Skip to content

CCC Warns Govt Over Coronavirus Climate Trap

May 7, 2020
tags:

By Paul Homewood

 

h/t Philip Bratby

 

 Harrabin gives the latest advice from the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) the usual uncritical coverage. Note the wording under the photo:

The government faces a post-lockdown choice between green growth or propping up polluting industries

If that is deliberately disingenuous, I don’t know what is!

 image

The UK must avoid lurching from the coronavirus crisis into a deeper climate crisis, the government’s advisers have warned.

They recommend that ministers ensure funds earmarked for a post-Covid-19 economic recovery go to firms that will reduce carbon emissions.

They say the public should work from home if possible; and to walk or cycle.

And investment should prioritise broadband over road-building, the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) says.

People should also be encouraged to save emissions by continuing to consult GPs online.

The government will reply later, although the Energy Secretary Alok Sharma has already spoken in favour of a green recovery to the recession.

In a letter to the Prime Minister, the committee says jobless people should be re-trained for work in geographically-spread labour-intensive “green” industries such as home insulation; tree-planting; and peatland restoration.

 

It makes a veiled reference to the current discussions over a potential government bailout to save jobs in aviation, which is struggling in the crisis.

The letter says: “Many sectors of the UK economy do not currently bear the full costs of emitting greenhouse gases. Revenue could be raised by setting or raising carbon prices for these sectors.”

Green groups say any bailout should include a condition that the industry shrinks until it finds a technological solution to its carbon emissions.

The letter also tackles broader social themes of fairness and risk.

It says the Covid-19 crisis has highlighted inequalities, with poorer people more in danger.

The committee notes: “The response to the pandemic has disproportionately affected the same lower-income groups and younger people – who face the largest long-term impacts of climate change.

“The benefits of acting on climate change must be shared widely, and the costs must not burden those who are least able to pay or whose livelihoods are most at risk as the economy changes.

“It is important that the lost or threatened jobs of today should be replaced by those created by the new, resilient economy.”

The committee says the government must produce policies that allow the UK to reduce emissions to Net Zero in an orderly way – unlike the chaos of the Covid-19 crisis.

The CCC Chairman, Lord Deben, said: “The Covid-19 crisis has shown the importance of planning well for the risks the country faces.

“Recovery means investing in new jobs, cleaner air and improved health. The actions needed to tackle climate change are central to rebuilding our economy.

“The government must prioritise actions that reduce climate risks and avoid measures that lock-in higher emissions.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-52547885

 

The reason, of course, is to save the planet, as Deben explains:

“The government must prioritise actions that reduce climate risks “

But Britain only accounts for 1% of the world’s emissions of carbon dioxide, so whatever we do will have no effect on the world’s weather whatsoever.

There is a lot of twaddle in the report, but the core proposal is to pour whatever bail out money there is into “green” industries, and leave the rest of the economy to fend for itself.

This logic, however, is fundamentally flawed.

The CCC talk about home insulation, tree planting and peatland restoration as examples. But these have little or no economic value. If families are struggling to put food on the table, it won’t be much consolation to know that peatlands have been restored!

Home insulation may, in theory, save a tiny amount on energy bills, but studies regularly show that the cost of installing serious insulation is far greater than any benefits accruing.

And all of these jobs have to be paid for by somebody, making the country poorer as a result. The CCC even have the nerve to suggest that jobless workers should be retrained to work in these “labour intensive green industries”. Try telling a skilled, well paid employee in, say, an oil refinery or car factory that he has got to relocate to the Highlands to plant trees!

As a country, we have to import much of what we need, including food. How can we pay for that if we have no exporting industry left?

Harrabin makes a particular reference to aviation, suggesting that any bailout should  include a condition that the industry shrinks. But this would simply mean that overseas airlines took up the slack, along with thousands of jobs.

Other proposals include working from home, or walking and cycling to work. It may well be that the coronavirus encourages more homeworking, as employers find their fears assuaged. But governments cannot order this. Besides, the vast majority of jobs cannot be carried out at home.

And very few people live within walking or cycling distance of their work.

The CCC also want to prioritise broadband over road building. But universal roll out of full fibre broadband is already happening. That should not be allowed to prevent investment in the road network, which is vital for the nation’s productivity.

For some reason, the CCC’s letter also tackles “broader social themes of fairness and risk”. Quite what this has to do with the CCC is beyond me. Nevertheless what poorer people need are well paid jobs and lower household bills.

They will be the ones who suffer most from higher energy bills, brought about by expensive renewable energy, which is already subsidised to the tune of £12bn a year. And they will also be the ones who suffer most when they find their jobs have disappeared.

The stark reality is that there are few sectors of the economy which are not struggling financially as a result of the coronavirus. Whatever bailout money is available must be used to keep these otherwise perfectly viable companies on the road, thus protecting jobs and the contribution they make to the overall economy.

To let them go to the wall and instead throw money at worthless green hogwash would be sheer madness.

49 Comments
  1. May 7, 2020 7:26 pm

    “labour intensive green industries”. What that means is that green industries are of very low productivity. That is why green industries need massive subsidies. The creation of over a million very low productivity green jobs is also and why the UK’s overall productivity was in decline (before lockdown). The work of tens of thousands people who used to produce the UK’s energy has gradually been replaced by the need for over a million people to produce green energy. Low productivity leads to increasing poverty.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      May 7, 2020 8:38 pm

      Harrabin just does not get it, Phillip – that ‘Green growth’ is an oxymoron, and he defines the last two syllables of that word.
      Dear Harrabin, ‘growth’ is the result of getting more out of a process than was put in. Growth is the ‘profit’ that allows the country to splurge on (some) virtue projects: it does not give carte-blanche for all of them, idiot, otherwise there is no growth. Got that?

      • 01 Cat permalink
        May 9, 2020 10:52 am

        Harrabin-Laden! (Together with his assistant, Matt McDeath.)

    • It doesn't add up... permalink
      May 7, 2020 10:02 pm

      I recently checked the ONS data on what sectors people are employed in, and how that has changed since 2007 just before the last crash.

      There are now 141,000 in Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply, an increase of some 72% on 2007. Not sure why they would lump in aircon and steam, but there you go. Just 10,000 in oil refineries, so we can say a productivity of 7,700 toe/head. Allocate the 59,000 original employees to gas, coal, nuclear and hydro gives an average productivity of 1,550 toe/head. That leaves the remaining 82,000 in renewables with a productivity of just 291 toe/head. Figures based on BP stats for primary energy in 2018. I have ignored the tiny amount of wind production in 2007.

      • May 8, 2020 9:30 am

        @IDAU are you saying that the renewables employ 5 times as many people for the same energy produced as the traditional generators? Or does this include a lot in construction…?

      • Russ Wood permalink
        May 8, 2020 2:20 pm

        I need to remind some readers of the old joke: A businessman was in a Far East country, and was shown the progress that the country was making on a new canal. Shown a scene of thousands of men with shovels, he asked his guide “Why aren’t you using steam shovels?”. The guide replied that this was in order to provide employment. The businessman said “So, why not give the workers spoons?”
        This whole ‘green jobs’ smacks of the ‘spoons’ scenario!

  2. tim leeney permalink
    May 7, 2020 7:38 pm

    !% of the world’s anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions, surely? Total anthropogenic only comes to about 3%, the rest being from natural sources.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      May 7, 2020 8:41 pm

      Tim, that point alone (your last sentence) would be worth watching Harrabin try to rebut it – and justify his solution.

    • Mack permalink
      May 7, 2020 8:53 pm

      Yep, and that is why global Co2 levels will continue to rise this year, despite humanity sitting on its’ collective backside in recent months and emissions falling rapidly. The oceans and the termites etc etc obviously never got the Lockdown message!

  3. jack broughton permalink
    May 7, 2020 7:43 pm

    It is amazing how belief in saving the planet can stop all sense.

    I heard Deben’s interview, or as much as I could take of it anyway.
    The interviewer meekly asked about other countries emissions but Deben continued on his meme irrespective with no real questions about the drivel he spouted.

    The new in-term, he used repeatedly (in addition to Climate Crisis, Sustainability and the other usual double-duckpeak) was “Resilience”. The unreliables apparently will enable greater “resilience”.

  4. jack broughton permalink
    May 7, 2020 7:53 pm

    I’ve just received the National Grid / ESO 2019/2020 End of Year Report.

    They are clearly with deben and revere him.

    The report comprises 131 pages of semi-intelligible self-congratulation. They have obviously employed Goodhart to set the numerous targets that they wonderfully exceed.

    There is useful info on the Balancing Mechanism and frequency control which they believe they will solve by demand-side management etc. However, I had lost the will to live long before I found the interesting bits. Will try to read further later.

    They also claim that they are spending a fortune to remove carbon to save us all massive costs and the planet.

    It is truly frightening that these people are controlling our electricity system now.

  5. Broadlands permalink
    May 7, 2020 7:55 pm

    Planting trees? Where and how many? In any meaningful numbers they will require lots of land not being used for people, for agriculture, or to install and maintain solar farms. All require transportation energy to plant, maintain and protect. Renewables in transportation don’t work at scale. One wildfire and start over? When they mature and die their biomass is compost… recycled. Start over. Green turns into brown turns back into a colorless trace gas. Start over! Crazy.

    • Mike Jackson permalink
      May 7, 2020 8:13 pm

      And where are they going to put the wind turbines if they’ve covered the place in trees?

      • Harry Passfield permalink
        May 7, 2020 8:49 pm

        Even if they did cover the land with trees, Mike, they’d only cut the beggars down for biomass!

    • May 8, 2020 9:57 am

      It is not wise to pay people to do something that Nature will do for you at no charge. The original wildwood that covered the UK to its mountain tops was not planted by unemployed graduates or dryads.

      If there is land you want to become forest… just leave it alone. Don’t plough it, graze it, or cut it. Nature will do the rest.

  6. May 7, 2020 7:59 pm

    It is not just that green energy suffers from low productivity, requiring several orders of magnitude of people to be empoyed to provide the same ammount of power that can be produced by a conventional fossil fuel powered generator, but also its footpront.

    Look at the area of land required to be used by windfarms or solar farms and compare that with the land area of a gas powered generator. And of course since there are lengthy times when the wind does not blow, and/or the sun does not shine, you still need to build and operate the gas powered generator. Sheer madness.

  7. Paul Michaels permalink
    May 7, 2020 8:22 pm

    More home insulation, in areas like Cornwall and Scotland for instance, that have a great deal of radon gas, may cause more serious health problems than doing nothing.

  8. May 7, 2020 8:32 pm

    Scotland has traded in nearly 14 million trees to make way for ‘wind farms’. Now there aren’t enough trees? Hardly surprising.

    https://www.wind-watch.org/documents/more-than-13-9-million-trees-felled-in-scotland-for-wind-development-2000-2019/

  9. MrGrimNasty permalink
    May 7, 2020 8:39 pm

    Windmills:-

    Built from fossil fuel derived plastic products.
    Built with raw materials mined and refined with fossil fuel power and heavy plant.
    Manufactured in largely fossil fuel powered factories.
    Erected and maintained with fossil fueled heavy plant, ships etc.
    Connected to the grid with fossil fueled heavy plant with power lines made from fossil fueled energy/mining/refining.
    Finally, buried with fossil fuel powered heavy equipment for eternity.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8294057/Hundreds-non-recyclable-fiberglass-wind-turbine-blades-pictured-piling-landfills.html

  10. Geoff B permalink
    May 7, 2020 8:39 pm

    Do you think we will ever hear from the likes of Merkel, Macron, Johnston, von der Leyen …..
    “As climate change has been exaggerated, we are abandoning the Paris agreement as it is unworkable….we will be investing in closed cycle natural gas electricity production and encouraging the use of hydrocarbons in transport”

    No… but that is actually what we have to do.

  11. JimW permalink
    May 7, 2020 8:40 pm

    Paul, its been very clear for a few weeks that this ‘government’ are using fear to enslave the populace. They must see the same stats as the rst of us, so cv-19 isn’t the reason for this, it is being used to create a compliant nation.
    The ‘new normal’ is feudalism. ‘Green/CC’ is being used in the same way. We, the plebs, have had too good for too long, this is ‘them’ turning back the clock.
    Unfortunately the populace is far too splintered to resist in any meaningful way. Most don’t know or even care its happening. Quite a few welcome it, we have seen from lockdown etc that many quite like just being told what to do, they like escaping the problems that what we regard as ‘ordinary’ life contains.
    I honestly thought that I and my wife would outlive this change, but how wrong I was, its happening at frightening speed. I guess we were just very lucky to live most of our lives in what will be a very special and very unique period of human existence when the ordinary guy actually had some control and say in his life.
    I, like all the readers of your blog, will continue to struggle against these forces as well as we can, but I think you know that ultimately its futile. I think the most awful reason I know that, is that my own intelligent kids are fully accepting of this new normal. They , like all their generation have been brainwashed to accept it, and they don’t even know they have been brainwashed!

    • May 7, 2020 10:07 pm

      There was a good article on Sunday about the Hong Kong flu in 1968

      It killed 80000 in the UK, but people just got on with their lives.

      The reason? They accepted death, having lived through wars and diseases.

      Nowadays we seem to have the attitude that we can stop death in its tracks, and panic when we find we can’t

    • Ian Phillips permalink
      May 7, 2020 10:23 pm

      I agree totally, Jim. This is all about World Governance by the UN, a dream, or nightmare, depending which end you’re on. As the man said, “The wages of fear is death”. And we now have a trinity of evil, Project Fear – Brexit, Project Fear – Climate, Project Fear – Covid.
      On the True Origins of the Climate Alarmist Movement….the United Nations bid for world domination. (The death referred to being spiritual….the goal of the fallen angel).
      O wrote this some weeks ago.
      Oxford University now has a whole industry on this topic….with global elitists such as Timothy Garton-Ash well involved.

      Three cheers that Brexit has at last happened, and a period of transition underway. Providing PM Boris Johnson delivers on the 31st December, can us Brits now sit back a bit and look forward to years of happy stability, democracy and reinvigorated nationhood?
      However, with the change of focus suddenly forced on us with the virus epidemic, and the climate hysteria out of the headlines for the moment, it is all too easy to let our guard drop.
      The eternal battle, we know so well, has always been between those two opposing mindsets: those of us who believe that every person has an equal democratic right to determine the way, and by whom, our country is governed and the others, who believe it’s preferable for an unelected “elite” to rule over us.
      Despite Brexit, this latter mindset is still well alive. It hides within a political package, calculatedly unmarked, containing the climate change movement and its propaganda, and has been steadily persuading many of the world’s peoples and governments, including our own, to accept its false beliefs. The unwritten label should read, “Towards Global Governance by the UN”.
      When the UN was formed in 1945, The US Senate was reassured that it would not interfere in the sovereignty of the US or the domestic affairs of the American people. It was sold as a debating chamber for the world’s nations to solve problems, to foster peace and wellbeing. UNESCO was set up in the same year. But, within just a matter of months, in an early 1946 meeting, William Benton, Assistant US Sec. of State said that UNESCO’s goal must include educating children away from “the poisoned air of nationalism”…. and to “break down the walls of national sovereignty” …..into “world-mindedness”. No interference? And only 5 years later, Council for Foreign Relations CFR member, James Warburg, said “We shall have world government whether or not you like it – by conquest or consent”. Over a period of time, spreading fear of a global climate meltdown became the tool for attempting to unite the world’s peoples against the supposed “common external threat” of man-made climate change.
      Big names in setting up the climate alarmist movement were Maurice Strong and Dr. Stephen Schneider.
      Maurice Strong was a tycoon wheeler-dealer in oil, energy and cattle, yet claiming to be a socialist and environmentalist. He organised the first Earth Summit in 1972, under U Thant. This led to the formation of the UN Environmental Program, UNEP, headed by himself, the first official commitee on “climate change” and a number of new UN bodies. Notably, The Commission on Global Governance, as its title clearly suggests, believes the world is now ready to grant the UN the authority to enter any soveriegn nation to guarantee “the security of the people” as expressed by “rights”, defined in various treaties. UNEP has been behind the environmental movement Agenda 21 which morphed into Agenda 30, incidently gaining the blessing of the Pope. It’s now been rebranded as The Green New Deal, and seemingly taken on board by our (UK) government.
      The movement’s true purpose was made plain at the 1992 Rio climate conference, chaired by Maurice Strong, when he stated, “The objective is to bring about a change in the present system of independent nations. The future is to be World Government, with central planning by the United Nations. Fear of environmental crises, whether real or not, is expected to lead to compliance.” In a further quote from the conference, Strong said “How better to accomplish the collapse (of Western Nations) than to create mass hysteria proselytized by the willing dupes in our education system that CO2 is going to destroy the world because allegedly it will cause the temperature to go up 3degC.”
      Strong fell from grace, in 2005, over a fraudelent cheque, endorsed and made out to himself for nearly a million dollars, issued by a Jordanian bank in the ‘Oil for Food Program’, and he fled to China.
      It was physicist, Dr. Stephen Schneider, who initiated the climate alarmist strategy. Earlier, in a 1989 interview for “Discover” magazine he said that, as a scientist, the whole truth and all the doubts must always be stated. But in order to capture the public’s imagination and get media coverage, “we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have,” and that each of us had to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. In other words, as long as you believe you are right, you can lie and exaggerate with a clear conscience to persuade others to your cause. Enter Al Gore, drawn into the debate by Schneider.
      As deputy US president, Gore demonstrated this poisonous mindset, of balancing efficiency versus honesty, when his climate adviser, Prof. Willi Happer refused to cooperate. Gore said that the facts must not be allowed to get in the way of policy, and Happer resigned.
      I should think we have all watched Gore’s propaganda film “Inconvenient Truth”, around 2007, which brought world opinion “on message” re the climate scare hypothesis. The film was the subject of a court case by a UK school governor Stewart Dimmock, who tried to get it banned in schools. A whole list of “errors and exaggerations” were identified by the court, under Justice Burton, but the film was still allowed to be shown. It contained the infamous “Hockey Stick Graph” stunt, eventually discredited as a scientific fiddle, and which led to the two public enquiry scandals, “Climategates I, and II”.
      So called “hockey team” US collaborator, Dr. Michael Mann of Penn State University, sued Canadian academic, Dr. Tim Ball for saying that he, Dr. Mann of Penn State, should be put in the state pen. This case was eventually concluded in 2019, won by Tim Ball on appeal in California, with the judge agreeing the Michael Mann was “motivated to commit fraud”. And this has been the story of the climate alarmist movement all along.
      We re now faced with The Green New Deal implying a complete shut down of fossil fuel use and with its mantra, “Net Zero”. For having just one seat in (the UK) parliament, it must be said the Green Party is doing rather well. And all this because no one of independent mind in our government is checking the facts. They’re just carelessly swallowing every fear-mongering interpretation coming from the UN and it’s climate propaganda body, the IPCC, and with the help of much of the MSM. Perhaps the greatest hypocrisy is that it will be the struggling third world countries, eg. of Africa, who will be hardest hit if this Net Zero demand is imposed on them.
      Going back to the beginning of this history, it’s no surprise to learn that Council on Foreign Relations, CFR president, Richard Haass, has joined in the clamour for world government, that he claims will save humanity and the planet. He insists that claims of sovereignty must no longer prevent a world authority from dictating action to deal with environmental problems. But can we just say it the way it really is, please, “…..a UN dictatorship to rule the world.”
      Fortunately, there are honourable people standing out against this. One such was the late Harold Lewis, Prof. of Physics at the University of California, a former member of the Defence Science Board and USAF Scientific Advisory Board, and serving on numerous top committees. He resigned his membership of the American Physical Society, after 67 years’ membership, in disgust at their refusal to engage in proper scientific debate about climate change, and their ignoring of climate sceptics.
      Lewis stated “It is, of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.”
      And do I detect a hint of the future, with comments beginning to appear in the press about needing to have a co-ordinated world response to the coronvirus outbreak, and maybe an extension to the Brexit transition period? Do the UN’s WHO ‘crats have a back-up plan ready, using fear of COVID-19, if their climate alarmist power bid stalls?

      Ian Phillips, BA. Physics. Harbertonford, Nr. Totnes, Devon, UK.

      The very lengthy research paper, ibid. on the UN source of the climate scare….
      https://www.iatp.org/sites/default/files/Global_Governance_Why_How_When.htm
      Really excellent sources I consult regularly….
      https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/ (subscribe FREE for daily reports)
      https://wattsupwiththat.com/ https://polarbearscience.com/ http://www.drroyspencer.com/

      • jack broughton permalink
        May 8, 2020 3:24 pm

        Great summary of the history. Lewis was a brilliant real scientist of course.
        What I cannot understand is why there is no sceptical press in the UK now. All media sources repeat the junk science – and that is how governments are making wrong decisions: are the politicians controlling the media, or vice versa?

      • Rowland P permalink
        May 9, 2020 7:35 am

        The Protocols of the Elders of Zion maps out the road to world governance by confusing and subduing the world’s populace.

  12. May 7, 2020 8:40 pm

    We are adviised by morons!

    • StephenP permalink
      May 8, 2020 10:27 am

      Is it a case of NHS lions being led by academic donkeys?
      A doctor aquaintance returned from Australia and was flabbergasted to see no checks at the UK airport. He immediately put himself into 14 days self-imposed quarantine, and is now back at work.

  13. 2hmp permalink
    May 7, 2020 8:42 pm

    When watching this video the whole climate change scene came flashing into view. The similarities are remarkable. https://youtu.be/sqksJuT2KfM

    • May 7, 2020 9:03 pm

      The video has been removed for violating YouTube guidelines!!!

    • May 7, 2020 10:08 pm

      It’s violated Utubes’ something or others – must be good!

  14. mikewaite permalink
    May 7, 2020 9:01 pm

    Did Gummer ( I refuse to let him Lord it over me) mention the obvious resultant good news from his recommendations? . We no longer need Universities, and therefore no more need to pay for lecturers and Vice Chancellors with million pound pay packets .
    If everyone is planting trees or attaching insulating tiles with Evostick to the walls of houses, why educate children beyond the age of 14?. That was the age my father had to leave school and it was sufficient education for him to become a skilled artisan of the building trades and his allotment skills kept us alive through the bleak years of rationing – which will come again shortly. Clearly did not need any college education for that which seems the sort of career that Gummer has in mind for the Nations’s children.
    According to BBC NW Man Univ will lose more than £200 million from the lockdown , Liverpool £150 million and so forth . They are asking for bailout, but according to Gummer we can dispense with them altogether and save money. And since we are all walking or cycling everywhere we certainly do not need to educate children in engineering skills – after all they might get ideas and we can’t have that can we in our new green paradise.

  15. martinbrumby permalink
    May 7, 2020 11:55 pm

    “Broader social themes of fairness and risk.”

    That’s the ticket.

    Well, just for a start, I think it would be very fair for trougher Gummer and his overpaid crypto Marxist parasite chums to be knocked away from the teat of taxpayer’s money for the rest of their worthless, hubristic, venal lives.

    And they should consider carefully the risk of an alternative outcome (which I would personally hope for), involving pike staffs and the walls of the Tower of London.

  16. Mike Stoddart permalink
    May 8, 2020 4:21 am

    Airline pilots could retrain as rooftop solar panel installers.
    At least they wouldn’t have a problem working at height.

  17. May 8, 2020 6:50 am

    The BBC is still pushing ts propaganda:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52580291
    The BBC doesn’t say who the other 53+ bosses are or where the open letter can be found.

    “As the UK eases restrictions and tries to repair damage to the economy from the crisis, the chief executives of more than 60 British organisations called on the government to:

    Invest in infrastructure, technology and skills to create jobs that help sustainability
    Exclude companies in “polluting industries” that do not have a proper climate plan
    Restore ecosystems on land and in our oceans by incentivising walking and cycling
    Support sustainable food, farming and fishing
    Swiftly pass environmental laws and bring in targets in law to restore ecosystems
    Bring global leaders together to plan for a sustainable economic recovery

    The signatories to an open letter to Boris Johnson included Iceland Foods, Barratt Developments, The Body Shop, Ben and Jerry’s, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), the National Trust and Greenpeace UK.”

    Barratt Developments? A company whose main aim is to concrete over the countryside!

    • Steve permalink
      May 8, 2020 10:20 am

      That’s a shame. I was getting to like Iceland food. They didn’t seem to be the sort of company that would go ecoloon.

      • Keith permalink
        May 8, 2020 10:37 am

        Yes, if you watched the tv series about Iceland foods it said the new MD is a member of Greenpeace. Says it all.

  18. dave permalink
    May 8, 2020 8:31 am

    “…polluting industries.”

    “Pollution” means “discharge of semen outside of sex.”

    Industries specializing in this would occasionally need “propping up.”

  19. May 8, 2020 8:55 am

    These are the people that once ruled the world???? Maybe the time has come for China to rule the world now that the falangs have turned into climate morons.

  20. StephenP permalink
    May 8, 2020 9:12 am

    If creating green jobs is concerned, we all remember the old joke about the economist who said that if the intention was to provide jobs then rather than using mechanical diggers or shovels for earth-moving the workers should use spoons.
    And how about milking cows by hand? Instead of one man per 120 cows it would keep one man per 20 cows in employment. Oh, but I forgot the vegans wouldn’t approve of keeping cows.

  21. Ian Cook permalink
    May 8, 2020 9:40 am

    “To save the planet” really does beg the question, which planet? Presumably the one they are on, because there is no issue we can control going on here. But it’s OK, we have an actual problem at the moment, a challenge to rise to. No need to make up a problem any more

  22. Coeur de Lion permalink
    May 8, 2020 9:46 am

    I have complained to the BBC (again) about their concealment from the taxpayer that U.K. emits only just over one percent of global CO2. My complaint also asked whether the superannuated Harrabin had read various papers. (SR1.5, Dr Ruth Lea, Prof Michael Kelly on Zero Carbon etc etc) and whether he’d yet apologised for the 28Gate conspiracy. I always tick the boxes for a reply

    • May 8, 2020 10:02 am

      I’m still waiting for a reply to a complaint I made in December when the Beeb published the “oceans running out of oxygen” story. I’ve had two letters apologising that they haven’t answered it yet, but no actual answer!

  23. Keith permalink
    May 8, 2020 10:40 am

    I think the current Government is stupid enough to do along with all this green c***. I have no faith in Boris over this, and instead of rebuilding a great country having got rid of the EU, he will launch into a green world and bring us completely to our knees..

  24. Bill Berry permalink
    May 8, 2020 10:46 am

    The blizzard of pleading is caused by the prospect of the bountiful high yielding taxpayer cow going dry – and then barren.

  25. May 8, 2020 11:18 am

    The Mexican Government disagrees, and has cancelled some up-coming renewables supply auctions. The whining is amusing.

  26. Mad Mike permalink
    May 8, 2020 11:20 am

    From this BBC article. The same story really but, as you can see some the various quotes, the BBC’s own story, the BBC is being rather naughty in claiming that these people are talking about CC. It is clear they are talking about protecting and improving the environment. Not one word about CC. I wonder if Richard Walker or the others are happy with their message being highjacked? Someone should ask them.

    Richard Walker, the managing director of Iceland Foods, said: “The economic recovery from this global health crisis must put the restoration of nature at its heart – because that is the only way we can continue to power our human endeavour sustainably. If nature is protected, we are protected.”

    Beccy Speight, the chief executive of the RSPB, said: “Humanity’s future is inextricably bound to the health of our planet. No part of the world is untouched by human activity, and as we continue our destruction of nature, we make our own planet less habitable for people as well.”
    Hilary McGrady, director-general at the National Trust, said: “Right now, the nation’s attention is rightly focused on dealing with the immediate and profound impact of coronavirus on health, social fabric and livelihoods.
    “But as governments around the world turn their thoughts to economic recovery, their plans must respond to what the lockdown has clearly shown; that people want and need access to nature-rich green spaces near where they live.”

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52580291?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science_and_environment&link_location=live-reporting-story

  27. C Lynch permalink
    May 8, 2020 1:24 pm

    Even if you accept that Co2 is responsible for the modest warming that has occurred since 1850 – and I don’t – the only way to decrease the levels in the atmosphere is to decrease the output among the major producers of Co2.
    The single greatest producer is China by a long stretch. Strange how the efforts of the CAGW advocates are exclusively focused on the West and utterly ignore China or, worse, give it a fools pardon. Strange also how many of the same people ignore or excuse the disgraceful role of China in the outbreak and spread of the current pandemic.

  28. dennisambler permalink
    May 8, 2020 2:11 pm

    The Tory elite have been sold on this for a long time, Zac Goldsmith and Gummer led Cameron’s “Quality of Life” nonsense. Gummer is still there because they want him there, in spite of all his vested interest. FoE thought he was the best Environment Secretary ever.

    The CCC members in general have occupations and interests that benefit from the measures they recommend. No surprise they have a psychologist on board to help them sell the message. The biggest con is the membership on the committee of Drax’s Rebecca Heaton.

  29. Farmer Sooticle permalink
    May 8, 2020 6:50 pm

    Finally found the full text of the “open letter”, poor journalism from the BBC not to provide a link:
    https://butterfly-conservation.org/news-and-blog/green-recovery-letter-to-boris-johnson
    A lot of bodies you have probably never heard of, Chris Packham inevitably pops up.

Comments are closed.

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: