is worst at the poles.

    The UK should be active in proposing new rules for the WTO, allowing tariffs to be imposed on the exports of countries that burn raw coal and manufacture CFCs.

    No more bullshit targets for 2050 (or in China’s case 2060); action this day.

  51. anon
    April 19, 2021

    Time for tariffs on CO2 content of imports, perhaps loaded on imported products of a strategic nature which would be better produced in the UK.

    I would think the West will move quickly to renewables as the costs fall anyway. The statutory need to close and demolish older plant seems rather hasty. Why not just move at a legally slower pace and maintain some of the assets in reserve or use for high demand periods.

    Perhaps our politicians and rulers prefer Global/EU dictat to the concepts of democracy. Our policies must benefit certain interests otherwise they would not be expedited by our globalist rulers.

    Its seems the law is being used against the people as a weapon of choice, to neuter all democratic controls.
    All events are interpreted to ensure this, despite it being obviously double standards are in play on analsyis.

  52. Alan Jutson
    April 19, 2021

    jas
    Absolutely true, even with all sorts of high tech glass sealed units these type of buildings are prone to temperature extremes which must be managed by a complex form of ventilated temperature controlled heating and management systems, which themselves use energy. Likewise the actual glass sealed units break down after a number of years in service, leading to costly and sometimes complicated and expensive replacement.
    The advantage of such structures ares that they are nice and bright and filled with light, usually have some sort of a view, and thus do not feel claustrophobic.
    Thus you pay’s your money, and takes your choice, within whatever the building regulations are at the time.

Comments are closed.