Skip to content

The Great Folly Of Our Age–Booker

April 8, 2017

By Paul Homewood

 

image

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4392220/Green-initiatives-disasters-says-Christopher-Booker.html

 

Booker with a hard hitting piece about the Climate Change Act in the Mail:

 

What a parable for our times the great diesel scandal has been, as councils vie to see which can devise the heaviest taxes on nearly half the cars in Britain because they are powered by nasty, polluting diesel.

This week, it was announced many diesel drivers will soon have to pay fully £24 a day to drive into Central London, while 35 towns across the country are thinking of following suit. Already some councils charge up to £90 more for a permit to park a diesel car.

The roots of this debacle go back to the heyday of Tony Blair’s government, when his chief scientific adviser, Sir David King, became obsessed with the need to fight global warming.

Although he was an expert in ‘surface chemistry’ — roughly speaking, the study of what happens when, for example, a liquid meets a gas — King had no qualifications in climate science.

'Every single green scheme politicians have fallen for has failed to achieve any of the results claimed for them and costing us more billions every year' says Christopher Booker

‘Every single green scheme politicians have fallen for has failed to achieve any of the results claimed for them and costing us more billions every year’ says Christopher Booker

On one occasion he famously told an environmental audit committee of MPs that the world was warming so dangerously fast that, by the end of this century, the only continent on earth left habitable would be Antarctica.

His light-bulb moment came when he learned that diesel emits less CO2 than petrol. What a brilliant way it would be to save the planet, he thought, to manipulate the tax system to encourage motorists to make the switch — which millions did.

And here we are 15 years later, being told that, as an unexpected side-effect, more than ten million diesel vehicles on Britain’s roads are chucking out so much nitrogen oxide and other toxic pollutants they are being linked to 12,000 premature deaths a year.

This is only the latest in a seemingly endless flow of examples of supposedly ‘green’ government schemes which, one after another, turn out to have been standing common sense on its head, at a cost which is rocketing up by billions of pounds a year.

There may be other competitors for the title of the greatest scandal in Britain today, but this is so crazy that it is time we all woke up to how damagingly mad it has become.

Nine years ago, MPs voted almost unanimously for then Labour minister Ed Miliband’s Climate Change Act, thus making Britain the only country in the world committed by law to cut its ‘carbon emissions’ by 80 per cent in just 40 years.

Not one of those politicians bothered to wonder how in practice such an absurdly ambitious target could be met: which is why we have since seen successive governments thrashing about trying to adopt one dotty ‘green’ scheme after another.

Last week, I was asked in conversation: ‘Why is it that almost all these green schemes seem to end up as a fiasco?’ To which I replied: ‘You’ve only got one word wrong there. You can leave out the word “almost”.’

The truth is that every single green scheme the politicians have fallen for has proved to be a total fiasco: failing to achieve any of the results claimed for them and costing us more billions with every year that passes.

Consider the scandal of Drax in Yorkshire, until recently the largest, cleanest, most efficient coal-fired power station in Europe.

Now, thanks to an annual half-a-billion pounds of public subsidy, Drax has been switching from burning coal to millions of tons a year of wood pellets.

'This week, it was announced many diesel drivers will soon have to pay fully £24 a day to drive into Central London, while 35 towns across the country are thinking of following suit. Already some councils charge up to £90 more for a permit to park a diesel car.'

‘This week, it was announced many diesel drivers will soon have to pay fully £24 a day to drive into Central London, while 35 towns across the country are thinking of following suit. Already some councils charge up to £90 more for a permit to park a diesel car.’

Absurdly, these are shipped 3,500 miles to Britain from the U.S., where vast acreages of virgin forest are being felled, supposedly to be replaced with new trees that will eventually soak up all the CO2 emitted by burning them.

Unfortunately, a bright spark has just pointed out in a report for a respected think-tank that it could take a replacement tree hundreds of years to grow to maturity — which would be far too long to have any supposed effect on any climate change. (It should be noted that the former coalition energy minister Chris Huhne, having been released from prison for perverting the course of justice over speeding points, became the European chairman of a firm called Zilkha Biomass, which makes its money supplying wood pellets from North America to Europe.)

The bottom line is that a new report has just confirmed that, far from reducing its CO2 footprint, Drax is now emitting more than it did when it was only burning coal.

Meanwhile, why is Northern Ireland going through its worst political crisis since the end of the Troubles? Because of the collapse of its power-sharing government over another green scheme, the Renewable Heat Incentive.

When businesses discovered that for every £100 they paid for wood chips to heat their offices, warehouses and factories, UK taxpayers would pay them £160 in subsidies, not surprisingly they kept their boilers running round the clock as if there were no tomorrow.

'This is only the latest in a seemingly endless flow of examples of supposedly ‘green’ government schemes which, one after another, turn out to have been standing common sense on its head, at a cost which is rocketing up by billions of pounds a year.'

‘This is only the latest in a seemingly endless flow of examples of supposedly ‘green’ government schemes which, one after another, turn out to have been standing common sense on its head, at a cost which is rocketing up by billions of pounds a year.’

When it was discovered that, by 2020, we will have paid those businesses £1 billion — even to heat buildings left empty for years — this created such a scandal that it brought down the government.

That example made headlines, but the same is happening quietly in the rest of the country, too, where owners of large houses openly boast that they are running their boilers flat out, even in summer, to cash in on the racket which gives them a 60 per cent profit on every £1 they spend on wood chips.

Some of that wood is now coming from clearing priceless ancient woodlands, such as a National Trust estate in Cheshire which the charity plans to turn back into open heathland.

Another scandal created under the same scheme is the way canny developers are plonking down large industrial installations called ‘anaerobic digesters’ in the middle of the English countryside, to turn huge quantities of crops into small quantities of methane for the national gas grid.

Official figures show that, thanks to subsidies costing us more than £200 million a year, 131,000 acres of maize are now being grown to feed the anaerobic digesters, on land formerly used for food crops.

'Then there was the dream of ‘carbon capture and storage’, for which Gordon Brown’s government offered £4 billion for companies to come up with a way of removing CO2 from the coal and gas used to make electricity, and then piping it away for burial in holes under the North Sea'

‘Then there was the dream of ‘carbon capture and storage’, for which Gordon Brown’s government offered £4 billion for companies to come up with a way of removing CO2 from the coal and gas used to make electricity, and then piping it away for burial in holes under the North Sea’

Separately, toxic spills of the ammonia that is used in the process have repeatedly poisoned livestock and fish in nearby fields and rivers.

Then there was the dream of ‘carbon capture and storage’, for which Gordon Brown’s government offered £4 billion for companies to come up with a way of removing CO2 from the coal and gas used to make electricity, and then piping it away for burial in holes under the North Sea.

Only one Scottish power station took up the offer, spending £1 billion before it discovered that it didn’t work.

But even though geologists say it can never work, the Government still talks about it as the only way it can allow coal and gas-fired power plants — which still supply more than half our electricity — to stay in business.

Consider, too, the not-so brilliant idea of bribing motorists to switch to supposedly ‘green’ all-electric cars. So far, this has cost us more than £50 million in subsidies, for the mere 50,000 cars which have been sold, at £25,000 or more a time. This is only a fraction of the 26 million cars on Britain’s roads.

And what gets cynically hidden by the authorities is that much of the electricity used to charge their batteries comes, of course, from fossil fuels. Add in emissions from the manufacturing process and, unsurprisingly, these vehicles give out more CO2 than they are claimed to save.

'But even though geologists say it can never work, the Government still talks about it as the only way it can allow coal and gas-fired power plants — which still supply more than half our electricity — to stay in business.'

‘But even though geologists say it can never work, the Government still talks about it as the only way it can allow coal and gas-fired power plants — which still supply more than half our electricity — to stay in business.’

Yet under the latest ‘carbon budget’, a five-yearly environmental plan nodded through by MPs to meet our commitments under Miliband’s misguided Climate Change Act, they still fondly imagine that, within 13 years, 60 per cent of all Britain’s cars will be electric.

The latest wheeze to catch the attention of gullible politicians has been a mega-project to spend £40 billion on six giant ‘tidal lagoons’ around Britain’s coasts, beginning with one in Swansea Bay, to harness the power of the tide to provide ‘clean, green’ electricity.

This seemed so irresistible to David Cameron and George Osborne that they put it in the Tory manifesto at the last election — and the then chancellor even mentioned it in his Budget speech. Only when the figures were looked at more carefully did they realise how little electricity this would produce. Not only that, it would be the most expensive in the world!

The firm behind the scheme asked the Government to agree to give it a uniquely high subsidy. The project will only work, it said, if the power produced could be sold to the National Grid at a staggering £168 per megawatt hour.

'The latest wheeze to catch the attention of gullible politicians has been a mega-project to spend £40 billion on six giant ‘tidal lagoons’ around Britain’s coasts, beginning with one in Swansea Bay, to harness the power of the tide to provide ‘clean, green’ electricity.'

‘The latest wheeze to catch the attention of gullible politicians has been a mega-project to spend £40 billion on six giant ‘tidal lagoons’ around Britain’s coasts, beginning with one in Swansea Bay, to harness the power of the tide to provide ‘clean, green’ electricity.’

This was well over three times the wholesale price of unsubsidised electricity from coal or gas-fired power stations, and would naturally be paid for by every UK householder through green surcharges on our electricity bills.

As a result of such concerns, a report on tidal energy was commissioned from a former energy minister, Charles Hendry. His objectivity can be guessed at when you learn that he is chairman of the world’s largest offshore wind farm project. Unsurprisingly, he was gung-ho for giving tidal lagoons the go-ahead.

But how can ministers justify proceeding with another pipe dream which, according to some conservationists, apart from its ludicrous cost would inflict serious damage on wading birds, eels and other fish?

This is because the building of gigantic stone tidal barriers miles long interferes with the natural ecosystem. Indeed, this disruption to the natural order is a common problem with schemes which are designed to be good for ‘the environment’. When, for example, the Somerset Levels suffered serious flooding in 2014, it emerged that this was not just a freak of nature.

‘To meet that Climate Change Act target, the Government still dreams of closing down all our remaining fossil-fuel power stations, instead relying on ‘zero-carbon’ electricity from renewables such as wind, sun and wood-burning, and a number of new nuclear power stations, which seem ever less likely to be built after wrangles over funding.’

For 18 years, the local rivers and drainage ditches had not been dredged by the Environment Agency, with the deliberate intention of keeping more water flooding out on to the Levels, to provide a habitat for birds and other wildlife.

One former head of the agency, who previously ran the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, had remarked that she wanted to see ‘a limpet mine’ on every one of the pumping stations which — separately from the dredging — were used to pump out the water channels to prevent flooding.

When the lack of dredging led to the inevitable, and the Levels disastrously flooded for the second time in three years, it not only did £100 million worth of damage to homes and businesses.

With bitter irony, it also resulted in the drowning of huge numbers of the birds, badgers and other creatures the conservationists had wanted to save.

Flooding aside, however, by far the greatest environmental damage, at the greatest cost to our household bills, has been done by the £52 billion so far spent on covering vast areas of our countryside and the sea around our coasts with wind and solar farms, which are now adding £5 billion a year to our electricity bills.

'Our politicians have been allowed to get away with all this make-believe for so long that few people noticed some startling figures published a few weeks ago at the time of the Budget, by the Office of Budget Responsibility.'

‘Our politicians have been allowed to get away with all this make-believe for so long that few people noticed some startling figures published a few weeks ago at the time of the Budget, by the Office of Budget Responsibility.’

Apart from the way these eyesores have come to dominate parts of our landscape, studies have shown the shocking damage the windmills do to birds and bats, including species such as golden eagles, which are supposed to be protected by law.

Research by the ornithological society SEO/Birdlife suggested that each turbine kills between 110 and 330 birds a year, though the RSPB countered this saying that ‘our own research suggests that a well-located wind farm is unlikely to be causing birds any harm’.

(Conservationists claim the wind industry has a vested interest in covering up the true extent of bird deaths.)

And all this is to produce just 14 per cent of our electricity, available so intermittently that if it wasn’t for those remaining CO2-emitting coal and gas-fired power stations stepping in when the wind wasn’t blowing and the sun wasn’t shining, our lights would have already gone out.

Yet to meet that Climate Change Act target, the Government still dreams of closing down all our remaining fossil-fuel power stations, instead relying on ‘zero-carbon’ electricity from renewables such as wind, sun and wood-burning, and a number of new nuclear power stations, which seem ever less likely to be built after wrangles over funding.

‘It was exactly a year ago that Theresa May’s joint chief of staff Nick Timothy described the Climate Change Act as ‘a monstrous act of national self-harm’. It is high time his boss realised just how chillingly right he was.’

Our politicians have been allowed to get away with all this make-believe for so long that few people noticed some startling figures published a few weeks ago at the time of the Budget, by the Office of Budget Responsibility.

These showed that, over the next five years, the annual cost of all the green taxes and subsidies we shall be paying for is due to rise from £8.97 billion a year to £15.2 billion.

This will bring the five-year total by 2022 to more than £73 billion, far higher than the estimated cost of the HS2 rail project, the most expensive engineering project ever seen in Britain. This equates to £561 a year for every household in the land.

When we consider that colossal sum, most of us may well conclude that our politicians must have gone completely off their heads.

Except that, alas, our MPs live in such a bubble of unreality that few will even have looked at those terrifying figures, let alone at what they are allowing our money to be spent on.

It was exactly a year ago that Theresa May’s joint chief of staff Nick Timothy described the Climate Change Act as ‘a monstrous act of national self-harm’. It is high time his boss realised just how chillingly right he was.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4392220/Green-initiatives-disasters-says-Christopher-Booker.html

Advertisements
44 Comments
  1. markl permalink
    April 8, 2017 6:42 pm

    Typical “shoot, ready, aim” from environmentalists. At some point people will understand how much damage they are doing to humanity.

    • April 9, 2017 4:08 pm

      In my experience “environmentalists” care more about their SJW image than they do about the environment. If FOE really cared about the earth they would be lobbying for a massive decrease in the world’s population; after all it is people that cause pollution, so reducing the population should by rights reduce the impact on the environment. Do you hear Greenpeace calling for less people? Do you hear that Greenpeace are investing in solutions of any sort? Does this count as a rant?

      • Saighdear permalink
        April 9, 2017 10:28 pm

        C’mon now! be careful in what you say….”people do not cause pollution” we live on Earth – without any choice on the matter – didn’t ASK to be borne. However it is correct that SOME of us Pollute the planet. Most leave a trace and some do not even get the chance to pollute.Many times those of us considerate enough to do unto others as they would have done to themselves – and thereby minimise pollution, often are by-passed by Mainstreamers using the Carrot and stick – the Stick being a Sledgehammer and the Carrot is only the Foto on the Seed packet – Go Figure that one

      • April 10, 2017 1:51 am

        So,who is volunteering to be first to top themselves?

  2. April 8, 2017 6:52 pm

    Christopher Booker has only listed a small selection of the totality of the green lunacy imposed on us by the lunatics who have been in charge since 1997. He hasn’t mentioned one of the biggest consumer rip-offs in UK history, namely the thousands of diesel generators to be used for Short Term Operating Reserve (STOR) at massive expense to electricity consumers. You cannot believe that government policy is encouraging building dirty diesel generators all over the countryside. The ‘carbon emissions’ from these DGs are far worse than from coal-fired power stations, which at least have huge chimneys to disperse the ‘pollution’.

    • Graeme No.3 permalink
      April 8, 2017 8:35 pm

      Yes, I can believe that government policy is encouraging, nay demanding, dirty diesel generators. It happened in Tasmania last year when they sold so much ‘green’ hydroelectricity to other States that they left their dams short of water. And in South Australia the excessive reliance on wind turbines has the government frantically installing diesels to avoid blackouts in the coming summer (and don’t mention the privately owned ones).

      It seems a general rule – the more green you are, the more diesels you need.

    • Gamecock permalink
      April 9, 2017 1:14 am

      “You cannot believe that government policy is encouraging building dirty diesel generators all over the countryside.”

      Just regular diesel generators. Get a grip.

      • AndyG55 permalink
        April 9, 2017 9:05 am

        SPEWING massive amounts of CO2 and particulates

        This is the GREEN agenda. !!

  3. AlecM permalink
    April 8, 2017 6:59 pm

    I suggest we introduce a petition to select the most suitable people to select to make reparations for the harm they have done to the population.

    Some representative pseudosciences, some politicians, some Corporate senior executives perhaps, to be put on trial for their alleged criminality?

  4. April 8, 2017 7:27 pm

    Good old Booker. He will never get a job with the Guardian or the BBC. Congratulations to the Telegraph.

    On another point:
    Why are images taken of cooling towers used to purport CO2 emissions?
    It is nonsense. We are looking at steam, not CO2.
    These towers cool the earth as each kilogram of water evaporated pushes some 600watts per sq.m up into atmosphere with a fair proportion of this winding up at ice crystals in the cirrus clouds nudging the top of the troposphere. ( check this with the steam tables).
    This fact has been studiously ignored by the IPCC and others as it knocks pesky CO2 (1.8 Watts?) into a cocked hat as an influence. It is water that provides us with our global thermostat and it is the Rankine Cycle that proves it.
    Indeed a subtle bit of False information hidden in these images, just to confuse.

    • A C Osborn permalink
      April 9, 2017 10:00 am

      Actually it is the Daily Mail Online, so good for them too.

  5. April 8, 2017 8:16 pm

    The diesel car debacle is perhaps the greatest cock up so far. The government has provided heavy subsidies for folks to buy diesel cars with the single minded aim of reducing CO2 emissions. But according to The Royal College of Physicians (RCP), these cars are “killing” 15,000 / year through air pollution. The latter statistic is difficult to understand and is potentially bogus. The RCP report does not explain it or provide references to the source of the stats. Nonetheless, UK deaths from CC = 0; UK deaths from air pollution designed to stop UK deaths from CC = several thousand. Those responsible should be held to account.

    • April 9, 2017 9:41 am

      According to what I hear, and it is plausible, the increase in London pollution is due to inefficient operation of the current “in thing” among the literati — the wood burning stove — and not to any sudden increase in the use of diesel cars.

      But since burning wood has, per Drax, become acceptable because it is CO2 neutral and therefore “green”, it cannot be permissible to lay any blame for anything at its door.

      In fact the only green things around are the people who believe that guff and (since demand is exceeding supply) too much of the wood for those burners, hence the pollution.

    • A C Osborn permalink
      April 9, 2017 10:03 am

      Euan, I am shocked that you believe the “1000s of deaths from pollution” is real without any Data, there is not even correlation let alone causation.
      Just take a look at how air quality in the UK has improved since the 70s and also the work done by Steve Milloy and others
      http://junkscience.com/2017/04/new-study-debunks-key-epa-pm2-5-study/

    • Anders Valland permalink
      April 9, 2017 10:36 am

      The Norwegian government did the exact same thing, and has followed suit by threatening with a diesel ban due to the claims regarding the lethality of local pollutions. It turns out however that most local pollution in cities stem from sources other than vehicles with internal combustion engines. And it turns out that when asked noone can come up with a decent reference to the causality between NOx-emissions and premature deaths. It is well known that NOx are lethal gases at various levels of exposure, but of course the attribution of premature deaths to single sources is a dodgy excercise – you cannot reliably provide such linkage, and if you follow the logic of medical stats used for such excercises you find they are developed not to address specific causes but rather to provide an overall epidemiological understanding of the factors included in premature deaths.

      • April 9, 2017 12:14 pm

        I seem to remember that the evidence for removing lead from petrol was equally dubious but followed the normal greenie reasoning: lead is poisonous when ingested therefore it follows that it must be poisonous when emitted by cars.

        Seductive reasoning for which no conclusive evidence is needed. Not if you’re an enviro-goon anyway.

        I didn’t call my blog “Stands to Reason” for nothing!

      • Gerry, England permalink
        April 9, 2017 3:20 pm

        Booker covered the lead in petrol scandal in his Scared To Death book. Excellent read. The replacement for lead is the carcinogenic benzene. Without checking, I think the originator of the report the lead ‘poisoning’ was based on refused to allow his data to be checked and the results replicated. And you thought that only happened in climate ‘science’.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      April 9, 2017 6:54 pm

      @Euan:

      […]according to The Royal College of Physicians (RCP), these cars are “killing” 15,000 / year through air pollution

      So, here’s a thing. Those 15k deaths occurring now (it must be now, surely?) are of people who have lived through (long) periods of time when diesel was not as clean as it is today. My point is, the 15k deaths are not a result of modern-day diesels (in private cars). This is a false attribution.

    • JasG permalink
      April 10, 2017 2:34 pm

      Check the actual research. These so-called deaths are early deaths of people with respiratory diseases already. And by ‘early’ they mean just up to few weeks early. That nuance is lost in the ludicrously overstated headlines – as if folk were dropping like flies indeed. Notwithstanding the problem of actually calculating an average lifespan, the error margins even exceed the estimates. It also turns out that tests show those breathing most diesel fumes are not pedestrians or cyclists – but other car drivers.

      Attempting to eliminating efficient diesel engines by such over-hyped reporting is a PR ploy from the anti-capitalist greens as a precursor to eliminating all IC engines. Which would be fine if there was a decent replacement ready.

  6. April 8, 2017 9:42 pm

    He’s right on a lot of this. But I doubt that the Somerset Levels floods drowned a lot of birds…

    • John F. Hultquist permalink
      April 8, 2017 10:13 pm

      Do some nest on the ground? Was the timing such to cover eggs or chicks?

      • April 9, 2017 11:31 am

        December-January so not really. The trouble with little inaccuracies is that a neutral, but relatively intelligent, reader would start to doubt more of the factoids presented.

      • April 9, 2017 12:27 pm

        Depends on the state of the ground in March/April when the ground-nesters started their season. The floods would have gone but was the ground fit for nest building?

        In any event the floods will have made life very hard for the residents though no doubt the geese will have had a field day. This is what happens when you let fanatics loose on anything; they have no sense of the balance of things, natural things especially. We are seeing several examples playing out now as the environmental groups try to square their CO2 obsession (the quickest way as they see it to “unpick the industrial revolution”) with the ecological damage being done by wind farms and the “hands off” approach they have persuaded the agencies to take.

        At the same time they have enlisted the environmentally ignorant townies to their cause (the words Thompson and Westwood pop to the surface) who don’t understand, or care, that the environment they want to “protect” is almost entirely man-created in the first place.

  7. John F. Hultquist permalink
    April 8, 2017 10:20 pm

    ” £561 a year for every household in the land ”

    This would be a rounding error in the financial affairs of the people promoting the subsidies.
    The green activists likely never see a bill of any sort.

  8. Athelstan permalink
    April 8, 2017 11:02 pm

    Like most on here, I’m a peaceable type who really just wants a quiet life.

    Cooling then Warming! but so what I thought.

    Ah but when the global warming scam was just a madhouse supposition, I left it well alone but as it came clearer that the green agenda had morphed into Leviathan and it was coming to roll all over me and my dealy cherished country, even peaceable folk sometimes have to find new uses for pitchforks and ploughshares……………………….

    I think deeply and often on, the sheer, the dreadful waste not only in terms of money but in terms of time and opportunities missed and if you consider how much is wasted on producing, shipping, erecting, connecting, back-up for ruinables, the figures are colossal, in the end where nothing is achieved unless, you account poverty, bankruptcy, foreclosure and a diminishment of economic activity as a positive on the spreadsheet.

    I cannot help but think at the back of all this eco mania is a simple end – to drive Britain off the industrial and manufacturing map of the world and in so doing cause such a financial catastrophe to be almost irrecoverable.

    Culprit?

    Who could it be, well the Gemans would be my first option and with the French not so far behind, these two nations have never, ever been friends of ours, always in the past they have been rivals and often sworn enemies – why would being a member of a club where the Germans pull all the strings benefit Britain – at all? It’s a collective thing, at governmental and in the corporate world Britons are customers and then, Britain is the rival to be eroded and wasted for they fear and loath us in equal measure. Aye……..they don’t like us and we don’t like them either and if you do believe the constant mantra, its monotoned dull chorus “our friends in the EU” – think do you believe those such as, nick clegg and handelscrote; the shills who ceaselessly clarion and apologize for ‘going green’ or, those running the green, lib-dhimmi/ lav party UK Communist party – you need to wise up and quickly, very quickly.

    But anyway, away from the politics for a mo’.

    Think on, all that [UK consumers/taxes] money down the drain paid into the bank accounts of fabulously wealthy Wet Office rune readers, the quangocrats, Chinese industrialists and magnates galore, danish/swedish construction and energy firms, Goldman Sachs and various other vultures; investment banksters and back pockets of he little men who are the frontispieces and spielers, ie; deben, yeo and fookwits like Black, Harrybin, Stern and the Graun…………..

    What else could have, be done with it?

    Just think, a few super efficient, new build and very reliable coal fired plant later and the ‘residue’ what could we spend it on:

    Training up > a few thousand STEM but particularly…..mathematics teachers?

    medical research, new Hospitals,
    An Army, a Navy with effective ships – even?
    Border force and proper security,
    developing houses which are well insulated, cheap to heat, are fast build but can ‘breathe’ are not petri dishes mould culture ‘greenhouses’ and don’t turn into sweat boxes in the summer – surely we could learn to design, engineer and build better housing [and more spacious]?
    research into Thorium reactors?
    Fusion?
    Seismic, super volcano prediction?
    Solar flares – protection against the ‘big one’ – we do FA about this major threat – in Britain AND in depth scanning of and about sunspot activity, we don’t effin know, we need to get with a PLAN – it’s ‘our’ Star, its life and DEATH!
    Throw in [well dig out actually] a few quid at dredging rivers again,

    Yeah OK, perchance, I’m just talking aloud.

    Why did, do we, allow the madhouse to dictate to us, it’s way past time to alter the equation over to our favour – is it not?

    • NeilC permalink
      April 9, 2017 6:56 am

      Just remember who initiated the CCA, Ed Milliband pseudo Marxist, Worthington pseudo Marxist. It was meant to de-industrialise the UK and make us a far weaker country.

      The huge problem we have, is who the hell do we vote for in the next election – certainly not the lib/lab/con advocates of this enormous, very costly climate scam.

    • April 10, 2017 1:59 am

      “Those with pitchforks to the left, those with torches to the right, those with burning pitchforks to the front”

  9. Gamecock permalink
    April 9, 2017 1:12 am

    ‘ten million diesel vehicles on Britain’s roads are chucking out so much nitrogen oxide and other toxic pollutants they are being linked to 12,000 premature deaths a year.’

    Habeas corpus. If they can’t provide some names, they are lying.

    • dennisambler permalink
      April 9, 2017 4:29 pm

      John Brignell has much on epidemiology and statistics.

      http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/statistical_bludgeon.htm

      The looseness of trendy modern statistical procedures provides a ready response to political requirements. Results can be virtually manufactured to order. These are then used, with the cooperation of the establishment media, to bludgeon the population into obedience.

      http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/trojan_number.htm

      One of the most effective forms of Trojan Number is the Virtual Body Count. Sub-editors cannot resist a headline Thousands to die of X.

      Back in 2011, he was describing what is now happening on the diesel front:

      http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/2011%20March.htm#NOM

      There has been a welter of articles of late about the alleged health dangers of sub-microscopic particles from diesel engines. Naturally this leads to a renewed flowering of the alliance between eco-zealots and authorities seeking to maximise taxation income. This leads to the conjecture that the gestation time between a gleam appearing in the eye of a greenie bureaucrat and the birth of a new tax is about 15 years.

      It was of the order of 15 years ago that representative of various disciplines across the university were summoned to a meeting at which it was announced that large sums of Government money were on the table for multidisciplinary research into very small particles in the atmosphere and possible health effects.

      It is typical of the way the political and bureaucratic classes operate. For years they have coerced drivers into switching to diesel on the basis of carbophobic beliefs and, now they have them in the trap, reverse the policy.

      • Harry Passfield permalink
        April 9, 2017 7:11 pm

        Dennis: I can’t wait for hydrogen cars to make it big. Imagine, all they exhaust is di-hydrogen-monoxide which, if you breathe in just a very small amount, will kill you – immediately. So we better ban hydrogen fuel cells.

  10. April 9, 2017 6:28 am

    CB yet again uses our host’s data in his Telegraph article:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/09/wonderful-spring-sign-completely-normal-weather/

  11. NeilC permalink
    April 9, 2017 6:59 am

    Thanks Christopher and Paul for bringing all this nonesense to the attention of more people.

    My big question is how do we bring back common sense?

  12. April 9, 2017 7:17 am

    Reblogged this on Wolsten and commented:
    Sobering analysis from Booker but it’s difficult to imagine politicians taking any responsibility for this train wreck.

  13. Richard111 permalink
    April 9, 2017 7:24 am

    The palm oil trees in the Philippines are not as effective as the original rain forest at encouraging local rain. The palm oil trees are dying and the rain forest will take more than a few lifetimes to regrow. So what else is new in this greenie world?

  14. April 9, 2017 9:57 am

    Reblogged this on Tallbloke's Talkshop and commented:
    Booker describes how fortunes are being wasted on so-called ‘green’ schemes, while achieving little except loss of reliability in the national electricity supply.

  15. April 9, 2017 10:01 am

    Reblogged this on Climate Collections.

  16. April 9, 2017 12:38 pm

    It’s time to stop wringing hands and time to start criminal investigations.

    • April 9, 2017 6:59 pm

      +1

      iirc – you’ve already made some moves on that front? I am guessing that finding a suitably litigious lawyer with a taste for actual courtrooms is proving a bit challenging?

    • April 9, 2017 7:00 pm

      Conspiracy to Defraud under Common Law would be my first port of call…..

  17. dennisambler permalink
    April 9, 2017 3:46 pm

    Tony Heller is fighting to save the environment from people who claim to be environmentalists in Boulder, Colorado.

    https://realclimatescience.com/2017/04/climate-activists-destroying-the-environment/

    Boulder is the home of the National Centre for Atmospheric Research, (NCAR), where people like Tom Wigley and Kevin Trenberth, of Climategate fame, practise their trade.

    https://ncar.ucar.edu/

    NCAR is also the source of classic modelling results such as “snow melts more slowly in a warming world”

  18. April 9, 2017 5:06 pm

    And still, the message is Green is Godly.
    Cognitive dissonance. How is that addressed?

  19. Dick Mandemaker permalink
    April 9, 2017 9:55 pm

    Paul, what about this story? https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/apr/10/great-barrier-reef-terminal-stage-australia-scientists-despair-latest-coral-bleaching-data Regards, Dick

    Sent from my Windows 10 phone

  20. martinbrumby permalink
    April 10, 2017 11:36 am

    I am aware of a colliery site where methane gas emissions are vented to atmosphere. In order to extract the gas in sufficient quantity and purity to generate electricity, it is proposed that initially a (diesel powered) gas pump is installed.

    This has been opposed by the local Wildlife Trust who (allegedly) worry that NOx from the pump will upset the nearby SSSI. No worries, apparently, about the NOx from the nearby Trunk Road, lightning strikes and all the rest of it, no details forthcoming about what possible effects NOx might have on the denizens of the SSSI, seemingly including various trees, weeds and, no doubt, the odd bunny, slug, beetles etc.

    If, as (in their view) a rough-arsed Chartered Civil Engineer, I made loud comments about the latest trendy artist, potter, composer, film director or whatever, that were as wilfully ill-informed and stupid as the Greenies’ comments on climate, energy, pollution or anything else, even remotely scientific or technical, they would announce themselves appalled and affronted. And the 97% of MPs who are Arts grads would enthusiastically agree and attempt to have me locked up somewhere unpleasant.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: