What Bob Ward Forgot To Tell You
By Paul Homewood
Bob Ward has responded to news, that MPs are calling for decarbonisation targets for 2028-32 postponed, with a typically misleading reply.
Let’s ignore the fact that the Committee on Climate Change is neither independent or expert. They are no more than a bunch of committed alarmists, and any pronouncements from them needs to be viewed in that light.
Let’s instead start by looking at what the CCC actually say in the Fifth Carbon Budget:
Apart from saying it is the lowest cost path, there is no mention of costs, and no supporting data is supplied, either in the report or supplementary files.
Indeed, how could there be, as nobody can have the slightest idea what various technologies and costs will look like in twenty years time. In other words, it is little more than meaningless waffle.
But let’s consider what we do know, again according to the CCC.
In the Technical Report, they have this to say about costs:
Even on these figures (at 2014 prices), meeting the CCC’s target will cost the UK economy £145 billion between now and 2030. And this cost, which only applies to the power sector, is also deliberately and misleadingly understated, as it assumes a Carbon Price Floor, rising to £78/tCO2 by 2030 (currently at £18/t).
This trick artificially inflates the cost of gas power generation, thus making renewable subsidies appear less.
The CCC dishonestly do not show the effect of this, but their detailed workings suggest this would amount to an extra cost of £1.7 billion a year.
Also note that this dishonestly also does not include the costs of the Capacity Market Mechanism, ie the cost of providing standby power.
As I say, this only applies to power. There are numerous other costs which are not included, such as converting to uneconomical electric cars, the hugely expensive electrification of domestic heating and knock on costs on industry.
Only a charlatan would forget to point all of this out.
Ward’s whole argument is that, if we don’t decarbonise now, it will be much more expensive to do so later on. This is arrant and obvious nonsense.
For a start we simply don’t know whether new technologies will reduce the cost of decarbonisation in years to come. For instance, what if a commercially viable form of CCS could be found – or fission power? Wouldn’t we feel idiots for having signed up to a obscenely expensive 35 year contract for Hinkley Point and utterly pointless wind farms?
But much worse, we are even told by the CCC that the cost of renewable power is already gradually coming down.
In what sane world would we be signing up for long term contracts at sky high prices, when we could wait a few years and get it at a much reduced price? And all in the name of a purely arbitrary and unnecessary target.
Bob Ward, the CCC and nobody else have the faintest idea what will happen in twenty, thirty or forty years time. What we do know is that the recommendations of the Committee on Climate Change will inflict on the UK a huge and immensely damaging cost in the next decade or so, costs which will not be borne by our competitors in most of the EU, or the rest of the world.