The government’s long road to COP 26

This week the government announced its support for hydrogen as a transport fuel and as a way of heating our homes. It said that it thought the hydrogen sector could create an additional 9000 jobs by 2030.

The UK economy has 31 million jobs, so the limited ambition for hydrogen this decade only sees an increase of 0.03% in employment if these hydrogen jobs are all additional.  It contrasts with the current 1,000,000 vacancies the job market sports. It implies pessimism about the speed of expansion and take up of this new wonder fuel. These jobs would add just 0.9% to the total available if they are extra jobs.

Hydrogen has obvious advantages over some of the other proposed technologies. Heat pumps for homes would be much dearer and less effective than adapting our current gas boilers to run on 100% hydrogen instead of natural gas. Batteries cannot offer sufficient power relative to weight for heavy trucks and other large vehicles.

The intermediate plan is to see if they can introduce 20% hydrogen into our current natural gas. That at least has the advantage that we can keep our current boilers. I never saw how it could be green to make us dump our gas boilers long before they have worn out, given the amount of energy it would take to replace them with Heat pumps.

 

The energy policy priority I am urging is to secure the construction of some more electricity capacity before thinking of new ways to use more electrical power directly or indirectly via hydrogen. Producing green hydrogen will take a lot of renewable power.

 

I am also pressing to make COP 26 about China, Germany and other large  producers of CO2 to catch up with the closures and changes the UK has already pushed through in the name of net zero.

221 Comments

  1. Mick
    August 20, 2021

    The first hydrogen car was made in the 60s but was side line by governments giving into the big oil company’s arm twisting

    1. None of the above
      August 20, 2021

      It’s sidelining by Government required little assistance by the oil companies. It was (and still is) expensive and is far more hazardous than, even, Acetylene.
      Its only benefit is its clean exhaust when burnt in air. Water!

      1. None of the above
        August 20, 2021

        In saying that hydrgen is more hazardous than acetylene, I was referring to hydrogen’s abillity to combust in almost any concentration with air. I acknowledge that acetylene is far less stable.?

        1. Alan Jutson
          August 20, 2021

          Auto gas vehicles, fuel which has been around and used already for 20 years and is about half the price of petrol were not allowed on cross channel ferries last time I looked, so what will be the score with Hydrogen !

      2. None of the above
        August 20, 2021

        Correction: Its.

      3. Mark
        August 20, 2021

        Well, not entirely clean. At higher temperatures, NOx is also produced when burnt in air that contains typically 78% nitrogen. Hydrogen’s dirty little secret. You want higher temperatures for maximum thermodynamic efficiency.

        1. Original Richard
          August 20, 2021

          Correct.

          In order to burn hydrogen in air without producing NOx emissions it has to be burnt very inefficiently.

      4. MiC
        August 21, 2021

        As I keep saying, old-fashioned coal gas, town gas, was up to 60% hydrogen.

        Life went on, didn’t it?

    2. Andy
      August 20, 2021

      The first electric car was built in 1890.

      1. Peter2
        August 20, 2021

        And was replaced by…..?

        1. jerry
          August 21, 2021

          @Peter2; I think you will find the first electric car went on to be modified to become the first electric milk float! 😆

          1. Peter2
            August 21, 2021

            Yes indeed Jerry.
            Nice and quiet in the early mornings.

    3. Peter
      August 20, 2021

      This is all so much hot air. Many politicians will agree to what suits. The consequences will be on somebody else’s watch. Brownie points will be earned with Davos folk meanwhile.

    4. Stred
      August 28, 2021

      https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ese3.956
      Late comment but SJR should read this study, which shows that the government policy of producing blue hydrogen is very foolish. It produces as much greenhouse gas as just burning it in conventional gas stations.

  2. jerry
    August 20, 2021

    “Producing green hydrogen will take a lot of renewable power.”

    Indeed, and much renewable power its self is not green, the other elephant in the room. The issue is not “China, Germany and other large producers of CO2”, it’s ours and other foolish govts worship of a religion that borders on the corrupt – might I suggest COP26 is cancelled, the King has no cloths!

    1. jerry
      August 20, 2021

      Not sure why our host keeps believing the lie that we are going to have to “dump our gas boilers long before they have worn out”, surely the only way that is going to happen is if the gas supply is shut off or changed. Thus switching to a hydrogen/methane mix may well cause what our host doesn’t want, millions of unusable boilers long before they are worn out, on account of either not having been converted to burn the new fuel or because they can not be converted, in the same way as some appliances had to be scrapped when the UK converted from coal gas to natural gas.

      1. MiC
        August 20, 2021

        The point is that boilers can burn up to 20% hydrogen without conversion, surely?

        1. jerry
          August 21, 2021

          @MiC; Sorry but I’m more than a little sceptical about such claims, after all the Green blob have suggested such theories before regarding other hydrocarbon burning technologies, the most recent is E10 petrol, nor are these recent half-truths either, remember when ‘experts’ proclaiming most car engines would not need to be modified to use unleaded petrol?

      2. No Longer Anonymous
        August 20, 2021

        They will be punishment taxed, Jerry.

      3. Hope
        August 20, 2021

        +1. Why no mention from JR of levelling playing field ie follow the EU that his govt. signed up to? Does Sharmer run his agenda past EU first?

    2. MiC
      August 20, 2021

      There are two basic forms of “blue” hydrogen.

      The easiest to produce from methane results in gaseous CO2 which would have to be stored – say in depleted gas fields, and that is not easy or secure.

      Pyrolysis on the other hand gives solid carbon as a waste product which is simple to store in landfill or whatever, but is a more complex process and results in a lower overall yield of hydrogen, although it is still orders more productive than by the electrolysis of water for the same energy usage.

      The fossil fuel companies must be given incentives or otherwise made to concentrate on the latter method. At present they have exploited subsidies for ineffective or unsustainable approaches and this must end.

      1. jerry
        August 20, 2021

        @MiC; No one, I repeat, no one is suggesting it is difficult to create/make hydrogen, my point was how “green” such schemes are, there are no free lunches with these renewable, all have issues, many have more issues than the current hydrocarbons we currently or have used, countries are simply off-shoring their pollution to another country – this is what the UK, the USA and others have done with manufacturing,. cutting pollution at home, increasing pollution in India, China, etc.

      2. NickC
        August 20, 2021

        If it’s so easy, Martin, why don’t you do it? Instead of continually whining that other people – in this case in the form of the “fossil fuel companies” – do it for you? The reality is that it’s not easy, nor is it quick; the technology doesn’t exist at scale, and it will require vast investment both to make the hydrogen production plant and build a new hydrogen national grid. And the resultant hydrogen will be vastly more expensive than natural gas anyway.

        1. John Hatfield
          August 20, 2021

          Hey Nick slow down. Martin is making a useful contribution to the argument.

        2. MiC
          August 20, 2021

          Ah, the good old Counsel Of Despair, yet again, from a quitter.

          1. NickC
            August 20, 2021

            Yet there would be no problem if people like you did not despair about the climate, Martin.

      3. Mark
        August 21, 2021

        The pyrolysis method has only been demonstrated at lab scale. It is quite some way from being a commercial alternative. Scaling up from test tube quantities often proves quite difficult.

      4. Mitchel
        August 21, 2021

        According to Hydrogen.Central.com,retweeted by Business New Europe, Gazprom is claiming that they will be the world’s leading Blue Hydrogen exporter by 2030.”The production of blue hydrogen is already possible with the cost estimated at c$2 per kilo.”Although it appears that Russia is only interested in producing it for the export market.

    3. Lifelogic
      August 20, 2021

      Indeed the solutions proposed do not work not even in CO2 terms. We have no zero CO2 electricity, we have no Hydrogen mines. Producing compressing and storing the hydrogen will be vastly expensive. It will also almost certainly produce more greenhouse gases than using methane unless you use CO2 capture technology (which would make it even more expensive). But we do not even have capture technology at any of our gas, coal and wood burning power stations yet. Surely you would do this first if CO2 is the problem? CO2 is actually not the problem it is largely a hoax.

      An article by James Frayne in the Telegraph says people like Allegra Stratton and Alok Sharma must to buy electric cars so as not to appear hypocritical. Why? Doing so (and thus causing a new electric car and battery to be mined and manufactured) will actually increase CO2 production not reduce it. They should really be pointing this reality to the public and discouraging use of new EV cars where the old one are fine. But perhaps they and government “experts” are too thick or dishonest to realise this reality?

      1. NickC
        August 20, 2021

        Lifelogic, Always good to read your sane comments.

    4. turboterrier
      August 20, 2021

      Jerry
      Well said mate , it’s been said for years but then like now, nobody listening.

    5. No Longer Anonymous
      August 20, 2021

      No wonder his windows are dirty.

    6. Nota#
      August 20, 2021

      @jerry – yes if there has any honesty amongst these hypocritical evangelist they would cancel COP26

      1. Nota#
        August 20, 2021

        Nota# – it would be great if predictive text was keeping up with what I am trying to type – ‘has any’ please read ‘was any’

    7. glen cullen
      August 20, 2021

      I agree that COP26 should be cancelled as the conclusions and decisions have already been made, therefore the actual conference is a show and sham…..this esteem UN conference is undemocratic, no one voted for this body to control the way we live and how our economy is managed

    8. Mark
      August 20, 2021

      The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge visited the new tidal stream power with hydrogen electrolysis facility in Orkney a few months ago. It would be interesting to have some real world performance figures from this project. I saw it had attracted £7m in equity crowd funding, a grant of €11m from the EU’s 2020 Horizon fund, and a further grant of £3.4m from the Scottish government – call it £17m in total. That produces a tidal generator (operational parts made in Germany) with a nameplate capacity of 2MW. Its predecessor prototype achieved a capacity factor of about 17%, considerably below the theoretical possible output of about 30% (limited by varying tides), presumably at least in part due to extended maintenance outages. The hydrogen electrolyser is there to act as a stabiliser for the electricity output, which suffers from considerable flicker as a result of wave action, and differential tide stream speeds in the water column that also impose considerable stresses on the turbines as they rotate. It is sized at a nominal 0.5MW capacity. Its output is transported to a hydrogen fuel cell generator at Kirkwall docks that is capable of supplying just 75kW (intended to provide power to up to 3 small ships in port), so clearly they are not expecting much hydrogen from the 500kW electrolyser (also made in Germany!). This has to be some of the most expensive hydrogen in the world.

  3. Mark B
    August 20, 2021

    Good morning

    Perhaps those in government and parliament might like to do some research before making such daft announcements.

    To begin with. Where is all this hydrogen going to come from ? If it is, as may well be the case, be extracted from the water around us, what method does the government intend to approve? This is important as they are both highly energy intensive.

    Then there is the question of storage and distribution. Hydrogen, especially the amounts that will be required, will take up a lot of space. So where will they be located and, what about the risks of what is a very flammable gas. Hindenburg anyone?

    At this rate our Lillipudlians in parliament will soon be looking at extracting Moonbeams from cucumbers.

    1. Sharon
      August 20, 2021

      Exactly, Mark B

      Yes, it’s a bit like the Diane Abbot police wage interview… pluck an idea (figure) from the air and run with it.

    2. Everhopeful
      August 20, 2021

      Sorry!
      The science is settled. You are peddling misinformation!
      You get moonbeams from RADISHES!!
      Now hie thee to yon greenhouse.
      🤪

      1. Mark B
        August 21, 2021

        BUSTED !!

        :o(

    3. Lifelogic
      August 20, 2021

      Exactly it is clearly not about science or real engineering – it is about what these fools think they can sell to or con the public with. My view is they are miles off the mark even on this political measure. Their agenda will be/is a political disaster too. 98% of deluded art graduate MPs might be for this lunacy but only about 10% of the more sensible public are. Even less than that once they realise the vast cost of it all and that it does not actually even work practically. Even if it were affordable and did work it in CO2 terms (it does not) it would still be pointless as China, India, Africa and many more places will never follow & anyway the effect of mankind’s C02 emissions on climate have been much exaggerated to say the least.

      1. NickC
        August 20, 2021

        Exactly so, Lifelogic. CAGW is a hoax; and our politicians regard technology as a god, or magic, because they have no practical ideas in their heads.

    4. Timaction
      August 20, 2021

      Indeed. It does smack of incompetence and cart before the horse. We should be mitigating any change in our climate, if any, until China, USA, Germany etc decide to get with any programme. It would be better if the Government commissioned INDEPENDENT scientists to explore the totality of the atmosphere, its make up, the impact of the sun and its cycles. The disappearance of the rain forests and our own flora and fauna due to building on the greenbelt and flood plains with the Governments obsession of importing the world here. Another 20,000 Afghans to add to those already here, on top of the annual 720,000 and the 9000,000 not born here plus the estimated 1000,000 illegals immigrants and over stayers. Don’t talk about net zero until your Government addresses mass immigration.

    5. Hope
      August 20, 2021

      Mark,
      I suspect this is another policy that will not last as long as the strap line. This useless govt is not capable of strategic thinking or lasting policies. It only thinks of grabbing a headline.

      How many U-turns, how many complete changes under Johnson- he cancelled Christmas last year after saying he would not, he cancelled return to school within two days when schools should never be shut!!

      How many empty planes leaving Kabul!! Humanitarian Crisis, climate change etc. Johnson and Raab both away last week even though Raab is meant to fill in for him! Whitehall civil servants all still at home!

      Shocking incompetence. Raab should resign, he should have had a plan for withdrawal as it was known for 18 months! A major foreign policy failure. Where was the diplomacy with the US to get an agreed position?

      May spouting her bile in parliament epitomises this toxic vile useless party. She should be dust.

      1. NickC
        August 20, 2021

        Hope, All true, I’m afraid. This government stumbles from one self-generated shambles to the next at the behest of the woke establishment.

        1. glen cullen
          August 20, 2021

          The term is ‘self-induced shambles’ and you could be put on a fizzer for that

  4. J Bush
    August 20, 2021

    The large CO2 producers will continue as before. Gleefully rubbing their hands together at the prospect of increasing their own export base, as the grandstanding UK politicians destroy their own country’s productive base.

    However, I am also increasingly of the opinion the Johnson regime are not only aware of the level of economic destruction this will cause, but is actively seeking to do just that.

    And the ‘holier than thou’ and ‘lead by example’ dross is just theatre to try and fool the native population of what their real intention is.

    1. turboterrier
      August 20, 2021

      J Bush
      Correct on all points I fear.

    2. Iain Moore
      August 20, 2021

      China has just built its self a 1,800 kilometre railway line from their Mongolia coal fields to their industrial heartlands to supply 200 million tons of coal a year. China’s interests in Afghanistan is to build themselves an oil pipeline from Iran. They are taking us for fools, we have a gullible political class who have swallowed too much Kool-Aid , and under some climate lunatics prompting they are shoving our economy off the cliff edge.

      1. Mitchel
        August 20, 2021

        Also look at the developing P1 and P2 corridors which will connect China’s old industrial heartland of (Inner)Manchuria with the natural resources of Mongolia and Russia and access to Russia’s ice free ports north of Vladivostok in the Russian Far East.Inner Manchuria (that was-now China’s three northern provinces) lost it’s access to the sea when Qing China ceded outer Manchuria to Tsarist Russia in 1860 in return for Russia blocking an Anglo-French advance on Peking/Beijing.As a result of that Russia controls the coast of Eurasia from the Norwegian border to the North Korean border.The Russians are currently expanding capacity on the BAM(Baikal-Amur Mainline-the northern branch of the Trans-Siberian) and will then start a massive re-development of those currently small ports.They will also encourage the involvement of Japan and S Korea-n0-one wants to see China become too dominant in the region.Russia is in an incredibly powerful sweet spot!

        1. Mitchel
          August 20, 2021

          The Mongolia the previous poster refers to is,I assume, the Chinese province of Inner Mongolia;the Mongolia I refer to is the sovereign state of Mongolia(Outer Mongolia),landlocked and sandwiched between Russia and China.

          1. Iain Moore
            August 20, 2021

            Yes….

            //Deemed the world’s longest heavy freight line, a $30bn railway built to haul coal from China’s northern mines to its eastern and central provinces is set to open by the end of this month.
            The Haoji line will carry up to 200 million tonnes of coal a year from Haole Baoji in the Inner Mongolia autonomous region to the city of Ji’an in Jiangxi province, a distance of around 1,800km.//

          2. Mark
            August 21, 2021

            $30bn for 1,800km vs over £50bn for 100 miles.

      2. NickC
        August 20, 2021

        Whilst we concentrate on gender fluidity, destroying statues, personal pronouns, and the self-destructiveness of the CAGW substitute religion, our enemies take over the world. Still the woke, the BBC, Carrie on Boris, etc, can pretend that the world admires their “values” when in fact the world despises and laughs at them.

    3. Lifelogic
      August 20, 2021

      What is their real intention? It clearly is going to do huge net harm, destroy and export jobs, circa triple heating costs & energy prices & freeze many pensioners to death, damage the economy and UK defence & increase taxes – it this the Boris/Carrie agenda? If so they have a good plan to achieve it.

  5. oldtimer
    August 20, 2021

    The chances of the UK government persuading China or Germany to abandon energy policies that meet their national interests are zero. The idea that we cripple our own economy on the altar of demonising CO2 is utterly misguided. But it has already happened. Whole industries have been shuttered or are in the process of being shuttered. Tens, probably hundreds, of thousands of jobs have been squandered in this cause rendering what remains of the UK industrial economy dangerously uncompetitive.

    1. Lifelogic
      August 20, 2021

      +1

    2. Andy
      August 20, 2021

      Germany has committed to be carbon net zero by 2045. So before us. China says it’ll get there in by 2060.

      You lot can spend the rest of your lives whining or you can help fix the problems you have created. Which will it be?

      1. NickC
        August 20, 2021

        “Carbon” net zero, Andy? Really? So no more black tyres on German cars then? Will they be net zero for water vapour too?

      2. Peter2
        August 20, 2021

        Headlines and claims andy.
        How are they going to achieve this ambition when their policies are moving in in the opposite direction?

      3. Mark
        August 21, 2021

        In other news:
        Germany plans to build a city for 10 million people on Mars by 2025.

      4. graham1946
        August 21, 2021

        Net zero will turn out to be an expensive con, rather like the rich with their private jets buying carbon credits. It will make no difference, just be a money spinner for the already wealthy. The green crowd say we only have 10 years to save the planet (like they do every 10 years) so what good is China ending coal in 2060 going to do? Proof positive it is all a scam.

  6. DOM
    August 20, 2021

    Why would a government take steps to force its private sector to become relatively less competitive in an increasingly competitive world by saddling them with ever higher costs?

    Why is the UK accommodating China and Germany’s refusal to implement many of the energy and business policies that this government led by Johnson is imposing on our employees and citizens? Is this part of a wider agenda?

    The vicious politics of environmental protection, of social and cultural re-engineering, official attacks on speech and the seemingly State backed embrace of a politics that systematically sets out to play defined social groups off one against the other is somewhat of a phenomena, certainly in the UK.

    All is imposition. All is State backed with oppressive and intolerant legislation. All is Anti-libertarian. All is Socialist. All is a hate fuelled contempt for choice, freedom and the sanctity of the private person. There’s a term for such politics. We only need to look to history to see how the vile political State composed of vile political animals use their power to coerce, coral and impose their demands upon a weak, compliant population. There’ll be a kickback eventually but what will trigger that response is beyond my ability to accurately predict the future

    1. Everhopeful
      August 20, 2021

      +many. Wonderful post.
      I have my own ( deleted always) theories regarding WHY.
      So they are either true or barmy.
      But of course, at this point…no one can claim that we are conspiracy theorists since we can see with our own eyes what is happening.

    2. J Bush
      August 20, 2021

      +10
      It is becomingly increasingly obvious the Johnson regime are dictatorial, manipulative and intent on following a cultural Marxism agenda.

      And as stupid as they are, I still find it increasingly hard to believe they are totally ignorant of the fact that want to force on us, will destroy our economy by making it uncompetitive and subsequently unproductive.

      1. Andy
        August 20, 2021

        Man who supports Brexit doesn’t understand irony.

        1. NickC
          August 20, 2021

          Man who supports CAGW religion doesn’t understand anything.

    3. turboterrier
      August 20, 2021

      DOM
      This country has been saddled with piss poor leadership for decades. Politicians with a few notable exceptions have followed whatever road and lane taken like sheep.
      If change is required, which it is desperately needed the whole parliament has got to undergo a seismic
      rethink about where we are and where we want to be. They could start by all standing in front of a full length mirror and ask a basic question, “Am I really fit for purpose to deliver what is really needed”? We need strong experienced leadership and someone with a vision we can all sign onto. Because as sure as hell we haven’t got it today. No wonder these other countries applaud what we are doing. You cannot make it up.

    4. No Longer Anonymous
      August 20, 2021

      Well. I think we’ll have to reach East German (cold war) austerity before that kick back happens. There is the religious conversion to go through first – the demographics are clear.

      I do wonder though. If we all converted to electric cars tomorrow would the cycle lanes be torn up ? Would the deliberately obstructive plant boxes be moved to the kerbs of the back streets ? Would the congestion charges be stopped and ‘traffic calming’ be reduced ?

      No. I don’t think so.

      The impetus for these changes (including the assault on free speech) has been a hatred of people in the West. I believe that Greta hates people in the West too – that’s her true motivation.

      These are times for sack cloths and self flagellation… or, more realistically, the working and lower middle classes are to be the whipping boys of the Tesla class, and how they love masks ! Those Teslarians Working From Home (Smug@Home) only have to wear them when they want to – those serving them have to wear them all day… just like the slaves at Boris’s otherwise unmasked BBQ for world leaders this year. How very Roman it’s all starting to look.

    5. Lifelogic
      August 20, 2021

      Indeed complete lunacy in political terms, energy engineering terms, practical terms and even CO2 terms. Not the CO2 is even really a problem.

    6. Jim Whitehead
      August 21, 2021

      DOM, +1, excellent comment once more.

  7. Everhopeful
    August 20, 2021

    Given the many miles of brand new gas pipes…all shiny and yellow…that have recently been installed with much faffing and noise and disruption, is it the case that a 20% hydrogen addition has always been the plan?
    The rest has just been the usual government pantomime maybe?
    Can’t they all be persuaded to take their organisational skills to Afghanistan or somewhere?
    Mars possibly?

    1. jerry
      August 20, 2021

      @EH; I doubt it, a few years back, I was told by a gas engineer (no, not a plumber…) the reason new plastic gas mains and pipes were being installed is because in areas were they have the pressure within the distribution pipes can be increased, thus the gas main its self acts as the old gasometer’s storage did, I see no reasoning to disbelieve what I was told.

      1. Everhopeful
        August 20, 2021

        +1

      2. Ian Wragg
        August 20, 2021

        There is a statutory requirement to replace 1% of the gas network annually.

        1. Everhopeful
          August 20, 2021

          Ah..that could explain it.

      3. Mark
        August 20, 2021

        That’s broadly correct. The linepack gas has varied between about 330 and 370 million cubic metres (at atmospheric pressure standard conditions) over the year. Current demand runs to 14-150mcm per day, so it’s about 2 days of supply at present levels of about 335mcm. However, it’s rather less than one day’s cold winter demand which can easily exceed 400mcm.

    2. MiC
      August 20, 2021

      Just for the record, town gas, made from the pyrolysis of coal, was up to 60% hydrogen.

      The bright flame – when unmixed with air – was caused by heavier components such as ethane and ethylene.

      1. Everhopeful
        August 20, 2021

        Very interesting.
        Could we not just go back to that then?
        It surely fits the bill?
        Is that what they made/stored in those ( I loved them) gasometers?

        1. MiC
          August 20, 2021

          You’d have to do the sums as to how much carbon was in the other 40-50% composed of methane, carbon monoxide, ethylene etc.

          But certainly the gas from pyrolysis of renewable wood would be worth examining, because the accumulated charcoal waste would be permanently removed from the atmosphere by the repeated regrowth of the trees. That could be put in the sea – where it would absorb pollutants such as persistent pesticide residues too.

          But whatever, it shows that a network of pipes can deal with high hydrogen content gas without insurmountable problems.

          1. Mark
            August 21, 2021

            Not really. Town gas was always made locally and used low pressures for delivery. Gas mains operate at pressures of over 100 atmospheres, which helps force the gas into all the microscopic imperfections in the pipe. Even at the very low concentrations found in normal methane pipelines this leads to HIC – hydrogen induced cracking. That is why the gas network is now being replaced.

      2. jerry
        August 20, 2021

        @MiC; So what are you suggesting, the answer is to go back to Coal Gas?!…

        1. MiC
          August 20, 2021

          No Jerry, I’m countering those who say that 20% hydrogen in methane would make the system dangerously leaky and cause many explosions.

          1. jerry
            August 21, 2021

            @MiC; Except that is not a point you were replying to, indeed the comment you replied to was suggesting preparations have been on-going for a higher hydrogen level in the gas supply!

            Back to the real issue, the need to modify or scrap older boilers etc… Boilers and the such are designed to work on a specific chemical make up of fuel, that is why a boiler or cooker built to burn natural gas needs to be converted to burn off-network LPG, for example, and why boilers and cookers designed for coal gas had to be modified to use natural gas. From what you said above, regarding coal gas and hydrogen (if true), surely means a methane/hydrogen mix, even at 80/20%, will change the boilers BTU rating, unless modified.

      3. NickC
        August 20, 2021

        Martin, As always you miss the points. Converting natural gas to hydrogen is an extra step, and therefore will make hydrogen much more expensive than natural gas. And we do not have the infrastructure to do it. So that’s even more expense. A pure hydrogen grid would probably put up home heating costs threefold. I suppose that’s an improvement on electricity being about six times the cost of natural gas. But it needs a fossil fuel based economy to implement and maintain it, and provide the feedstock, anyway. I thought you said fossil fuels were bad?

        1. MiC
          August 21, 2021

          Converting crude oil to petrol and to diesel etc. is an extra step.

          Your point is?

          1. jerry
            August 22, 2021

            @MiC; No, that is not what NickC said or implied, refining oil, distilling it, simply separates the various fractions within the pre-existing crude oil, petrol being one of the first to be distilled off whilst fractions such as heavy bunker fuel (as used by merchant ships) and tar are more or less what gets left behind as the residue of the crude oil.

            What you and the unthinking green blob keep suggesting is the artificial creation of a gas, at a scale previously unknown to industrial man, akin to making artificial crude oil out if a forest you chopped down only last week!

    3. Mitchel
      August 20, 2021

      On the subject of Afghanistan ,the Taliban have just captured and executed the local ISIS leader as a demonstration to China and Russia that they are serious about eradicating Islamist terrorists operating on their soil.

      Also Russia is taking the lead with the peace and reconciliation process in the “Moscow format”,involving Russia,China,USA,India,Pakistan,Iran and the five central Asian countries.No EU and no UK.

      I wonder if Presidents Biden and Putin agreed “something” during their Geneva sumit.

      1. Dave Andrews
        August 20, 2021

        And IS have stated they believe the Taliban takeover a US plot!
        The two have a hostile relationship, with one disliking the ideology of the other. For the Taliban, IS is an unwelcome competitor for fanatical support.

        1. Mitchel
          August 20, 2021

          There is an excellent,insightful article from the extremely well connected and widely travelled Eurasia expert at Asia Times,Pepe Escobar –

          “China,Russia are stage managing the Taliban”19/8/21

          “This means the Shanghai Co-operation Organization is stage managing the whole process:Russia and China are applying consensual decisions that have been taken in SCO meetings………………….It’s essential also to note the closer integration of the expanding SCO-Iran has just become a full member-with ASEAN.The absolute majority of Asia will not shun the Taliban.”

          I think Asia Times is still mostly free to view if you want to read the full article.

    4. Alan Jutson
      August 20, 2021

      They are diluting lower grade petrol with ethanol now, problem is it does not work well in older vehicles, thus you need to purchase the more expensive higher octane petrol.
      Will the result be similar with older gas boilers if gas is diluted.

      1. Stred
        August 22, 2021

        It doesn’t work well in new vehicles with small engines. Consumption increases by over 10% in my car so I use the more expensive higher octane to otherwise it does 45mpg on the same journey instead of 59.8mpg.

  8. Nig l
    August 20, 2021

    We are again being treated as stupid re hydrogen. How can renewables create sufficient ‘green’ when it cannot be guaranteed to supply current grid demand? So it is the blue variety that we will be spun is the solution and that is unravelling. Indeed there is clear evidence that making one gas from another increases green house gas both in terms of the energy needed and the residue. On this I am with Lifelogic, Ministers with zero understanding of the science are being conned/conning us.

    As in so many other areas, the Boris soundbite approach is ‘economical’ with the truth and built on sand.

    We are also being lied to about the eye watering cost, again now being exposed as the policies are subjected to informed scrutiny. And in a similar respect I see a senior civil servant responding to a claim the government had misled Parliament non the HS2 costs said that was untrue but that their costing processes were now more efficient. Strewth.

    Re China/India/Germany what will it take you to, instead of all this ‘pressing’ , actually be honest and tell the government to be straight with the electorate for a change (ha) they will as they have always done do whatever’s needed for their domestic economy.

    Yet again supine MPs failing in their main tasks, representing their electorate and holding the Executive to account.

    1. Bryan Harris
      August 20, 2021

      @NIG L
      Yes

      Yet again supine MPs failing in their main tasks, representing their electorate and holding the Executive to account.

      This is a constant problem – most MPs now only quote the government response for any query or complaint, and never take up issues raised.
      It is clear that as well as the public being effect of government psychology, Parliament is truly overwhelmed by it.

    2. Jim Whitehead
      August 21, 2021

      Nig 1, +1, ineffectual ‘pressing’, or totally supine MPs as per your last sentence, we are miserably led by our elected representatives.

  9. ferd
    August 20, 2021

    COP26 may well be the occasion when we can say hold fire on all these momentous and expensive changes to our lives if the latest United Nations peer reviewed report on global warming is to be supported. This suggests that CO2 may not be the cause of temperature changes as the research that has been carried out heretofore has given insufficient credit to the vagaries of the sun, a view supported by most atmosphere physicists. COP26 could be the time to halt the mad rush to enormous experiments in life changing decisions

    1. SM
      August 20, 2021

      But that would result in an awful lot of public personae and celebrities looking foolish, ferd, so we can’t have that, can we?

    2. John Hatfield
      August 20, 2021

      Never happen Ferd. Boris has got the renewables bit between his teeth. Makes you wonder what shares he owns in which companies.

  10. Old Albion
    August 20, 2021

    Are you suggesting some of the politicians who have swallowed every bit of exaggerated ‘climate change’ disinformation are beginning to think for themselves? ……surely not….

  11. Sakara Gold
    August 20, 2021

    Indeed the Dogger Bank Array, a joint venture between SSE Renewables (40%), Equinor (40%) and Eni (20%) will increase the amount of UK windfarm power by ~3.6GW on a good day. This is a tremendous amount of electricity. It will utilise the world’s largest turbines and installation vessels to provide the world’s largest single source of renewable energy.

    Onshore construction began in 2020 and is currently underway for Dogger Bank A and Dogger Bank B, with offshore construction on Dogger Bank A due to begin in Q2 2022. First power is expected in Summer 2023 and Summer 2024 for Dogger Bank A and B, respectively, with commercial operations to follow around six months later. Turbine installation for Dogger Bank C will begin in 2025.

    Thousands of jobs will be created in the Teeside turbine blade and tower factories. There is ample room south of the river to build the UK’s first hydrogen electrolysis plant. Cheap wind energy plus free seawater equals cheap green hydrogen, with oxygen as a valuable by-product.

    1. Ian Wragg
      August 20, 2021

      Oy when the wind blows and on average give 19% of nameplate rating.

    2. Lifelogic
      August 20, 2021

      ON a good day perhaps. BUT average will perhaps be more like 20% of that plus expensive back up WILL be
      needed! A gigawatt is a unit of power not an “amount” of electricity!

  12. Nig l
    August 20, 2021

    And in other news the Morecambe NHS trust, the one that previously was responsible for the death of 11 babies and one mother is once again being put into special needs.

    With a budget of well north of 100 billion why does the Secretary of State need whistle blowers to raise the issues?

    The report stated not all senior management demonstrated the knowledge and skill to lead effectively. Presumably all recruited post scandal or if not, why were they still,there? How do these people get and keep jobs? Poor recruitment and zero performance management?

    How much more of this ‘hidden’ across other NHS trusts? When will our politicians stop hiding behind the excellence of the front line staff?

    1. SM
      August 20, 2021

      Oh, it isn’t hidden if you know where to look, Nig,

      A very sick friend left hospital today after being admitted as an emergency 10 days ago; the emergency was due, the doctors admitted, to completely inexplicable delays in giving her the regular surgical treatment they know she requires. She was moved from ward to ward 5 times in 10 days, the food was in her own words “unbearable and inedible”, and the various renal procedures were performed – extremely painfully – without anaesthetic or sedatives. The Trust she has had to rely on has been in and out of Special Needs for about 15 years now.

  13. Bryan Harris
    August 20, 2021

    Another policy change just so Boris can look good at this coming together of great minds, that should be done remotely.
    How long before they change their mind again when they realise that hydrogen creates more Co2 than gas?

    Have they really dotted all the I’s and crossed the T’s as regards us using hydrogen widely? I very much doubt it. How long before another bungled change of heart? And how much will this cost us?

    Does anybody know the latest date for when the Earth is supposed to overheat and burn up – It changes every decade, I know, but we really should have something that indicates the days left to disaster, alongside alleged Co2 levels.
    Listening to the justifications from the green experts on why the Earth has not burned up yet, as the date gets continually extended, will be amusing!

  14. None of the above
    August 20, 2021

    Whilst I applaud all efforts to eliminate pollution and waste, I am increasingly dismayed with this blinkered approach to (so called) green energy. Take, for example, the proposals to use hydrgen. All methods of Hydrgen production require high levels of energy and one, in particular, produces large amounts of Carbon Dioxide, the capture of which is expensiive. In their enthusiasm, the supporters of this costly technology are forgetting one of the most important laws of physics. Namely, energy can neither be created or destroyed, it can only be converted from one form to another.
    If we are to replace fossil fuels then let be with nuclear fission or fusion.

    1. None of the above
      August 20, 2021

      Correction: Hydrogen.

  15. Lifelogic
    August 20, 2021

    It said that it thought the hydrogen sector could create an additional 9000 jobs by 2030. Well perhaps but only by destroying or exporting about 30,000 real jobs with higher energy prices and extra taxes to subsidise this idiotic and pointless agenda.

    You say “Hydrogen has obvious advantages over some of the other proposed technologies.” Obvious entirely “superficial” ones perhaps. On balance it has very obvious disadvantages over sticking with methane. It will produce more CO2, will be vastly more expensive per KWH of heat, & will demand vast investment in infrastructure, H2 production, distribution and storage (we have no H2 mines) & with huge negatives for jobs, the economy and living costs. It is economic and engineering insanity.

    1. Lifelogic
      August 20, 2021

      It is economic and engineering insanity and it would be even if reducing world CO2 were a sensible objective – it is not. Furthermore it will not happen anyway as we have no practical ways of doing it and China, India and much of the world is rightly not even going to try.

    2. Mark
      August 21, 2021

      We have about 18TWh of gas storage, excluding LNG tanks which cannot be used for hydrogen. Use it for hydrogen and that capacity drops to just 6TWH. Peak UK gas demand is about 4.4 TWh per day.

  16. Lisa
    August 20, 2021

    Hydrogen also has many disadvantages. It is far more inflammable than other fuels, much harder to seal inside pressure vessels, is produced almost entirely by the use of fossil fuels and will require an almost total replacement of existing systems at enormous cost. Look forward to huge explosions, failures of supply, no reduction in fossil fuel use and vastly increased costs. A ridiculous sham just like every other “green” policy by this awful government.

    1. MiC
      August 20, 2021

      Good old coal gas was up to 60% hydrogen, and there were no especial problems with that, were there, Lisa?

      1. Peter2
        August 20, 2021

        Except you start with coal.

        1. glen cullen
          August 20, 2021

          Nothing wrong with good old british coal

    2. Jim Whitehead
      August 21, 2021

      Lisa, neatly expressed and powerfully condensed in your final sentence.

  17. turboterrier
    August 20, 2021

    Nig 1
    For my money all nails firmly driven home.
    Enough of this peeing down our necks and telling us it’s raining. I know we are partly guilty because we have got what we voted for. But never in a thousand years did I think it could get this bad and I am not alone.

  18. Roger W Carradice
    August 20, 2021

    Sir John
    Could you perhaps ask our Prime Minister to ask a chemist how hydrogen could be made and he might just realise how impractical and economically stupid any process would be.
    Roger

  19. ukretired123
    August 20, 2021

    Sadly the only folks who will COP it will be us!

    1. ukretired123
      August 20, 2021

      But it won’t be just 2 and 6 2/6 or half-crown but cost an arm and a leg and all the rest.
      China Outlaws Pollution?

  20. Alan Jutson
    August 20, 2021

    Wonder fuels for the future, where have I heard that before.

    The cost of nuclear will be so low as to almost be free, remember that statement and many like it.
    Harness the use of the wind and tides, they are free, as is the power of the sun.

    Then add on the huge costs to build the infrastructure, storage, waste, distribution then of course government taxation, and they are all more expensive than existing.

    Its like saying coal, gas, and oil are free, because they already exist in abundance.

    1. MiC
      August 20, 2021

      Not everything that you hear is a lie, that is Weak Induction on your part.

      However, the paperless office is still something of a rarity.

      1. Alan Jutson
        August 20, 2021

        Mic

        I remember well the statements at the time, I did not make them up.

        As usual its spectacular headlines, which then require you to read the small print to get to the truth, a bit like Budget Statements, and Government Policies of all colours.

  21. Bill B.
    August 20, 2021

    SJR, you will be ‘pressing’ to make ‘China, Germany and other large producers of CO2 to catch up with the closures and changes the UK has already pushed’. A very good idea. Is there a better way to exert ‘pressure’ on them than to pause our ‘closures and changes’ until those countries do catch up, if they ever do?

    Would this not shame them into make the same efforts we have?

    Or would they not just laugh to themselves, knowing this whole thing is a charade that only clueless politicians like Johnson take seriously?

    1. Narrow Shoulders
      August 20, 2021

      Quite – no one is following our lead so why do we think we are leading?

    2. Jim Whitehead
      August 21, 2021

      Lisa, neatly expressed and powerfully condensed in your final sentence.

  22. Stred
    August 20, 2021

    The Climate Change Committee technical report itself recognised that geen hydrogen by electrolysis will cost twice as much as blue hydrogen from reformed natural gas. This is because of inescapable physics of energy production and transmission. But blue hydrogen will also be at least three times the cost of natural gas because of the physics of heating the methane and separating the carbon dioxide, liquefying it and pumping it into disused gas and oilfields under the North Sea. The gas network will also have to be upgraded because H2 is less dense and in order to pump the same amount of energy it will have to be at higher pressure and hydrogen is much more likely to leak. And the iron gas pipes coming into homes will also have to be replaced in addition to boilers, cookers and fires. There is not a single competent electrical, mechanical or chemical engineer in the government machine.

    1. Stred
      August 20, 2021

      Also, regarding cars, hydrogen has an overall energy efficiency of 30% average, against battery electric of 70%.

      https://www.volkswagenag.com/en/news/stories/2019/08/hydrogen-or-battery–that-is-the-question.html#

    2. MiC
      August 20, 2021

      Coal gas was up to 60% hydrogen.

      1. MiC
        August 20, 2021

        Pyrolysis of methane gives solid carbon, not CO2.

        1. Mark
          August 21, 2021

          In the lab.

          1. MiC
            August 21, 2021

            Yes, covid vaccines were made in the lab too, along with almost every other technology.

  23. Nota#
    August 20, 2021

    So the UK Government decides maybe after all the rest of the World has the right idea on Hydrogen.

    While most of us don’t like how it is run you have to note the EU has already headed that way big time, even little Portugal is further ahead than this Government. In the last couple of days BMW have been showing off their Hydrogen Vehicles for next year. Even the Mayor of London since the London Olympics has been going down that route.

    As with a lot of things in recent weeks we have to despair at the abilities of this Government.
    Yes, they will ‘Grandstand’
    Yes, they will make ‘Virtue Signal’
    Yes, they will make the ‘Political Gesture’

    But the leadership is just lacking in its ability to think further than those electioneering sound bites

  24. Nota#
    August 20, 2021

    COP 26 the biggest contradiction the World has been faced with. A lot of ‘talking heads’, with entourages and MsM in tow travelling around the Globe pumping tons of pollution into the atmosphere, while lecturing every one else they mustn’t do those things. While all the time there is are many environmentally friendly methods of meeting up and achieving more.

    How hypocritical can you get, how can they then expect in one should take note.

  25. glen cullen
    August 20, 2021

    July – the driest and hottest month on record – has to be due to climate change
    August – the wettest and coldest month on record – has to be due to climate change

    Maybe China has the right approach, and the climate change is all a hoax so put people and jobs first….1.4 billion mouths to feed

    Our paid-off environmental scientists would have us believe – you need to destroy your economy and stop all CO2 production to satisfy their model that ‘maybe’ man-made emissions will over the next 50 years increase the global temperature by 1.5 degree…..utter madness

    1. The Prangwizard
      August 20, 2021

      Indeed so. All weather is now caused by climate change because all weather is extreme – they have redifined words.

      When we get normal heavy rainfall or strong winds which we have previously taken in our strides without excessive concern, tbey are now storms so bad they require names. This is to promote fear, as they know we previously heard of serious hurricanes in the world far away by name and we were shown pictures of the damage. I

      It is clear policy of government to frighten us and so subdue us.

  26. MPC
    August 20, 2021

    I do hope your final paragraph was tongue in cheek and that you don’t really want the whole world to go net zero! I found myself watching Sky News this morning and agreeing with everything Greta Thunberg said about the UK not being a world leader in emissions reductions if offshored industrial emissions and goods imported are taken into account. Good, so the leading climate zealot thinks Western climate policies have failed. So let’s have a new start in the UK focussed on energy security, energy economy and gas and nuclear with Greta visiting Beijing and Delhi for a change to persuade them to do whatever she thinks they should. Some hope.

    1. Mark
      August 20, 2021

      I’m not sure whether she has had a look at the statistics. The UK is one of the few countries that attempts to produce them if somewhat in arrears. In 1991 the UK’s consumption based emissions (i.e. including emissions embedded in imports but creidting emissions embedded in exports) were just over 1bn tonnes of CO2, a level they hovered around for some years, withe weather and recession the primary influences. They peaked in 2004 at 1,018millon tonnes CO2e. The latest data for 2018 shows 703 million tonnes CO2e. Obviously 2020 will be substantially lower – at least 10% down I would guess. There will be very few countries with such a large percentage reduction – certainly not her native Sweden.

  27. Nota#
    August 20, 2021

    The 50% of the World that wont be involved in the UN fiasco of COP26 are said to produce 70% of the Worlds Carbon Emissions.

    Were Boris and his religious Zealot chums have it wrong is there is nothing they can do other take the UK back to the Stone Age by destroying the UK further.

    These nations that are now the top producers are also playin catch up, they have extreme poverty, no universal health and education – they want to get to were it is perceived the rest of us are.

    The big things Boris cannot comprehend is that the UK’s around 1% of the Worlds population cannot cut back enough to compensate enough for the 50% of the World that is playing catch up without receding to the ‘Stone Age’ then that wouldn’t be enough.

    Then in all his evangelistic soundbites his answer is that the UK must renew everything by buying primarily from the Worlds largest polluters. How does that work on a World scale.

    What Boris and the UK Government should be doing (other than cancelling COP26) is planning for the World to be the quoted 2degess warmer and how the UK will cope. At the moment Boris is showing all the signs of trying to emulate King Canute.

    The one single thing a UK Government should be concerned with big time is the UK economy. The UK must as an imperative become strong, robust and resilient. Until that happens as @jerry says ‘the king has no cloths’

    1. glen cullen
      August 20, 2021

      Your first sentence says it all – COP26 is a farse

    2. Alan Jutson
      August 20, 2021

      +1

  28. Donna
    August 20, 2021

    I foresee a change in the green-lunacy being proposed by the Johnson Government.

    Blair has announced that only relatively minor changes to personal behaviour are needed to cut UK CO2 emissions from the outrageous 1% a year of global emissions to zero (they hope). According to the Establishment Puppet Master all we have to do is eat less red meat, take fewer flights and walk a bit more.

    I think we can deduce from this that the Puppet Master has worked out far more quickly than the pretendy-conservative in Downing St that horrendously expensive, unaffordable and inefficient green-lunacy policies are a massive vote loser.

    Still, Johnson’s invested so much political capital in his COP26 Boondoggle that the serious backtracking won’t really start until he’s had his moment of glory on the world stage.

  29. ChrisS
    August 20, 2021

    With cars and road transport generally we are in a VHS/Betamax situation. Where the inferior VHS technology triumphed over the technically superior Sony alternative.

    Everyone in the industry knows that battery electric cars have significant drawbacks over cost, range, recharging and battery longevity plus they are severely limited in towing. None of these problems will be solved by 2030. It will probably happen much later, if ever.

    Those that have taken the trouble to look at the alternatives know that Hydrogen fuel cell cars have only one significant disadvantage which is cost and that is one shared by battery electric vehicles. Hydrogen fuel cell cars can be refueled in roughly the same time it takes to fill a diesel tank, have a similar range, limited only by the size of the fuel cell, and the equipment should last indefinitely, or at least as long as a good IC-engined car. If the technology was adopted widely, the oil companies could be relied upon to convert their petrol stations to Hydrogen stations. The alternative will be for them to lose their lucrative retail fuel sales business.

    So why are we having an inferior technology foisted upon us ?

    It can only be because the average politician (and most, let’s face it, are distinctly average ) have failed to do the necessary research and come to an informed decision. For the manufactures, battery electric cars are superficially easier to design and build. They are just not very convenient for the user.

    1. dixie
      August 21, 2021

      The latest EVs from Kia and Hyundai can recharge in minutes (20-80% in 18 minutes giving 200+ miles – my bladder doesn’t last that distance) have a 300 mile range and can tow. That range is more than enough for a week of average journeys in the UK. They can also provide mains power and can charge other EVs if needed. EV batteries typically carry an 8 year warranty but have found to have working lives well beyond that time and no-one can say how long batteries last.

      Hydrogen has several disadvantages and they currently cost more than BEVs. Note that the range is dependent on the size of the pressurized hydrogen fuel tank (another weakness) not on size of fuel cell which would more limit the amount of power the unit could deliver. I am not aware of any hydrogen powered car that can tow.

      As to longevity, hydrogen has an unfortunate property called embrittlement which can cause leakage over a short time and turn metal to powder unless special precautions and materials are used.

      I own an EV and find it far more convenient than the diesel it replaced not least because I can charge it anywhere and am not held hostage by the oil companies.

    2. Donna
      August 21, 2021

      They haven’t failed to do the research ….. most of them are completely incapable of doing it.

      The maxim “don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good” is relevant in any discussion about pollution (which is the only real justification for reviewing the propulsion of vehicles we use to get about it).

      The appalling Blair/Brown administration incentivised people to buy heavily-polluting diesel vehicles. The balance between petrol and diesel was skewed towards the more polluting diesel. Instead of attempting to force us ALL into switching to expensive and impractical electric vehicles in such a short timescale, the Government should change the incentives back towards unleaded petrol vehicles …. and towards discouraging the huge 4 x 4s which so many want to demonstrate their social status, since for most people they are unnecessary.

  30. Iain Gill
    August 20, 2021

    we have no government, whats going on?

  31. Micky Taking
    August 20, 2021

    ‘I never saw how it could be green to make us dump our gas boilers long before they have worn out’.
    These days CH boilers don’t normally ‘wear out’ but expensive repairs are inevitable. The most compelling argument gas service engineers can make is that the new boiler designs are far more efficient – thus being green and saving gas and money.

    1. glen cullen
      August 20, 2021

      Are you bonkers….with that attitude we’d never make the conservative party greener than the green party
      Remember Boris’s goal isn’t just to steal and use all the policies of all the other political parties…..its to be the only party

    2. Mark
      August 20, 2021

      I wonder how quickly the new hydrogen ready boilers will need to be replaced.

      1. Micky Taking
        August 21, 2021

        shhh…

    3. Iain Moore
      August 20, 2021

      Are they more efficient? I was told they weren’t, less polluting may be, but not more efficient.

      1. Micky Taking
        August 21, 2021

        We found just over 11 years ago our new (Bosch) Worcester used 30% less gas per year than we used previously. This time around being recommended to replace rather incur high repair cost, the engineer expressed surprise at a few other recent failures of 10 year old Worcester models. So, we have another new ‘Green’ gas boiler.

        1. Mark
          August 21, 2021

          It’s an interesting equation to consider the energy saving against the increased cost of more expensive boiler designs that have to be replaced every 10 years instead of say every 25 years.

        2. Alan Jutson
          August 21, 2021

          MT

          Our Bosch Worcester Boiler came with a 9 year guarantee when it was installed 7 years ago.
          Only provision, it’s serviced every year at a cost of about £100 a pop.

          The older boiler it replaced lasted 35 years and was still working when it was taken out, was only serviced once after 20 years working.
          Whilst the newer one uses less gas, its maintenance cost is very significantly more, new one has more trouble keeping the house warm on bitterly cold days, even when everything is on maximum/constant..

  32. forthurst
    August 20, 2021

    The most economical way of reducing our exposure to SavethePlanet lunacy is to stop voting Tory. Who knows what they believe? Pass. I cannot read the Asiatic mind. What is clear is that they are on a course of manifest treason with their determination to flood the country with unassimilable aliens like themselves and destroying our economy with insane economic policies.

  33. John Miller
    August 20, 2021

    I have previously expressed my doubts on “global warming” purely on the negative attitude of the zealots in suppressing counter views and trashing the reputation of sceptics, who, in their fervour, they label “deniers”.
    I therefore tried to investigate the science behind global warming.
    I found a paper which purported to explain the physics involved.
    Evidently, molecules based on carbon atoms, like CO2, CH4 etc, posess a magical ability. They permit incoming radiation to reach the surface of the earth, but when it tries to escape to outer space, they suddenly decide not to let it pass.
    Crediting molecules with double the intelligence of the average Labour leader seems improbable.
    Perhaps Mrs Johnson could be persuaded to sack her domestic staff and have a go at cooking with an electric range, or to buy an electric car (from her own money) and zoom around London (but no further).
    Having experienced the opportunities and luxuries she is forcing on us, she may have an epiphany.

  34. glen cullen
    August 20, 2021

    What if COP26 wasn’t scheduled, what if petrol cars weren’t to be banned, and what if we didn’t racially transform our infrastructure and economy to reduce our CO2 output
    Every decade the environmental alarmists predict world disaster ….and nothing happens
    Our current government, could reverse all its climate policies, dissolve political committees and re-employed climate officers – what a saving
    Look out your window, nothing has changed, ‘we don’t believe you’

  35. X-Tory
    August 20, 2021

    I am, as you know, highly critical of ministers when they deserve it, but I am a fair man and so I am also happy to congratulate them if they do something right. I am very pleased that the government is funding R&D into hydrogen and batteries. These will be huge future industries and we must make sure that we are world leaders in these fields. (If anything, the government is not investing enough – with the development of gigafactories being delayed because of government hesitancy in supporting these.) But hydrogen and batteries are energy *storage* devices, not primary energy sources. They need to be produced or replenished using electricity.

    So we need to create much more electricity – but how? Renewable energy (wind, wave, solar) can only go so far, and is intermittent, so needs back-up, which raises costs. The obvious answer (at least in the short term) is nuclear. NOT the cretinous large plants like Hinkley or Sizewell C which are insanely expensive, rely on foreign companies (and governments) and are of dubious operational ability. No, we need a large-scale programme of small modular reactors, built by Rolls Royce. If the government provided the money for these (instead of forcing RR to waste time searching for international investors) we could already be building them, and ensuring our energy independence and security. This ministerial incompetence and hesitation is yet another massive government FAIL. In the longer term, nuclear fusion may well be the answer, but in the meantime let’s go big on the RR SMRs.

    “I am also pressing to make COP 26 about China, Germany and other large producers of CO2 to catch up with the closures and changes the UK has already pushed through in the name of net zero.”. YES, a thousand times yes. This is the KEY issue. I am simply not willing to accept the masochistic self-flagellation of us raising our costs and our taxes to cut our emissions when we are such a minuscule contributor to greenhouse gases. Not only is this cretinous and treacherous, but it is also totally, totally pointless.

    Countries like China and India (you forgot to mention them) are increasing their CO2 output faster than we can cut ours (excluding 2020, due to the Covid-induced slump), so what the hell is the point??? I am not convinced – because NO PROOF has ever been provided – that man is influencing the climate, but I could accept efforts to reduce pollution IF the burden was equally shared. But instead our moronic government is handing a commercial advantage to our economic enemies, thus making *them* richer and *us* poorer. This is completely unacceptable.

  36. graham1946
    August 20, 2021

    9,000 new jobs? Seriously? Is that it? How does that in any way cover the hundreds of thousands of jobs lost? Where are the rest of the ‘green jobs’ we have been promised?
    What is going to drive agricultural machinery? I don’t see an electric combine harvester or even a tractor doing the job. If its to be hydrogen, our food will be priced out of most wage earners reach. We can only hope that the political classes will wake up from the Alice in Wonderland of Westminster and see sense. Without the big polluters on board, and China has said it will retain coal until 2060, we are just peeing in the wind and will get the resultant blow back.

  37. Lifelogic
    August 20, 2021

    JR you are falling for the BBC arts grad error of confusing “power” with “energy” when you say – “Batteries cannot offer sufficient power relative to weight for heavy trucks and other large vehicles”.

    Batteries are fine for “power” but only for a short time before they go flat.

    The problems of batteries are high weight for the quantity of energy they can store (so very poor range). Very high cost perhaps £10,000 for a battery to store just ~ £10 of electricity and high depreciation. Perhaps £1500 PA on battery depreciation (more than the electricity to run the car usually). A plastic fuel tank cost about 1/100 as much and stores ~ 10 times the energy. Then we have slow recharge rates. Who wants to spend hours refilling their tanks at a service station? Plus ordering a new EV saves no CO2 compared to keeping you old diesel anyway.

    Then we have the recycling of EVs and the batteries problem to solve too. Again energy intensive. So what is the point exactly? The only advantage is it moves some pollution out of the city buy hybrids are a better solution for this. Just doing the city miles on the battery.

    1. Lifelogic
      August 20, 2021

      I see the NHS are ordering electric ambulances to be “net zero”. Do they not have rather more important issues like the £5 million waiting list? Hello emergency services here I am afraid we are recharging the ambulances at the moment we will be there in about 6 hours mate so hold on!

    2. glen cullen
      August 20, 2021

      Have ever seen pictures of a motorway pileup, now imagine that same pileup with EV cars, the fire brigade can’t put out the fires, the EVs can’t be towed and they’ll melt the tarmac…motorway useless for months

  38. Denis Cooper
    August 20, 2021

    Off topic,

    A chap writes in the Irish News today that “Tory brinkmanship over the Protocol needs to stop”, and “it’s all about the primacy of narrow English nationalist interests”, and “the immediate focus of this British Government needs to shift towards finding resolutions for genuine concerns of local businesses rather than using these to promote a self-serving Tory ideological agenda.”

    As the author is a Sinn Fein politician it is not surprising that he is enthusiastic about Boris Johnson’s creation of a trade barrier in the Irish Sea, rather the puzzle is why all but two “Conservative and Unionist” MPs happily went along with it.

    On the other hand here is my letter printed in this week’s edition of the Maidenhead Advertiser:

    “Why was there a ‘must’ over EU agreement?”

    “I recently happened upon a ‘position paper’ published by the government of Theresa May four years ago, on August 16, 2017, which carried the seeds of the current potentially disastrous outcome of Brexit.

    In its paragraph 42: ‘The UK must reach an agreement with the EU in order to ensure that the Irish side of the land border, which is subject to relevant EU regulations, is also as seamless and frictionless as possible.’

    For sure, most people would have agreed that it would be preferable to reach an amicable agreement with the EU, but it was a grave strategic error to publicly declare that we ‘must’ reach such an agreement.

    The price for that agreement demanded by the EU and the Irish government was continued EU control of Northern Ireland, but Theresa May cleverly persuaded them to accept control over the whole of the UK.

    It took the genius of her successor, Boris Johnson, to reverse that negotiating triumph, to sacrifice the integrity of our internal market to protect that of the EU single market, and potentially break up the UK.

    Perhaps even he now realises that the revised Irish protocol he gave to the EU must be terminated, and if Theresa May wishes to make good use of her remaining time as our MP she should work to that end.

    As a “Conservative and Unionist” MP she should surely be able to convince the other “Conservative and Unionist” MPs that to preserve the union the Prime Minister they chose must abrogate this treaty.”

    1. Andy
      August 20, 2021

      You’re a Brexitist who appears to not like Brexit very much.

      This is funny.

      1. Denis Cooper
        August 20, 2021

        Only for somebody with a warped sense of humour.

      2. Micky Taking
        August 21, 2021

        You always remind me of the deranged maniacal laugh usually portrayed in films.

  39. Lifelogic
    August 20, 2021

    You say- “The energy policy priority I am urging is to secure the construction of some more electricity capacity before thinking of new ways to use more electrical power directly or indirectly via hydrogen. Producing green hydrogen will take a lot of renewable power.”

    No such thing as “renewable” energy really – long lasting perhaps, nor indeed do we have any zero CO2 energy (even wind, solar and hydro require loads of fossil fuels to construct, maintain amd back up. But indeed clearly no point in doing anything that needs more “clean” electricity until we have that or at least a sensible plan for it. The UK does not really have one.

    “Renewable” energy is mainly radiated fusion energy from the suns reactor. Tidal power slows the earths rotation rate very slightly. Neither is actually renewable.

  40. NickC
    August 20, 2021

    So, our exposure of the inadequacies and the enormous costs of heat pumps for domestic heating has worked. The latest propaganda is now for domestic hydrogen boilers to replace our natural gas heating, not heat pumps.

    The changeover in the propaganda in the MSM has happened rapidly in the last couple of weeks. You can tell this because it was only about two weeks ago that Andy, for example, faithfully recounting the current government CAGW views was telling us that “we” (wokes, climate activists, BBC, etc) “needed” us (thickos, oldies, deniers, etc) to replace our worn out natural gas boilers with heat pumps. Caught on the hop, the GAGW activists will segue seamlessly from heat pumps to hydrogen boilers with no shame and no rationality and no technical understanding.

    1. Andy
      August 20, 2021

      I didn’t vote for this incompetent government. Most of you did. In the manifesto there was a commitment to be net zero by 2050. Most of you voted for this.

      It isn’t my fault you didn’t understand what you were voting for. Wouldn’t be the first time though, would it?

      1. DOM
        August 20, 2021

        Andy

        ‘It isn’t my fault you didn’t understand what you were voting for. Wouldn’t be the first time though, would it?’

        I cannot disagree with this fact, for it is a fact that those who Labour and Conservative are dangerously ill-informed, information starved muppets

        A political leader promising to spend more before a GE is shameless grooming

      2. glen cullen
        August 20, 2021

        They’ve changed the goal-posts of those manifesto commitment, therefore the whole manifesto is meaningless

      3. NickC
        August 21, 2021

        You’ve been told many times before, Andy, that people vote on balance for a party and are unlikely to agree with every part of the manifesto package. But you live by slogans rather than rational consideration.

      4. Mark
        August 21, 2021

        Did you vote for the even more incompetent opposition?

  41. agricola
    August 20, 2021

    Do I detect that the sound logic of Hydrogen is beginning to take root among our legislators. It is where many in manufacturing vehicles and heating systems are placing their bets. Ultimately science , engineering and the market will decide.

    1. Mark
      August 21, 2021

      The only logic for hydrogen is that it’s a cheaper way to store energy than batteries. But that ignores the fact that it is (depending on how you make it) 5-10 times as costly as natural gas. Increasing energy costs by a factor of 5 doesn’t sound like a sensible plan to me.

  42. MikeP
    August 20, 2021

    Unsurprisingly that doyen of climate “scientists” has preempted the Government’s likely opening address at COP26 by accusing us of “lying” about our claim to be a “climate leader”, insofar as our efforts go on decarbonising our energy consumption. Yes lying, not misrepresenting (as we’ve excluded all the CO2 effects of our aviation sector and our imports) or, more truthfully, using the IPCC’s chosen method for calculating CO2 reduction.
    So is she going to be given a platform to spout this criticism, much to delegates’ delight or are we at least going to set the record straight for her?!

  43. Mitchel
    August 20, 2021

    Interesting developments in the grain markets due to climate change and drought.Ukraine (in recent years the world’s second largest wheat exporter after Russia)has had a poor harvest,Kazakhstan is also expecting a 24% fall in it’s grain harvest.Russia,on the other hand,sitting on more northerly latitudes,has had it’s second best wheat crop on record and there are some very fancy forecasts for potential future increases(as in big multiples of it’s current output) in the coming decades,particularly in the Russian Far East -on the fertile land adjacent to China.

    The smart people are being very nice to Mr Putin!

    1. DOM
      August 20, 2021

      Putin, the most powerful politician in Europe. Merkel crawling on her Marxist hands and knees begging Vlad the bad lad for more environmentally destructive gas supplies. Why has Merkel not been demonised for her nation’s increasing use of fossil fuels to drive the German economy? NS2 comes on stream pretty soon so Germany will become ever more gas dependent

      It’s the double standards of the scum that now rule the western political landscape that grates with most.

      1. Mitchel
        August 21, 2021

        The televised joint Q&A after Mrs Merkel’s visit to Moscow yesterday is worth catching.

    2. Mark
      August 20, 2021

      FAO’s forecast for global cereal production in 2021 has been lowered marginally since the previous report in June to 2 817 million tonnes, but still 1.7 percent (47.8 million tonnes) higher than in 2020 and would mark a new record high.

      Doesn’t sound like a major problem. Maybe that CO2 is helpful?

      1. Mitchel
        August 21, 2021

        The problem is not overall supply it is a geo-strategic question of who are the losers and who are the winners in that mix.

  44. mongoose
    August 20, 2021

    Hydrogen as a fuel?

    We haven’t got any hydrogen. We will have to make it. Therefore we will require another source of concentrated energy that we can use to make our hydrogen. What is that source going to be?

  45. glen cullen
    August 20, 2021

    The biggest scam is the way this government has introduced these climate change measures….you should be honest with the electorate, the last general election & manifesto had nothing to do with going green but had everything to do with getting brexit across the line
    Why is this government happy to pursue their green policies against the wishes of the people?
    We have been deceived – we demand a referendum or general election

  46. acorn
    August 20, 2021

    By linking Britain to neighbouring countries, interconnectors can import cheaper clean energy when it is needed, while exporting excess power – so that both Britain and its neighbours have access to a broader and more flexible supply of electricity. Giving energy systems access to renewable energy via interconnectors helps countries phase out dirtier forms of generation.

    The amount of offshore wind needed by 2050 to meet the UK’s net zero target is 75 GW; 10 times the amount of offshore wind it has today. By 2030, we [ National Grid] estimate our interconnectors will help Britain to prevent 100 million tonnes of carbon emissions. Equivalent to planting approximately 4.5 billion trees or taking up to 64 millions cars off the road. The calculation assumes that a tree consumes 22kg of CO2 per year and an average diesel or petrol car emits 1560kg of CO2 in a year.

    BTW. It takes circa 42 kWh of electric to make 1 kg of H2 in a modern electrolyser. You would get twice the miles per kg of H2 in a fuel cell electric motor vehicle than in a Hydrogen fuel internal combustion engine vehicle.

    1. Micky Taking
      August 21, 2021

      Would you give us some numbers on UK import of electricity versus exporting it?

    2. Mark
      August 21, 2021

      In order to be supplied via interconnectors we have to contrive to pay more for our electricity than buyers on the continent pay. That happens simply because we have inadequate capacity of our own to meet demand. So we pay for the interconnector and its line losses, and the power station at the other end of the line at a premium to local price, instead of just having our own capacity.

      The low demand periods and windy days we saw last year give us a taste of what happens when we have a surplus. Prices go negative, and we pay other countries to take the surplus. These exports are subsidised by UK consumers. We are in danger of overinvesting in wind, which will make these surpluses more frequent. We might redesign our market to achieve more curtailment rather than exports at negative prices. But as curtailment rises, prices will rise on days without surpluses.

      A big worry is that reliable, dispatchable capacity is closing on the continent – particularly nuclear and coal, and at least until Nordstream 2 starts up, gas supply remains tight. The result is that prices have been rising. We are in danger of reaching the point when windless periods result in continent wide shortages and bidding wars to avoid blackouts.

  47. Stred
    August 20, 2021

    As someone with two low mileage diesel cars with zero road tax and engines which are clean enough for the ULEZones, can anyone tell me why diesel, which currently contains vegetable oil, cannot become a zero carbon dioxide fuel by making more biofuel. A friend of mine finds that rapeseed oil mixed 50/50 gives peak performance. As the cost is about the same per litre, and a Euro 6 engine may not run well on crisp’n dry I don’t do this, but it would be possible to put additives in to make biodiesel. I suppose it’s the tax that the government would miss but the cost of hydrogen and batteries would offset this.

    1. Alan Jutson
      August 20, 2021

      Stred

      The easy fix for petrol engines is Auto Gas, approx half the petrol price, burns cleaner in the engine so less servicing, although slightly less miles per gallon or equivalent, but not readily available everywhere. We did have a garage with a pump in Wokingham, but now it’s gone gone.

      Problem is it used to cost about £2,000 for the conversion at the time, and when I did the sums 20 years ago it meant the costs broke even after 120,000 miles so I did not do it at the time, vehicle has now done 125,000 miles, but I now do far less miles in it than I did many years ago, so not a problem.

    2. Micky Taking
      August 20, 2021

      The problem might be the smell of fried chips or rotting cabbage?

      1. Stred
        August 22, 2021

        The slight smell of fried chips does happen and is another advantage.

  48. The PrangWizard of England
    August 20, 2021

    Very interesting. Clearly Sir John is happy with the net-zero principle being pushed by his party, he merely wants it slowed down a bit and believes and hopes others will do what we have done if we ask them nicely. It is his form of virtue signalling, perhaps fence-sitting and party propaganda. We can all see that he is sending a message to the Tory party and his boss that he is and will be loyal no matter what level of insanity and destructive activity for the country the leadership comes up with.

    1. Fedupsoutherner
      August 20, 2021

      PrangW. Just about sums up what our politicians are all about today. As Peter Lilly said on GB news this morning, what is the point if other countries are carrying on as normal? What we do will make a blind bit of difference to the worlds climate so it’s pointless virtue signalling but with a devastating effect on jobs and our economy. How bloody dense is that?

      1. Andy
        August 20, 2021

        Other countries are not carrying on as usual. The EU has committed to taking action. So has the US. So has Canada. So has China.

        Your problem is twofold.
        1) You are listening to Peter Lilley.
        2) You are watching GB News.

        1. Peter2
          August 20, 2021

          Ask yourself if any neighbouring countries have done anything, young Andy.

        2. Micky Taking
          August 21, 2021

          The ‘action’ you claim merely amounts to flying thousands of representatives who fancy a jolly holiday seeing something of the world. Please tell us what EXACTLY this action is?

    2. DOM
      August 20, 2021

      I don’t know the fella personally but one would like to think that Mr Redwood is at heart and indeed in soul a decent human being but it cannot be denied that party loyalty is destroying our most precious freedoms simply because moral human beings in Parliament are captured and therefore cannot be themselves and scream at the top of their voices ‘that this is all wrong, so wrong’

      I have no doubt now that western political leaders have the capacity for evil. The SNP for example have become a dangerous presence in Scotland. I also believe that all main parties in England are determined to the point of death to protect the status quo from any and all threats.

      I expect even more oppressive legislation and Marxist infused public policy to silence and cancel any and all opposition

      1. Jim Whitehead
        August 21, 2021

        DOM, +1, and I don’t see time and events providing any refutation to what you have written.

  49. ferd
    August 20, 2021

    Can you please tell me, Sir John. how many Conservative MPS know anything about CO2 ? Do they know that it is only 0.04% of the atmosphere ? Do they know that if that 0.04% fell to 0.15% then we and all living creatures and plants would die ? Do they know that the heating effect off CO2 is logarithmic in that for every increase in temperature caused by it the same increase requires double the amount of CO2? Do they know that the maximum heating effect of CO2 occurred thousands of years ago and that now its heating effect is virtually nothing?
    Finally I ask these questions because when a Conservative ex minister was asked what percentage CO2 is of the atmosphere said he thought it was about 60%. If that is indicative of Conservative knowledge on the subject we are doomed to penury.

    1. glen cullen
      August 20, 2021

      +1

  50. Mike Wilson
    August 20, 2021

    The general consensus on here is that the increased CO2 content in the atmosphere is harmless, not made by man, not as bad as in the past etc. And that digging oil out of the ground, refining it, transporting it, storing it in tanks and burning it in our cars is completely benign and has no detrimental effects on anyone or anything.

    If that is the case, why do you think all politicians – Green, Blue, Red and Yellow – have decided the opposite is true and that burning oil must be stopped? Please, no mad responses about ‘them’ not wanting ‘us’ to have the freedom to travel that we have enjoyed since the 1950s. Let’s face it, if that is what ‘they’ want, they are going to be out of power in very short order.

    1. Alan Jutson
      August 20, 2021

      The point is Mike the politicians are not following sensible research and development, they are laying down laws, regulations, and taxes which will preclude a sensible and gradual move towards a reliable solution to our so called problems.
      ICE cars now are nowhere near as polluting as they used to be 20 years ago, let alone 30 -50 years ago.
      Household appliances are also way more efficient than they were 10 years ago, as are modern boilers.
      People will eventually graduate towards the less polluting, better products if they are cost effective to purchase (no taxpayer subsidy needed) and maintain when the old items time expire.

      What is the point of scrapping a perfectly good 10 year old car/boiler which could run for another 10 years if maintained properly, just to satisfy a government policy that wants to tax it out of existence to purchase a new model, which has a huge initial emission footprint. Its daft !

    2. ferd
      August 20, 2021

      I don’t quite follow your argument. Burning diesel fuel produces pollutants and they are harmful but the motor industry can clean the exhausts of cars within a reasonable budget. Removing diesel engines is the greatest benefit. Electric cars are heavy and tyre particulates are more numerous than with petrol cars. Special tyres have been developed for electric cars to try to reduce the wear rate but the corollary is that they have less grip.

      1. dixie
        August 21, 2021

        Cleaning the exhaust of diesels and petrol cars involves the use of Platinum, Paladium and Cobalt. Considering the constant complaints of “child slave labour etc” necessary to production of Cobalt for EV batteries then perhaps the true cost is not as palatable as “reasonabl;e budget” might suggest.
        Secondly, the Nissan Leaf EV weighs not much more than the very popular Nissan Qashqai yet the latter does not require special tyres.
        Driving an EV involves significantly less braking using brakepads, so less particulates.

        1. ferd
          August 21, 2021

          You are right about brake pads but it is tyres that produce the more. Difficult to compare an SUV with a small saloon.

          1. dixie
            August 21, 2021

            The Leaf is not a small saloon, it’s taller than a Golf and about the same internal size as a Qashqai which is a “cross-over” and not really an SUV.

          2. ferd
            August 22, 2021

            The Leaf is little larger an a Ford Fiesta about 2 inches longer.

      2. harry again
        August 24, 2021

        The motor industry has failed to clean up exhaust pollutants because all the solutions are costly and impractical.

    3. Andy
      August 20, 2021

      Because they all listen to experts and contributors here don’t?

      1. NickC
        August 21, 2021

        Well, we don’t listen to CAGW activists, Andy. Climate scientists are rowing back on CAGW leaving it to “experts” like yourself, Greta, and Prince Charles.

    4. NickC
      August 21, 2021

      Mike, I don’t who you include in your “consensus on here”, but your list doesn’t cover my position. The recent (c150 years) global warming and increase in CO2 is not “harmless”, it has been beneficial.

      Until it is absorbed in the natural CO2 sinks and sources, some of the extra CO2 is derived from humanity’s burning of natural fuels (as proved by C isotope mix) – so what? Either there are natural balancing mechanisms for ‘free’ (atmospheric) CO2, or there are not. Since there must be (otherwise atmospheric CO2 might be zero or 100% of the atmosphere, and massively unstable), why do you suppose these mechanisms work for ‘natural’ CO2 but not for the CO2 released by humanity?

      As for the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, you can confirm for yourself that they were around 10 times (c4000 ppm) compared to today (c410 ppm) during the Cambrian epoch. Moreover you can also confirm that we are near the end of the current interglacial (compared to geological records) so the next major climate change is likely to be a new ice-age. A catastrophic global meltdown (which humanity is unable mitigate) is only being predicted by climate activists and politicians, not by climate scientists.

  51. Derek
    August 20, 2021

    These latest COP get-together is another waste of energy, money and time. How many thousands are flying into Glasgow to talk about “tackling climate-change” and as though it is man-made?
    It it were the case how did global climates constantly alter before man appeared on the planet?
    Why was the Sahara desert once covered with lush forests and lakes? Why was Greenland once “Green” and farmed by the Vikings? There are many more examples that demonstrate that Earth’s climates constantly change and have been doing so for millions of years. We should be told why the powerful effects of the sun are ignored in this debate?
    In any case, new research has established the UK is now responsible for less than 1 per cent of GLOBAL CO2 totals, whereas China, the world’s biggest offender emits 29% percent.
    Collectively China, USA and India account for over 50% of Global totals so I would suggest to our Prime Minister that those Nations look in their own closets and get their own houses in order BEFORE this country commits economic hari-kari attempting to “beat” the RoTW to the pipe dream -“zero” goal.

    Mankind on Earth has as much chance of altering our climates as man has in changing the weather or safely landing a rocket onto our life-giving Sun.

  52. Micky Taking
    August 20, 2021

    OFF TOPIC.
    from: British Medical Journal.
    The UK’s drug regulator has approved the first monoclonal antibody treatment—Ronapreve, a combination of casirivimab and imdevimab—for the treatment and prevention of acute covid-19 in adults. The treatment binds to two different sites on the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, neutralising the virus’s ability to infect cells.
    It was given the green light after the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) reviewed the available evidence. However, the government and NHS have yet to outline how the treatment will be used in practice. Japan was the first country to license the treatment in July after a phase III trial reported that casirivimab and imdevimab reduced hospital admission or death by 70% in high risk non-admitted patients. The treatment is administered either by injection or infusion and was found to reduce symptom duration by four days. Casirivimab and imdevimab as a combination was also tested as part of the UK’s Recovery trial, which concluded that it reduced the risk of death when given to patients admitted to hospital with severe covid-19 who had not mounted a natural antibody response to the virus.
    Ronapreve has been licensed in the US, India, Switzerland, and Canada, as well as by the European Union.

  53. Kathy Penney
    August 20, 2021

    For how long is this farce going to continue? I know many people who voted Conservative (and by default, for our Prime Minister) because he promised to ‘get Brexit done’. I don’t know any Conservative voter who voted for all this ‘climate change’, ‘global warming’ and ‘carbon net zero’ nonsense. If we had wanted all that, Caroline Lucas would be Prime Minister now, and we all know how badly her party does at elections.

    Please, Boris, make it stop.

    1. DOM
      August 20, 2021

      It’s an international movement, Johnson’s merely the idiotic, bumbling conduit.

      The voter continues to vote ‘stain on humanity’ Labour and ‘the captured’ Tories so they deserve the full gamut of what is coming their way. I have no sympathy.

    2. Mike Wilson
      August 21, 2021

      The Green Party does very well at elections – given that our absurd and undemocratic first-past-the-post voting system means that, unless you live in Brighton, a vote for the Green Party is a wasted vote.

      However, I persist. I have voted Green in every election since 2010 – in the hope that enough Green votes will keep ‘the environment’ on the political agenda. Seems to be working.

      You can construe nothing about support for political parties based on our voting system. If we had PR the Tory and Labour parties would get far less votes and the Lib Dems and Greens would get far more. Which is why Labour and the Tories will never embrace a fair voting system.

      1. Derek
        August 22, 2021

        Greens? Great if you’d rather ride on horse-back to pick up your groceries or sail across the Atlantic to visit your relatives in Canada. Son in Australia for 2 weeks with your grandchildren? Forget it.

  54. XY
    August 20, 2021

    Interested to hear of the proposall to test 20% hydrogen in the gas we use now.

    It made me wonder if the new ARPA-style body could be usefully researching this kind of thing?

    And, while they’re about it, they could do some research into climate change (root causes, if there really is any etc).

  55. DavidJ
    August 20, 2021

    COP26- all based on pseudo science and manipulated data. It needs to be binned.

  56. Paul Cuthbertson
    August 20, 2021

    Does anyone REALLY believe all this climate BS. Wake up people f++

  57. Julian Flood
    August 21, 2021

    Hydrogen: the home heating equivalent to smart motorways.

    The stuff is not a source of energy, any more than a battery, it is essentially a store of energy produced by other means. Costs will double. Uk industry and Red Wall take note.

    JF

  58. glen cullen
    August 21, 2021

    News channels reporting many EV recalls due to fires

    Maybe this technology isn’t quite ready yet…or Boris oven ready

  59. harry again
    August 24, 2021

    Hydrogen is a dangerous, inefficient and expensive fuel.
    It has one saving grace, “spare” green energy could be used to makes it from electricity (by electrolysis) and then storing it for times of dearth. This is very inefficient BTW.
    There is absolutely nothing else going for it as a fuel,

    The normal method of manufacture is from natural gas, also very inefficient.
    The by product is…….. carbon dioxide.

Comments are closed.