Skip to content

Comrade Harrabin’s Trump Card

January 5, 2017
tags: , ,

By Paul Homewood

 

image

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b086s95f

 

Roger Harrabin’s programme on Radio 4 this week, Climate Change: The Trump Card, was an exercise in delusional groupthink, stunning even by BBC standards.

 

It spent the first half in a sob fest about how the wicked Trump was going to ruin the world’s climate single handed. It related how all of the attendees at the Marrakesh climate conference were in a severe state of depression, when they found out he had won the election.

Then there followed interviews with the likes of Mary Robinson, long time signed up member of UN internationalism, and Hans Schnellnhuber of the Potsdam Institute. You certainly are not going to hear the truth from those two.

 

But then, we discover that there is really nothing to worry about at all, because those nice governments in China and India are going to take up the US mantle, and save the world.

 

 

China, we are told, wants to lead the world in “clean energy” technology, although, as even the programme admits, what they really want is to dominate the manufacture of the technology, something they are already well on with.

Then Corinne Le Quere of the Tyndall Centre is wheeled on to point out that China is shutting down many old coal power plants in urban centres because of air pollution. This, we are assured, will mean that China’s emissions of CO2 will start to drop much sooner than expected.

Nobody seems to have told her that China’s Five Year Plan, published two months ago, calls for an increase in coal fired capacity of 39% by 2020.

As for China’s commitment to renewable energy, the same plan aims to grow wind and solar capacity to 320 GW.

While that might sound an impressive number, it will only raise wind and solar’s share of electricity output to 7%.

 

Then we move on to India, and a recorded segment from an earlier Harrabin trip.

We hear about his visit to the world’s largest solar farm at Kamuthi in southern India, part of Modi’s “solar dream”.

We know from India’s INDC that 40% of electric power capacity will come from non-fossil fuel sources by 2030.

However, much of this is intended to come from nuclear power. And because they are so intermittent, the contribution from wind and solar will be much less, just 12% of India’s electricity demand in 2030.

And all of this comes at a huge cost. Again according to India’s INDC, it will cost $2.5 trillion to meet India’s climate change actions between now and 2030. Much of this they were hoping would come from the US.

And nowhere does Harrabin mention the massive expansion in coal fired capacity, which India has planned.

 

 

For a dose of reality, we should perhaps consult the Exxon Energy Outlook, just published this week.

This estimates that CO2 emissions in China/India will rise from 11bn tonnes in 2015, to 13.4bn by 2040. By that stage, they will account for 37% of the world’s emissions.

Some leadership!

 

Does he really believe that China and India are going to abandon their pursuit of economic growth, that can only occur with cheap, reliable energy?

Does he really believe that they will take over the US role in providing hundreds of billions in climate aid, money which they themselves have been banking on?

 

If Harrabin actually talked to some people outside of his tightknit circle of climate scientists, Greenpeace activists, renewable lobbyists and UN cronies, he might have discovered some harsh truths.

Instead we are left with a wishy washy collection of wishful thinking and mutual back slapping.

Advertisements
48 Comments
  1. John Palmer permalink
    January 5, 2017 8:15 pm

    …. and you expected anything else, Paul?

  2. Broadlands permalink
    January 5, 2017 8:20 pm

    I noticed that this programme is listed as Genre: Factual. Does ignoring other evidence make it more factual? Should they be supported 1000%?

  3. January 5, 2017 8:23 pm

    It is delusional to think these views cannot be fact checked and rebutted with very little effort. Maybe they think most won’t. Enough will to expose the dishonesty, as you have here.

    • Gerry, England permalink
      January 6, 2017 2:05 pm

      Too many people think of the BBC as it was decades ago and would be stunned to see how biased they are and how many lies they pump out to support their political position. Surely Auntie wouldn’t do that they would say. A conservative government would end it but who knows when we might get one of them.

  4. January 5, 2017 8:24 pm

    Situation normal Paul. We know where denial lives.

  5. January 5, 2017 8:30 pm

    Be careful about following links to BBC iPlayer. If you are not covered by a TV license at your viewing location you may now be held to ransom for viewing iPlayer content from the BBC.
    http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/bbc-will-require-login-iplayer-mobile-apps-2017/1410192

    • Joe Public permalink
      January 5, 2017 9:54 pm

      Thanking you from a friend. 😉

  6. BLACK PEARL permalink
    January 5, 2017 8:41 pm

    Must be very convenient to have a nationwide state sponsored media outlet to broadcast, on all airwaves, your personal beliefs, plus agenda riddled highly funded documentaries, with the added ability to snuff out those who contradict them by not giving similar air time.and funding.
    And they criticise other certain Govts for suppressing and malipulating the freedoms & opinions of their populations.
    Its time they were made to hand back the 300 grand they’ve had off the EU superstate since the referendum, back to the people.

    • John Palmer permalink
      January 5, 2017 9:06 pm

      +10!!

  7. Bitter&twisted permalink
    January 5, 2017 9:03 pm

    Horrorbin is the worst kind of bottom feeder. The duplicitous bastard phoned me up some years ago about “climategate” trying to find out how much “Big Oil” were paying me to “harass” the poor, innocent “scientists” at UEA.
    I hate his guts.

  8. Michael Oxenham permalink
    January 5, 2017 9:50 pm

    Kate Humble has caught Horobinitis in the Yellowstone NP— all the wildlife is doomed—sigh….

  9. Dave Ward permalink
    January 5, 2017 10:02 pm

    The Beeb are at it again – there’s a programme about Yellowstone park on BBC2 at the moment, and Kate Humble is giving it large on the “Climate Change” front. Predictably, higher temperatures are giving rise to all sorts of problems – a pine destroying beetle is not being killed off during winter, and is devastating the forests. But when we were being told that “up to 80% of trees are affected” the aerial shots showed nothing of the sort – more like 8%!!! Grizzly bears are having to adapt (just like creatures have been doing for thousands of years), and moving into farming areas. Wildfires are becoming more frequent, because the rains are not having time to soak into the fallen trees. These fires are (apparently) now as bad as they were some 300 years ago – before man was chucking lots of CO2 into the atmosphere – yet, of course, that wasn’t mentioned. I could only watch a short segment – it’s just too damn depressing…

    • mikewaite permalink
      January 5, 2017 10:36 pm

      It was , IMO , a rather deceitful programme in that no attempt was made to look at the bigger picture of natural variability of temperature and snowfall in Yellowstone , as I commented on the previous thread;
      https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2017/01/05/rss-confirm-2016-is-tied-with-1998-as-warmest-year/#comment-84487
      I found a source , dont know how reliable it is , which gives monthly temperatures and snowfall fo the last 4 decades at least , and the variability is clearly present without invoking manmade climate change :
      http://weather-warehouse.com/WeatherHistory/PastWeatherData_TowerFalls_YellowstoneNationalPark_WY_January.html
      (you can cycle years and months ).
      Also the presenters, in claiming climate change disasters for the wolf population did not , so far as I can remember , once mention that all wolf packs were exterminated , by disease, but mainly by shooting, in 1926 and only reintroduced on an experimental basis in 1995 .
      I could mention also their inability to see that their concern for the fate (which did not appear to be so dire as expected) of the Great Owl does not fit very nicely with their presumed approval of windfarms for mitigating climate change and the US permission to kill up to 1000 eagles per year. But it is hopeless to go on. I just hope Kate Humble is not so silly as she is made to seem , but is an unwitting tool of BBC producers with an agenda .

      • roger permalink
        January 6, 2017 9:24 am

        Their concern for the fate of the Great Owl is not misplaced, as it’s habitat and nesting sites are ruthlessly cut down, pelletised and exported to Drax, where a further unit has been converted.
        This is rapid climate change in action with no time for the owls to adapt by developing a migration strategy.
        Not so much follow the money, but from the owls point of view, follow the forest.

    • It doesn't add up... permalink
      January 6, 2017 9:51 am

      I’m sure the Daily Mirror could outdo them with a tale of the risk of the Yellowstone caldera blowing. Now that of course really would change the climate.

      • January 6, 2017 1:18 pm

        I was about to mention that, but you saved me the trouble. As most of the species are older than the last time it blew (some 640,000 ya), some survived to mate another day…..been there, done that.

  10. January 5, 2017 10:17 pm

    There is little doubt that the BBC has ramped up its climate change propaganda machine so that it is mentioned in any pseudo-documentary, pseudo-scientific or pseudo-news programme. Of course it is just the same with regard to Brexit and Donald Trump. Channel 4 is also in full climate change propaganda mode, with it being mentioned on every evening’s news. I’m not sure what effect they think all this propaganda will have.

    • CheshireRed permalink
      January 5, 2017 11:46 pm

      This is pre-Trump green blob pushback. In short, they’re absolutely shitting it.

    • January 6, 2017 11:29 am

      Sky news also….

    • January 6, 2017 2:22 pm

      The propaganda will convince many youngsters that past climates were very benign with little variation, but as time passes they will get used to the “horrific” climate of today and start to ask why it is necessary to part with so much money in order to (not) change it.

  11. January 5, 2017 10:48 pm

    more fake news from the bbc
    “climate refugees”
    https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=X9Cg8NBEYsI

  12. January 5, 2017 10:52 pm

    They don’t even bother to mention that air pollution has nothing to do with CO2, for the obvious reason that they are happy if you are fooled by their silence into thinking it does.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      January 6, 2017 3:23 pm

      Oldbrew: air pollution looks black; Carbon is black; what colour is the bogeyman? What a way to teach children about good and evil. Words fail me (that I can use here).

  13. Athelstan permalink
    January 6, 2017 12:47 am

    Harrabin, has little or no intellectual span, I would get more sense out of talking about high-resolution transmission molecular absorption and comparisons, carbon dioxide photon wave band absorption rates, if I consulted my niece’s “bestist mate”, the young lady’s pet Gerbil.

    On Corinne Le Quere, I always have a vision of the sea cow, a very ugly but nevertheless totally harmless grazing marine blob, useless and which should be unseen and definitely – not heard.

    • Bloke down the pub permalink
      January 6, 2017 10:32 am

      Harrabin is a lot of things, but I’m sure he’s not stupid. He understands the figures quoted by Paul as well as the next person, but if he told the full story on the Beeb , his reason for being would disappear . No, while I think Harrabin is a lying two faced cynical arse, I don’t think he’s stupid.

      • Gerry, England permalink
        January 6, 2017 1:54 pm

        Constructive ignorance at work. He has no interest in gaining knowledge.

  14. January 6, 2017 12:52 am

    Harrabin is a self-serving pain in the arse! His understanding of climate is inversely proportional to the salary he “earns” from the British Bullshit Co-Operative.

  15. January 6, 2017 4:27 am

    The BBC are so completely biased that its safe to say they are institutionally incapable of honesty and the only thing any sceptic should advocate is shutting the BBC down.

  16. Ex-expat Colin permalink
    January 6, 2017 7:52 am

    Channel 4 News last night at the US HQ for Climate research Bollox somewhere there. The reporter standing in about 8 inches of snow and 5 layers of North Face at -15deg C. Tough stuff because he could hardly string sentences and then a parting shot from some semi bald old twerp who looks after the Global CO2 record…he said, whatever happens they will continue on the fight, or some such sh*t! Sorry, memory retention on this stuff is auto dire?

    • January 6, 2017 11:28 am

      I saw it too. You got it about right. I think it was outside NOAA HQ.

  17. Malcolm permalink
    January 6, 2017 8:54 am

    Paul, it’s about time you found a pretext to get yourself onto the Today programme. If you present yourself as a denier you will be rebuffed but if you present yourself as an academic examining statistics perhaps you will stand a chance (on the programme today and academic challenged the government statistics regarding the Brexit campaign). What the BBC is doing is propagandising and if they can coerce the facts in this area of public discussion then they can do it anywhere. You represent the public interest and the lack of scrupulousness in what is being disseminated.

    • January 6, 2017 2:31 pm

      Climate Historian is a perfect description for Paul, they can’t argue against that, despite trying to change history themselves.

  18. Coeur de Lion permalink
    January 6, 2017 9:22 am

    How many harrabins was it worth? I rated Climate Change By Numbers at six. And recent coverage of Marrakech at three. Shall we say four? ( a harrabin is a dimensionless subjective measure of public deception)

    • NeilC permalink
      January 6, 2017 10:07 am

      Do you mean the levels of ecoterrorism?

  19. NeilC permalink
    January 6, 2017 10:31 am

    Extract from BBC Charter

    “B2.1
    The Director-General is the Editor-in-Chief of the BBC and is accountable for the BBC’s editorial and creative output.

    B2.2
    The Executive Board is responsible for ensuring compliance with the Editorial Guidelines, the Ofcom Broadcasting Code as it applies to the BBC and any other relevant codes, policies and guidelines and is accountable to the Trust for such compliance in all BBC output, 14 (except Election and Referendum Guidelines from 1 January 2017 under the transitional arrangements of the BBC’s Charter commencing on that date). In particular, the Executive
    Board must do all it can to ensure that controversial subjects are treated with due accuracy and impartiality in all output that consists of news or deals with matters of public policy, or of political or industrial controversy.

    B2.3
    The Executive Board will ensure that the BBC World Service maintains high standards of editorial integrity.

    B2.4
    The Executive Board is required to report regularly to the Trust on editorial compliance and to submit an impartiality report to the Trust twice a year. The Executive Board
    is required to inform the Trust of serious editorial breaches as they arise. The Executive
    Board shall, as required by the Trust, also provide the Trust with a report on any serious editorial breach (and the potential gravity of any editorial breach shall be determined by Trust).”

    http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/regulatory_framework/protocols/2016/b2_editorial_standards.pdf

    Extract from Editorial standards
    The Trust is responsible for approving the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines. These Guidelines are the key foundation for the maintenance of high editorial standards in everything broadcast or produced by the BBC. They cover a range of standards including impartiality, harm and offence, accuracy, fairness, privacy and dealing with children and young people as contributors. Through the links below, you can find details of the various ways the Trust seeks to ensure that the BBC lives up to these standards, such as acting as final arbiter on complaints and by holding impartiality reviews on specific topics.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/our_work/editorial_standards/

    The BBC constantly break these codes on impartiality, accuracy and fairness

    • January 6, 2017 2:34 pm

      The World Service is even worse than the domestic BBC, recent example: a large iceberg about to break away from Antarctica is caused by climate change, warming seas, etc.

  20. January 6, 2017 11:26 am

    There is another example of bias from the BBC today – it’s by Matt McCrap and concerns the impending Antarctic iceberg.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38522954

    “The researchers say that this is a geographical and not a climate event. The rift has been present for decades, they say, but it has punched through at this particular time.

    It is believed that climate warming has brought forward the likely separation of the iceberg but the scientists say they have no direct evidence to support this.”

    Why mention “climate warming if it has nothing to do with it, unless the idea is to implant “climate change” in peoples’ minds, ie pure propaganda?

    It would be good if he could say who these people are who do “believe”. Perhaps McCrap is thinking of moving to be the BBC religious affairs correspondent.

    • NeilC permalink
      January 6, 2017 11:32 am

      I doubt it would change his beliefs

      • A C Osborn permalink
        January 6, 2017 3:21 pm

        They did actually have a real Glacier expert on this afternoon who clearly explained how Glaciers work and how this was perfectly normal.
        About time too.

  21. Michael Oxenham permalink
    January 6, 2017 11:55 am

    Remember 28gate 2006 onwards. Its worth reading Booker & Delingpole’s comments again. High time the Guvment looked at what is clearly a Beeb editorial policy on CAGW. Maybe Pres.Trump could help. Will the Beeb be sending its usual 300 to his Inauguration including Horobin?

  22. January 6, 2017 11:57 am

    Alarmism central crossing borders, an article by RH in the Guardian this week.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/03/indian-firm-carbon-capture-breakthrough-carbonclean

  23. dennisambler permalink
    January 6, 2017 12:42 pm

    Link no longer available
    http://www.antarctica.ac.uk / News and Information / Press Releases / 1998

    “Giant iceberg is born in Antarctica”

    Today 13 October 1998 the British Antarctic Survey received a satellite image
    showing an iceberg, approximately 150 km x 35 km, has broken off Ronne Ice
    Shelf, in the Weddell Sea, Antarctica (approx 77 S 50 W). In this region the
    front of the ice has now retreated to its 1947 position. The Ronne iceberg is
    four times the size of the last large iceberg to calve in the region which came
    from Larsen Ice Shelf.

    Dr Doake said “Regular calving of large ice bergs is a natural part of the
    life-cycle of an ice shelf. We have been expecting this event for some time….
    Although ice shelves are retreating on the Antarctic Peninsula as a result of
    regional warming, we do not believe that this event is associated with climate
    change.”

    http://www.meteor.iastate.edu/gccourse/ocean/ross.html

    British Antarctic Survey Press Release 1/95 27 February 1995

    “One Small Ice Shelf Dies, One Giant Iceberg Born”

    “The ice shelf which formerly occupied Prince Gustav Channel and connected James Ross Island to the Antarctic Peninsula has disintegrated. For the first time in recorded history, James Ross Island is circumnavigable. The new iceberg calved from the Larsen Ice Shelf and measures 78 km x 37 km, (roughly the size of Oxfordshire), and is around 200 m thick.

    The calving of icebergs is normal within the lifecycle of ice shelves, which may be quiet for decades between calving events. Exceptionally the calving of one large iceberg may be a fore-runner of a more serious disintegration. It will take time before the implications are completely understood.”

    • January 9, 2017 6:19 pm

      Yes indeed. Ian Plimer has much to say on this, whereby carving rates has much to do with the past thousands of years when the glaciers were developed.
      Rather like our guts. what we produce is a function of what we eat! There is a time lapse. Am I out of order here?
      Current local weather appears marginal in this perspective. After all it is Climate not weather we are considering.
      (One data point on the climate scale represents approx. 30 years. It takes three data points to even estimate trend. I’m 81 so only have experienced 2.5 data points. Therefore can’t comment.)

  24. January 6, 2017 1:28 pm

    Rush Limbaugh’s “Morning Update” this morning was about the “ship of fools” proving that the Arctic ice has melted so much last fall that you can sail clear through the passage. They are stuck in the ice!! Much like the last load of geniuses who were stuck in the Antarctic ice while “proving” there was none.

  25. Vernon E permalink
    January 6, 2017 3:23 pm

    Lord Beaverbrook you are absolutely right about Sky News channels (including the daily Ian King Live) suddenly having become rabidly anti Brexit and pro eco-alarmism. What on earth is Murdoch up to?

  26. Tony McKenna permalink
    January 6, 2017 7:39 pm

    Is anyone else seeing an avalanche of unsolicited recommendations to buy Tesla shares or miss out on the massive opportunity it represents?
    I assume that some big players are hoping to offload the crap before it collapses and have the PR machine on at full speed.
    Quite heartening really (if you don’t think about the innocents who get dragged in. )

Trackbacks

  1. It’s the facts the BBC leaves out about climate change that are important  – MMN

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: