What Will It Cost, Roger?
By Paul Homewood
h/t Philip Bratby
More misreporting from Roger Harrabin:
A huge breakthrough in climate policy was signalled this week when China announced it will reduce its emissions to net zero by 2060.
It’s a potentially game-changing leap, following in the footsteps of the UK’s existing 2050 net zero target.
But promises are easy, actions are more challenging – and the UK has been steadily slipping from its climate targets.
It’s consistently promised tougher policies for the future, but for a few years, Britain’s long-term climate strategy has lain buried in fog.
We know the net zero carbon destination point, but we can’t yet see how the government intends to get there.
At last, in a contribution to the UN General Assembly (UNGA) on Thursday, the prime minister did briefly illuminate several paths towards carbon Nirvana.
But they’re only tantalising pointers to the direction of travel, when a full, clear properly funded roadmap is urgently needed.
In previous years, climate policy was typically held up in different government departments.
But environmentalists say key policies are now stuck in a Downing Street logjam awaiting sign-off from the prime minister himself.
It prompts John Sauven from Greenpeace to plead: "Some of the ideas the government is proposing are really impressive – but the prime minister needs to resolve disputes within government on environmental policies. Now is the time for him to lead."
No 10 insists that deadlines for decisions on climate and the environment will be met in key policy areas like those in the long list below:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-54296828
Just look again at his opening claim:
A huge breakthrough in climate policy was signalled this week when China announced it will reduce its emissions to net zero by 2060.
China have said nothing of the sort, simply that it is an aim.
Harrabin goes on to complain that the government have not laid our a detailed roadmap of how they will achieve Net Zero, conveniently ignoring the fact that China have not either, nor just about every other country in the world.
He then reproduces the usual list of options, without daring to mention how horrifically expensive they all are.
He claims that offshore wind no longer needs subsidy, but if this was so energy companies would be queuing up to build them without waiting for Contracts for Difference.
Notably however he does acknowledge that hydrogen solutions “look expensive”.
Harrabin reveals his green bias with his comments about the dismay of some green campaigners regarding nuclear power. If they/he were so concerned about global warming, they would embrace nuclear.
It is high time the public were told the truth about how much they will have to pay for the climate agenda. They deserve better than the torrent of eco-propaganda they get from the BBC.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
I don’t recall ever seeing any published cost comparisons for consumers. Is there anywhere that shows what average household energy bills are now; were, say, ten years ago; and will be if/when any of these policies are introduced?
The GWPF did a costing for net zero .
Click to access ThreeTrillion-1.pdf
Over 3 Trillion .
Yet another report that misunderstands what NET-zero means. Achieving NET-zero means the technological capture and geological storage of CO2 in massive amounts. Negative emissions. This cannot be done by anyone in the huge amounts needed to affect the Earth’s climate. It is high time that the public be clearly told what NET-zero actually entails and how much CO2 would be required…billions of tons!
Harrabin is so self righteous and delightfully gullible. It is highly entertaining to watch his enthusiastic reaction to bare faced lying by the Chinese Govt. Doesn’t he look at anything except Press releases?
A man born to be conned.
Trouble is, Johnson is also a lefty environmental nutcase, mentioning “Climate Change” more than Strong Economy”. Carrie (the new Sally Bercow) has already brainwashed him. God help us!!
Leadership challenge anyone?
If anyone suggests the storage of CO2, ask at what temperature will it be stored. Remember the triple point of CO2 is about −56.4°C and a pressure of 5.11 atm. Also ask, for how long will this CO2 will need to be stored: the correct answer is, forever! That’s longer than the storage of radioactive material: that’s only millions of years!
On second thoughts, even these questions will confuse them. 🙂
Notwithstanding Harrabin’s view of the future world, why would anyone believe a single word that comes out from communist controlled China? I believe they will say and do anything and everything to achieve their global goals regarding their position and power.
I’m equally concerned about how much we, the licence-fee payer are having to pay the likes of Harrabin, Amos, Mcgrath, Shukman – and I’m sure many, many more staff and support staff. I bet it’s not far from a couple of million. And all to lie for their country.
As Bojo is supposedly positioning ‘conservative’ figures at the top of Beeb and Offcom, and a new TV news channel is coming, led by Andrew Neil, I would hope to see some proper challenges to the mindless groupthink narrative.
What is UK’s objective? (1). To control global temperature in 2100AD. Incapable at 1.2 per cent. (2) Impress everybody else and get them to follow suit. Let’s gather the evidence that this is happening.
The Govt.shoud realise they cannot control the climate here or anywhere else. They should focus on grown up things like securing cheap reliable sources of energy that do not need huge subsidies.
It prompts John Sauven from Greenpeace to plead: “Some of the ideas the government is proposing are really impressive – but the prime minister needs to resolve disputes within government on environmental policies. Now is the time for him to lead.”
I must remind everyone citing China’s stated climate action intentions that it is necessary to know or to study Confucianism to be able to decipher these statements and to translate them into the language of cultures that value truth over appearances.
Western cultures that value truth over appearance are sure that their culture is the better culture but asian confucian cultures that value appearance over truth are just as sure that their culture is the better culture. It’s not a right or wrong thing. It’s a culture thing.
Very good point chaamjamal! Also, as China does not allow anyone to check their emission statements, nobody can know what the real situation is. The Chinese must be laughing their heads off at the gullibility of western climate crusaders.
Lol. The truth in plain language.
“But promises are easy, actions are more challenging – and the UK has been steadily slipping from its climate targets.”
Reality always eventually overrules fantasy.
“Reality always eventually overrules fantasy” the trouble is in the case of “climate change” how long is “eventually” is it several decades of fuel poverty and energy rationing or does it go on until the complete collapse of western civilization .
Probably when the power cuts and/or compulsory demand reduction get beyond a joke.
The two things these alarmists will never show us is a detailed roadmap of how to get to their promised land nor how much it will cost. They shouldn’t be taken seriously by Government until they do. If they did come up with anything then it could be subject to scrutiny and that’s the last thing they want for obvious reasons.
Or whether the promises of the promised land are real. For instance, does the evidence show that climate action will slow down the rate of increase in atmospheric co2? In other words, do we have the evidence for the foundation of it all that atmospheric composition is responsive to fossil fuel emissions?
https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/09/23/emission-reduction-atmospheric-co2/
Harrabin’s naivety knows no bounds.
Don’t just blame Harrabin. There are at least 649 MPs who are either Useful Idiots, hypocrites, or riders of the gravy train, not to mention the thousands of local politicians who’ve signed up to the myth. Harrabin can’t do a thing. These people could if they weren’t so far up their own backsides.
Forgive me for asking, but isn’t Harrabin one of those people who goes along with the idea that if we don’t take action yesterday, climate change will be irreversible by 2035 (or was it 2050?). Either way anything China does by 2060 won’t affect that. They know that so it is a pretty empty promise.
It will cost a lot of Golden Eagles and other raptors.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-54295035
But they can just pretend it is all the work of the landed gentry blood sport lovers instead of equally or more the turbines. Do they really think vested ‘community’ wind farm projects and big land owners/business wouldn’t make sure they regularly patrol and disappear the evidence as fast as rogue gamekeepers would?
https://www.google.com/maps/@56.5562363,-3.7607963,7122m/data=!3m1!1e3
The Braan (where the lead wrapped tag was found) is alongside the A822 and the ugly scars just to the north in the Tay Forest Park are wind turbines.
It’s a bit ironic that they call it the Griffin Wind Farm.
https://www.google.com/maps/@56.5590412,-3.7786012,3a,19.6y,76.68h,91.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq_F7Pndc7EiLsP6Orl3Q0Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Wiki: Roger Harrabin … studied English at St Catharine’s College, Cambridge … is the BBC’s Energy and Environment Analyst, and one of their senior journalists on the environment and energy.
Says it all really, about Harrabin, and the BBC.
That’s BBC logic for you – he needs to be good at English in order to write about stuff.
Like those photos of steam venting from cooling towers, the photo and caption that reads: “can the government see its way to a greener future?” at the top of Harrabin’s article is misleading.
This would be a more honest depiction of Harrabin’s ‘green future’ landscape:
The cost of renewables is burning a massive hole in Britain’s pocket. https://briefingsforbritain.co.uk/the-costs-offshore-wind-power-blindness-and-insight/?mc_cid=c616f4eb54&mc_eid=7678a30fb3