Skip to content

The Cost Of Going Green

March 18, 2017

By Paul Homewood


Booker’s column today highlights the bit that most of the Press forgot to tell us about the Budget:





This is the table from the OBR, detailing Environmental Levies:


2.7 Environmental levies

£ billion

Outturn Forecast

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22
Carbon reduction commitment 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0
Warm home discount1 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4
Feed-in tariffs1 0.0 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6
Renewables obligation 3.9 4.6 5.4 6.3 6.6 6.8 7.0
Contracts for difference 0.0 0.1 0.7 1.3 1.9 2.7 3.2
Capacity market 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.7 1.0 1.3 1.4
Environmental levies 4.6 6.9 8.7 10.7 11.9 12.6 13.5
Memo: Expenditure on renewable heat incentive (RHI) 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2
Note: The ‘Environmental levies’ line above is consistent with the ‘Environmental levies’ line in Table 4.6 of the March 2017 Economic and fiscal outlook.
1 The ONS have yet to include Warm Home Discount and Feed-in Tariffs in their outturn numbers. If they were included, they would have been £0.3bn and £1.1bn respectively.

  1. Robert Fairless permalink
    March 18, 2017 11:41 pm

    We have been taken over by madmen. They devise impossible schemes with objectives that are impossible to achieve and create remedies for the inevitable failures which are themselves products of fevered minds.
    The madmen are rewarded for their failures by knighthoods, huge salaries and pensions and the assured adulation of their political masters.
    The huge financial loss (profit is banned) is paid for by the poor plebs who are forced to install technical gadgets which serve no useful purpose other than to sit in under heated houses during the winters and meanwhile a privileged few become rich beyond their dreams.

    • Graeme No.3 permalink
      March 19, 2017 12:10 am

      Back in the freezing fifties and sixties millions of British emigrated to sunny Australia. I wouldn’t recommend this action now as our politicians are displaying the same signs of lunacy. South Australia is even more advanced as we are having blackouts, and will have for years to come. Current State and Federal policy makes Alice in Wonderland read like a dull sensible report.

    • 1saveenergy permalink
      March 19, 2017 1:03 pm

      “We have been taken over by madmen”

      No Robert, WE voted them in, all they’ve done is take advantage of the situation, just like any top predator does.

      • Robert Fairless permalink
        March 19, 2017 4:05 pm

        If you think I would ever be tempted or induced to vote for the likes of Kinnock Blair, Brown or their ilk you are mistaken. For that matter, those in the other political parties I found equally repulsive and untrustworthy, such as Ashdown, Cameron, Major, Heath etc.
        For what all of them did to my country I felt a deep sense of shame and despair.
        As a WWII veteran I have a special sense of loyalty and patriotism for the citizens of this country as well as members of the Commonwealth who were betrayed by all of the above traitors.

      • Gerry, England permalink
        March 20, 2017 1:59 pm

        And it is our mistake to keep voting these wretches in (excluding me as I haven’t voted in any election since the 90s). The electorate get the politicians they deserve. The people need to abstain until presented with some quality. And we need the Harrogate Agenda to bring back democracy. No point just voting without any power – that is just half the word.

  2. Tom Dowter permalink
    March 19, 2017 5:34 am

    Booker appears to have damaged a strong case by over-stating it.

    Including things like air passenger duty in the cost of going green is a bit of a stretch. Although it is often sold as a tax on CO2, its proceeds are not hypothecated for climate change mitigation. It is simply another tax, and, if it were abolished, it would have to be replaced by something else.

    The only real costs to the nation are those whereby we replace certain activities with less productive ones. This applies to biomass, solar power and wind power when compared with fossil fuel generation.

    • March 19, 2017 11:04 am

      I agree Tom

    • Gerry, England permalink
      March 20, 2017 1:56 pm

      No, if the reasoning behind it is to reduce CO2 by making flying less attractive (ie more expensive) even if they are pretty certain it will just be paid, it is a green tax. If it is scrapped and they need more money to waste then they should find it another way.

  3. March 19, 2017 6:36 am

    Christopher Booker has also not accounted for the cost we have to pay for the thousands (or hundreds of thousands) of civil servants up and down the land who administer the green policies of the politicians – those in DBEIS, in Defra, in the Home Office, in DOA, the NHS etc and in local government with titles such as “sustainability officer”, “climate change officer”; and not to mention all those writing and enforcing planning policies to ensure that our lives are run sustainably and will take account of the impacts of “climate change”. I would surmise that every civil servant throughout the UK wastes some, if not all of their time, on “climate change” issues.

    • Athelstan permalink
      March 19, 2017 10:03 am

      The great global warming scam just will not lay down and die in Britain why do we have to suffer so much more than the others?

      Alas, the green public sector Empire reaches into, your, our every crevice and facet of daily life.

      Promulgating nebulous BS like ‘sustainability’ is such a vague term ‘saving the planet’ – who could gainsay it, who would dare if you worked in one of these public sector collectives, say a local council taliban command centre civic hall office?

      I used to be agog, at the stories of the DDR, their network of apparatchiks and people spies, everyone peeking, prying into everyone else’s lives – East Germany was social dystopia on amphetamines.
      And yet – observe – what has been wrought albeit by bureaucratic sleight, a slightly different methodology but the resultant paranoia over even the slightest critique, the way the rabble can be roused and marchers put on the streets to fight for ‘green’ – anti fracking nimbys not least. Picture the earnestly dedicated eco soldiers disseminating UN agenda propaganda – agitprop in skools. The green mania has metamorphosed into a monster, a Hydra with multi headed, venomous, writhing green snakeheads.
      It all costs, spreadshit phil tells us by way of artifice, “we must tax you more!” – said mother theresa…………….and yet if, if some bold minister was to say – ahem like the Donald is doing stateside – er hang on a minute – how many £billions could be saved in just one small step?

      SAVE £our Economy!!! Thats RIGHT and Bin it, bin the green agenda, bin the green Hydra: Britain cannot afford you ‘it’ any more and guess what, the world will continue to spin on its axis just like before – no green guff no buts.

      • HotScot permalink
        March 19, 2017 11:45 am


        there is one, perhaps faint, hope; in that whilst the Green Goblins have hijacked entire governments and civil servants to spread their disease, they need billions of £/$ to maintain their momentum.

        They rely entirely on taxpayers money literally handed to them. They rely on government supported charities that have sprung up like spring daffodils since the bonfire of the quango’s’ and are now, in fact, just that themselves, quango’s.

        We sceptics, on the other hand, have struggled in the wake of the money driven propaganda and wasteful government spending on renewables. We have relied on the enthusiasm and dedication of people like Paul and Anthony over at WUWT devoting their time for nothing, contributors, scientists, and dummies like me who only have a modicum of common sense.

        However, the green money is being slashed by Trump, not overnight as hoped, but gradually. Will that affect Paul and Anthony? Not in the slightest because they have survived on nothing for years and done a damn good job.

        Will Trumps actions affect the UK and Australia, two havens for the maddest Green Pimples? Damn right it will; they will lose access to volumes of useless scientific research to distort. They will lose access to their prominent supporters like Mann and Gore because as the money dries up, so will they.

        The sceptical movement will flourish as bogus sources for research into the climate become more and more difficult to access.

        The media, well it’s always looking for new and ground breaking stories, so expect the next round of revelations to be “We were all conned by GW”, “The Greens lied to us”, “What’s happened to all our tax money?” etc. Then Paul and Anthony can perhaps relax a bit as all their hard work is recognised, and of course the contributions by yourself and many other knowledgeable commentators.

        Softly Softly, catchee monkey.

        Thank you all, you will be vindicated.

    • March 20, 2017 12:53 pm

      No Phillip, there are some very serious solutions being thought through by these wonderful people who give their all to counter the extreme costs of man made warming.
      Just be grateful.

  4. AlecM permalink
    March 19, 2017 10:48 am

    With fraccing and micro-generators in a high proportion of homes and businesses we can divorce the renewables producers and their captive politicians.

  5. March 19, 2017 1:27 pm

    Surely that cost for FIT is magnitudes too small ?
    I’m guessing it only includes the government component and not the part that Granny pays in her electricity bill when her energy supplier is forced to pay £100, £120, £140/MWh for solar on/offshore wind, tidal gimmicks when the market rate for electricity from gas/coal is less than £40/MWh

  6. j martin permalink
    March 19, 2017 9:00 pm

    £700 a year subsidy. Makes me wonder at what point it becomes cheaper to generate one’s own electricity.

    • bea permalink
      March 19, 2017 10:33 pm

      If you have a stream on your property…it is not difficult. If you live in a flat in Walsall, it is a little more difficult.

  7. Svend Ferdinandsen permalink
    March 20, 2017 12:01 am

    Unfortunately it is in norwegian,but be very afraid.
    It is about artificial clouds and increasing the cloud cover..
    My problem is that if you don’t increase the amount of water you just change the place of the clouds. And who knows how clouds works, certainly not the climate scientists.

  8. March 20, 2017 11:27 am

    Reblogged this on ajmarciniak.

  9. March 20, 2017 12:31 pm

    As ever, simplistic computer modelling with little understanding of all the inputs and no understanding of the results of dicking around with complex weather mechanisms.

    I have no doubt they would cause unforeseen problems as Ma Gaia seeks to rebalance in the face of their ‘Solar Resource Management’.

    • March 20, 2017 12:41 pm

      Currently their government and coalition supporters are agreed on increasing bio fuel percentage to 20% by 2020 (note the usual totemic 20/20 figure!).

      This though many experts tell them this is unlikely to actually reduce CO2 emissions, will be hugely expensive and will be damaging for many older vehicles.

      PS I read Norwegian.

  10. Gerry, England permalink
    March 20, 2017 2:03 pm

    If the politicians are hell bent on going ahead with plans to cap energy price rises, I wonder if the Big Six will be brave enough to sit there and tell them the truth about the costs government add to the bills. Or will they have too much subsidy elsewhere to risk doing so?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: