The latest UN report on CO2 reveals what some of us have been saying for several years. CO2 output continues to rise year by year. The large emitters led by China and India are producing a lot more, and the USA remains at a high level. Total world CO2 output is now 54% higher than in the base year of 1990, when it is meant to be falling from that level. It demonstrates that many countries have not offered a realistic target to reduce their emissions to assist the world plan, and demonstrates that some countries do not even deliver what they have promised. Meanwhile the UK producing under 1% of the world total is one of the few that has made major reductions. In 2020 CO2 output was just half the 1990 level though it presumably went up a bit in 2021 as we came out of lockdown. It was down 38% on 1990 levels in 2019. As the press releases based on the Report state, on this basis the world will not come anywhere near hitting the targets they say we need to hit to avoid a temperature rise of more than 2 degrees.
The net zero movement is only going to succeed if all major countries participate fully and take actions that do actually reduce their CO2 output. Some of the UK’s tough actions to cut its CO2 have probably served to raise total world CO2, as we have closed down industry at home only to import from places like China where they may produce more CO2 per unit of manufactured output. As I have often pointed out, keeping our own gas unused and importing LNG is a sure way to more than double the amount of CO2 generated in the overall process of extracting, transporting and using gas as a fuel.
In a world of energy shortages and high prices and food shortages the UK needs to take self sufficiency and security of supply more seriously. Making and growing more at home can also cut world CO2 at the same time, though UK CO2 will rise on the way of accounting adopted for this. Today the world economy is running on a model which maximises exports from high emitting economies and industrial processes, with imports into countries that could make and grow with less CO2 if the net zero rules were properly enforced in the exporting countries. It looks as if COP 27 needs to have more realistic tougher talks with the big emitters if it is serious about cutting overall world CO2 anytime soon.
April 6, 2022
China and India have zero intention of undermining their own economies to pander and appease a western Neo-Marxist political ideology that elevates utopian misery (Net Zero) above utility and practicality.
All the odious and costly changes now being imposed upon us from these Socialist low lifes derive from Marxist ideology. Their intent is nothing less than total State control of all areas of human life.
It seems the Tory party has now become a Neo-Marxist outrider and that should concern us all
April 6, 2022
+ wonderful!
100%
April 6, 2022
Meanwhile Johnson on TV blaming his abject failure of running the country on everyone else, global inflation, global energy problems etc etc. it is HIS chaotic misfit govt causing us to be poor, his tax rises, his wasteful spending by the tens of billions, his money printing, his green crackers energy policy, his fuel prices, his draconian lock down policy causing financial nightmare that he ignored but was for everyone else, his failed reform of public services just shovel billions of taxes into a black hole without anything in return! His N.Ireland protocol breaking our union and United Kingdom! Giving away N.Ireland to the EU!
I blame JR and chums for keeping him in office.
April 6, 2022
DOM, +1, The futility of applying patient forensic reasoning to such discussions is totally obvious to the Climate Change fanatics (IPCC, BBC, etc.), they know that it’s a one-way non-negotiable ticket to their objective. Might as well try to coax a Crocodile from lunching on Bambi by offering it a stick of celery.
April 6, 2022
The net zero philosophy must be profitable to certain folk but certainly not to the taxpayer.
Vote Reform.
April 7, 2022
Indeed it is clearly driven by the money, vested interests (often fully & openly declared by MPs and Lords) and/or corruption. Grant farming.
April 6, 2022
And Russia(and other resource majors) will continue to supply them from their vast resources – outside the $/SWIFT system.So,there’s nothing you can do about it.
April 6, 2022
Spot On
April 6, 2022
This is the Great Reset.
There is no other explanation for such wilful deafness on the issue.
They don’t want us to go green. They don’t want us to have ANYTHING.
April 6, 2022
No Longer Anonymous : They don’t want us to have anything”
You may or may not be correct, but what is perfectly clear is that if we discontinue with fossil fuels and we have not yet solved nuclear fusion and hence must rely on all the “green” energy solutions which are very expensive and problematic (intermittency etc) it will consequently mean we have a much lower and restricted quality of life.
Nuclear fission comes closest to providing affordable, reliable, weather independent low carbon energy but the electrification of everything using sub-optimal electric devices and batteries will not only reduce living standards themselves but also be a huge security risk.
For many reasons hydrogen is not the answer and a better solution may be the green production of synthetic liquid hydrocarbons which have a much higher energy density, can be far more easily and safely stored, transported, and used than hydrogen.
April 7, 2022
OR, Re last paragraph, certainly true but even synthetic hydroCARBONS produce CO2 when burned to produce electricity.
How is Carbon Capture and Storage going on these days?
Presently on a global scale, about 40 m tonnes of CO2 are captured and sequestered (figures from 2020) from industry, gas processing and power plants, with not even 5% (about 2 m tonnes) coming from the power/utility sector. At least 75 m tonnes from this particular sector should be CCSed but are not.
Where are the UK leaders in CCS? In 2019-2020, nine companies secured ÂŁ26 m from government funding for CCS projects as part of the Clean Growth Strategy. ÂŁ20 m have also been made available to other companies as part of the Carbon Capture, Usage and Demonstration efforts. But to what avail?
The UK looks very much like the USA as described by Pianta et al., 2021, âCarbon capture and storage in the USA: Perceptions, preferences and lessons for policyâ, Energy Policy, 151, 112149: The conclusion in a nutshell: Implementing CCS increases the cost of energy and the majority of the public does not support increased prices (if CCS supported by private companies) or increased taxes (if supported by the state).
April 6, 2022
All of this CO2 is being driven by the UN but they seem to let the heavy polluters carry on accepting their short and long term strategies as gospel. Once again for all intents and purposes the UK is leading the world and we it would appear are on a road to self destruction.
One of the reasons for the higher CO2 levels must surely be that the world population is still growing at a pace and that in itself if everything stood still would increase the volume of CO2 gas.
That said it still comes down to the fact that the whole process is still driven by computer predictions.
Perhaps like as with covid the world should learn to live with it as a lot of people are sceptical about who and what is driving the programme and what the ultimate final solution or agenda is.
The hell and damnation sermons from the pulpit from the latest religious sect doesn’t seem to be having the desired affect.
April 6, 2022
When science has been hijacked for personal and political gain it is very difficult to tell fact from fiction. And since âGlobal WarmingââŠ.hastily amended to âClimate Changeâ( when the snows came) has been turned into a religion it is impossible to get unbiased information.
According to some it should all be over by now. Six feet under water. No ozone layer âŠburned to a frazzle by the sun.
Yet strangely since the gloomy hippy predictions of the 1960sâŠ.THEY KEEP ON cutting down rainforests, increasing population, manufacturing arms etc etc.
Canât be that scared can they?
April 6, 2022
Another problem could well be that the people charged with dictating all these programmes and processes are not qualified in the field they are controlling. They are only the voice piece for the researchers. Bit like the re runs of Yes Minister.
How many of our Ministers for
Environment and Climate Change have been qualified in the subject they make far reaching decisions on?
As in nearly all sectors of life there is nothing more dangerous than an enthusiastic, emotional amateur taking control. Prone to heart ruling head syndrome.
April 6, 2022
Once upon a time there was a grammar school system in this country. Trouble is, they were producing people who achieved through merit, which was a challenge to the establishment, who saw themselves threatened by jumped up grammar school people, taking the jobs they thought belonged to them and their posh school friends.
So they introduced the comprehensive system, ensuring all children would be reduced to the same low level.
So not only are there no suitably qualified people in government (who don’t do those sort of degrees), but there are extremely few in the country as a whole.
April 7, 2022
+1 best system to allow everyone the opportunity to flourish. School system designed to prevent masses from establishment top jobs.
April 6, 2022
I see the papers were reporting Johnson now saying we will have Hydrogen boilers heating our homes, heat pumps were last month’s fad, next month it will be farts from rainbow coloured Unicorns. As for wondering how the gas network will cope with the Hydrogen molecule 1/20th the size of a Propane molecule, just a mere detail , I am sure all the seals and joints will be fine .
April 7, 2022
IM, For domestic purposes, propane comes in a liquefied form. I have a real question: Is your comment about the molecule size of propane vs hydrogen still valid for the liquefied versions of these gases?
Looking at hydrogen.energy.gov âLiquid hydrogen – A carbon free complementary to LNGâ, N. Gupta did not give any answer to my question. But LH2 is being transported over long distances by ships.
Moreover NASA has launched multiple rockets fuelled by liquid hydrogen, so the problem you discuss might not be insuperable.
April 6, 2022
I am still not convinced that CO2 is the problem. The world has been heating and cooling since time immemorial, even before humans existed. Even if CO2 were the problem the world of humans will not cooperate anyway, as we have seen, and some countries will even use it as an opportunity to increase their power and control over others.
Best use the time and money to prepare for change, be it the climate, as in weather, or climate, as in hostilities.
April 6, 2022
Almost 12 hours since I posted, despite other posts being approved at various times. Have I offended you or have I been ‘cancelled’?
April 6, 2022
Ever seen the original photos of the Cheddar cave excavations?
Taken in the late 1890s they show an absolute JUMBLE of bones and artefacts.
All having been manhandled and mixed up etc.
Interestingly, the caves were extremely commercial and Gough had an ongoing rivalry with another cave owner to attract paying visitors. So no doubt bones etc were shuffled around between caves and different locations anyway.
ScienceâŠHUMBUG.
Just follow the money.
And as for LeakeyâŠ..
April 6, 2022
What will happen us that the UK will continue to make itself poorer while other countries ignore it. It is not difficult to understand that our actions are making things worse. Importing so much is ridiculous when all its doing is encouraging slave labour and enabling countries that don’t promote cleaner means of producing energy to carry on. Nobody has proved that CO2 is a problem yet anyway. No doubt Boris and Carrie will want to destroy the UK further with more madness while adding to the problem in other ways. Bonkers.
April 6, 2022
Yep and JR is saying in his erudite piece what we have been saying for years in our few sentences. The fact that the big emitters don’t do anything but increase their CO2 output shows me that there is no climate emergency, but a made up theory that they cannot now retract as so much political capital and money has been expended. Can it really be assumed that if the planet is going to be killed in a few years the big emitters will be exempted, rather like the local councils of old declaring themselves nuclear free zones and currently, like our council, declaring itself anti CO2 and wasting more council tax (whilst they whine that their funding is falling) on public relations of it? Councillors seem to think they are credible politicians when frankly, even those at Westminster are in the main rank amateurs, head in the clouds as we go to hell in a handcart.
April 6, 2022
+1
April 6, 2022
If you read the scare mongering from the IPCC, right from its inception, you will see that CO2 is not the problem that the panel states. I have tried to follow the so called science for CO2 being a green house gas, for some 30+ years now and have come to the conclusion that the so called science (by activists in the main) is hogwash. I’m sorry that John Redwood is taken in by it.
April 6, 2022
Well you must not have gone very deeply in your reading. Did you read the 1964 book âAtmospheric Radiation: Theoretical Basisâ by Richard M. Goody (a British born Cambridge alumnus and PhD, who might be 100 years old now).
It is of graduate level in its equations but the overall âstoryâ it tells, from atomic and molecular structure, spectroscopy (line intensity, position in the spectrum, line width), then radiative transfer equation and how to solve it for an absorbing, emitting and scattering medium, the major absorption bands of water vapour, carbon dioxide and ozone (1964 was too early for the author to be concerned by methane, nitrous oxide or CFCs et al.) should give you a reasonable background. And possibly prevent you from writing another such hogwash.
(Upon checking I have found there is a 2nd edition in 1996 by Goody and Yung but quite pricey. The original one can sometimes be found for a few pounds).
April 7, 2022
The most recent work in that line is the impressive paper by Wijngaarden and Happer which takes advantage of the enormous library of data on spectra, HITRAN, and modern computing power to demonstrate that the absorptions and emissions of the atmosphere typical at various latitudes around the world can be accurately modelled in that fashion, producing theoretical spectra that are a remarkably good match to those measured by satellites. Having shown that the theory matches experiment, they then show that adding various greenhouse gases will not produce the warming that most of the climate models show, but instead a rather lesser amount, because absorption bands are already largely saturated.
April 7, 2022
I think I had already answered that point some weeks ago. Wijngaarden and Happer produced such (static) comparisons over three profiles, and the way the results were presented (separate curves for simulations and observations in two sets of plots) did not allow a proper comparison. Moreover looking at these sets of curves, in all areas of interest, CO2 around 15 microns, O3 around 9.6 microns and part of the H2O rotation band at 20 microns, the agreement was far from perfect.
So to my eyes there was nothing to brag about, another proof being that the original paper had first been submitted to a peer-reviewed journal in 2006, likely to have been criticised and possibly rejected as not bringing any new âscienceâ (the calculations were âold hatâ) and the authors, fourteen years later (2020) and given the current denialist atmosphere, put it in the free-for-all arxiv.org site (where no scientific review is being made), but I guess expecting any dumbo (particularly from the Clintel and Wattsupwiththat stables) to comment on these âbeautifulâ findings.
NB: I had done similar but more accurate comparisons for my degree in ⊠1984 using the HITRAN 1983 database (L.S. Rothman et al., 1983, Appl.Opt. 22, 2247-2256).
April 7, 2022
1964, 1996 – so nothing has changed, no more research etc. in 58 or 26 years? Could it be wrong? Have you read anything up to date on the opposing side or are you so entrenched that only one opinon/old theories exist? They were saying in the 70’s and 80’s that by now we would be fried due to a hole in the ozone layer. Why are we still here? Scientists used to insist the earth was flat.
April 8, 2022
g46, It is incredible you can write such a thing. Thatâs the problem getting your info from tabloids and assimilated. If you knew anything about the ozone hole (and all the research on the topic in the 70s and â80s (eg, Rowland & Molina, 1975, Rev.Geophys.Space Phys., 13, 1-35; Farman et al., 1985, Nature 315, 207-210 and plenty of other papers) you would have known it had originally happened over Antarctica and only affected the tip of South America, the decrease in ozone over the Arctic being much smaller, you would also have noted that there had been a major effort (following the 1987 Montreal Protocol) by the CFC/HCFC producing companies (the most prominent of all being DuPont (de Nemours)) to move from ChloroFluoroCarbons (CFCs) and HydroChloroFluoroCarbons (HCFCs) to HydroFluoroCarbons (HFCs). CFCs and HCFCs were photochemically reacting with UV radiation in the stratosphere releasing chlorine molecules then interacting and destroying ozone.
These HFCs developed from the end of the â80s onwards were shown not to affect ozone and the Antarctic ozone hole started to fill up. Unfortunately HFCs were shown in the 2010s by various measurements in both laboratories and with in situ spectrometers flown in high-altitude aircrafts to have lines in the infrared electromagnetic spectrum and as such adding to the effect of other greenhouse gases (Velders et al., 2012, Science, doi:10.1126/science.1216414 âPreserving Montreal Protocol climate benefits by limiting HFCsâ).
I am afraid the only way to follow this type of âstoriesâ is to make oneself aware of scientific developments, and not repeat without any basic understanding of the intervening physical processes the stories brought by people with a particular agenda not related to science.
April 6, 2022
Well said FUS, I agree with all you say. Nothing is proven, just melon theories. Mountaineering is my pass time and one has just to look round while having lunch on a mountain top to realise just how insignificant the human race is in nature.
Things greater than us are controling our world- the rich trying to influence it all are deluded.
Go with nature and you will not go far wrong!
April 6, 2022
Sir John,
Your highlighting of the absurdity of increasing total world CO2 pollution to meet flawed national quotas is getting through. For example, shipping wood pellets around the world to burn at Drax and destroying a temperate rain forest, while banning the use of the gas beneath our feet is indefensible.
Unlike many of the contributors to this site, I believe that AGW must be curtailed, but the use of our domestic gas in particular is clearly the least polluting path to nett zero.
The international agreements requiring increased CO2 pollution by outsourcing industry are a political creation and politicians urgently need to decolonise them.
April 6, 2022
Perhaps all these other countries are the sensible ones. They realise you cannot run a modern society with a healthy economy using renewables. Every European country has proved as much with the need to use gas, oil and coal. It’s just not feasible yet. Moving away from nuclear which is clean was a big mistake. Why strive for something which cannot be achieved yet?
April 6, 2022
All these other countries are not infected by Marxist / Maoist Chicken Little’s
April 6, 2022
I’ve been monitoring the commentary in Japan over energy and sanctions re Russia.As for sanctions,there’s nothing they can do that does not rebound on them ten fold-at least.They’ve sanctioned 12 members of the Duma-but,hilariously,they are all members of the opposition Communist Party.They’ve banned exports of luxury goods which amount to virtually nothing.They can’t ban Russian transport because Russia doesn’t need to overfly Japan (but avoiding Russian airspace adds 4 to 5 hours-and prohibitive extra cost-to Japanese flights to Europe) and banning Russian ships from their ports will halt seafood imports(have you seen the price of sea urchins lately?!).
The Russians have,as usual,responded with a barrage of mocking humour. Stalin’s great grandson,Selim Bensaad,has said he will sell his Japanese car in protest-and as a bonus he’ll give the buyer a signed copy of his book,”Secrets of Stalin’s Family-and buy a Chinese car instead.
On energy,they have come clean this week;senior government adviser Kihara announced “There’s no way we’re giving up (major gas project)Sakhalin on our own or pulling out on our own.Our country’s energy self-sufficiency rate is in single digits and we are the most vulnerable country in the G7,so for us energy is a matter of life or death.”
April 7, 2022
The Japanese tale emphasizes the need to bolster fossil fuel production around the world, wherever it can be achieved. That will include coal, whose price lurched up very sharply today on the announcement of forthcoming sanctions.
April 6, 2022
Trying to achieve the impossible ‘Net zero’ objective can be used as the irrefutable basis for further societal control and taxation. Remember the science is settled although women can have penises, right?
April 6, 2022
âMan made climate changeâ
Not really accurate.
How about âElite made mess upâ?
Since the establishment is so keen on retrospective criminalisation and so terrified of climate change ( apparently) and so DESPERATE to make ordinary folk blame themselves letâs trace back and see exactly who made money out of all this.
And from related trades!
No peasant ever ASKED them to turn his goose/pig/sheep off of the common land and stick him in a filthy industrial townâŠ. now did they?
April 6, 2022
The rural idyll of the past is something of a myth. Plenty of rural folk were very happy to get far better-paid and more stable jobs in urban areas when the Industrial Revolution started to take effect. However much their conditions make us feel (justifiably) horrified from today’s perspective, in fact life-expectancy rates increased and opportunities grew.
April 6, 2022
Nope.
They were forced off the land by enclosures and draconian poaching laws.
And probably to some extent by the elite-enriching Agricultural Revolution.
They were made poor.
They suddenly had to clock watch in the new slum towns. They had never had to do that before.
They lost all their feast days and customs.
Many turned to crime and joined gangs. Displacement and deracination like high rise blocks.
Ever heard of St Monday?
And our ideas of early death in the past are only based on a harsh industrial life away from family and traditional cures.
This 4th Revolution will achieve similar.
April 6, 2022
Agree – We all need to just look out of the window…nothing has changed
April 6, 2022
+1
April 6, 2022
Remember medieval peasants only had to pay a tenth of their income to the Church. We’ve never had it so good.
April 6, 2022
for some today 10% of net is still the going rate…
April 6, 2022
Longinus
The genius of the church is that it got the poor to feel sorry for the rich and persuaded them give up their money to save their souls.
Similarly the genius of going green is to impoverish us with taxes whilst making us believe it’s for our own good.
They tell us that we have green choices but we don’t. EV cars and solar panels have such huge up-front costs for the average person that break-even day may never come for them. They are only for the well off.
It is also quite obvious that the Government is not serious about making EV cars a viable option for most as the infrastructure to make them so is completely neglected and behind schedule.
April 6, 2022
+1
They also had a lot of rightsâŠsome still persist.
I knew someone whose house deeds gave them the right to graze sheep on the local common. And that common famously avoided ( not peacefully) enclosure.
April 6, 2022
We are being asked to believe the climate change models are so accurate they can predict temperature changes to 0.2 degrees C 25 years out , that is quite something, yet the BBC and all we reporting their claims of a 3.2C temperature change claim without question, let alone wondering how we could possibly survive a temperatures varying by 3 degrees.
April 6, 2022
+1
If the powers that be really believe all this it might be better to admit that we can do nothing about it. I doubt if the dinosaurs wasted much time worrying about us đŠ
Wait and see and hope for the best which has been our govtâs MO forever!
Why get all proactive all of a sudden?
April 6, 2022
Outsourcing industry not only increases current CO2 pollution into the one atmosphere on planet earth.
It destroys any incentive to increase efficiency through technological innovation, which is the only real way we can put an end to future pollution.
April 6, 2022
Outsourcing industry is a clever way for the political class and Establishment to appease large financial investors and move industry out of one country with high wage, social and regulatory costs to another, and provide said political class with the cover of saving the planet.
We have seen this in a microcoum (sp) with regards to P&O.
April 6, 2022
I have two questions about this:
1. Would I be correct in assuming that Russia’s terrible actions in Ukraine have contributed to the increase in CO2, and in atmospheric pollution generally?
2. Why have I seen no protests from Green organisations about the pollution caused by such warfare?
April 6, 2022
Perhaps we should send Greta to visit Putin.
April 6, 2022
A-Tracy, could we record the proceedings, it would be really funny!
April 6, 2022
I’m sure he would tell her that Russia has already stopped using all fossil fuels, it’s only Western propaganda that says they haven’t.
April 7, 2022
“1 Nov 2020 â Russia has no plans to rein in its production of fossil fuels in the coming decades despite the global efforts to shift towards low-carbon” are you saying the Guardian is misleading me?
April 8, 2022
as if they would !
April 6, 2022
SM
When you come to the realisation (sorry if that sounds rude, it is not meant to be) that this has nothing to do with saving the planet and everything to do with deindustrialisation of the UK and the West, and thereby reducing its wealth and power, then it becomes very clear why they never ever think in the terms you point out.
April 6, 2022
Ukraine’s polluting industries have mostly closed down.
April 6, 2022
SM
I think we can safely say that the CO2 emissions from both sides in the Ukraine war are miniscule compared to those from recent volcanic eruptions from the La Palma volcano and Mount Etna!
April 6, 2022
we should ask the fracking ‘capping supporters’ to go there and do their stuff!
April 6, 2022
Indeed absolutely incomparable BOF. Because volcanic eruptions contribute about 1-2% of the atmospheric CO2. Etna is quoted to provide 10% of the CO2 of volcanic origin, ie 0.1-0.2% of the atmospheric CO2. And most gases produced by volcanoes are essentially made of ⊠SO2 and other sulphur compounds. Only the soot is a carbonaceous compound and it is not in a gaseous form.
April 7, 2022
I don’t think that those posters are here to learn anything, Hefner.
They are here to repeat and to propagate fallacies which cause people to vote for parties offering policies based on those which would, if they were true, however, please them.
Sadly, those policies will only lead to increased problems for that reason, but perhaps the people who crave power above all else – including the quality of life on this planet – will get it by these means.
April 6, 2022
Heaven help us. Johnson will read this report and announce that Global Britain will cut its emissions further still.
So basically the Chinese and Indians, as an example, are not in the least bit concerned about all this.
Why I wonder if we are on the edge of extinction as we are being told (and Greta knows all) do such countries carry on as if there is no danger at all.
Is that the crux of it ‘there is no danger at all’ or at least not to the extent we are being driven to believe.
If the threat is as near and as large as Johnson & Gates would have us believe, does that mean the Chinese and Indians are happily committing suicide.
As Sir John himself says policies here are likely driving up world CO2 with the refusal to be self sufficient and I can’t imagine the massive unwanted population explosion here will do much to help either.
It’s all very odd and leaves me with more questions than answers.
Although it does look very much like a part of the managed decline doctrine of our home.
April 6, 2022
Its also the Chinese and Indian that are the biggest river and ocean polluters âŠbut heyho, like co2, the UN canât issue a fine or stop you from polluting
April 6, 2022
Not yet, Glen. They’re probably working on it, though. Let’s follow the action at Davos next year.
April 7, 2022
The Canadians produce the most CO2 per head, with the US and UK not so far behind. The Chinese and Indians come way down the list by that measure.
You might claim that this is irrelevant, but about three billion of them think rather differently.
April 7, 2022
That must mean the Canadians must breathe out the most, while the Chinese and Indians have a slower breathing rate?
April 7, 2022
My claim is …..’so what’ is any of this going to reduce the predicted rise in the oceans – and thats what this is all about
April 8, 2022
Per head is a nonsensical calculation
The IPCC is interested in world outputs of CO2
That is the only way of stopping doomsday.
Surely?
April 9, 2022
What about having the two sets of figures, one for the country and one per head, to be able to figure out how much a country is producing but also how that is likely related to its people welfare/lifestyle. And if NLH is right, it might show that the relatively small number of Canadians relative to the size of their country and industrial production, plus the effect of their climate, are indeed higher CO2 emitters than USAmericans or British in their countries with somewhat warmer weathers.
And the Indians and Chinese being 40-45 times more numerous than the Canadians have indeed a much smaller contribution per head.
What is so wrong with making such a point?
I would have thought that as a businessman you would have recognised the need to know both the price of the individual services/products you are providing your customers and the figures related to the overall inputs/outputs/success of your company. Am I wrong here?
April 6, 2022
Sir John,
From your mouth to God’s ear.
Let’s see a (mock) confession that the UK has been tardy in addressing CO2 incorporated in imported goods – we have been using the drop in home production as a figleaf to cover up this sleight of hand.
Addressing this will, unfortunately involve using our own fossil fuels in our provenly frugal manner and, while making our tally look a little worse will, overall, lower global CO2 emissions. .
If the Nudge Unit can’t get the message across, sack them. If the CCC objects, sack them too – presumably the Tower is not available.
This hard message will not go down well with a brainwashed public and will need further sweetening. Please get one of your staff to research Prof. Tom Wigley of UEA and his question ‘why the blip.’ Then back research into non-CO2 warming – UHI has been looked into, but there are areas on Earth that are warming anomalously fast, for example the Sea of Marmara which is getting warmer four times faster than the norm.
A research effort into Anthropic Local Warming would show we are not shirking our duty, but pwe have done enough setting an example to those CO2 hogs who are the problem, not the UK.
JF
JF
April 6, 2022
Sir John, you are trying to oppose reasoned argument against ideology. To the next zero true believers, the reality of what is going on in the world economy is not the real criterion. The fact that CO2 ’emissions’ are growing in Asia is unimportant, if their real ideological target is to reshape Western economies along Club of Rome zero growth lines. A look at their ‘Planetary Boundaries’ framework shows that prosperity and fulfilled lives for people are of secondary importance. We humans’ role is to be the ‘stewards’ of the planet. From that perspective, you can talk all you want about growing food and farming (and indeed it would be nice to seeing this as a new priority in formerly rural Wokingham borough). But what matters if we are merely ‘stewards’ is how much biodiversity we can maintain by wilding the fields, not ploughing them. Your analyses will never persuade those with this cast of mind, I’m afraid.
April 6, 2022
I do not believe the net zero carbon target for the world is necessary, nor is it achievable which makes the whole narrative even more folly.
However if the world leaders prompted by the world’s largest (and ineffectual) pressure group, the UN, are to pursue this target they need to change the measure. It needs to be measured by use per capita, not by output.
You write above that we have reduced our carbon usage but then write that we haven’t – just exported the production – carbon offsets are merely wealth creators and destroyers.
Measure by use, with global tariffs for those who do not meet targets, or give up. We need to stop impoverishing ourselves while handing competitive advantage to those who pay lip service.
It’s just like being part of the EU where we were naĂŻve and had to leave.
April 6, 2022
Net zero is a UN/WEF construct to bankrupt the western world and promote China, India and the other up and coming countries.
Mass immigration into the west is all part of the plan to lower our living standards.
You’re is an open goal for a leader who stands up and says enough .
I’m waiting patiently.
April 6, 2022
Nail. Head. Hit !
April 6, 2022
The omission in the IPCC report was the mediaeval period⊠which, had it been included in the report, would have shown the CO2 levels to be approximately twice what they are now!
Itâs nothing to do with humans. We could aim to look after the world in many ways, but trying to turn an industrialised world back to the dark ages isnât it. To quote a âgreenâ enthusiast, 15 years in the trade, in his lecture on the environment, âIâve concluded that going green will be at the expense of the environment.â
Itâs all nonsense, CO2 has fluctuated since the world began! The green issue is for greater control of the peasants.
April 6, 2022
Sharing. Exactly. I do believe that man’s interference with the planet is what is destroying it and not CO2. We are stripping it bare of so many elements in our bid to ‘save it’ but doing more harm to nature and people than good.
April 6, 2022
Northern hemisphere temperatures were higher during the medieval period (tree rings, lake sediments) but CO2 concentration level was not. Go back to basics, please.
April 6, 2022
hefner :
So what was the cause please of the higher temperatures if it wasn’t from increased CO2 concentration levels?
Could there be another reason/variable other than anthropogenic CO2 causing temperatures to rise and fall?
April 6, 2022
What about getting yourself up to date on Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation?
April 6, 2022
Surely that just proves the point – not higher CO2 as you maintain but there were higher temperatures, so CO2 nothing whatever to do with it. It’s all a scam.
April 6, 2022
+1
April 6, 2022
The problem with you guys is that nobody in the scientific community ever said that the Medieval Warm Period was linked to a change in CO2. This argument was confected afterwards by the usual âdeniersâ and taken onboard by people ⊠like you ⊠who try to shut up any discussion based on what they read on their favourite websites/tabloids or even misunderstood from the websites of NOAA, NASA, other satellite and meteorological centre websites.
Now I do not even try to convince people with no background in atmospheric physics who take their âscienceâ from, eg, what they have âfollowedâ for thirty years in the IPCC reports with the help of the GWPF or similar websites.
The only real bad feeling I have is when thinking of my grandchildren who will have to bear the consequences of
âourâ generation (not that I feel much in common with most of you
).
April 7, 2022
Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation?
April 6, 2022
If you are referring to WG1, which examines the science, I have yet to download and read the final report to compare with the draft version. That said the IPCC only looks at man made CO2; it ignores the dominant natural causes of CO2 change and global temperatures such as the sun or volcanic action or cloud behaviour. The destruction of whole industries in pursuit of net zero is complete and utter folly. Moreover it would fail to deliver the claimed outcome of controlling global temperatures even if man made CO2 were contained or reduced. Natural forces will deliver that outcome. The man made activity that would most likely cause a reduction of global temperature would be all out nuclear war. That is not to be recommended.
April 7, 2022
I somewhat agree with you, OT, there are two ranges of questions, one scientific, the other one economic. For me, the incredible thing is that (some) people worried by the economic consequences of climate change (and they are certainly right in their worries, what those are/will be (or not) and how various politicians will deal with them) have resorted to ignore, deny, find other tentative and often ridiculous arguments to explain, climate change.
As for the IPCC reports you must not have read the series of WG1 reports properly, they donât only look at man-made CO2. They consider man-made CO2 among the other (natural) sources of CO2 (mangroves, vegetation respiration, emission from oceans, âŠ) and emissions of other gases (O3, CH4, N2O, all other types of CFCs, HCFCs, HFCs).
April 6, 2022
The whole point of COP 26 was so that those who believe they are the great and the good could get together for a mass love-in; pat themselves on the back and demonstrate their virtue to the Eco Loons on the world.
Johnson basically announced that he was going to destroy the lifestyles and livelihoods – and in many cases actual lives – by forcing British citizens to conform to the Net Zero agenda. And then – Prize Pig of the Animal Farm variety that he is – got on a plane to go to a party in London.
COP27 will be no different.
The electorate will have to stop the Eco Lunacy. Because the CONs are taking their Orders from the UN and WEF and won’t do anything unless they are forced.
April 6, 2022
+1
April 6, 2022
Donna, +1, as usual, a powerful and pithy comment, with no wasted effort to placate the implacable or humour the humourless.
April 6, 2022
The Net Zero movement will never succeed it is an insane goal anyway. Most of the so called low carbon sources of energy and other measures such as wind, solar, imported wood to burn at Drax, hydrogen, electric vehicles save very little or no CO2 anyway. EVs and imported wood actually increase CO2. It can also never succeed without cooperation from China, Russia, India… and this clearly is never realistically going to happen.
But why would we want it to succeed anyway? There is no thermal runaway climate emergency and soon we will have better nuclear and then later fusion. A bit more CO2 is good thing. It greens the planet and increase crop yields also tree, seaweed and plant food (a natural negative feed back on atmospheric CO2). Slightly warmer anyway is a net good too on balance. Net zero using expensive unreliable energy is economic and political suicide. It will also freeze many people to death.
The claims that the UK has reduced CO2 significantly are bogus fiddled figure too. The UK has just exported energy intensive industries and jobs overseas and does not count the wood we burn at Drax either.
Wind farms cause extra CO2 in their construction and back up so at best they only save CO2 after about 10 years or so. Wind therefore has saved no CO2 yet overall as yet I suspect in the UK. The only real saving so far in CO2 is more gas and less coal.
April 6, 2022
I read that “Johnson Matthey has received a ÂŁ400m government-backed loan to develop hydrogen Âtech and help Britain hit its net-zero targets.”
So why can they not take a commercial loan rather than a soft Gov. one – does the project make any sense I wound? How will “green hydrogen” actually save CO2? To convert wind to electricity, to splitting water, to H2 + 02, to compression, transmission & storage, to heat and then to motion via an engine will probably waste over 80% of the wind energy. If you then allow for the wind farm construction, the catalysts mining, compression gear, storage tanks… I would be amazed if there is not a rather large negative CO2 “saving” compared to using fracked natural gas directly or (rather less efficiently) converting methane to H2.
April 6, 2022
Governments always want to jump on bandwagons instead of concentrating on the mundane matters that most people are concerned with.
April 6, 2022
+1 Indeed
Like having enough food to eat and energy in their homes
April 6, 2022
That is also true of local government….and regional mayors
April 6, 2022
PM defends NI rise as âfair and responsibleâ
Increase of 1.25 percentage points will end cruel lottery of spiralling care costs, says Johnson.
What an absurd argument to tax workers hugely so that some children of the wealthy can inherit a bit more! Oh and it is 2 x 1.25% = 2.5%. Just stop the vast government waste mate.
April 6, 2022
Agree LL. I’ve just been told that some councils are paying their leaders over ÂŁ500k. Utterly disgusting and getting close to ÂŁ100k lump sum when they leave with their gold plated pensions. But don’t forget. We’re all in this together. Report from The Tax Payers Alliance. At least we can now see where our rises in council tax is being spent and no, it’s not on services unless you include help yourself service to a nice fat cat wage.
April 6, 2022
This is Communism.
12 years of Tory rule.
April 6, 2022
+1
April 6, 2022
Well, that looks like a change of heart. You are always banging on about IHT sticking at a level few working people can achieve anyway, now you are decrying wealthy people leaving more to their inheritors.
April 6, 2022
Not at all, I am against all taxes above about 20% of GDP which is more than enough. But taxing mainly poor workers just to pay for rich peopleâs social care – so their children can inherit more is a very misguided tax. IHT should not exist. It does not in sensible countries.
April 7, 2022
g46, consistency has never been one of LLâs strong points, apart maybe from his oh so intelligent young coal for wood or old wood for coal.
I am not surprised that the UK could be going down the drains if LL is to be taken as an example of a Cambridge-educated scientific mind.
See his âdemonstrationâ about green hydrogen above, well worth ten minutes rib splitting laugh, as if 1/ direct use of fracked gas were not producing CO2 as a by-product, or 2/ steam-methane reforming and water-gas shift reaction were not requiring very high temperature for the first process (700-1000 degC) and catalysts like nickel, cobalt, gold, platinum, rhodium to ensure an efficient second process.
April 6, 2022
No NI increase for foreign companies , so it’s just UK businesses competing in global markets the government is committed to destroying.
April 7, 2022
Nor I suspect for Mode 4 migrants.
April 6, 2022
Why on earth the some daft Socialist Tory MPs (circa 50 reported to include the dire Ruth Davidson, Julian Knight and Jeremy Hunt (who left us with such an appalling NHS and pandemic planning) against the sell off of the appalling channel 4. Why on earth should tax payers own this dire left wing propaganda organisation. Sell it off now and give tax cuts to everyone. Let these 50 daft Tory MP buy it if they want to!
April 6, 2022
In the Telegraph today:- âElectric cars are cheaper in the long run for many drivers if they do enough miles. This is likely to remain the case if fuel duty on petrol at 52.95p a litre and VAT at 20pc persist, while household electricity attracts VAT of just 5pc.â
Rubbish and how many is enough? The finance costs, depreciation of car and the short lived battery mean they will typically cost many times more to run than keeping you old car often 5 times more and they do not even save any CO2 they increase it. The only way they can be cheaper is for London with the the blatant market rigging of ULEZ, congestion, car tax, subsidy and lower tax on fuel. Most EV will be almost worthless after about 8 years as the batteries fail to hold the charge and waste even more of it too.
April 6, 2022
+1
Yup, they have once again fixed the equation/question to get the answer they want.
Ignoring important things like production emissions, taxes on Fossil fuel and Road Duty on ICE vehicles, and subsidies on EV’s and windmills.
Who really believes this sort of crap, unfortunately millions who simply take what is broadcast as real and factual.
April 6, 2022
Quite so. The selective presentation of data is nothing new in this war on prosperity.
April 6, 2022
@LifeLogic
Do you have any figures to back the assertions you make regarding total carbon cost of EVs (and wind turbines)!
April 6, 2022
Well yes many studies but most are propaganda. If you think it through, an EV might typically use only about ÂŁ6,000 of electricity over its useful life of ~ 8 years 100k miles (new battery is then needed so almost worthless at that point). Much of this charging will be generated from gas or coal anyway with over 50% waste of energy at the power station the. more lost in transmission & charging and recharging. Then you have the mining, purifying of materials for car and battery and then the recycling of car and battery. How much of a ÂŁ40,000 EV car was the energy to manufacture it? Almost certainly well over 10% as with most such manufactured products.
April 7, 2022
âWell yes many studies but most are propagandaâ, ie, LL does not understand them or does not like them or is not able to properly see the arguments put forward in their entirety. He must be stopping at the first sight of an argument he recognises. Gotcha âŠand LL can write (in fact repeat for the n-th time) a âdelightfulâ comment on Sir Johnâs website.
For example, âmuch of this charging will be generated from gas or coalâ, wrong Norway gets it from hydro, mediterranean countries get it from solar power, France from nuclear stations. So no obligation to get the electricity âfrom gas or coalâ.
Then his usual argument about âmining, purifying, blah blahâ. Have you ever read LL commenting about oil, gas or coal extraction, the type of pollution linked to this extraction, or the CO2 linked to transport of gas and oil from the Middle East, ⊠Has he ever complained about the waste of energy in lines from present power stations and the consumers?
Did he ever worry about the energy required to build a ICE car or about the recycling of the present generation of ICE cars?
No the bee in his bonnet is squarely stuck on EVs.
April 6, 2022
//In a world of energy shortages and high prices and food shortages the UK needs to take self sufficiency and security of supply more seriously. //
More seriously? It would be nice if the Government weren’t doing everything they can to make matters worse, a great deal worse. Their mass immigration policies have added 16% to the levels of demand, at the same time they are taking agricultural land out of production , with their ‘green energy’ (covering land with solar panels is an abomination) , covering it with concrete in order to house the millions they have added to our population, and they are converting food crops to petrol with their E10 fuel, how mad is that? Not content with shooting ourselves in the head and foot and the same time over food supplies they have done the same thing with fuel, where they have created the crisis with their Green Zealotry.
Right now I believe we would be a lot better off if we didn’t have a Government creating all the crises.
April 6, 2022
Surely this should all be about CAUSE and EFFECT…Anybody could produce a model to say what they want it to say, and that is just what is happening here.
WHERE is the evidence that for example the seas are rising? Tell me why the Maldives are not under water by now?
The Maldives are perfectly OK as it happens, Polar bears are thriving like never before, and the Poles have more ice than they’ve had for many years. CHECK it out, but don’t ask the BBC
All of the alleged evidence to support MMCC is pure propaganda, and every claim that we are getting more severe weather, more tornadoes, more rain, more droughts, can be so easily dismissed when a review of past weather conditions is done— Our weather has always been violent, at times, that’s why we have such a fascination with the subject.
So, rather than rely on concocted science that demands we trash our already poor standard of living, we should do the reverse – We are on this planet to flourish and prosper, not to succumb to every last control mechanism the global elite throw at us.
April 6, 2022
So the people preventing fuel tankers leaving U.K. refineries are guilty of seriously misdirected and largely pointless effort then.
One is left to wonder what motivates them to act as they do.
April 6, 2022
Perhaps Putin or similar is funding these useful idiots?
Or perhaps they have just suffered too much vile propaganda from UK schools, Gov, BBC, Quangos, the Committee for Climate Change, Greta, “Charities”… on the devil gas CO2 religion.
The government/police seems to be rather failing to deter them too.
April 6, 2022
Not read the report but there appears to be no mention by anyone of methane, which is supposed to be hundreds of times worse than CO2 if some reports are to be believed.
Is it no longer a problem, or is it a gas which is not caused by the kind of emissions that Governments are seeking to control with financial penalties/subsidies.
April 6, 2022
Best wherever possible to capture methane and sell it for fuel! Yes can have more heating effect but not for that long as in the atmosphere is does not last very long.
Some methane has been leaking into the air for many millions of years anyway.
April 6, 2022
âJâai pas lu, jâai pas vu mais jâen ai entendu causerâ as Michel Colucci (Coluche) was saying.
And you are wrong. Methane is addressed in the April 2022 report and is required to be cut by 33% by 2030 (ipcc.ch âThe evidence is clear: the time for action is now. We can halve emissions by 2030â, 12th paragraph of the declaration).
April 6, 2022
has anyone explained this to the cows?
April 7, 2022
They are already making food for cows to stop them farting. Standby for another BSE type problem in years to come. Stop interfering in natural processes.
April 7, 2022
I wondered if we planned to remove one of their stomachs, and persuade them to stop eating grass?
April 7, 2022
hefner
So if reducing methane is so important, and as I understand it, it is more toxic for the environment and global warming than CO2, why is no one in the government concentrating on its control, are they keeping the plans secret, or is there not much they can do for now
I have heard we should stop eating meat, but nothing else.
Hence my posting, am I missing out on a policy for reduction of this gas.
April 7, 2022
Maybe here in the UK. In the US, Prof. V. Ramanathan has been addressing the methane question since at least the end of the 2000s.
ramanathanold.ucsd.edu, âFrom burning dung to global warming and back againâ, Science, 326, 16/10/2009. (who is that guy?)
V.Ramanathan & Y. Xu, 2010, âThe Copenhagen Accord for limiting global warming: Criteria, constraints and available avenuesâ, pnas.org
eesi.org âShort-Lived Climate Pollutantsâ, 2013.
âWhat role for short-lived climate pollutants in mitigation policy?â, 2013, science.org, J.K.Shoemaker et al.
ramanathan.ucsd.edu âChapter 1: Bending the curveâ, 2016, see p.3 âbending the curve, CH4 is one of the SCLP with black carbon, HFCs and tropospheric ozone that the authors want to see drastically reduced by 2030.
âShort-lived climate pollutant mitigation and the Sustainable Development Goalsâ, A. Haines et al., 2017, Nature Climate Change, 7, 863-869.
âHow cutting methane emissions can move the needle on climate changeâ, L.Maizland, 21/05/2021, cfr.org
Any search with âshort-lived climate pollutantâ will provide some other papers âŠ
April 7, 2022
I mentioned the work of Wijngaarden and Happer on the radiation balances in the atmosphere earlier. One of the gases they specifically look at is methane, and they conclude that its real warming potential is very limited because most of its absorption is at wavelengths that are already covered by other gases.
April 7, 2022
Wijngaarden and Happer could conclude this because their simulation was of the fluxes at the top of the atmosphere (86 km) and at the âtropopauseâ (11 km). They did not appear to have bothered to calculate cooling rate profiles, ie, the derivative of, say, fluxes computed every kilometre (or every 20 hPa). If they had done it, they might have realised that the methane band around 7.5 microns, while it is covered/overlapped by the strong 6.3 micron band of H2O in the lower troposphere, is non negligible at all in the upper troposphere and stratosphere where the amount of water vapour is much smaller.
Thatâs something that any decent radiation transfer scheme, as for example used in a weather forecast model has been doing (properly) since the 1980s.
April 7, 2022
Mark, Have you ever thought of taking a MOOC on radiation transfer? I am pretty sure you would learn a lot and stop taking half-baked âscienceâ paper (even more so when presented âdigestedâ by Clintel, Whatsupwiththat or the GWPF) without considering whether a pinch of salt might be required.
April 6, 2022
CO2 the Bogyman. Seriously. It’s a plant food at 0.04% get over it! Produce the science not the unproven rhetoric! We all agree on pollution, not religion! The msm are gullible, we’re not.
April 6, 2022
+1 – plus the methods they have to reduce it do not even work significantly or at all in CO2 terms, plus we have China, India, Russia who will take no notice… total insanity from Boris, Carrie, Kwarteng for three reasons each one of which is sufficient to make it nonsense on its own!
April 6, 2022
And all these are true!
April 6, 2022
+1
April 6, 2022
Timaction, +1, Quite!
April 6, 2022
TA, You could start by reading all the IPCC reports (first series in 1990) and seeing whether those qualify as âyour type of scienceâ.
Or maybe (as you are likely not to like climate models) have a look at the various WMO reports on past weathers and discussions on the frequency and intensity of âfreak eventsâ (tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, dust storms, fires, polar temperatures out of whack by 20-30 degrees, methane emission linked to permafrost melting, ice shelves and glaciers melting, âŠ).
April 6, 2022
Hypocrisy is possibly the best word to describe the climate industry on the subject of CO2. It applies to those countries that while paying lip service continue to ignore the tenets of CO2 reduction. It equally applies to all those UK activist anarchists who daily pursue the less than one percent of CO2 emitted in the UK. What prevents them protesting in Tianamen Square, or even outside the Chinese and Indian embassies. The consequences I would suggest. The last comment, I have never heard coherently explained , is the danger of fluctuating CO2, better known as plant food . There are far more toxic emissions with deadlier effect on life than CO2.
April 6, 2022
It’s not an option to argue that third world countries attain net zero when it’s impossible for our own country to achieve it. Technology just isn’t advanced enough to make net zero viable. Stop listening to the UN. It is a damaged organisation that has strayed from its original remit. Similar to most international organisations they are part of the problem not the solution. A load of parasites paid for by the rest of us.
April 6, 2022
Correct!
April 6, 2022
The net zero movement is entirely designed to increase profits for big business and decrease freedom for us as every government policy is nowadays. 50 years ago fools were claiming by 2000 all glaciers and ice caps would have melted and we’d all be underwater. Well my feet are still dry.
It is entirely based on fiction. We are currently in a mini ice age and the world is colder than for most of it’s history. The is no evidence that CO2 drives temperature, in fact it has a very loose correlation. “Green” energy does not work for large applications and we can already see that in Germany yet still the ruling class presses on with it. The net zero is a ludicrous fantasy and will cause more suffering than any amount of non existent warming or sea level rise.
April 14, 2022
G, You could have tried to check the dates and by doing so not look misinformed. The first set of IPCC reports, with mention of melting glaciers was published in 1990, so 32 years ago not 50 years ago. And nobody except maybe the dumbo âjournalistsâ in the Express would have said that all glaciers and ice caps would have melted by 2000.
The only thing that had been written around the â90s was that the speed at which glaciers and ice caps would be melting would accelerate. And indeed in various parts of the world (Himalaya, New Zealand, Alps, some Greenland and Antarctic glaciers) the melting speed has at least doubled compared to what it was thirty years ago.
I can only conclude that you are making this up because maybe you think youâd be funny âŠ
April 6, 2022
Where is the tree planting scheme? This country is a patchwork of fields enclosed by hedgerows. Trees could be planted in/next to all the hedgerows without affecting the use of the field at all. They wouldnât get in the way of animals, crops or tractors. With a bit of organisation an army of retired people (like me) could be tasked with planting trees alongside every hedgerow in the country.
Mind you, this would require someone in government with the ability to get something done. In the first instance millions of saplings need to be grown. Again, Dadâs army would do the job.
April 6, 2022
Only a few years ago they were urging farmers to rip out hedgerows to make prairie fields which still exist in East Anglia. Now fashion has changed again and they want to grow weeds. Can we really trust ‘experts’? Another time, another fad?
April 6, 2022
Prairie fields in East Anglia now becoming solar farms. It’s all planned.
April 7, 2022
read James Rebanks (Cumbrian farmer) on the subject. Entertaining.
April 7, 2022
books – I should have made clear.
April 6, 2022
I think it was only yesterday I heard someone on BBC talking zealously about the ‘climate emergency’ and how if we had not met our targets for reducing CO2 then it would have to be sucked out of the air mechanically.
Do these lunatics not understand that it is essential for life. By the time they have finished, there will be no life on earth!
April 6, 2022
BOF, I hope you realise you are simply ridiculous. The lowest CO2 concentration appears to have been 180 ppm at the end of the Carboniferous period (about 2 million years ago). Right now it is 410 ppm. You are really misinformed if you think we have the technology to pump the whole CO2 out of the atmosphere. All that is presently discussed is preventing the release of more CO2, and possibly letting the CO2 concentration adjust via the uptake/release of it by the oceans. Increasing the areas of wetlands, planting trees, forest management, changes in agricultural practices, carbon capture and storage are all ways to stabilise the effects of further releases of CO2.
Do not worry, nobody will prevent you from breathing.
April 6, 2022
I read that Elon Musk appears interested in the UK energy market.
I hope that he is not encouraged at the expense of Rolls Royce who should be assisted with their implementation of modular nuclear reactors. If I read that Musk has succeeded, I will only be convinced that he has sowed the seeds of his vast wealth where they will germinate, in certain peoples’ pockets…
Thank God CO2 is increasing, making the planet greener and more fertile.
April 6, 2022
He is rather good at tax payer grant farming with his (to me) amazingly over valued Tesla company.
April 6, 2022
The whole point of reducing co2 was to ultimately reduce the global temperature and any rise in sea level (as co2 was deemed by the IPCC as the trigger to rising temperature) â well the sea levels arenât rising and the global temperature measurements are in dispute between reality and forecast modelling remaining near normsâŠ..therefore the IPCC main thrust in emphasising co2 is political
April 6, 2022
@Glen +99
EXACTLY
April 6, 2022
Global temperature measurements obtained by collecting individual meteorological synoptic station measurements of temperature show an increase in it and âare not in disputeâ. Those are not forecasts but analyses of measurements.
And indeed there is no reduction in temperature as there has not been any substantial reduction in CO2 emissions on a global scale and due to its long lifetime CO2 concentration continues to grow.
And could you give us your reference that sea levels are not rising. Thanks in advance.
NOAA, NASA via their TOPEX/Poseidon, Jason, OSTM/Jason-2, Jason-3 series of satellites appear not to agree with you. But who are they with their radar altimeters, certainly not as clever as you can be, watching from the seashore.
April 6, 2022
UK Climate Report 2020 shows that UK sea level rose by 6Âœ inches (1.5 ±â0.1âcm/decade) since 1901 (120 years). However, issues with data quality mean there was not enough data to update the UK sea level index with a value for 2020.
https://noc.ac.uk/news/uk-sea-level-rising-data-quality-going-down
April 6, 2022
Run for the hills
April 8, 2022
gc, BTW I have a 19.5 year car.
April 7, 2022
gc, I know we are âGlobal Britainâ but I hope you will recognise that Southampton Universityâs findings about the deterioration in quality of sea level data obtained around the British Isles might not readily transfer, say, to data over the South Atlantic, Pacific or Indian oceans.
April 7, 2022
Drive to the hills in your EV
April 6, 2022
So the Government may be shipping illegal migrants to Rwanda, as evidenced by the hysterical reaction of the liberal House of Lords. You get the most flak when you are over the target. But why is lengthy processing required when paying for clandestine transport from a safe country is a de facto admission that you have no credible claim for asylum? The judiciary were able to use a mechanism called ‘totally without merit’ to prevent legal actions against Brexit-blocking from reaching the courtroom, and challenges to Covid policies have also been summarily dismissed. Taking away a migrant’s phone is apparently a violation of their rights, so just block the signal instead. Don’t ‘process’ them in Rwanda, deport them there. This is also an answer to the torturers who can ‘t be deported for ‘fear’ of left-wing judges that they may be tortured.
April 6, 2022
“Meanwhile the UK producing under 1% of the world total is one of the few that has made major reductions.”
And how low is this compared to our manufacturing size compared to the rest? All we did was export our energy-intensive industry and then re-import the goods after they affect India or China’s emissions.
April 6, 2022
Falls into the category of “It’s all too difficult to bother with, so let’s ignore it”, or at least suggests to the reader to do that, I’d say.
It’s rather like the first approach to covid19, isn’t it?
April 6, 2022
“4 Feb 2019 â The UK’s CO2 emissions peaked in the year 1973 and have declined by around 38% since 1990, faster than any other major developed country.
The UK’s CO2 emissions fell by 2.9% in 2019, according to Carbon Brief analysis. This brings the total reduction to 29% over the past decade since 2010, even as the economy grew by a fifth.3 Mar 2020”
CarbonBrief.org
“24 Mar 2022 â The UK’s territorial greenhouse gas emissions have fallen by roughly 50 percent since 1990. The UK is now halfway to meeting its 2050 net-zero “. Statista
Tell us again how we’re not bothering? We are impoverishing ourselves with this zealotry.
April 6, 2022
The UK is environmentally cleaner now than its been for decades…..but it will never be enough
April 7, 2022
a-t, Yes, as you have written: âterritorial greenhouse emissionsâ. A goal not so difficult to reach when a non-negligible fraction of our industry has disappeared or be sent to countries with cheaper workforce, and when the population here relies even more on imports.
April 6, 2022
You are a very negative person.
April 6, 2022
or ‘grumpy old man?’
April 6, 2022
It is difficult, at times, not to be a very negative person when day after day there are comments by some people not knowing the first thing about what they are talking about but keeping producing their unqualified dross, and even when gently contradicted continue, as if nothing had happened, to spit incredibly uninformed âfactsâ.
April 7, 2022
Yes hefner and NLH is one of the worst ones for spouting rubbish and when challenged with facts they rarely come back.
April 7, 2022
by the way – has the Boy wonder been banned? – perhaps driving Ukranians fleeing to his chateau in France?
April 8, 2022
I don’t engage with time wasters who spout tripe, no.
April 9, 2022
NLH I point out a man named Mark who had corrected your incorrect quotes about Chernobyl you just ignored the correction, it was you spouting tripe.
April 7, 2022
This site is an opinion site – people are entitled to say what they think. If everything had to be proved there would never be any debate. My opinion, not being a scientist but merely using common sense says your ‘science’ is wrong and that we are being impoverished for purposes other than saving the planet, which we cannot do on our own anyway. What do they say about your science in China? No doubt you will tell me I am an idiot, but I don’t care, I say what I see.
April 8, 2022
only an opinion site in as much as Sir John manages the content.
April 8, 2022
Fair enough, I do not mind. If it is an opinion site one could expect these opinions being based on some kind or arguments, maybe not simply gut-feelings? Or are opinions nowadays only based on the last thing one has read in the morning on their favourite website?
Why is it that any attempt at trying to explain and produce a story closer to what most atmospheric physicists and chemists, meteorologists, glaciologists, vegetation scientists is criticised with comments as as âwatermelonâ, âmarxist/maoistâ?
Or is it so much easier to kill any such attempt by referring to what the Russians, Chinese, Indians, Japanese, ⊠might be doing?
April 6, 2022
NLH
Not saying don’t bother with it.
But knocking down power stations BEFORE replacements are there ???
Therefore it is absolutely right to point out that China is not actually going green and is building coal powered plants apace. It puts our economic suicide in perspective.
April 6, 2022
What you were calling the ‘first approach’ to COVID-19, lad, was in fact the pandemic preparedness plan that most countries had ready, based on knowledge and experience of how to deal with major disease outbreaks. Britain started to follow it, but then changed to lockdowns. Sweden did follow the original plan, and emerged with fewer Covid deaths per head than us, and with an economy that suffered least damage among major European countries. Also, our inflation rate is supposed to be currently about 7%, whereas Sweden’s is running at 4%.
Check out Ourworldindata, lad: you’ll see that per million population Sweden had about 1,800 covid deaths, the UK about 2,400 million, and Italy – which locked down first in Europe – 2,800.
It really surprises me you still want to talk about Covid 19, given the pro-lockdown position you took at the time.
April 6, 2022
Off shore wind farms with battery ships?
April 6, 2022
The always use diesel ship to install and maintain the wind turbines – as battery ships are useless and vastly expensive! Vast amounts of CO2 and fossil fuels are used to construct and maintain the expensive turbines. Circa 10 years to break even on energy and CO2.
April 6, 2022
The EROI for wind is said to be around 23 I think. So they are net producers of energy according to that.
April 7, 2022
This is very optimistic indeed and before the back up/ energy storage needs of wind. Can easily be about 10 years before they generate more energy than is needed to construct them, provide back up, connect to grid and maintain.
April 7, 2022
It’s true that figure doesn’t include energy storage, which really it should.
April 6, 2022
Ans we end up with thousands of huge blades at life end or breakage that cannot be recycled. And the installation of each land-based turbine requires the use of hundreds of tons of cement – cement, the production of which consumes huge amounts of fossil fuel energy and causes massive amounts of CO2. Green they ain’t!
April 6, 2022
Martyn. Concrete platforms the size of Olympic swimming pools. It encourages flooding off the hills.
April 8, 2022
Do you think that the construction of the new nuclear plants or SMRs will be carried out without using any cement? And that the fracking infrastructure is being set up without any pollution whatsoever?
MG: 30/11/2021 Kate S. Petersen, news.yahoo.com âFact check: Wind turbine blades can be recycled, but it rarely happens todayâ. The US company Global Fiberglass Solutions has a proprietary recycling technology.
April 6, 2022
And the 12th of never before electricity bills come down, just like nuclear was going to be so abundant and too cheap to meter. Just big money making more big money – the biggest transfer of wealth from poor to rich ever in history,
April 6, 2022
We are in a warm spell between the last ice age and the next ice age.
Should we be worried?
April 6, 2022
How long does an ice age last? And the warm spell in-between? What is the âusualâ temperature trend when the ice age ends and the warm spell starts? Have these trends always been the same during the different ice ages and in-between warm spells?
Are those trends one degree per decade, per century, per millenium, over a longer period?
April 6, 2022
Bob
Indeed a number of scientists have suggested that this is indeed the case, they have of course been rubbished by the present climate change zealots, on the alter of Plan Zero.
Thus their arguments and theories have not been closely examined to see if they may have a point.
April 8, 2022
aj, Since the mid-2000s, the scientific arguments, theories and observations related to climate change have been closely examined, certainly much more than the counter arguments produced by all types of sceptical websites and publications.
Just look at the recently released flood of comments on websites criticising the recent 2021 and 2022 IPCC reports.
Have you ever heard of Clintel, whatsupwiththat, GWPF, climate-skeptic, ⊠or the more scientifically minded and much more interesting judithcurry.com?
To pretend that climate sceptics do not have a voice is rather comical when they have the support of the Heritage Foundation, the Global Climate Coalition, the Cato Institute, Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, ⊠in the USA and of the GWPF, Science and Public Policy Institute, the Energy and Environment journal, ⊠in the UK.
Either you display a really bad faith or possibly (more likely) you do not know what you are talking about. But it is an âopinion websiteâ so no need to bring any fact to a possible discussion, isnât it?
April 6, 2022
With the bills we have we should be more worried about being cold and hungry.
April 6, 2022
+1
April 6, 2022
Good morning.
I am currently listening to a podcast featuring a professor (nothing to do with climate change BTW) explaining a survey that was carried out in Greenland. Apparently they measured the ice cores of a glacier dating back as far as 15,000 years. Two things he pointed out, one that the earth temperature over the last 2,000 years has been pretty stable and, secondly the earths temperature over the last 15,000 years have varied between 1 and 4 degrees Celcius. This they found by measuring the Oxygen (a particular isotope of it) content.
Given the above and much more REAL scientific data that, Climate Change is both real and has been happening long before the industrial revolution, would it not be wise to reconsider what we are currently doing ?
Of course we all know that this has nothing to do with saving the planet etc. We all know it is a SCAM ! But it is a SCAM that will cost us dearly and impoverish us all.
We either need a change of direction or, a change of government and ruling parties, because the current lot, well some 500 of them, do not seem to get it.
April 14, 2022
By looking at 1 mm slices of these cores, the glaciologists can get to the rate of temperature increase or decrease these last 15,000. Has there ever been a temperature variation as rapid as what is being observed these last 50 years?
April 6, 2022
What a bloody joke. Here we are in the UK and europe going on about emissions from China and we are the ones at fault. We have made our industries unprofitable with higher energy costs and then sensible countries like China have filled the gap producing things we need and we blame them for higher emissions! It surely goes to show we should get our own energy and use it for our industries but
in the meantime look for other ways of weaning ourselves off fossil fuels but only when they are capable of working ON THEIR OWN AND WITHOUT SUBSIDIES. We are trying to achieve the impossible now and to our detriment.
April 6, 2022
Sir John,
Perhaps these climate alarmists could come up with a plan to prevent volcanic eruptions.
April 6, 2022
So ….. if the eco warriors stopped gluing themselves to things and instead encouraged us to stop buying stuff from China, India and the USA ….. maybe we would start to take them seriously and listen to them ?
April 6, 2022
If they actually went to China and spouted their nonsense I’d be more impressed.
April 6, 2022
I’d cheer and wave them off
April 7, 2022
many might pass round the hat to pay for the one-way ticket.
April 6, 2022
The UK green movement are only interested in protesting against the UK government. Irrespective of what Boris does to appease them, and of the fact the UK is a world leader in CO2 reduction, they will only demand more and will never vote for him anyway. So why pander to them ?
April 6, 2022
Off topic, I have a letter in the Belfast News Letter:
https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/opinion/letters/boris-johnson-did-not-deliver-on-plan-to-protect-eu-market-and-sort-out-protocol-3642439
“Boris Johnson did not deliver on plan to protect EU market and sort out protocol”
Last July the government issued a Command Paper on the way forward with the Northern Ireland protocol, and two of the paragraphs envisaged the passage of UK laws to protect the EU single market (âBring in penalties to deter exports from Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland which evade EU standards,â July 28 2021)
Of course the UK would not need the agreement of the Irish government or the EU to create such domestic laws, and in any case it is difficult to see why either should object to their passage.
If those new laws had actually been put in place there could now be a proven system of export controls to prevent non-compliant goods being taken across the border into the Republic.
Once that alternative control system had been demonstrated the EU would no longer have any reasonable grounds for complaint if the checks mandated by the protocol were discontinued.
Which preferably could be done by agreement with EU, with suitable amendments to the protocol, or otherwise through unilateral action taken by the UK under Article 16 of the protocol.
So why did Boris Johnson offer the prospect of these new UK laws to sort out the protocol, but then do nothing about them? Indeed, did he ever intend to do anything about them?
And is there still some hidden obstacle to stop him taking this long overdue action, maybe even including this legislation in the agenda soon to be announced in the Queenâs Speech?”
April 6, 2022
OR…
It indicates that Mankind’s emissions are not the cause.
Wht’s happened to what they used to call “global warming” in the meantime? It’s not happening as they preditced, which is why they changed it to “climate change”.
No-one even considers any more that CO2 may not be a damaging gas, it’s what plants live on and higher CO2 is causing re0greening of desert areas meaning the world can grow more food.
I remember when the fuss was about “deforestation”, people squelaing that we’d all suffocate from lack of oxygen. But science kept going and dioscovered that the world’s oxygen is actually produced and the % regulated by phytoplankton.
Strangely, no-one leapt on that bandwagon, I guess there was no money in it. But that is a real danger, if people want an environmental issue to worry about, that should be the one.
April 6, 2022
Net Zero is an impossibility. Since when was it sensible to base governmental policy on insisting we achieve the impossible?
April 6, 2022
They know it’s unachievable but this is about State control and most definitely NOT about protecting the environment. I’m not sure why people cannot see that.
Western governments have been infected by those whose intentions are disturbingly authoritarian.
Orban and Poland having none of it and he’ll fight back against the progressive cancer.
April 6, 2022
âToday the world economy is running on a model which maximises exports from high emitting economies and industrial processes, with imports into countries that could make and grow with less CO2 if the net zero rules were properly enforced in the exporting countries.â
Thatâs the idea.
The Chinese and Russian captured UN has devised CAGW in order to weaken the capitalist Westâs industry, economy and finally military by destroying the Westâs access to affordable and reliable energy tied with making the West dependent upon China and Russia for food, goods and energy.
The communists and their useful idiots who push the unilateral net zero policies in the West are the same groups who tried to destroy our defences in the last century through unilateral nuclear disarmament.
You will not find any of these groups outside the Chinese and Russian Embassies demonstrating against their lack of any carbon reduction policies.
And if windmill power was as cheap as they claim, then why are the Chinese building coal fired power stations instead of wind farms?
April 6, 2022
CAGW is a Russian and Chinese scam promoted by the captured UN and promoted in the West by communists and their useful idiots, such as the BBC, in order to destroy the West.
There simply is no climate crisis.
What is the correct temperature of the earth anyway?
Are the UNâs IPCC really expecting us to believe that there would be no changes to the earthâs average temperature, when weâre solely dependent upon the sun, a nuclear fireball 93 million miles away with a fluctuating output?
So is not a fluctuation of our earthâs temperature more likely than remaining constant, which it has never been, in all its previous history?
What caused the last ice age with a maximum just 22,000 years ago and what is the anthropological reason for the warming that ended the ice age about 8000 years ago?
We are in a relatively cool period since this last ice age. Based upon Greenland ice core sampling the earthâs temperature has been 3 times nearly 3 degrees C warmer than our current temperature. So is it not reasonable to believe that we would most likely now be in a warming period quite naturally?
April 7, 2022
OK, what is the range of fluctuations over the well known 11-year cycle (in percentage and actual W/m^2)? over the ~80-year cycle, the ~200-year cycle, over the ~2,400-year cycle, over the various Milankovitch 25k and 100k-year cycles?
Without that information talking of fluctuations in the solar output and incident solar radiation at the top of the atmosphere is a rather weak argument. Where in such cycles is the Earth nowadays? Are we in a situation of a peak or a trough of resonance between these various cycles? Is the current slight increase (in amplitude) of the global temperature consistent with any of these solar cycle-based explanation? Is the rate (wrt time) of such increase in global temperature consistent with the periodicity of any one of or of the superimposition of these cycles?
Do you have some scientific papers supporting such theories? (If your explanation is correct there must be a wealth of them).
April 6, 2022
Can we please ban Russian oil and gas and move to a different supplier – and quickly.
I know it will cost each person considerably more. But easily a price worth paying to stop this very dangerous man.
We need to do whatever we can economically (not just morally) to squeeze the Russian’s leader on power – and bring this war and his intentions of violence on the world to an end.
Otherwise, we could pay considerably more (God forbid) if we don’t don’t do this.
God bless Ukraine, also, what’s great about Russia and the Russian people (not this horrible war), and keep the UK, Europe and the rest of the world safe from dangerous, brutal dictators.
April 6, 2022
I agree we need a new supplier ….how about shale gas in the north west of england, oil from the north sea and coal from the north east of england – and you can change supplier tomorrow with the right government
April 6, 2022
I’d definitely support that to get rid of Pootin. What the long-term plan for this, though, I don’t, know. I’m agnostic on shales / fracking – don’t know enough about it.
April 6, 2022
Ed M
I wish Ukraine had decided not to join the EU or NATO. They would have been safe. If I hear yet another Ukrainian saying “I want the country and the life I loved back…”
They were warned time and time again by wise figures in the West (including Henry Kissinger) and by Putin himself.
I voted Brexit because my parents did NOT, in the 1975 referendum, give a mandate to take the Common Market up to a geo-political fault line and make Ukraine a country that our own Prime Minister could posture and say was “… in our back yard.”
April 6, 2022
Do not be daft Ed!
April 6, 2022
I’m not an expert on this. But if each of us has to pay a few hundred pounds – maybe more – for our oil / gas over next while (hopefully not long), then price worth paying. It might not even be enough. But it could be. Enough to squeeze this dictator out of power and away from further invasions of Europe, WMD and stalling the world economy.
April 6, 2022
Who’s ‘we’ and whose gas are you trying to ban so ‘quickly’, Ed? European countries whose economies cannot function without Russian energy supplies for years to come?
Your ‘different supplier’ is of course the USA with its far more expensive LNG – for which lots of expensive terminals would need to be built for this energy source to even start to work. Why should Europe ruin its economy to make the US richer, Europeans may wonder? They may also think you don’t keep the world safe by provoking big powers into war, when they’re the ones who would have to suffer the casualties and economic ruin, not the US. Bearing in mind we Brits would be likely to suffer far less from what you’re suggesting, as we don’t use so much Russian oil or gas, I wouldn’t rush to condemn them.
April 6, 2022
(Appeasement doesn’t work when you’re dealing with a brutal dictator. Appeasement is like being a doormat to a bully – they thrive on it. Only prayer, courage and being tough – in a sensible, measured way – offers us realistic hope out of this – God bless our efforts and defend us).
April 6, 2022
+1
April 6, 2022
Ed, you’re calling for divine assistance: who do you think is attacking you?
April 6, 2022
Pootin could – assisted by dark, spiritual forces.
They say a Guardian Angel guards the UK. I certainly believe in all that when I consider the Battle of Britain but even more so when I think of Joan of Arc, aged 18, an uneducated, semi-educated peasant warrior woman who booted the enemy out of France after 100 years of war. Couldn’t make it up. Even Mark Twain, a non-religious person, was obsessed by Joan of Arc. I’m not obsessed but she was an amazing historical figure.
Lastly, I don’t mean to scare people. Right now I’m just thinking how much I love the warm sun on my skin, a cold beer, smoking away on a Gauloise cigarette, putting my feet up and having a real laugh with my friends in this great, wonderful country I love. But at same time, I couldn’t be as relaxed and happy as I can be without prayer. I need to keep asking that Guardian Angel – and Higher Powers, The Almighty Himself – to keep us all safe (and to have a bit of adventure and excitement in life too).
April 7, 2022
So presumably, God doesn’t care about Ukraine then. I think you will find Joan of Arc, Churchill, our forces etc. were mortals who shed blood in their efforts. Funny sort of God who likes to see his children suffer before intervening.
April 7, 2022
@Graham,
I’ll give it to you. The argument for suffering is the hardest to defend. Can I please defer you to Dostoevsky’s brilliant Brother’s Karamazov that attempts to respond to your type of question.
Regarding, Joan of Arc, being passive (i.e. quietism / doing nothing / being a doormat) is a heresy in traditional Christianity. You’re meant to be moved by your (divine) conscience and then act. Love is ultimately an act of the will (including fighting in a Just War).
Best
April 7, 2022
The Book of Job is also the Jews’ brilliant response to suffering / why we have to suffer. Job was like a saint, a man of ‘standing’ in society but lost everything (loving wife, kids, money, respect, health—-everything). Although story ends happily for Job.
Others have likened the Jewish Book of Job to the Christians’ tradition of The Dark Night of the Soul.
April 8, 2022
a test to demonstrate that evil must be challenged? Ukraine drew the short straw on being the victim and hero?
April 6, 2022
(Think of it like this. How do we earn Putin’s respect if possible at all? Certainly not by being weak. He would expect a strong enemy, who he respects, to ban Russian oil and gas. And shows the world and other would-be dictators that we stand up to bullying behaviour. No ifs or buts. Human nature requires you stand up to bullies. We know this from the classroom. We know this from WW2 when Chamberlain failed to stand up to Hitler. How pathetic the Nazis must have seen us. And wanted to punish us harder for being such a weak-foe – at least when Chamberlain refused to man-up). This is just basic human psychology. God bless us).
April 6, 2022
Ed, Chamberlain was hailed as a hero when he returned to the UK waving his piece of paper for peace. You are talking with the benefit of hindsight.
April 7, 2022
There is also the view that we were not ready for war and that the time Chamberlain gained by his piece of paper enabled us to arm and get ready. It may be that without that breathing space we would have been slaughtered by the Nazis. The government are making us unprepared again in their mania to save their god money, running down our defences to toy town levels. Our entire army wouldn’t fill Wembley stadium.
April 7, 2022
Bullies / dictators are pretty much the same from one generation to the next – at least in terms of psychology not what resources / armaments they have at their disposal.. Chamberlain should have learned from his time at public school, that you can’t appease a bully (whether that be Stevens in the lower sixth form or Stalin in The Soviet Union).
(And I’m not proposing war at all – but that we have to be tough where we can – measured toughness – and lots of prayer).
April 6, 2022
May I remind everyone that the UK electorate only returned one (1) single âgreen partyâ MPâŠ.the people have spoken and they donât support the green revolution or the mad drive to net-zero
April 6, 2022
And they returned zero UKIP-TBP MPs to the HoC up to now, the people have spoken.
I just hope this will continue with the Reform Party, which I have seen from its website is reduced to call on good will to get candidates for the coming local elections. What a laugh.
Could it be that the good people of GB and NI do not support some fringe lunatics and their far-right wing âprogramâ?
April 6, 2022
By ‘fringe lunatics ‘ do you mean the Green Party and the Conservative Environment Network (CEN)
April 7, 2022
Monster Raving Looney is annoyed that his position in politics has been usurped.
April 7, 2022
ha haa
April 7, 2022
Wrong again. Two previously Conservative MP’s became UKIP and had by elections and won. True they did not win in the General election. Your grip of facts seems a bit shaky, not for the first time.
April 8, 2022
I admit I have not followed the UKIP-TBP-Reform saga that closely, but youâre (obviously) right: of these two originally Conservative MPs, Carswell and Reckless, elected as UKIP in by-elections in 2014, one moved from UKIP to become an Independent in 2017, and the other did not make it at the following GE.
Sorry for my oversight and thanks for putting me right.
April 6, 2022
This is the Great Reset.
Boris is not our real PM.
April 6, 2022
He most certainly isn’t a conservative
April 7, 2022
No, you may not remind the people because our first past the post system is completely unrepresentative of how people vote.
If we had MPs based on the number of people that vote Green and Lib Dem, at least 25% of MPs would be Green or Lib Dem. And there would only be about 15% Tories.
April 6, 2022
This inconsequential little island somewhere off the coast of Europe needs to stop trying to be a world leader in CO2 reduction. The target dates are way too early for them to be achieved without massive cost to our people.
Whatever we do is completely irrelevant in world terms, with less than 1% of total emissions.
Instead, we should be a CO2 FOLLOWER. We should guarantee to TRACK the average progress of the G20, not lead the way.
April 6, 2022
Global temperatures in Feb 2022 are exactly the same as 1991.
https://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_February_2022_v6.jpg
What climate change?
April 6, 2022
If only we could share this info with all MPs, Peers and the media…….perhaps they already know but don’t care !
April 6, 2022
If you quote Dr Roy Spencer, do it properly please: drroyspencercom
His curve published on 02/04/2022 shows a +0.15 deg above a very âinterestingâ zero line, supposed to represent the average 1979-2021.
Even more interesting (accessible from Dr Spencer site) is nsstc.uah.edu âGlobal Temperature Reportâ both his global anomaly map for Febâ22 and his monthly global lower troposphere temperature anomaly 1979-2022.
e.d., you must have meant 1998! as the anomaly in 1991 was roughly three times smaller.
April 6, 2022
+1
April 6, 2022
The government’s net zero policies are not just pointless, they are actively damaging Britain and the quality of life of every British citizen. That’s why I accuse them of being cretins and traitors. If you disagree you need to tell me what the point is of us cutting our CO2 output when these cuts are more than made up for by the increases in CO2 output by the likes of China, India, etc. It’s like trying to empty a bucket of water with a teaspoon when someone else is filling it up with a jug. What’s the f*****g point??? Why is Boris never asked this question at PMQs?
We are told that Britain must “lead” the rest of the world (though it’s not clear why!). But you can only ‘lead’ if others are following you. If they’re not then you are not leading, you are walking in the wilderness on your own! And clearly China and the other main emitters – the ones that matter! – are NOT following us. So we are just engaging in pointless masochism. Boris might get some sort of perverted kick out of this but I don’t. Boris is the main culprit, as he has the principal responsibility, but ALL Tory MPs are guilty as they have not submitted their letters of no confidence to either kick him out or force him to change his policies.
Even if the government believes that action needs to be taken, the net zero target is 2050 – so why are we piling all these costs on ourselves NOW??? We do not need to spend billions now on idiotic wind turbines that only operate a fraction of the time – we can develop and build nuclear power stations (RR’s SMRs), deep geothermal energy and even nuclear fusion reactors, so that by 2050 all our energy will come form non-fossil fuel sources.
April 6, 2022
Global emissions of CO2 may indeed be up by 50% on the 1990 level but I would like to know what percentage of total atmospheric CO2 that represents and, does it make anything but a marginal difference?
Also, it is a trace gas in our atmosphere, representing only 0.04% but is essential for the growth of plantlife, and our very survival. So why is something that contributes to greening of the planet so dangerous?
As for global warming, that is simply not happening and our planet has been warmer in the not too distant past. Such as the Roman Warm and when the Vikings colonised Greenland! ( The clue is in the name).
April 6, 2022
update on my attempts to survive gas/electric price increases.
Now turned down all upstairs radiator thermostats, and 2 in less used downstairs rooms.
Eased gas boiler dial down a little.
Closed all upstairs windows after a reasonable change of air (instead of open half the day)..
Changed heating programmer to reduce daytime active, and stopping earlier in evening.
April 6, 2022
Because of energy companies running costs the less customers use the more expensive the productâŠ.we should all be using more energy to drive the costs downâŠ.now turn up that fossil fuel derived heater
April 6, 2022
are you willing to pay my estimated ÂŁ450 energy bill at April 2nd?
April 7, 2022
Sorry I canât help you out as it appears Iâm in the same boat as youâŠ..Iâm about to follow government advise ie wear a woolly hat, only heat one room for a limited time, wear an extra jumper, travel by bus to keep warm, visit the library to keep warm, erect childrens windmills in garden to power lights, pray for the green revolution and investigate alternative cheaper energy suppliers (I hear that Russia is selling cheap energyâŠI believe they have many branches in London)
April 6, 2022
Thinking out of the box, but maybe we need t0 re-think the future of Europe big time.
Because looming in the background is China with 1.5 billion people with increasingly formidable wealth, technology and sophisticated armaments (hypersonic weapons including weapons that can destroy satellites in the sky).
That in the future – but not a EU or Single Market – Europe comes more together over economics, culture and security. But where security is based on DEFENCE. To defend Europe from hostile, sophisticated armaments. And that one day, Russia, may even be included in some kind of friendly European group. Where instead of building hostile, aggressive armaments, they will be helping to create a defence system of the future. And where we tap into their know-how.
And where we would have a population of 750 million people – as a strong counterweight to other large superpowers. And where we share the same geography and similar culture – even religion (Christianity).
Again, not a EU or Single Market, but certainly closer links, economically, culturally and in particular in defence before the creation of The Common Market.
April 6, 2022
Lastly, to say ‘tough luck’ or something like that as someone said in comments on this site about hostile WMD attack is NOT good enough. We must and should and CAN defend ourselves to everything (in theory). Technology is amazing. Amazing things can be achieved. But we have to do something. Not just sit back and let people such as Pootin (and China) just build up hostile, sophisticated armaments and we just stand back, passively, and say there’s nothing we can do. We can’t stop them build this stuff but we can build stuff to defend from. And it’s not just Pootin and China. But all kinds of threats from terrorists and the rest. We CAN do it. We got brilliant universities, scientists and engineers. And it would support the economy too. We just need more of a CAN-DO attitude.
April 6, 2022
CO2 is not the enemy. That title belongs to “our” government.
April 6, 2022
Spot on DavidJ
April 6, 2022
The UN is an organisation highly susceptible to institutional capture. That is why those who want to foist their odious agenda on us make a beeline for it in New York. Some of those conveniently live there aleady. That is why we need to get out of it and govern ourselves according to our own lights.
This may require regime change because we certainly do not have a government either patriotic enough or capable enough to do it.
April 6, 2022
Apologies for my rant about Pootin
April 7, 2022
why apologise?
April 7, 2022
the fuel pumps in the town I am in have run dry of both diesel and petrol every day for the last 3 days.
clearly the nutters holding protests at the fuel depots are having an impact.
and clearly this is being kept off the front page news, presumably to stop panic buying?
can those in power please do something so that the decent ordinary people can continue to go about their business?
thanks
April 7, 2022
With our decision not to import Russian oil at the end of the year, we need to increase our domestic energy production PDQ, with the emphasis on cheap energy. The things that can be implemented in a reasonably short time scale are on shore wind farms, gas from fracking, roof solar panels and home insulation. Talk of a strategy can wait. In any event, can we afford to spend ÂŁ100 billion on nuclear power?
April 8, 2022
Rather ÂŁ100bn on nuclear power than ÂŁ180bn on HS2