Time for the UK to tell the COP26 main players some home truths

There is a part of the UK establishment that is always keen to belittle and run the UK down, claiming we are small and unimportant now we have left the EU. They ignore the facts that we are the second biggest contributor to NATO, a member of the UN security Council, the fifth largest world economy, a member of the G7 and the Commonwealth, and an important influence on world events. This autumn sees the UK chairing the COP 26 Climate conference, shortly after we chaired the G7.

There is however one important area where I agree with them that we are small and not very important, and that is in the list of countries and regions that put out the most carbon dioxide. Ironically here the establishment seem to think it is the UK that has to do so much more, when all the figures show attention needs to be focussed on the Big three carbon generators, China, the USA and the EU. Between them they account for 52% of the world output compared to our 1%. In other words if the UK eliminated all its carbon dioxide output it would have the same effect on world figures as the Big 3 cutting their output by just 2%.

China is still saying she intends to increase her massive carbon output further this decade before finding some ways to start to curb it. China needs to be challenged on her large and growing output. At 29% of world CO2 she is by far and away the biggest single source. If the UK eliminated all its CO2 that would not fully offset one recent year’s growth in output by China. The USA has just experienced four years under a President dedicated to increasing US output and use of cheap fossil fuel energy. He successfully boosted US output of oil and gas to help power an industrial renaissance by onshoring investments that had gone abroad and expanding US output. The new President thinks this was a wrong policy but has yet to announce the ways in which he intends to redirect US activities. We await a detailed plan with timetables on how to get US people out of their internal combustion engines cars, eating less meat and putting in electric heating. The EU too has a similar issue. Germany remains wedded to a major car industry which largely sells diesel and petrol vehicles. The country burns a lot of coal and says it intends to keep coal in its power mix at least until 2035. How is this compatible with the EU’s aims? The EU is around one tenth of world carbon dioxide production.

As Chairman of the Conference the UK needs to challenge the USA and EU to produce timely and convincing plans of how they will achieve demanding targets as early as 2030 as it is difficult to see them hitting them on current policy. All major participants need to see that if they do not get a much better offer from China and other leading emerging market countries world emissions will continue to grow. It is not fair to close down our industries and power stations whilst others carry on churning out the CO2.

264 Comments

  1. Grey Friar
    June 25, 2021

    “As Chairman of the Conference the UK needs to challenge the USA and EU …” – the utter delusion would be funny if it weren’t so tragic. It’s only a couple of weeks since the UK last “challenged” the USA and EU, on the Ireland Protocol, and it resulted in the US issuing a formal diplomatic rebuke to the UK and the EU beginning legal proceedings against the UK. The UK is weak and it is not listened to. That’s Brexit. You voted for it

    1. MiC
      June 25, 2021

      It would be helpful if those on the populist Right would define what they mean by the “establishment” with a small “e”.

      The British Establishment was defined in the 1960s when the term became popular as the military and intelligence, the landed, the BBC, the Church, the Royals, the top brass in finance, government, the judiciary and so on. It centrally implied the strongly social nature of the holding of power in the UK, and it was and is inherently Conservative.

      It absolutely did not include the Labour Party, unions, co-ops, mutual societies, professional groups such as teachers and professors, scientists, ordinary journalists, and so on.

      It now appears that – in large measure – John means precisely those groups that the properly understood definition actually excludes.

      I think that this is intentionally misleading.

      1. Peter2
        June 25, 2021

        MiC
        There are many on the left and on the right that can be called part of the establishment.
        Individuals as well as established groups.

        You make too much of Sir John’s opening words:- “There is a part of the UK establishment that is always keen to belittle and run the UK down…”

        PS
        To claim the Labour Party and others you mention are not part of the establishment is nonsense.

      2. Micky Taking
        June 25, 2021

        ‘ it was and is inherently Conservative.’ You checked with Her Majesty did you?

      3. agricola
        June 25, 2021

        MiC in terms of Brexit, your principal consuming hate, the Establishment,with whatever size e is to your liking, were all those individuals or organisations who had much to lose from Brexit and much to gain from remain. What the establishment was defined as in the 60s might have been relevant in the 60s but was totally irrelevant in 2016/2020. In terms of the electorate it was not I think a matter of personal gain or loss more a reflection of how they saw the future of the UK, a canton in a vast undemocratic state and milch cow to the cause, or a totally independant sovereign state taking its place at the table of World decision making, appreciated for its long history as a democracy, experience and wisdom. Does that help in your understanding.

        1. SM
          June 25, 2021

          +1

      4. jerry
        June 25, 2021

        @MiC; “It now appears that – in large measure – John means precisely those groups that the properly understood definition actually excludes.”

        Except “The Establishment” is not, and never has been, a fixed group, it simply indicative of which group is most dominant, the definition you use was actually from the mid 1950s, the groups our host point out are the most recent “Establishment” dominant group(s).

        1. MiC
          June 28, 2021

          That is true, but they remain largely the same as they were in the 1960s.

          They still do not include Labour, the Greens, SNP, SF, Plaid Cymru, trade unions, mutuals, or professions such as teaching, lecturing, the sciences and so on.

          They perhaps do include the elite in such newer domains as the broadcasting and internet multiplexes however, along with those behind the various right-wing “think tanks”.

      5. dixie
        June 26, 2021

        @mic – perhaps you should kick things off by defining what you mean by “populist Right” as well as “right”, “left” and “centre” all with or without capitals. Don’t forget to include something on the feral left.

    2. Richard1
      June 25, 2021

      The UK has done nothing of the sort. It is simply asking the EU to implement the protocol according to its terms, including those which recognise and respect the UK internal market and the terms of the Belfast agreement. Let’s see where the court case(s) get to.

      Biden appears to have said nothing to Boris on this issue. He’s probably figured out that the EU is trying to use it as a weapon for political advantage.

      With Macron and Merkel now off to try to ingratiate themselves with Putin on the back of the Nordstream2 pipeline go ahead, to the fury of EU states threatened by Russia, Biden is probably beginning to wise up to the threat posed to the security of the West by an assertive EU looking to become a global power.

      1. Mitchel
        June 25, 2021

        M Macron is also,I understand,going to send an extensive delegation to the Russian Far East -the Gateway to Eurasia-later this year to assess investment opportunities-they do not want to miss out on what is going on there.

        When Russia effectively severed relations with the EU earlier this year(institutionally but maintaining good bi-lateral relations with those countries deemed worthy),they knew the EU would come crawling back.And so it has come to pass.Mr Putin holds all the aces.

        1. Original Richard
          June 25, 2021

          Whilst I am certainly no supporter of Mr. Putin I think we need to realise that China is a far, far bigger threat to us than Russia and it would not be a good idea to worsen our relations with Russia.

          1. Mitchel
            June 26, 2021

            It is a mortal threat to the UK Establishment because “Eurasia”and all it’s implications for trade and the financial system (whether it be a China-Russia or a Russia-Germany concoction)is the antithesis of the sea-based system of western Europe(passed onto the USA) for the past few hundred years.Russia is always the key.As the USA tries to contrain China,the latter’s relationship with Russia becomes critically important to Beijing.

          2. Dennis
            June 26, 2021

            No doubt China could be a threat as many countries are to each other, the US, UK, France, Germany, Russia etc., etc are but all say China is a threat but never say what that is. As China seemingly would want the UK to still buy their goods what damage could China do to the UK but still leave the population rich enough to continue buying their stuff? I’d really like to know.

    3. Narrow Shoulders
      June 25, 2021

      So you are saying in effect that COP 26 is a complete waste of time?

      The Chair is the Chair in any meeting and has the ultimate say (Malta Chairs the EU on a rotating basis so size is unimportant)

      There is a part of the UK establishment that is always keen to belittle and run the UK down, claiming we are small and unimportant now we have left the EU. You could not have highlighted it better @GF

    4. a-tracy
      June 25, 2021

      Grey F, and yet Andy was telling us all this week our ‘weak and not listened to’ Country alone are going to be responsible for ‘girls not being educated’, Andy Jun 21 ‘axed swathes of intentional aid – literally -killing hundreds of thousands of mostly poor brown kids in other countries in the process.’

      1. John C.
        June 25, 2021

        A-Tracy. Certainly, if we’re so weak we should act in accordance with our feebleness, and look after ourselves.

      2. jon livesey
        June 25, 2021

        Right. Everything has to be anti-Brexit, even if Remainers contradict themselves in the process. It is clumsy Labour tactics applied to Brexit.

    5. John C.
      June 25, 2021

      We voted to leave the EU and we clearly haven’t, or the EU would have no right to tell us how to deal with N. Ireland. Nor would it be any business of Biden’s. So we’ve been cheated, mainly because of Remainers like you.

      1. John C.
        June 25, 2021

        This is addressed to Grey F. This blog oddly transports one’s reply to somewhere lower down. Must remember to state who it is a reply to.

        1. Dennis
          June 26, 2021

          ‘Must remember to state who it is a reply to.’ This should be necessary to get posts posted.

          (No need to mention John C. I think)

      2. Malone
        June 26, 2021

        You totally have been cheated. But the people who have cheated you are the Leave campaigners who promised you we would hold all the cards when we left. Fiction and fantasy. We are now a much smaller and weaker country – the humiliation of Northern Ireland is just one of many. All down to the stupidity of leaving the world’s most powerful multi-country bloc, and being left exposed and isolated. You are right to be angry John, but be sure to be angry at the right people, the charlatans and cheats who mis-sold you Brexit

    6. jon livesey
      June 25, 2021

      No, it’s not Brexit, but your own self-delusion and fictionalization of events. Remainers predicted a disaster, and now they insist on living in one. But fabricating non-events doesn’t win you any prizes.

      The real news here is that there isn’t a big issue between the UK and US, Biden did not hand out any orders, but simply repeated the mealy-mouthed support for the GFA that is compulsory for any American President, and the EU, so I read, is in the process of winding down its pressure on NI.

      But what really is happening post-Brexit is that the EU has been so clumsy and reactive that it has done its own cause in the UK ten times more harm than any domestic organization could ever have done. Newspaper stories today are written from the point of view that the EU is Britain’s enemy. Changing the public psychology towards the EU in such negative way is an EU own-goal of epic proportions.

  2. Mark B
    June 25, 2021

    Good morning.

    *This all reminds me of the day that CMD came out of a meeting with other members of the EU to announce a cut in the budget. All hail the Great Leader ! Trouble was, our contributions went up while others went down.

    The point being that the UK Government and our CS are basically pants at negotiating. The other nations act in their national interest and, irrespective of how much posturing and virtue signalling the PM does, they will just ignore him. We all need to realise that we have a very well educated fool at the helm.

    Pat. I replied to your post yesterday.

    *I’d link the above, but since I am not a ‘prefered’ member of this site I am afraid you will have to Google it yourself.

    1. glen cullen
      June 25, 2021

      If we acted in our national interest and negotiated to our own advantaged we’d be labelled as those old empire racists and fascists

    2. formula57
      June 25, 2021

      @ Mark B – There is membership here and there are preferred members?! 😯 Thinking about it I suspect I might be amongst the preferred – I shall certainly make that claim now. :smug: 🙂

    3. Mike Wilson
      June 25, 2021

      I’ve found if you post a relevant link, it gets published.

      1. Mark B
        June 26, 2021

        All my links are relevant, on topic and from known sources. They just do not agree with the narrative being portrayed.

  3. turboterrier
    June 25, 2021

    Our leader and his government ministers can huff and puff and cascade whatever nonsense they believe at that moment of time regarding all these outrageous predictions on zero Co2, electric vehicles and eating less meat upon the Great British public , all the while the band is playing “believe it if you like” The scientific models, programmes and processes coming out of all the main players governments are all different. Each, other than this country concerned with their own agenda, not in the least worried about being in the vanguard countries following our example.
    It is therefore quite understandable that the people are confused, sceptical and do not believe a bleeding word they say.
    Their role and only role is doing what is best for this country now, today, next month. Not what is predicted by all so accredited scientists from all the different countries each one with a different hypothesis. How many scientists and engineers are in the cabinet?

    1. DavidJ
      June 25, 2021

      Outrageous predictions indeed; all based on the lie of global warming derived from seriously flawed “science” and manipulated data. If government continues to be subservient to the globalist purveyors of such propaganda then life as we know (knew?) it is finished to be replaced by a truly Orwellian society.

  4. Shirley M
    June 25, 2021

    I am not convinced that CO2 is the cause of ‘climate change’. However, I am convinced that we cannot rely on fossil fuels forever. I am not keen on nuclear, given the dangers of radiation and the long term problems yet to be solved, but we do need a reliable source of energy. Is there any source of energy that is reliable, doesn’t cost a fortune and doesn’t ‘destroy the planet’ as part of it’s manufacture or use? I don’t know of any!

    Given the advance of science, it is disappointing that we have not made more headway in this regard. I wonder if future generations will have to manage with restrictions on electricity, unless they are extremely wealthy.

    On the other hand, we could always ignore it all, as China does, and let nature take its course.

    1. turboterrier
      June 25, 2021

      Shirley M
      Now that is the way to finish a post.
      Love it.

      1. glen cullen
        June 25, 2021

        +1

    2. agricola
      June 25, 2021

      Shirley M,
      Scotland is full of valleys that could be dammed to produce hydro electricity and the exposed hillsides could be filled with trees to answer our timber needs. That would satisfy the electrical needs of the north of England and balance the Barnett Formula.
      Long term we hope for cold fusion to cover our needs.

      1. hefner
        June 26, 2021

        a, What about ‘The race to build a commercial fusion reactor heats up’, Economist, 24/06/2021. ‘Hot’ fusion has been shown to work if only for a few minutes, a Canadian company is to build a laser-confined fusion reactor in the Culham Centre for Fusion Energy, Oxon.
        The Fleischmann-Pons cold fusion results (1989) have never been reproduced.

    3. Everhopeful
      June 25, 2021

      Basic problem
we can’t, no matter what the socialists say, all heat and light our houses perpetually to the same standard as the richest man in the village.
      There is always a cost.
      But they plough on ahead trying to find sustainability
and that does have a cost! A huge one!
      While we sit on millions of tonnes of unmined and stockpiled coal.

      1. hefner
        June 25, 2021

        EH, At present level of consumption, the proven reserves of coal (77 million metric tons in 2016) represent 
 two years. That’s below 0.1% of known world reserves.
        How much investment are you going to put forward to dig those? (worldometers.info)

        1. Peter2
          June 25, 2021

          Yet every year explorations find new reserves.

          Peak oil and coal has been a failed prediction for decades.

          1. glen cullen
            June 26, 2021

            Agree

          2. hefner
            June 26, 2021

            P2, not in the UK (which I forgot to stress and which was my point).

          3. Peter2
            June 26, 2021

            We have coal reserves and gas reserves in the UK which we seem to have decided not to utilise.

          4. hefner 

            June 26, 2021

            P2, how many years’ worth? How much investment required? In how many sites? Without that information your statement does not hold much water. And you are a ‘businessman’?

          5. Peter2
            June 27, 2021

            I think you already know the answers to current known UK reserve heffy.
            But that is completely beside the point.
            We have decided not to to use coal nor explore for even more reserves and I’m sure you already know we have found huge reserves of fracking gas but we have decided not to use them nor explore for more reserves.
            Do you see?

        2. Everhopeful
          June 25, 2021

          The world is sitting on about 130 years of coal.
          We import coal and coke from USA, Russia and Australia. Even a little anthracite from the EU. Amount is down on 2019 but if saner times ever returned we could import more I imagine?
          Meanwhile someone could invent a decent new fuel that has nothing to do with windmills! 130 years odd is a long time!
          And never mind investment..this green lark won’t come cheap!

        3. hefner
          June 27, 2021

          P2, yes I see: 77 mmt of coal (about 2 years), 7.32 trillion cubic feet of gas (2.6 times the UK annual consumption). So tell me, is the UK not going for those because of the EU? Or is there an economic case showing the whole thing would not be profitable? Or is it because of Carrie? Or what did you read on the subject that convinces you we should go on exploiting UK coal and gas? I would really like what you think and not have to deal your usual escapist comments.
          That would particularly help me decide whether you’re just a windbag or whether you could possibly bring anything sensible to a discussion.

          1. Edward2
            June 28, 2021

            Gosh, lots of stats there.
            Took you two days to respond.
            Is that a record?
            Windbag…never a post from a lefty without abuse.
            You just can’t resist it can you hefty.

          2. hefner
            July 2, 2021

            P2, and as usual, windbag^2, you do not answer the point, as I guess you would have extreme difficulties to put a couple (or more, pleasy please) of facts in a row to get to a conclusion consistent with those facts.

    4. Lifelogic
      June 25, 2021

      “Is there any source of energy that is reliable, doesn’t cost a fortune and doesn’t ‘destroy the planet’ as part of it’s manufacture or use?”

      Nuclear fusion (or other better safer nuclear) are the only long term options. We will surely have this cracked within 20 years. Fossil fuels are just fine until then. The effect of a little more atmospheric CO2 has been hugely exaggerated no climate crisis is imminent. Anyways the government is idiotically encouraging people to change old cars for electric new ones that cost a fortune and do not even save any net CO2 after manufacture. Nor will vastly expensive heat pumps or burning imported wood at Drax save C02, it produces more in fact.

      With cheap fusion energy we can have almost limitless safe and clean energy, we could (if needed) reduce atmospheric C02 from the atmosphere (though it will probably not be needed), we can manufacture aircraft and other transport and heating fuels as needed and we can desalinate water as required. It will be reliable, largely on demand and controllable energy.

      1. Lifelogic
        June 25, 2021

        A Heath yesterday in the Telegraph spot on as usual.

        “Decadent Britain is sleepwalking into a vortex of permanent decline
        Lockdown has precipitated a pernicious cultural revolution that will make us poorer and less free”

      2. Lifelogic
        June 25, 2021

        Rachel Maclean under sec. at Transport seems nearly as daft as her boss. She claims electric cars cost 1p per mile to charge and conventional cars 10p, the figures are clearly optimistic & not very typical and this is mainly due to 80% taxes on petrol anyway so gov. loses out on tax.

        Clearly she must assume very cheap electricity and no car heating, lights, hills or wipers! But what this means is an electric car only uses perhaps ÂŁ1,ooo over its whole lifetime to do say 100,000 miles and the. write off the vehicle. But tax and finance costs and installing chargers might cost ÂŁ50,000. So the electricity costs are almost irrelevant.

        Clearly to mine the battery materials, manufacture the ÂŁ30,000 EV cars and batteries will use for more energy and CO2 than the ÂŁ1000 of electricity will ever save. Plus this electricity is far from carbon free anyway. So why are these Gov. dopes pushing this agenda that saves no CO2 anyway? She is an experimental psychology graduate it seems. Can we have some decent engineers, physicists and people who can do basic sums please?

        1. Lifelogic
          June 25, 2021

          A friend of mine had to spend ÂŁ10,000 on a rapid home car charger when he bought a Tesla, this as upgrading the mains supply was also needed. So his 100,000 miles or the ÂŁ1,000+ of electricity needed for this will cost him ÂŁ11,000+ far more than petrol. This on top of the ÂŁ80k car which is now perhaps worth ÂŁ30k and lost of the investment return on say 75k had he kept his perfectly fine ÂŁ5k old car.

          1. dixie
            June 26, 2021

            Most EV users do not run an ÂŁ80k vehicle nor have 3 phase mains laid in but instead rely on the standard 80 – 100 A single phase which allows a 7kW wall charger costing ÂŁ500-750.
            BTW I imagine his EV is worth a lot more than ÂŁ30k now, recent second hand vehicles have rocketed in price recently, second hand EVs even more.

            You complain about non-STEM graduates in government positions yet pretend expertise in numerous disciplines and use “data” pulled out of thin air and extreme examples – you are the one bringing science and considered analysis into disrepute.

          2. Lifelogic
            June 26, 2021

            I did not say or even suggest my friends car was typical at all did I? Looking at cars for sale ÂŁ30k looks right but even if it is say ÂŁ40k he has still lost perhaps 66k in loss of alternative investment return and depreciation,

            Yes I complain about Gov. departments being run by people who do not even know the basics Energy, Transport, Health, Housing, defence in particular. The transport Sec. even seems to think electric cars are “zero emission” and save CO2 so unscientific & deluded is he.

            If you think any of my figures are wrong do please let me know, I believe they are fairly sound and good estimates. My background is Maths, Physics, Stats, Electronic Engineering, investment/betting, Military aircraft, Business, Property (development & investment) and building materials.

          3. dixie
            June 27, 2021

            @LL, I have often questioned your assertions and asked for evidence. Without that, proof references or workings out that is all they are – assertions or theory, not fact.

        2. acorn
          June 25, 2021

          Currently, Battery Electric vehicles, at street level, are averaging about 0.3 kWh per mile, at about 15 pence per kWh. Have a look at https://cleantechnica.com/files/2021/02/Why-Battery-Electric-Vehicles-Beat-Hydrogen-Electric-Vehicles.jpeg

          Fantasists still reckon that a “Hydrogen Economy” is the future. Just as it has been ever since the original article was published in Scientific American back in the 1970s. Naturally, the Oil and Gas industry want’s you to believe that they can crack H2 out of Oil and Gas wells; and, miraculously sequester all the CO2 that process produces.

          1. Peter2
            June 25, 2021

            Whilst electric cars can save a few hundred pounds per year in fuelling they cost many thousands more to buy than a similar car and depreciation is higher.
            Currently company car tax is lower which is I recognise as a plus.
            But if you value your time sitting at a recharging areas on a journey adds to the expense.

          2. Lifelogic
            June 26, 2021

            I agree the 1p per miles was from the under Sec. at the Dep. of energy. I assume she was taking an extreme example with very cheap over night electricity or something. This to push the misguided governments EV agenda before the tech. works.

          3. dixie
            June 26, 2021

            @Peter2 not just savings in fuel, my EV saves in tyres, brakes and servicing, the latter alone is ÂŁ600 less pa than my previous German oiler which cost more.

        3. Mockbeggar
          June 25, 2021

          With present technology, car batteries will probably need replacing every 20,000 miles or so and certainly won’t go to 100,000.

          1. lifelogic
            June 26, 2021

            Not quite as bad as that, but if you really want to buy an electric car read the battery guarantee rather carefully. Most are rather poor as the manufacturers know the problem with current battery technology.

          2. dixie
            June 26, 2021

            mainstream EV manufacturers warranty the batteries for 8 years/ 100,000 miles or more – 150,000 miles in Tesla’s case.
            Longevity is based on usage and manufacturers don’t know for sure how long batteries will last, currently guesstimating 10 -20 years. After that the batteries get re-used for domestic/industrial storage.

        4. dixie
          June 26, 2021

          “Clearly to mine the battery materials, manufacture the ÂŁ30,000 EV cars and batteries will use for more energy and CO2 than the ÂŁ1000 of electricity will ever save”
          Huh? if you are saving anything it is the pollutants, resources and CO2 from the ICE equivalent doing 100,000 miles. Besides you need to subtract that used to manufacture the ICE vehicle in the first place, then add on the continual emissions to fuel and rune the ICE vehicle.

          1. Lifelogic
            June 26, 2021

            @Dixie – No you could just justccontinue to run you old small petrol car for another 100k miles which would clearly save more CO2 than buying a new electric one if you do the maths. Even if do you assume a new petrol or a new electric one it is not clear.

            As to the 8 years or 100,000 miles guarantee then read the small print range and efficiency decay and the G’tees do not protect for this fully. Even if the battery does manage 100,000 miles in its lifetime the battery alone has cost at least 10p per mile, about 4 times the value of the electricity per mile.

        5. dixie
          June 26, 2021

          1p per mile is clearly wrong and would likely range up to 5p-ish per mile for domestic charging and more for public chargers depending on vehicle, usage, tariff and plan.
          I get around 4 miles per kWh so it is around 4p per mile from domestic grid charging
          Though, it can also be 0p per mile when charged off domestic solar PV …

          1. Lifelogic
            June 26, 2021

            1p per mile not typical I agree but that was the claim made by the junior minister not me!

          2. dixie
            June 27, 2021

            @LL – was agreeing not criticising.

      3. Mitchel
        June 25, 2021

        A couple of weeks ago I noted that the Russian government has instructed Rosatom,the state nuclear energy giant,to re-start development of a huge Uranium field in Yakutia(Eastern Siberia)which is the largest such in the world.This project had been suspended five or six years ago when in the wake of Fukushima,a number of states announced they were closing their nuclear plants and the Uranium price subsequently fell sharply but with more interest in nuclear,the price has partially recovered this year.

      4. DavidJ
        June 25, 2021

        +3

      5. Dennis
        June 26, 2021

        LL – ‘With cheap fusion energy ….’ Wasn’t this said about nuclear power stations in the 1950s?

        1. Dennis
          June 26, 2021

          Dennis – no, it was said to be too cheap to meter.

    5. Julian Flood
      June 25, 2021

      The UK can reduce its CO2 emissions by fracking its own gas and extending the gas grid. A lot of space heating relies on oil. Natural gas is half carbon half hydrogen so it produces less CO2.
      Compressed natural gas (aka methane or CH4) is a low carbon low particulate fuel for large vehicles, trains, HGVs, buses etc which would be a boon for our choking cities.
      What do we get instead? Our political class mandates solar down the road from where I live and condemns the thousands who object as nimbys, but they allow a few dozen objectors to veto production of a gas that goes a long way to meeting our climate change targets. Why?

      JF

      1. acorn
        June 25, 2021

        For the record Natural Gas which is mostly methane, is 75% Carbon and 25% Hydrogen.

        1. hefner
          June 25, 2021

          Are you sure? Methane is CH4, ie 1 C for 4 H, which to me looks like 20% C and 80% H, in terms of atoms. Furthermore assuming the simplest of reactions CH4 + H2O -> CO +3 H2 that means one mole of CH4 and one of (steamed) water react together to produce three moles of H2 plus one of carbon monoxide.
          Now figure out the process able to have this reaction energetically and industrially profitable.

          1. Mark
            June 26, 2021

            The molecular weight of carbon is 12, and of hydrogen is 1. The molecular weight of methane – CH4 – is 16. So carbon is indeed 75% by weight, and hydrogen 25%.

          2. hefner
            June 26, 2021

            Mark, Sorry, but if the expectation is to get H2 out of CH4 the molecular weight of the various molecules is rather irrelevant. Or am I missing something?

          3. Lifelogic
            June 26, 2021

            Measured by weight or by the number of molecules or by volume occupied it rather depends!

          4. Mark
            June 26, 2021

            Steam methane reforming is a two stage process: the first stage requires high temperatures to produce carbon monoxide and hydrogen from methan and steam under pressure. In the second stage the carbon monoxide readily oxidizes to carbon dioxide, so the overall reaction becomes

            CH4+2H2O->CO2+4H2 if air is excluded

            Otherwise methane simply burns in air

            CH4+2O2->CO2+2H2O

            I would suggest that the important properties of hydrogen include its very low temperature of liquefaction, the considerable energy required to compress it as a gas to store a reasonable amount of energy in a reasonable volume, its large flammability range in air and difficulty of stenching or being aware of hydrogen flames, and the ease with which it permeates or embrittles containers and pipework, particularly when under pressure.

      2. Lifelogic
        June 25, 2021

        Indeed get fracking!

      3. Mockbeggar
        June 25, 2021

        Quite right, JF

      4. dixie
        June 26, 2021

        fracking doesn’t save the CO2 produced when you burn the gas. A better argument would be security of supply but even better to bank it for when imports become a problem.

        1. Lifelogic
          June 26, 2021

          Well burning fracked methane is hugely better than importing wood to burn in CO2 terms, not that CO2 is a major problem anyway.

    6. Ian Wragg
      June 25, 2021

      CO2 is the basis for all life. Trying to get to nett zero using ruinous financial penalties won’t end well.
      Germany,USA and China will pay lip service whilst pursuing their own policies.
      We are governed by arts graduates who have o real life experience and will send us back into the dark aged.
      Whilst the government supports silly battery cars, hydrogen will be perfected and we’ll be left looking stupid once more.
      Remember the groundnut scheme in Africa.

      1. Lifelogic
        June 26, 2021

        Indeed but what is the advantage of hydrogen over say methane or other easier gas alternatives? We have no hydrogen mines after all. Easier to store too and much infrastructure is already in place.

    7. Christine
      June 25, 2021

      I agree that we do need to find an alternative source of energy to oil and gas as these are finite resources. Boris needs to tap into what this country does best which is innovation. Applying restrictions and exorbitant costing alternatives before the science has caught up with demand is just madness. I don’t want any Government telling me I can’t eat meat. This Government needs to butt out of our lives and allow us to make our own choices. One minute we are told children are in poverty and starving and the next we have a child obesity crisis. Which is it? I don’t think they have a clue what they are doing and lurch from one crisis of their own making to the next.

      1. John Hatfield
        June 25, 2021

        +1

    8. Ed M
      June 25, 2021

      If the luddites in the USA still had their way, Americans would still be driving gas guzzlers en masse. Gas guzzlers might be fun to drive but they’re not that amazing either – I’d rather a more efficient German-made car. Faster, better designed and more economical – plus it’s just unstainable to have millions of cars guzzling gas.

      Science is AMAZING. Mix science with AMAZING design + PERSEVERNCE + THE SPIRIT OF ADVENTURE, we can have amazing – both beautiful and powerful – technology with no damage to our environment or economy. We can have the best of both or all worlds – with the UK becoming a leader in green tech, contributing billions to our economy, and hugely increasing productivity, skills, and quality brand exports abroad, raising sense of patriotism about our economy. Not forgetting, it’s just a psychological fact that men love making things – and so production of high tech / digital is essential to our economy – above all, increasing productivity as well as much more money to our economy.

      1. Ed M
        June 25, 2021

        Those who continue to deny climate change are becoming more and more dinosaur-like as each year progresses and harms the Tories chances of getting re-elected. And also totally goes against the medium to long-term well-being of our economy. The market has decided green is the future. It matters not what some people on the right think. The market is more important. Plus the market is RIGHT! Not 100% right. But right in that there is a problem with the environment but that if we play our cards right we can have both a strong economy and healthy environment whilst making extra money out of the green economy. In other words, a win-win-win for everyone.

        1. Peter2
          June 25, 2021

          Who denies that the climate changes Ed M?
          The unanswered question is what percentage is mankind the driver of all climate change and what percentage is not caused by mankind.
          PS
          You berate America but they have reduced their CO2 emissions* and improved air quality significantly over the last decades despite big population increases.

          *The world’s biggest reduction, 758 million metric tonnes since 2005 compared to China who grew by 3 billion metric tonnes and India who grew by 1 billion metric tonnes in the same time period.

        2. Hat man
          June 25, 2021

          Except that it isn’t the free market, Ed M. It’s a rigged playing field where private business corporations are lured by the attraction of taxpayer billions, to do what they would very likely not do without gigantic subsidies. All of which of course does their share prices a power of good, enriching the 1%, while us plebs will just have to fork ever more to pay for this cynical scam.

          And will climate alarmists like you ever understand that there probably aren’t any actual climate change ‘deniers’? There are many people, including scientists, who question whether it is significantly caused by human activity. Gambling our way of life and future prosperity on the off-chance that it might be, is reckless and irresponsible.

          1. Ed M
            June 25, 2021

            @Hat Man

            You know b**gger all about me sir. Please don’t pigeon hole me to win your argument to yourself so easily.
            I’m a big opponent of the greenies (i.e. the young Swedish woman whatever her name is, I forget).
            I just follow SCIENCE that there is a problem with the environment and its man-made. Except the reality is we don’t really know more than that. The science isn’t v accurate. However, creating forms of green tech is the right way forward. You can’t just do absolutely SFA digging your head in the sands. Plus there’s good opportunity for lots of people here in the UK to make lots of money from green tech – and when it really takes off and becomes more efficient and useful in 10+ years time.

        3. John Hatfield
          June 25, 2021

          Ed, “The market has decided green is the future.”
          Tripe. Pressure groups have decided that green is the future. Whether, in reality, this turns out to be the case, the jury is still out.

        4. John C.
          June 25, 2021

          Ed M. The market hasn’t decided. Greenness is being forced upon us, and it’s impractical.

        5. Mark B
          June 26, 2021

          The climate has always and will continue to change.

          The ‘market’ is skewed as we are denied real choice and wind farms a subsidies by the government. If it was to compete for energy against coal, gas and oil people would not choose it.

          This is NOT a Right vs Left issue. The Left always tries to use anything to paint itself in a virtuous light whilst acting in a truly nasty way.

        6. Lifelogic
          June 26, 2021

          No one denies that “climate change” always has always will – we just deny there is any real climate emergency. Plus the solutions this Gov. is pushing do not even save any sig. CO2 anyway. Not that CO2 is actually a serious problem.

    9. paul cuthbertson
      June 25, 2021

      Shirley – The Climate Change BS is all part of the globalist plan. The Paris Climate Accord, where does ALL the money go!!!!! on climate policies???? Wake up.
      The majority of the people are fooled because they believe the MSM. Switch off your TV and do some research.
      However your final paragraph is spot on.

      1. Lifelogic
        June 26, 2021

        +1

  5. Alan Holmes
    June 25, 2021

    What makes you think that China cares what we think? The west has systematically shifted it’s industrial production to China and now it wants to complain that China is burning lots of fuel to make the goods that the west buys. Idiotic.
    Then you have the other little problem that China does not believe the man made climate change drivel. Good luck trying to infect it with that particular mind virus .

    1. Micky Taking
      June 25, 2021

      and remember the age of the inner circle of Chinese government. Why would they care – they will all be dead within 10 years.

    2. glen cullen
      June 25, 2021

      +1

  6. Richard1
    June 25, 2021

    Excellent interview on GB News by Andrew Neil with the founder of extinction rebellion. An individual who is clearly a fanatic, is quite incapable of rational argument and cannot cite any scientific evidence for his absurd claims that “billions will stave to death”.

    His proposed policy – banning all fossil fuels in 4 years and confiscation 90% of wealth (why?) – is incidentally no differnet from what is shrilly urged by the absurdly over- praised swedish teenager ms thunberg.

    Let’s by all means look for ways to reduce CO2 output. But it’s time to stop the incoherent nonsense talked by climate fanatics going unchallenged.

    1. glen cullen
      June 25, 2021

      Agree

    2. Mark
      June 26, 2021

      I think calling him merely a fanatic is being overly polite. It is an interview that should be seen widely – and congratulations to Andrew Neil for conducting it. I drew the conclusion that Mr Hallam is stark staring bonkers. I am not surprised that even branches of his XR movement are distancing themselves from him. It is clear why he has been kept off our screens by the media that propagandise “climate”: his position is so utterly ludicrous that it would completely undermine their campaigns. I am not sure that his call for zero carbon – no “net” curtains to hide behind for him – is meant to include his exhalations, but he seems to be keen on destroying humanity.

  7. Cynic
    June 25, 2021

    Throughout the world most problems are caused by governments. Less government action would be the best course.

    1. Micky Taking
      June 25, 2021

      second only to religions.

    2. glen cullen
      June 25, 2021

      I’ve been saying that for years – however everytime I turn my head another department or quango appears with success measured in the number of laws they can enact

    3. Sharon
      June 25, 2021

      Cynic

      I can’t remember who it was that said it, but during the Brexit years when government was pre-occupied with Brexit, this person said that the country ticked along better than it had for ages!

    4. DavidJ
      June 25, 2021

      Excellent comment.

    5. Dennis
      June 26, 2021

      I read somewhere that the Pentagon ( and their doings) is the biggest single GHG emitter in the world.

  8. BJC
    June 25, 2021

    Our glorious “leadership” team don’t appear to understand the Pareto Principle if, indeed, they’ve even heard of it.

    1. graham1946
      June 25, 2021

      They are more in tune with the ‘Peter principle’ – i.e. you rise to the level of your own incompetence. Most ministers are already there.

    2. paul cuthbertson
      June 25, 2021

      BJC – LEADERSHIP!!!!!!!! Let me know when you find one individual with leadership qualities in the HoC. Look at Boris, the most incoherent waffler one has ever seen yet the people still vote these idiots into office. Like her or loathe her Margaret Thatcher was a LEADER however I did not agree with all of her policies.

  9. agricola
    June 25, 2021

    We, thanks to a conservative party taking the knee to this unproven religion are expected to eliminate 1% of the total 0.04 % of CO2 in the Earths atmosphere, while the rest of the World continues to emit 99% of 0.04 %. This will be done at enormous cost and great disruption to the countries economy. At the end of the day it will have zero effect on climate as the major players in practice ignore the green religion as heresy, realising that climate state equates with sun state.

    The things we could do to improve the quality of life we play at. For instance the continued use of vast amounts of none degradable plastic. The fouling lf the sea and land by dumping in it. Continuing to allow the manufacture, marketing, and sale of obese creating so called food. Visit any supermarket and watch odesity waddling to self destruction. Try following the science and engineering route to minimally polluting transport. The drive for all electric when we are already dependant on outside sources for electricity is a particular form of pillow induced insanity.

    Take note, our government aided and abetted by otherwise dormant opposition parties are creating a political void. A perfect place for the germination of a political party that talks sense.

    1. Lester
      June 25, 2021

      Agricola

      Spot on!

  10. Peter
    June 25, 2021

    Boris Johnson will go along with the targets on carbon dioxide despite the behaviour of countries that generate more emissions.

    It will be useful for him when he seeks roles after he has left government.

    1. Bill B.
      June 25, 2021

      + 1

  11. turboterrier
    June 25, 2021

    Breaking news.
    Earthquake recorded 15 miles off of Cornwall the size of a hand grenade.
    Wow, get the bunting out, at long last they have started fracking to give us cheap reliable energy. Lol
    All these resources and we cannot or will not entertain them to make us more competitive and prosperous.

    1. Mark
      June 26, 2021

      Actually there have been a lot of seismic tremors near Carharrack, Cornwall, where they have been drilling and fracking for a geothermal project (United Downs), which will also see attempts at commercial recovery of lithium from the recirculated brine. This is a chart showing the timings and sizes of the recorded events:

      https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/P5OE0/4/

      The most recent Cornish earthquake I can find was 25km NW of Trevose Head on 31st May, and ML 0.5 in strength – easily exceeded by many of the fracking seismic tremors. There was another one in the Channel about 50km NNW of Guernsey on 17th June, at ML 1.8 still within the range of the fracking events.

      1. Micky Taking
        June 26, 2021

        cause and effect, or natural?

  12. MPC
    June 25, 2021

    ‘China needs to be challenged’ but they won’t listen and are trying to erase poverty for all their people through low cost energy just as we did in the industrial revolution. It’s our own government that needs to be challenged as we’ve already reduced our emissions compared to what they were in 1990 by about 40%! Do you and Steve Baker need to challenge more fundamentally the very efficacy of government policy rather than solely focusing on the cost implications of Net Zero please Mr Redwood?

  13. Atlas
    June 25, 2021

    … if only Climate Change could be investigated by people who do not have a vested interest in promoting it …

    However since we are being driven by the new religion of Wokeism, with Climate Change as one of its credos, I don’t see that this investigation is likely to happen under present Western Governments who are in thrall to Wokery.

    1. DavidJ
      June 25, 2021

      It was investigated in great detail by Steve McIntyre and Prof. Ross McKitrick and discredited. Their work features in a book “The Hockey Stick Illusion”; well worth reading.

    2. lifelogic
      June 26, 2021

      +1

  14. Sharon
    June 25, 2021

    Co2 has been much, much higher than the levels seen today, thousands of years ago. The levels rise and dip according to solar spots. It’s high now because it’s rising back out from the seas. China is acting as it is because they don’t believe all the Co2 nonsense. Politically, it suits them perfectly!

    The saving the planet has been going on for decades
 many times the world was going to end, but we’re all still here! It’s solely a political agenda, nothing more!

    And as for taking care of the environment, that’s actually what will be sacrificed to achieve all this green crap, Co2 agenda.

    1. David L
      June 25, 2021

      Yesterday I watched the TED talk (below) on YouTube and, for someone long in favour of renewable energy sources, it gave cause for a lot of thought. When I discuss anything energy related with “green” people, anything that doesn’t back up the agenda is dismissed as “financed by the fossil fuel industry”. Similarly, any medical or scientific dissension from the SAGE pronunciations on Sars Covid-2 is dismissed by government, media and much of the public as of no validity. Rational debate of anything seems to have withered away.

      Why renewables can’t save the planet | Michael Shellenberger | TEDxDanubia

      1. Ed M
        June 25, 2021

        Problem is you have fanatics on both sides: the fanatical greenies and those who deny there is no environmental problem.

        We all know the views of the former are bonkers. But let’s look at the latter which is more dangerous to the Tory Party. Science shows there is an environmental problem and that it is man-made. Just that we don’t really know more than this. It’s also complete garbage to think creating green tech will destroy our economy. There might be a small price to be paid in the short term, but in the medium to long-term, there will be both gains to our environment AND our economy especially if the UK takes a lead in becoming the leader of green tech of the future and all the high tech / digital industries related to that. It’s a WIN-WIN. People just need to hold their nerve.

        1. Ed M
          June 25, 2021

          It’s a problem for the Tories because so many of the young are greenies and some / many of them quite fanatical even the posh ones. If older Tories don’t get with it, then these younger Tories might vote Lib Dem or just not vote at all. Plus we could lose out on the billions to be made from green tech in the future.
          We need Tories looking at what really is useful green policy and what isn’t. Instead of burying head in sand that’s there no problem and that the problem will just go away. It won’t.

        2. Mark
          June 26, 2021

          If the plan was simply to grow a industry that might be a success on world markets it might make some sense. But the plans are actually to destroy the industries and energy sources we have first, with no regard for whether we have feasible alternatives on the timescale set out for their destruction. The destruction timetable is only ever tightened, and it becomes more and more unrealistic with every twist of the noose. The plans for green replacement are simply not feasible, and if we pursue them we will end up with a not much milder version of Mr Hallam’s world in which there is total economic and social collapse.

          1. Ed M
            June 26, 2021

            @Mark,
            I getch you. We have to say NO to the mindless hysteria of the radical greenies.
            But at same time, there is a man-made problem with the environment. If the greenies are hysterical, then their climate-denying opponents have their head in the sands (just as bad as hysteria).
            It’s about thinking hard and in a nuanced and CREATIVE way. And then progressing with a properly thought-out plan that reduces the environmental problem without destroying our economy – in fact that could even boost our economy. Some people think that’s being idealist but that’s rubbish. Science is amazing. It can do amazing things. We need to tap into that to solve the environmental problem whilst not harming our economy. Science is amazing but we also need some cool-headed, stout-hearted people involved in all this as well.

    2. DavidJ
      June 25, 2021

      +1

  15. Everhopeful
    June 25, 2021

    Do they have lovely fairy-dust, rose petal perfumed oil in the Shetlands then?
    Gives me a teeny bit of hope that this barmy nonsense won’t persist.

  16. No Longer Anonymous
    June 25, 2021

    So on the one hand we’re a small and insignificant country at the same time as telling us we are going to be world leaders in showing the way to go Green.

    I wish they’d make their minds up.

    ———

    Boris will listen to the ‘stop eating meat’ campaign and put taxes on meat. If he thinks this will save the planet where are people going to get their protein ? Beer and peanuts, now that he’s destroyed the pubs ?

    If he thinks it will help people lose weight it will be more useless than the sugar tax. Meat isn’t the cause of weight gain.

    The reason we have an obesity crisis is that there is no longer any shame in being fat. It has become normalised to the point that when a healthy weight person walks into a room they are looked at in a suspicious way and called ‘skinny’. The NHS provide pills for it and the NHS goes to work on cake too by the look of things.

    (A very high litter tax needs to be put on Drive Thru fast food – too lazy to get out of the car to eat = too lazy to find a bin… won’t mention the company I pick most litter up from ten miles from the nearest outlet but NOT lovin’ it.)

  17. oldtimer
    June 25, 2021

    COP 26 will be an exercise in virtue signalling, like its predecessors. Like its predecessors it again will sound the trumpet to continue the charge into the valley of industrial death.

  18. Old Albion
    June 25, 2021

    As I keep saying. If the (dis)UK achieves net zero CO2 by 2030. It will make no noticeable difference to global CO2. It will however, cripple industry, create massive job losses, move production (and therefore CO2 emissions) to other countries, put millions of households into poverty as they try to heat their homes.
    It’s utter madness.

  19. Everhopeful
    June 25, 2021

    If “leaders” truly believed in emissions and viruses they would permanently close all manufacturing at midnight tonight and NEVER again cavort on a Cornish beach.
    They aren’t hypocrites 
they are liars.

  20. Newmania
    June 25, 2021

    Oh dear dear that 5th largest economy thing is funny. This is list of Islands in the British Isles by size

    Great Britain
    Ireland
    Lewis and Harris
    Skye

    5th Mainland Shetland ..woo hoo

    Same thing . Then UK is not quite as insignificant as Shetland but the world is run by the EU the US and now China . We are not in a heavyweight division and the G7 conference made that very clear. Funnily enough the Uk`s power is more as a cultural leader, a bit of a Greece in the Roman world ( as has often been said ).
    Remain Britain gives it what power it has , makes all its money and was its future .
    God knows what dire future we have now…. a theme park maybe

    1. steve
      June 25, 2021

      Newmania

      I don’t know why you think it annoys us to suggest Gt Britain is little and insignificant. FYI that’s actually what we want. We don’t want anything to do with the rest of the world and it’s troubles….we want our country to be as self sufficient as possible.

      1. margaret brandreth-jones
        June 25, 2021

        of course steve … we want to go to Andora

    2. jon livesey
      June 25, 2021

      This is what Remainers have been reduced to. They can’t make any impact on the argument with facts, because things have turned out quite differently to their predictions. So they go back to the only thing they have, which is to rant and gloat over ridiculous issues of definition.

      Just look at what Newmania is saying. That France, a slightly smaller economy than the UK’s is “big” because “the world is run by the EU the US and now China” and the UK is “insignificant”.

      Got that? By this brilliant logic, we were also “big” until January of this year, but mysteriously we have become “insignificant”. It’s a kind of thinking that would make a cat laugh, but Remainers actually seem to think that there is a magic sauce that make one unit of GDP big and another “insignificant” despite them being almost exactly the same.

      We are watching a crazy new religious cult in the throes of being born.

  21. Everhopeful
    June 25, 2021

    Speaking of emissions and pollution..how goes the long term study on the disastrous effects of mask wearing?
    AND
why are they trying to roll out a cancer blood testing scheme when they have no cures and no hospital capacity ( they claim) and a huge untreated patient backlog?
    Still, the genomics industry is doing very well indeed I believe.

    1. Micky Taking
      June 25, 2021

      speaking of pollution – it used to be the take away meal and coffee packaging – now it will be the used masks and lateral flow tests.

      1. Everhopeful
        June 25, 2021

        About 129 billion masks globally per month chucked away..just as bad as plastic bags!
        And as for those horrible test swabs
goodness knows where they end up
probably with the genome industry feverishly collecting our DNA!

  22. Bryan Harris
    June 25, 2021

    When it comes to keeping the lights on or following a destructive policy for very very little gain, I hope the UK will see sense and abandon its ridiculous net-zero plans.

    Germany has already retreated to using more coal due to gas shortages, so you can see what kind of example they will set.
    Yet we in the UK are expected to set an example, destroy our industry and way of life, for a fallacy.

    Perhaps countries like China are ignoring the pleas to reduce their carbon output because they see it as a way to get stronger than the west, and will use that new strength to forge the world in their image. Fundamentally I believe they recognize the whole subject as a joke and just play along, laughing at us behind our backs.

    1. DavidJ
      June 25, 2021

      Well said; the madness must end.

    2. Lester
      June 25, 2021

      Bryan Harris

      Extremely well put

      + 100

    3. Mark
      June 26, 2021

      I think German gas supply has remained adequate, although it is clear that stocks have been run right down to meet high levels of demand arising from cold weather: most gas is in fact consumed in industry and heating rather than power stations, and there is no ready substitution by other fuels. Refilling storage for next winter is now somewhat behind, but may catch up with Nordstream II opening. What has disappointed has been the output from renewables this year, which has fallen sharply because of long periods of low winds in particular. That has led to significant extra coal and lignite burning.

  23. DOM
    June 25, 2021

    So why Hancock was ‘working tirelessly day and night’ to keep people safe I and others were prevented from seeing our loved ones and in many instances not seeing their loved ones before they died

    I actually feel SICK with anger. The arrogance. The lies. The betrayal

    Tory. Labour. SNP. Plaid Cymru. All standing firm against the people’s innate, divine desire for freedom and our hatred of interventionist politics

    1. DOM
      June 25, 2021

      ‘So while Hancock’

    2. Ian Pennell
      June 25, 2021

      @ DOM

      I agree with your sentiments. It is time this country was opened up, rather than cowering in the face of a disease that (now most of Britain is vaccinated) will kill much less than seasonal Flu.

      @ Right Hon. John Redwood, MP

      You and your Conservative colleagues must lean on the Prime Minister to sack Matthew Hancock, rather than expending political capital and losing the Batley and Spen by-election by sticking by the indefensible like he did over Dominic Cumming’s “Do As I Say, Not As I Do!” antics. He must go, preferably before Monday morning- then there is a faint hope of winning the West Yorkshire by-election.

      As a Conservative, I am spitting feathers over Matthew Hancock: The man is an electoral liability and I want him gone – and fast!

      1. Lifelogic
        June 26, 2021

        He will surely resign by Monday, it is in his own interests to, no point in dragging it out he has to go. This unless he is really even dafter than I think he is.

  24. MFD
    June 25, 2021

    Well said Shirley, +1

    Now back to my steak sandwich Breakfast!

  25. Walt
    June 25, 2021

    China, the USA, Germany and perhaps all the rest of the EU appear more keen to protect their own domestic economy than to impair it and make life difficult for their citizens by pushing a ‘green’ agenda too hard and too fast. I wish that the UK would do similarly, especially when, as noted in your post, the effect of the UK’s emissions is relatively tiny. We live in one world: what is the point of hurting ourselves by cutting back when the big countries are continuing and increasing?
    It took many years to invent and develop the steam engine, the internal combustion engine, nuclear generators, etc. and it’s only been in the last few years that the UK government turned 180 degrees from incentivising us to buy Diesel engined vehicles to branding them the equivalent of the work of the devil. Science and industry has yet properly to develop alternative ‘green’ power sources that are affordable and practicable. When they have, we will naturally turn to it as the better option. Until then, would our government please not push the ‘green’ agenda upon us so hard so fast.

  26. Brian Tomkinson
    June 25, 2021

    Do you really believe that politicians are capable of controlling the climate?

  27. Everhopeful
    June 25, 2021

    Ooooo NO!
    Not an AFFAIR??
    Is that good for the Health?

    1. beresford
      June 25, 2021

      Remember, this was one of the people who was telling heart-broken girls that they couldn’t see their boyfriends because they weren’t part of the same household. Boris shrugging it off tells you all you need to know about the scamdemic.

      1. Everhopeful
        June 25, 2021

        Absolutely. No fear in those promulgating fear = nothing to fear!
        If someone shouted “Run! There’s a lion!” And didn’t run themselves then you’d know they were lying.
        The 1936 Public Order Act rightly made it illegal to put people in fear of death or injury.

    2. Micky Taking
      June 26, 2021

      I did detect a sparkle in the eye.

  28. glen cullen
    June 25, 2021

    Why does the conservative party and this government have anything to do with COP26
.its just a lovin for the Green Party and attended by left wing wannabe communists and mud dwelling vegans that worship the sun
    Its not a conference for debate or reasoned argument it’s a rally of likeminded extremist that don’t allow any consent
    Why do governments pander to this group who are in the minority (one MP and usually last in every public vote)
.could it be the media

    1. Everhopeful
      June 25, 2021

      +1

    2. Lifelogic
      June 26, 2021

      +1 Carrie and they wrongly see votes in it perhaps?

  29. nota#
    June 25, 2021

    Good morning Sir John

    “Between them they account for 52% of the world output compared to our 1%. In other words if the UK eliminated all its carbon dioxide output it would have the same effect on world figures as the Big 3 cutting their output by just 2%.”

    Isn’t that the point this hair brained Conservative Government doesn’t get. They can destroy UK Industry further with their ‘grand standing’. They can bolster our import trajectory from this polluting countries.

    What they can’t do is make a difference to World. Unlike the UK the rest of the World puts their economy first and forward before anything else, they realise that without a sound economy there is no ‘future’

    Rather than all these airy fairy speeches that are nothing more than ‘virtue signalling’ and ‘grand standing’ it would be better than put some effort into ensuring the UK an its people can survive and prosper in a world polluted and warmed by others. What the UK cannot and doesn’t have the possibility/capability to do or have an effect on climate and be the Worlds saviour.

  30. nota#
    June 25, 2021

    Yesterday in the MsM there was a ‘Lord’ banging the drum for the UK Space Port in Cornwall, all well and good. Until he said the Chinese’s had to get involved. – As if they don’t steal enough of the Worlds tech already

    1. Everhopeful
      June 25, 2021

      Stately home need a refurb?

  31. majorfrustration
    June 25, 2021

    BBC prattling on yesterday evening that the UK is not on course to hit its target reduction as though we were the worst of all bad things. Great balance as usual. Has anything actually changed at the BBC yet?

  32. formula57
    June 25, 2021

    “As Chairman of the Conference the UK needs to challenge…” – surely not!

    COP26 participants know the truth (that the world is not going to be able to reduce CO2 emissions enough to make much difference) and there will be no thanks handed out to any party obliging them to confront it. Much better to use the conference for its presumed purposes of hand-wringing and virtue signalling. Let us just be proud that a starring role will be taken by the people’s Blue Boris, possibly assisted by Wilfred and Dilyn to the delight of delegates.

  33. Andy
    June 25, 2021

    Nobody thinks the U.K. has to do so much more than everybody else. We all think everybody has to do the same.

    Nobody is asking any more of you right now than that you eat a little less meat and switch to a green energy tariff. When your car needs replacing we ask you to replace it with an electric car. When your boiler needs replacing we ask you replace it with a heat pump.

    If the high upfront costs of these things make them unaffordable for you then that is a policy question your party of government could fix.

    You all lost the climate debate 3 decades ago. If we’d have started taking proper action in 1990 rather than giving airtime to ranting windbags like Nigel Lawson the problem would have been solved by now.

    1. Micky Taking
      June 25, 2021

      I blame the ones who discovered coal burns quite well.

    2. glen cullen
      June 25, 2021

      When your coat needs replacing we ask you to replace it with a “Mao suit”
      When your hair needs cutting we ask that you get a ‘dear leader’ cut

    3. DavidJ
      June 25, 2021

      Good job we didn’t start taking action on a lie. Now we must stop the green nonsense. Real pollution is a different matter…

      1. Lifelogic
        June 26, 2021

        +1

    4. Cliff. Wokingham
      June 25, 2021

      Andy
      Again I find myself asking… Who is this “we” you keep mentioning… Who do you actually represent?

    5. Richard II
      June 25, 2021

      Andy, the issue many people care about is, they would like in future to have a genuine option to say no when ‘asked’, and continue with their ICE cars and gas boilers. But we know by now what the word ‘ask’ means when you use it.

    6. Mark
      June 26, 2021

      The problem is that the costs are not “fixable”. They would destroy the economy, for “solutions” that don’t actually work.

  34. Andy
    June 25, 2021

    I see EE is reintroducing mobile roaming charges – as is O2 in some circumstances.

    This’ll further turn young people against Tory pensioner Brexit.

    And I thought we held all the (SIM) cards
..

    1. Micky Taking
      June 25, 2021

      I think younger people are the main users of EE – -so mobile elsewhere when you visit your French castle.

    2. Peter2
      June 25, 2021

      ÂŁ2 a day when you are in Europe on EE
      Not exactly a huge amount.
      (O2 only charges if you go over 25gb otherwise it is free.)

      Most of you youngsters spend twice that amount a day on your lattes lagers and cocktails.

      Or move to another provider if it irks you so much.

    3. a-tracy
      June 25, 2021

      Do we all get a discount now Andy from O2 and EE if not I think we need to instruct Ofcom to challenge why if service levels are cut.

    4. steve
      June 25, 2021

      Andy

      This’ll further turn young people…..blah, blah, blah.

      Put another record on woman for heaven’s sake.

    5. Original Richard
      June 25, 2021

      Andy : “I see EE is reintroducing mobile roaming charges – as is O2 in some circumstances.”

      ÂŁ2.00/day is not a lot and can be avoided through the use of WiFi calling.

      I still prefer to maintain the ability to be able to influence our laws and policies (trade, fiscal, taxation, energy, environmental, foreign, military, immigration etc.) through retaining the right to elect and remove those who make these decisions.

    6. graham1946
      June 26, 2021

      ÂŁ2 a day eh? It is said the rich are the tightest wads and you just prove it.

  35. Alan Jutson
    June 25, 2021

    A good post again today John, all other nations are only worried about themselves, and treat their own needs as a priority, and this is what will eventually be the downfall of the EU when the people of the Nations states wake up.
    The science is not settled on so called man made Climate change, as it has never to my knowledge been even properly argued or discussed freely to reach any conclusion.
    If we are not careful we will sacrifice our own economy and the wealth and wellbeing of our people on this fake alter of being able to control the weather.

    1. Alan Jutson
      June 25, 2021

      Interesting interview on GB News earlier today (can be seen on Guido Fawkes website)

      Brillo takes on Extinction Rebellion Founder, ref Climate change. (11.59 25th June 2021)

      Be aware they live amongst us. !

    2. DavidJ
      June 25, 2021

      +1

  36. Iain Moore
    June 25, 2021

    “Health Protection (Coronavirus international and operator liability) regulations 2021 SI 2021/582 to provide limited exemptions from obligations to self isolate……”

    Exempting their COP26 from the restrictions the rest of us may have to abide by.

    Boris Johnson flew down to the G7 meeting at Cornwall , and they all tucked into lavish banquets, no insect burgers for them.

    A case of do as we say not as we do. And for what? Andrew Neil interviewed a founder of XR, they want to level our economy and confiscate assets for something that might happen , well may be, only if the very, very worst case scenario happens, and then it will be less traumatic to our economy than their cure.

    Rather than expending our diplomatic capital on this climate change zealotry better they give it a rest, for it is clear Johnson and co have no intention of it affecting their own lives.

    1. steve
      June 25, 2021

      Iain Moore

      “…and they all tucked into lavish banquets, no insect burgers for them. ”

      Now there’s an interesting thought !

      When these climate scam culprits in government are finally exposed and incarcerated, they could be fed a daily diet of bug burgers.

  37. a-tracy
    June 25, 2021

    Interesting post. Did you watch Andrew Neil last night, he had the climate warrior on, I think people need to hear people like this man much more. No air travel, no meat, cut travelling for all, cut freedoms within four years or ‘weak and not listened to’ Britain (according to GreyF) will be responsible for billions of deaths. Billions.

    1. glen cullen
      June 25, 2021

      He didn’t have an answers and didn’t produce any valid evidence apart from hearsay, but carried on spouting out that million where going to die. He talked with tunnel vision and liked ill-at-ease during the interview

      1. a-tracy
        June 25, 2021

        Roger Hallam, co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, an environmental extremist organization.
        It was billions are going to die if we don’t take extreme action in the next four years.
        I don’t believe people actually know what the likes of Roger Hallam are actually proposing.
        To confiscate 90% of the assets of the wealthiest. Companies would close down, Cars and Delivery vans would go, flying would go and Roger was just nodding along in agreement.
        ZERO emissions in 4 years – these people want to send the UK back to the dark ages whilst turning a blind eye to the places we’ve exported our production to like China or India. Opentheword blog has a link to the interview if anyone missed it and some interesting points to consider.
        Thank goodness GBNews are actually putting these people on our screen and giving them the opportunity to put their points across with minimal interruption – very refreshing.

        1. Micky Taking
          June 26, 2021

          Have you got your cave equipped with lots of wool bedding, candles and ready to defend gatecrashers? Bicycle in good order, and know a clean stream for water? Oh good.

  38. Grumpy German
    June 25, 2021

    Germany is only responsible for about 2 % of the CO2 emissions. By your logic also the Germans should not bother to lower their emissions.

    Reply The EU is 10% and has done a lot less than the UK

    1. Grumpy German
      June 25, 2021

      Reply to reply: Well, China is 29% and has done a lot less than the EU. Following your logic, there is also no need for the EU to do anything.

  39. MiC
    June 25, 2021

    And how much notice does John expect other countries to take of one which blew ÂŁ37 billion on a test-and-trace set up, which has been analysed to have made “no significant difference” to illness and death, and we read, managed to lose 550,000,000 Covid tests?

    Yes, count the noughts.

    1. Micky Taking
      June 25, 2021

      I make it literally 7 noughts Martin.

    2. Peter2
      June 25, 2021

      They are not “lost” MiC in the way you claim.
      They have been distributed and they are available at many places like chemists on request and are being used to check your Covid status.
      Where I work there a many in stock available for use.

  40. Christine
    June 25, 2021

    Sounds to me like climate change will go the same way as NATO and Foreign Aid, with Boris making big promises at our expense and the rest of the world ignoring the situation. Boris is like King Canute trying to hold back the waves. Curbing the rise in the human population is the best and easiest way to protect the planet. He can make a start by aiming for net-zero immigration and stop concreting over our green and pleasant land.

    1. Shirley M
      June 25, 2021

      +1

    2. Dennis
      June 26, 2021

      Yes with net zero immigration and if the approx. 250,000 leave per year keeps up that would reduce UK population by 1 million every 4 years which would be a very good start.

  41. Original Richard
    June 25, 2021

    “The country [Germany] burns a lot of coal and says it intends to keep coal in its power mix at least until 2035.

    Germany is also on the point of completing its 9.5 bn Euro Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline to import gas directly from Russia.

  42. Original Richard
    June 25, 2021

    AGW is a scam. The Earth has been warming since the last glacial maximum 22,000 years ago and long before the Industrial Revolution.

    The calls for us to unilaterally implement technologically impossible CO2 reduction targets without severe energy rationing and hence enormous lifestyle, economic and consequently social and political changes are made by the same groups who in the last century called for unilateral nuclear disarmament.

    1. Lifelogic
      June 26, 2021

      +1

  43. glen cullen
    June 25, 2021

    No rules broken, please move on, nothing to see here, all within the guidelines, all proper & reasonable scrutiny followed
it’s a personal matter
no comment
    This is hotter than climate change

    1. Peter
      June 25, 2021

      Glen Cullen,

      It sent me back to the ’Little Britain’ comedy sketches where Sir Norman Fry MP makes various far-fetched apologies to camera in the company of his family. He ends with the words ‘as far as I am concerned that is the end of the matter’.

      Life imitating comedy?

  44. DOM
    June 25, 2021

    Yes, we definitely need ‘some home truths’ to be told to the political class who smash our lives into pieces while they ‘carry on’ as though NOWT much has happened, breaking the law while expecting the plebs to sacrifice precious time with family and friends

    I have two words for the political class that are destroying our nation and crushing our precious freedoms. You can guess what those two words are.

    One rule for them, one rule for the compliant plebs

    CV19 is without question a POLITICAL EVENT not a clinical event. Time will expose the criminality of what we are seeing

    1. beresford
      June 25, 2021

      The Sun is reporting that the ‘Lambda’ variant from South America is the next scariant to have the sheep hiding under their beds. Wonder if they have any sense of irony?

  45. mactheknife
    June 25, 2021

    We are a very small cog in a large wheel but we have ministers and civil servants in DECC who want to virtue signal their way into economic chaos. Until someone or a group of MP’s say to the government enough is enough until the major polluters do something themselves, we disengage – full stop.
    When Spain went full on for Solar power a report published by a consultancy said for every 1 green job created, 3 others would be lost across other sectors. Obviously the eco-blob went into meltdown and Spain ignored it.
    Stranger still, we are now hearing openly of the climate lobby asking for ‘climate lock-downs’ are part of their agenda. Having seen how government can control the plebs, they now think this could be a viable tactic for them.
    In the meantime the war on diesel and petrol cars continue with engine manufacturers deserting the UK, UKEF stating they will no longer fund fossil fuels projects, green taxes burdening every family and list list goes on.
    We did not vote for this.

  46. acorn
    June 25, 2021

    Did you know that 40% of the 1200 GWs of Coal fired generation built or being built since 2015, is financed and securitized for western Investors by UK, US and EU financial institutions?

    Emissions have fallen 27% in the UK between 1990 and 2014; but once CO2 imports from trade are considered, this drops to only an 11% reduction. Similarly, a 9% increase in domestic US emissions since 1990 turns out to be a 17% increase when trade is included.

    Emissions outsourced to other countries accounts for carbon transfers associated with the decline of the manufacturing sector in the developed world that the developed world re- imports through trade.

    1. Peter2
      June 25, 2021

      Interesting you chose 1990 to 2014 for your USA statistics acorn.
      If you had carried on you would see a large reduction in USA’s emissions.
      You stopped just as the graph turned downwards.

      1. acorn
        June 26, 2021

        US emissions started dropping in 2007 with power generation switching from coal to gas. See https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/styles/large/public/2021-04/econsector1990_2019.png

        1. Peter2
          June 26, 2021

          You chose the particular dateline to get the figures you wanted.
          The USA has had the biggest reductions in emissions since 2014 of any country.

          1. Peter2
            June 26, 2021

            *The world’s biggest reduction, 758 million metric tonnes since 2005 compared to China who grew by 3 billion metric tonnes and India who grew by 1 billion metric tonnes in the same time period.

  47. margaret
    June 25, 2021

    We could be small in the sea and flux of trends , business , and policies , yet big in influence and home capabilities.

  48. ChrisS
    June 25, 2021

    Your post this morning is very timely, given that the Westminster Climate Change Committee has just heavily criticised the government for not doing enough to reach our own climate change targets.

    Both the CC committee and all politicians at Westminster need an infusion of reality as the targets are both unachievable and affordable. Nobody has come up with a fully costed timeline to achieve the targets. Hardly surprising when we all know that the Country and our long suffering taxpayers can’t possibly afford it.

    This is the one issue that English taxpayers could get behind. Given that the three devolved administrations are already running very large deficits, the full cost of the Green agenda across the whole of the UK will inevitably land on the shoulders of English taxpayers.

    1. glen cullen
      June 25, 2021

      ”heavily criticised the government for not doing enough to reach our own climate change targets”

      These are the targets set at cabinet after the general election and not included in the Tory manifesto – therefore not the people’s targets

    2. Peter2
      June 25, 2021

      Trillions Chris.
      Totally unaffordable.
      Once voters realise the costs to them there will be a huge reaction.

  49. Denis Cooper
    June 25, 2021

    A pity that this article by Bernard Jenkin was not available to feed into yesterday’s thread on this site:

    https://www.politicshome.com/thehouse/article/no-one-foresaw-that-any-government-would-make-such-a-mess-of-brexit

    “No one foresaw that any government would make such a mess of Brexit”

    He finishes:

    “The Northern Ireland Protocol, a forced inheritance from Mrs May’s backstop, will prove to be politically fraudulent. Bertie Aherne or Enda Kenny would have attached the highest importance to achieving a deal to maintain the consent of both communities in Northern Ireland. Instead, Leo Veradkar’s EU ideology eclipsed any traditional Irish pragmatism. The Protocol is now destroying peace and political stability in Northern Ireland. A system of trusted traders and mutual enforcement must in the end replace the Protocol to restore the trust between the two communities. To resist this is to elevate the importance of a mere protocol over the Good Friday Agreement and peace in Northern Ireland.”

    1. Old Salt
      June 25, 2021

      Denis Cooper
      The EU will drag out NIP negotiations for ever if we allow them causing much lasting damage. We must not play along with their little ploy any longer. Time to call it a day after five long years and tell them their game is up.

      What was that about no border down the Irish sea? Eventually agreed under duress presumably to get Brexit done with the EU dragging out the negotiations to the deadline.

      Old saying – Any agreement is not worth the paper it’s written on if not agreed to on both sides.

      Part of the plan to dismember the UK. Scotland next then Wales. Divide and conquer.

      Barnier reported as saying the loss of NI the price of Brexit. Also Muiread Mcguiness “..get used to the new reality”. Determined they are to hang on to as much control of their treasure island as possible.

  50. James1
    June 25, 2021

    Is there a collective term for politicians and others who profess to agree with the notion that the temperature of the world can not only be ‘controlled but ‘managed’ to accord with a required number of degrees?

  51. The Prangwizard
    June 25, 2021

    Dreams and fantasies. If Sir John imagines that ‘Boris’ will dare to speak to these countries in any fashion that will require their attention, he dreams.

    And ‘Boris’ will fantasise about his influence, bragging that other countries will follow him when he says we are the world leader in action to save the planet.

    They will go away laughing. We will be left crying, while ‘Boris’ and his wife inflict their authoritarian demands on us that require our personal impoverishment.

  52. Quentin Paterson
    June 25, 2021

    CO2 does not drive climate and we should not be harming our economy with decarbonisation.

    The picture tells the story. The geologic record has a number of proxies for temperature and co2 going back – pretty accurate for last million years or so. The swings from warm to cold periods are called marine isotope stages, MIS 1, 2, 34 etc. You can look up the images quite easily.

    The peaks and troughs occur at roughly similar points, and the graph is flat. No scary acceleration.

    Sure, concentration of co2 jumps up and down in a saw tooth pattern that closely mimics temperature, but more often than not it lags temperature.

    That’s what you would expect. When times get warm, gasses come out of solution. Like steam from heating water. Oceans outgas. Cooling reverses.

    The lag is an effect. Effect cannot be cause.

    But the picture says something else. At no point does the rise in co2 lead to any kind of catastrophic runaway feedback. Peaks and troughs align.

    There are strong natural forces at work, but co2 is not driving the process.

    And there’s the physics. Co2 is a “greenhouse” gas, but not a very important one. Double co2 concentration from low levels and you get some warming – no one arguing with that. Double again from current levels and you get less than a degree. It’s nearly saturated. The effect is sort of “S” shaped, like most natural things.

    1. Dennis
      June 26, 2021

      QP – ‘And there’s the physics. Co2 is a “greenhouse” gas, but not a very important one’ Yes, but it drives water vapour which is.

      Other of your points are contradicted by this reputable science website (Veritasium)- check it out, less than 7 minutes and light hearted too but informative. I’d be interested in your view of it one way or another.
      https://youtu.be/OWXoRSIxyIU

  53. Original Richard
    June 25, 2021

    30,000 delegates are expected to attend the COP26 conference in Glasgow.

    This number of people flying into the UK from all around the world quite clearly demonstrates that AGW is a scam and furthermore shows that either Covid-19 is not a serious illness or else the government does not care for the health of the nation.

  54. forthurst
    June 25, 2021

    Let’s not overplay our importance. We are a member of the Security Council because we were on the winning side in WWII which would not have been the case without the USA and USSR. Our economy is not the fifth largest at purchasing power parity which puts it at 28th and if we add in the population which the supermarkets are feeding, the figure is 40th. China is first in terms of PPP with the largest economy in the world. We need to be looking forward the whole time and with our blinkers removed.

    Saving the planet with windmills is not a done deal. The economically extractable sources of Rare Earth’s of which very large amounts are used in the permanent magnets of windmills are very likely to run out well before the equivalent supplies of coal, oil and gas have been extracted. Electrical power from windmills is a non-scientist’s answer to a non-scientist’s problem which is to focus on CO2 and ignore water vapour which at current temperature and humidity is one percent of the lower atmosphere by mass and has a far more important role in driving the Earth’s climate.

    Nuclear power may be the future but at present it is too dirty and dangerous and no one has proved the viability of fusion as a means of creating more energy than it consumes. Hydrogen is simply a by-product of windmill based production and suffers the same limitations.

    1. forthurst
      June 25, 2021

      Correction: UK 10th by GDP (PPP); the other figures are for GDP (PPP) per capita.

  55. Paul Cuthbertson
    June 25, 2021

    It appears to have taken you a long time to realise that about the UK Establishment.
    Something that most of us have known for a very long time.
    If the UK chairing the COP 26 Climate conference is on apar with the G7 fiasco we are wasting our time. There again all part of the globalist plan.
    Do not concern yourself about the USA they will be in better shape very shortly.
    Nothing can stop what is coming, Nothing.

  56. Mike Wilson
    June 25, 2021

    Mr. Redwood, on yesterday’s topic – if I may. I would be interested in your thoughts if you compare the Brexit we have – fishing sold down the river, N. Ireland sold down the river and (from recent figures) a dramatic loss of exports the awful EU with where we would be if we had left properly on WTO terms. Could WTO have been worse than the appalling deal we have?

  57. steve
    June 25, 2021

    JR

    Personally I think it’s time Biden was told that unless he shuts China down by preventing US big Incs from exploiting cheap labour there, and if he does’nt refrain from poking his sympathiser nose in our sovereign matters concerning NI……we will close USAAF bases in this country, ask US military personnel to leave, and we will pull out of NATO and his country can fund the loss of our contribution.

    But then I wait to be informed of any government that did not squander this country’s ace cards, except Lady Thatcher’s government.

  58. Mike Wilson
    June 25, 2021

    As an aside, although to do with this topic, I saw an article the other day which said that some research group at a university, in collaboration with someone from industry, was on the point of perfecting a battery that uses aluminium instead of lithium which will charge in 5 minutes.

    I hope I am allowed to post this link to the forbes.com site.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltaylor/2021/05/13/ev-range-breakthrough-as-new-aluminum-ion-battery-charges-60-times-faster-than-lithium-ion/?sh=15aaec26d287

  59. Philip P.
    June 25, 2021

    O/T I know, but surely important, Sir John. Does the government’s Health Secretary now have the authority to make any further pronouncements on public health and Covid restrictions? And standing next to the Union flag?

    I fancy quite a number of us posting here could name the senior Conservative MP we would like to see in his job.

    1. a-tracy
      June 25, 2021

      Philip, it is time for Hancock to fall on his sword, today. Not only has he as Minister of Heath breached covid regulations in the workplace that he has put on the rest of us, not for the first time, remember him getting next to people in the chamber at the height of the crisis and patting them on the back. He has also had an inappropriate relationship in the workplace with an assistant – he could have been blackmailed over this photograph – he could have left his employer culpable to be sued. I’m sad for his wife and her husband and families, step down Hancock and give them some peace you are not going to be effective with all this going on.

    2. graham1946
      June 26, 2021

      Worse is yet to come, no matter who the Health Secretary is. Dido Harding is being touted as the next CEO of the NHS.

  60. acorn
    June 25, 2021

    I am just wondering what Redwoodian denialists consider Health Secretary Matt Hancock having admitted breaking social distancing guidance after pictures of him kissing an aide were published in a newspaper.

    He said he had “let people down” after photos emerged of him with Gina Coladangelo – whom he appointed – and he was “very sorry”.

    Labour urged the PM to sack Mr Hancock, calling his position “untenable”. But Downing Street said Boris Johnson accepted Mr Hancock’s apology and considered the matter closed. A spokesman added that the prime minister had full confidence in the health secretary.

    I assume that all you leave voting Redwoodians consider this to be of no consequence.

    1. Peter2
      June 25, 2021

      denialists …
      Don’t we all look at facts and evidence and decide.
      What do you do acorn?
      I presume you are not a victim to your own prejudices?

      1. hefner
        June 26, 2021

        P2, what facts and evidence do you look at before deciding to write your comments?
        I guess just some names on this blog are enough to trigger you. Good man, just a fun.

        1. Peter2
          June 26, 2021

          Well no different to you then hef.
          The lefty trolls on here need their nonsense challenging.

    2. Peter
      June 26, 2021

      acorn,

      ‘I assume that all you leave voting Redwoodians consider this to be of no consequence.’

      Your assumptions are very wrong then.

    3. Micky Taking
      June 26, 2021

      ‘ the prime minister had full confidence in the health secretary.’
      Enough said about the PM. Who else in the country does have confidence?

    4. a-tracy
      June 26, 2021

      Acorn, that just shows you are a very bad judge of character. You come on here with your prepared attack lines and your own prejudices each day.

  61. Will in Hampshire
    June 25, 2021

    COP26 is important and worthy, but perhaps our host would be good enough to offer his thoughts on Ministerial hypocrisy tomorrow.

  62. Will in Hampshire
    June 25, 2021

    I don’t generally agree with Allison Pearson in the Daily Telegraph, but her column this evening concerning Mr Hancock’s conduct is magnificent.

  63. anon
    June 25, 2021

    Its a closed matter. Deliver the message with all the sincerity & credibilty the chosen minister can feign?
    We know its a global elite stitchup. Yes the virus exists. Yes climate change exists.But policies are devoid from reality.

  64. Ed M
    June 25, 2021

    Apologies, I don’t mean to be overly sparky but just had a couple of drinks. I just think the science shows there is a problem with the environment and it’s man made. And that the young – including so many young Tories – are strong greenies. And the market is following this pattern of thought whether people like it or not. I think the fanatical greenies need to be challenged too. They’re not basing their assertions on proper science or coming up with a plan that is scientific enough. But at same time, the days of trying to deny there is a problem with the environment are – gone. It will just lose the Tories votes. When it’s also a great opportunity to tap into the BILLIONS that can be made out of Green Tech. Green Tech is only going to get bigger and bigger and bigger. And we need to be world leaders in that. In order to get as much of the pie as we can, instead of letting the Germans or French or Americans or whoever take our slice of the cake.

    1. Peter2
      June 26, 2021

      You give the impression that you think little or nothing is happening EdM
      But the UK passed into law the world’s most radical piece of environmental law years ago, in the shape of the Climate Change Act.
      We are also signatories to radical UN global environmental policies via the Paris Accord.
      The UK government has set a very challenging target of net zero emissions and has banned the manufacturing of internal combustion engines cars in the very near future.
      Solar and wind as forms of alternative energy are being subsidised to the tune of hundreds of millions a year.
      Coal fired power stations have been closed down .
      Plastic bags taxed. Recycling of household waste is in place.
      Cities have introduced low emission zones.
      The long and very expensive list goes on and on.
      Meanwhile the levels of increases in global temperatures from 2000 have not happened as predicted by the computer models, despite continued increases in CO2 levels.

      1. Ed M
        June 26, 2021

        @Peter,
        I am NOT criticising the government compared to my criticism of the the hysterical greenies and those in the other extreme who deny there is any man-made climate change.
        I am just arguing we take a balanced approached – where we come out on top in terms of both a healthy economy AND environment. It’s possible. But the fanatics think it’s either / or.

      2. hefner
        June 26, 2021

        0.5 degC since 2000, data available from all good corner shops. Even the GWPF in its’UAH Global Temperature Update’ shows it from data from Roy Spencer.
        Look for GWPF, then ‘The Observatory’ for 03/04/2021.

        And you would not want to cast doubt on Lord Lawson’s baby site, would you?

        1. Peter2
          June 26, 2021

          Measured as a global average half a degree…after altering methodology, with less satellite data input and more ground measurements.
          Some ground sites and moved others ignored.
          The result is still less than was predicted for post 2000.

          1. hefner
            June 26, 2021

            Wrong P2, The time series of UAH data use the same methodology over all these years. And if you had followed Roy Spencer you would know that as a NASA scientist he had criticised the whole Al Gore saga, and is accepted by the GWPF for his non-climate model-dependent observations.

            For your education, ground measurements are all dependent on the calibration of instruments at each of the hundreds of stations used in the meteorological network, over land, coastal areas, seas, etc. The same satellite and therefore the same instrument covers the whole globe over a few days. It might not be perfect, but its imperfections are spatially consistent, which with a few reference ground stations allow the satellite data to produce as good if not a better quality for what is actually measured.

            And as you seem so knowledgeable in all those things how much increase in temperature was predicted in 1990 in the first-, and in 1995 in the second- IPCC reports for the period 2000-2020?

          2. hefner
            June 27, 2021

            P2, The First IPCC report published in 1990 was saying an increase of 0.3degC per decade in global temperature. For 2000-2020, even GWPF refers to a Roy Spencer observational data study showing a 0.5 degC increase over these twenty years.

            So you are absolutely right, it was less than predicted by 0.1 degC, but your comment about methodology, satellite and ground measurements is wrong if you do not know how the University of Alabama Huntsville data set is actually produced. Is it something you have checked before writing? I guess not.

          3. Peter2
            June 27, 2021

            Others in the green movement predicted a higher rate of temperature increase post 2000
            Tipping point was the phrase regularly used.
            And instead we have had a reduced rate of increase.
            Despite CO2 levels continued increases which confounds the current theory.

            There are many articles apart from your reference about how temperature data is now collected and how changes have been made to the latest choice, mix and weightings going into the headline total given.

            ER today is predicting over 4 degrees in a few decades.
            I expect you think that is true too heffy.

  65. L Jones
    June 25, 2021

    Would this be the same CO2 that all plants need in order to grow? The CO2 of which the earth has less now than in bygone ages when the climate was colder? The stuff that has been shown to have no correlation to the warming of the atmosphere, through those bygone ages? THAT CO2?

    1. hefner
      July 2, 2021

      LJ, could you point out in past eras the various periods when the CO2 concentration was much higher and the temperature colder. Thanks in advance.

  66. Freeborn John
    June 25, 2021

    Hancock has to go. Is it not obvious that his position is untenable?

    1. Peter2
      June 25, 2021

      Did it affect his job?

      1. glen cullen
        June 26, 2021

        It would appear that he has favourites in his team and expects favours in return
        That can and will affect everybody else on that team

        1. a-tracy
          June 26, 2021

          I agree glen, he also left himself open to blackmail if the person with the photos wasn’t after his head rather than his contracts.

      2. hefner
        June 26, 2021

        P2, how do you know it has not?

        1. Peter2
          June 26, 2021

          That is why I asked my question.
          Is that OK hef?

      3. graham1946
        June 26, 2021

        ‘Did it affect his job?’

        There is not enough blood for the brain as well, so I’d guess, yes.

    2. miami.mode
      June 25, 2021

      Freeborn John

      Dictionary definition of tenable “held for a particular period of time”.

      “Untenable” doesn’t seem the best description of his position!

    3. steve
      June 26, 2021

      Freeborn John

      Matt Hancock…… looks to me like a classic case of a man being set up.

      1. glen cullen
        June 26, 2021

        ah…the old russian candy trap

        1. hefner
          June 26, 2021

          Reading too many spy novels, aren’t you?

  67. Mark
    June 26, 2021

    Boris should cancel COP26, claiming a saving in emissions from the avoided travel. He should announce that the UK will seek to improve global climate through onshoring industry, taking advantage of our more efficient and less polluting knowhow; support the continued research into better fuel economy in our uses of fossil fuels, and the development of nuclear technology that is the only viable replacement for it in the medium term. He should say he is calling a halt to the subsidy of future renewables investment in the UK, which will need to demonstrate not only market competitiveness but also that it has provided for cover for intermittency before it will be licensed to connect to the grid.

    He should explain that as we cannot afford the bill for net zero and neither is it attainable in practice at economic cost or even at all with the technology we have and can expect, other countries necessary to achieving the absurd and arbitrary targets that are meant to control the climate will be unable to do so, and that therefore it makes much more sense to abandon the futile attempt, and to reserve for the effort that might be needed to adapt to changes in climate as we go along. He will acknowledge that the pandemic is one factor that means we can ill afford to waste money, and need instead to focus on regrowing a sound economy. As a footnote, he will cancel HS2: as Esther McVey pointed out at PMQs the cost is spiralling out of control, and long past the point at which it can possibly make any kind of economic sense.

    1. Syd
      June 26, 2021

      Mark, once again you spell out in simple language the real world practicalities, consequences, and solutions needed to deal with this Man Made Global Warming foolishness.
      An excellent contribution, thank you.

  68. Ed M
    June 26, 2021

    Here’s a balanced approach / article from The Wall Street Journal. They are ‘capitalists,’ so am I. I pretty much share the views of this article which cuts through the fanaticism of the fanatical greenies and those fanatical dinosaurs who stick their heads in the sand, ignoring science about man-made climatechange being real and the markets who are responding to people’s concerns. As a ‘capitalist’ I also think there’s a lot of money to be made, and I’m thinking in particular of our UK High Tech / Digital Sector.

    ‘Green Tech Gets Serious’ – Wall Street Journal

  69. XY
    June 27, 2021

    Dr Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace appears to be a true environmentalist – why is it not reported anywhere that he says we need MORE CO2 (much more) in the atmosphere or plants will be n danger of dying out. See here:

    https://cairnsnews.org/2020/01/13/greenpeace-co-founder-dr-patrick-moore-says-we-need-much-more-co2-in-the-atmosphere/

    This net zero is absolute nonsense – the real science says the exact opposite.

Comments are closed.