Skip to content

COP26 Ends In Humiliating Failure

November 14, 2021

By Paul Homewood




The UN’s climate agenda has finally hit the buffers in Glasgow.

It almost happened in Copenhagen 12 years ago, when developing nations refused to limit their economic growth to satisfy the West. It was only the promise of hundreds of billions of dollars that persuaded them to come along for the ride.

The can was kicked down the road again in 2015 at Paris, when developing countries were given carte blanche to carry on increasing emissions.

But sooner or later, the time would come for action, not talk. And when it came to the crunch, the developing nations rebelled, led by India, China, South Africa and Iran. The touchpaper was this clause in the Draft Agreement, which was presented to the conference yesterday:




India along with a host of like minded countries knew that they could not run their economies without coal and other fossil fuels, never mind grow them and relieve poverty. Faced with the whole Agreement being lost, Alok Sharma and the UN organisers backed down, and replaced the words “phase-out” with “phase-down”. Just one word changed, but its effect was devastating for the Agreement.

Given that there is no obligation to do any of this (hence the term “Calls”), and no timescales are mentioned, India and the rest can interpret this clause any way they want. (Unabated coal, by the way, means where the carbon is not captured). In short, they will be able to carry on burning all the coal they want, for as long as they want.

The rest of the Agreement is pretty weak and ineffectual as well. It is full of terms such as “urges”, “requests” and “invites”, which mean there is no obligation on anybody to do anything.

And all COP26 has really agreed on is to meet up again next year and discuss things again.

In terms of Mitigation, ie reducing emissions, countries who have not yet submitted new plans are requested to do so next year. But if they have not done so yet, it is hardly likely they will come up with anything meaningful next year.

The Agreement inevitably “reaffirms” the 1.5C target. It would have been politically impossible to do otherwise. However, 1.5C was never an option, and was effectively kicked into touch at Paris, when it was acknowledged that emissions would carry on rising till 2030. According to the science, emissions would need to be cut in half in this decade to hit 1.5C, something which is clearly not remotely possible now.

Parties are also requested to come back next year with strengthened targets. But again, are countries that have just submitted new targets this year going to propose anything significantly different next year?





Then, of course, there is the money. There is a lot of “urging” and “requesting” developed countries to cough up:


But already the bar is being raised, with the third world demanding ever more. One significant item introduced at COP26 is the demand by developing nations that finance for adaption to climate change should be ramped up at the expense of mitigation.

In other words, they don’t want money for solar panels. They’d rather have it for building resilience against climate change (by which they mean weather!).

One further blow to those demanding western money has been the neutering of their Loss and Damage agenda. This is the ludicrous claim that all weather disasters are due to global warming, and that rich countries should therefore pay poor ones every time there is a bit of bad weather.

That was too much for even Joe Biden to accept, as it would leave the West on the hook for ever. The Glasgow Pact has effectively kicked this into touch, just promising more talks at some time in the future.

Naturally supporters of the UN agenda, such as the BBC, have tried to make the best of a bad job, claiming that “progress has been made”. The absurd Matt McGrath calls it “ambitious” and “progressive”.

Some have even claimed that the 1.5C target is still alive. Chris Stark, Chief Executive of the Committee on Climate Change, for instance stated:


This shows just how out of touch he is with reality. Living in his little bubble, he seems to think the rest of the world shares his obsession with climate change.

But as the Climate Action tracker reaffirms, emissions will carry on growing, despite the new plans submitted to COP26:


The end of the road.

In my view, we have seen the beginning of the end for the UN’s climate agenda.

There will no doubt be many more COPs to come. And there will be annual warnings from Prince Charles that we have 12 more months to save the planet.

But the writing is now on the wall. Developing countries around the world are standing up and refusing to cut back on fossil fuels, because they know they have no alternative if they want to grown their economies and give their people a better life.

They have got off the Climate Train.

So should we.

  1. November 14, 2021 11:01 am

    That’s what it deserved. Never again-costs too much for CO2-rich hot air.

  2. Clive permalink
    November 14, 2021 11:09 am

    The whole anthropogenic climate change theory, because that is what it is, “a theory” is the emperors new clothes. All designed and orchestrated by the UN & WEF to the benefit of the 1% at a huge cost to the minions.
    It needs to consigned to the dustbin of history now!

    • bobn permalink
      November 14, 2021 2:41 pm

      As such Paul makes a mistake by writing ‘According to the science, emissions would need to be cut in half ‘. This should read ‘According to the imaginary anti-science of AGW alarmists, emissions would need to be cut in half’.

    • Mike Jackson permalink
      November 14, 2021 6:43 pm

      Not even a ‘theory’, Clive, except perhaps in non-scientific layman’s language. Barely even qualifies as a scientific hypothesis.
      No serious attempt has made to prove or disprove any of the vague ideas put forward about what is the “ideal” temperature. The 2° figure was plucked from the air because it was felt that it was a figure the politicians could relate to (they like figures; makes then sound knowledgeable). At least one author — I can’t remember whether it is Lomborg, Moore, or Shellenburger — reckons that about 3.5° would be better and that we have no need to start worrying ourselves about CO2 because a doubling of the current level would do no harm and would provide a buffer against the next downturn.
      Climate Change is ‘policy-based evidence making’ par excellence. There is no attempt at rigorous scientific research. The whole affair is an enviro-Malthusian belief system from beginning to end.
      And a nice little earner for third-rate politicians with an eye to the main chance.

      • devonblueboy permalink
        November 14, 2021 6:45 pm

        That will be 100% of politicians then

      • November 14, 2021 7:40 pm

        I’ve implored my MP to think logically and critically, but I know he won’t. He hasn’t yet even provided any evidence for his ‘climate change’ assertions, despite asking more than once, but know he can’t, and I suspect he knows he can’t.

      • devonblueboy permalink
        November 14, 2021 7:53 pm

        My MP is an ex BBC journalist and Spad so I haven’t bothered to stress his brain cell with the concept of critical thinking

      • Mike Jackson permalink
        November 14, 2021 6:46 pm

        And I should have added — yet again “un grand merçi” to Paul for the efforts he puts into all this. With his help we’ll get there in the end!

      • devonblueboy permalink
        November 14, 2021 6:49 pm

        Hear hear 👏👏👏

      • November 14, 2021 7:44 pm


      • Julian Flood permalink
        November 15, 2021 4:07 am

        Third rate? Gummer et al? You flatter them.


  3. magesox permalink
    November 14, 2021 11:17 am

    I’m really, really sorry for being so inhuman, but I am the only one who burst out laughing when I saw Alok Sharma starting to sob? Was he crying for the planet, or just crying over the fact that such an immense and costly conference involving tens of thousands of people from around the world, and under his personal stewardship, has achieved, well, “net zero”?

    • Harry Davidson permalink
      November 14, 2021 11:21 am

      Yes, I was amused by that as well. “Air miles Sharma”, denied his great personal triumph. The man is a total onanist.

      • eastdevonoldie permalink
        November 14, 2021 5:54 pm

        Sharma will always be associated with COP26 and knows Bojo handed him a poisoned chalice when he gave him the COP26 job,
        A seriously flawed ‘agreement’ that will inevitably unravel very quickly is nit a good thing to have on your CV.

      • Vernon E permalink
        November 15, 2021 10:45 am

        Yet Boris is all over the media claiming what a huge success and world saving event it has been. Presumably that means he will have to sack Sharma but where does it leave poor Joe Public?

    • devonblueboy permalink
      November 14, 2021 12:07 pm

      Undoubtedly crying about his damaged ego and the greatly limited chances of future airmiles accumulation

    • Jordan permalink
      November 14, 2021 5:28 pm

      Crying due to the shame of having blown up Ferrybridge Coal Fired Power Station in a publicity stunt?

  4. Harry Davidson permalink
    November 14, 2021 11:24 am

    China, India and Russia have never remotely bought into the AGW mantra. For China, they simply see it as another lever for increasing their power in the world.

    So: anyone who says “Deniers are just stupid” is de facto being racist. I win, I was first with the racism card.

    • devonblueboy permalink
      November 14, 2021 12:08 pm

      Bravo 😁 👍👍

  5. tom0mason permalink
    November 14, 2021 11:25 am

    And now this COP is over,
    As the motorcades rush off,
    To their many private jets,
    Elites back to their usual trough.
    Less fake news paraded daily,
    Less excess climate deceit,
    Surely no one sane will miss it,
    Surely now less BBC conceit.

    • tom0mason permalink
      November 14, 2021 11:45 am

      It’s the same the whole world over,
      It’s the rich what burns more fuel,
      While folk die in freezing weather,
      And those elites just want to rule.

      • Harry Davidson permalink
        November 14, 2021 1:29 pm

        “It’s the rich wot get’s the pleasure, it’s the poor wot get’s the blame” has been brought up to date and re-invigorated.

      • T Walker permalink
        November 14, 2021 1:52 pm

        Love it tomo.!!! Thanks for brightening my day.

      • Stuart Hamish permalink
        November 15, 2021 8:17 am

        I like the Kiplingesque quality Tomo

  6. November 14, 2021 11:27 am

    FLOP26, just like FLOPs 1 to 25. All a complete waste of taxpayers’ money. Josh’s cartoon has predicted it for every FLOP.

    Unfortunately for us all, Bozo will continue with his insanely expensive and ultimately useless Net Zero policy and he will ruin the country.

    • November 14, 2021 2:10 pm

      Safe in the knowledge that his so-called opponents are even more bonkers about the climate than he is.

    • dennisambler permalink
      November 14, 2021 11:09 pm

      Boris was quoted by the beeb as saying, “It’s the beginning of the end of global warming”. I think it may be the beginning of the end of him.

      • November 14, 2021 11:25 pm

        Yes,when/if decarbonization happens at latest .

      • John Hultquist permalink
        November 15, 2021 2:41 am

        But Boris follows that other great climate cult member Obama:
        “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal …”~~Barack Obama upon winning the Democratic nomination for presidency conveys his thinking of what that means ….for the world, Tuesday, JUNE 03, 2008”

      • Julian Flood permalink
        November 15, 2021 4:11 am

        Why does the phrase ‘blue soylent fuel’ come to mind?


  7. Is it just me? permalink
    November 14, 2021 11:31 am

    Please can we get a sensible science-based media channel together to expose this nonsense narrative for what it is? The timing is getting close now. BTW Paul – try not to use words like ‘Militwat’ if you can. I know it’s uber-frustrating as both Ed and his equally dodgy ‘Clinton-doting’ brother are (without question) c**** of the supreme first order – but outward facing communication should remain professional at all times. That is essential. At this CRITICAL stage – don’t fall victim to outward-facing name calling. This whole façade is (hopefully) quite close to falling down now and the very last thing those of us who support what you say & do is to see it pulled down as ‘offensive language’. That would be a horribly easy win for them after such tireless hard work.

    • Brian Jackson permalink
      November 14, 2021 12:03 pm

      Just call him “1 MilliWATT”, because in electrical terms that’s about the level of his intelligence – so close to zero as hardly measurable.

      • T Walker permalink
        November 14, 2021 1:57 pm

        Stop exaggerating Brain!! I’ve told you a million times before.

      • Ben Vorlich permalink
        November 14, 2021 6:38 pm

        @IIJM. I agree that was a step too far.

        At first glance I actually read it as Milliwatt. Had to read it twice.

      • November 14, 2021 7:36 pm

        What you measure is volts, but Ed has no potential. What you measure is amps, but Ed is not current.

    • Terence Carlin permalink
      November 14, 2021 12:22 pm

      well said

      • Is it just me? permalink
        November 15, 2021 12:42 pm

        Thank you @TC. So close, How would (some) of us feel if after 10 years the site was forced into closure over a public facing ‘offensive’ remark? 10 years wasted. Cheap schoolboy jokes play a very poor second to getting a result.

    • Jordan permalink
      November 14, 2021 6:28 pm

      I also thought Ed Militwat was not very appropriate for this site. Ed Megatwat works better for me.

    • watersider permalink
      November 15, 2021 4:44 pm

      Whilst I agree with you up to point, it is well known that the best response to those pretentious so called experts is redicule and plenty of it.
      I see Paul gets some well deserved airing on (lockdown) now known as Daily I think that an effort should be made to get a regular slot on GB News.
      I am sure a word with Nigel Faerrage or Mark Steyn would help.
      We have so many great people on here that I am sure some could aggregate our knowledge and inform the growing viewership on GB News about the truth behind this global warming fraud.

      • November 15, 2021 5:51 pm

        The problem is not just these so-called experts, but those in power and the media who listen to them. To break that link, you need to create a sufficient level of doubt that what they’re saying is nonsense. Sometimes even clear logic and proof is not good enough. It’s a tough one to crack.

  8. GeoffB permalink
    November 14, 2021 11:34 am

    I noticed a lot of publicity for the Marshall Isles and Tuvalu who were campaigning for reparations, so to put this in perspective, here are the populations. (11am 14/11/21)
    China 1,446,020,275
    India 1,398,412,407
    Marshall Isles 59,610
    Tuvalu 11,931

    Why are these insignificant countries given air time by the media? In fact COP 27 should be limited to the top 20 countries by population, so there is a manageable number of delegates,

    • Cheshire Red permalink
      November 14, 2021 1:29 pm

      Oh for Gods sake Geoff, stop being so logical and reasonable. Where’s your hysteria, man?

  9. November 14, 2021 11:35 am

    I also notice the good news in clause 23, where in future they will throw away all the junk science that they have relied on so far and will instead use the best available scientific knowledge. I trust all the BBC environment correspondents have taken note of this.

    • devonblueboy permalink
      November 14, 2021 12:11 pm

      There’s no chance of that. As BBC Environment correspondents their jobs depend on propagating ‘we’re all doomed’

    • Jordan permalink
      November 14, 2021 5:38 pm

      You can summarise the best available scientific knowledge in two sentences:
      1) We have no idea what the value of climate sensitivity.
      2) The models with a climate sensitivity predict a tropospheric hotspot which has never been observed.

      From these two statements, the whole thing falls down in totality. Those over-reaching claims at COP26 about how much we will control temperature. And those unsupportable assertions that past industrial CO2 emissions (of the developed nations) have had had any adverse impact on the climate whatsoever.

      • Phoenix44 permalink
        November 14, 2021 11:00 pm

        Add in we don’t understand and we can’t explain the various cycles and we can’t model clouds.

        This is my basic problem with climate science – there’s really very little actual science in it as yet. And they’ve wasted 20 years now pursuing CO2. Compared with say medicine they’ve just about discovered what the heart is for.

      • November 14, 2021 11:21 pm

        Sun, Clouds from water vapour stimulated by cosmic rays.
        Minimal greenhouse effect from CO2 but it greens the Earth.
        It’s concentration in .atmosphere could double to 400ppm within min greenhouse effect.

        See Ratzer, Lightfoot, Svensmark.

  10. Harry Passfield permalink
    November 14, 2021 11:37 am

    The nonsense of the negotiations for the Draft Agreement was outlined on R4 yesterday morning when it was reported that one of the biggest arguments was over whether which was the stronger word, ‘urge’ or ‘request’ countries to do a particular thing. They decided that ‘request’ had a stronger meaning to ‘urge’!
    Then, I thought to myself, what does it matter when the text us translated into 100+ other languages?

    • T Walker permalink
      November 14, 2021 3:36 pm

      I once had a line manager who when completing annual reports on staff spent ages looking up the meaning of words in a dictionary. I pointed out that those who deciphered the reports would also need the same dictionary. This draft mess is many times more stupid.

  11. November 14, 2021 11:39 am

    The COP26 agreement was so bad
    .. that the privileged grandchildren of top millionaire EU officials with gold-plated pensions
    “will fight with other human beings for water and food.
    That’s the stark reality we face.”

    “Reality” I doubt it, you emotional-blackmailing dramaqueen.

    Yet according to the Green Party that’s “science it’s a no-brainer”

    • November 14, 2021 11:59 am

      BTW here’s the video of that part
      He does give himself a get out
      that it’s “if we fail in the next couple of years”

    • cookers52 permalink
      November 14, 2021 12:33 pm

      All of human history is humanity fighting with itself, but usually the cause is political or religious dogma, with a lot of greed for power and wealth.

    • Martin Brumby permalink
      November 14, 2021 1:15 pm

      He will more probably fight with other kids calling his Grandfather (quite accurately), a gormless twat.

    • T Walker permalink
      November 14, 2021 3:40 pm

      Stew – even the local Jehova’s Witnesses are not as deep in their beliefs as this guy.

    • Dave Ward permalink
      November 14, 2021 5:53 pm

      “If we fail [my one-year-old grandson] will fight with other human beings for water and food”

      That’s because their absurd policies will mean the things we currently take for granted have become too scarce and expensive…

    • The Informed Consumer permalink
      November 14, 2021 6:54 pm

      That’s not blackmail, that’s just pathetic bleating.

    • The Informed Consumer permalink
      November 14, 2021 6:58 pm

      I love that this m0r0n hijacks his grandsons opinion long before the kid has the opportunity to form one himself or give permission for his use as an icon of disaster.

      So much for the sanctity of the individual these creeps use when it suits them.

  12. Mad Mike permalink
    November 14, 2021 11:53 am

    O no, not another COP next year. COP25 was 2 years ago and it gave us some respite from the build up drama that passed for news by the BBC etc for a good few months. but now, if they carry on with their annual jamborees, we will face incessant hysteria and demonstrations.I was wondering though how long they could keep this annual stuff going before finally realising that their forecasts of doom within 3, 5,7 years etc were not being fulfilled.

    Even though the weasel words carry no legal weight our Government will copper plate the wording and cite them as necessary instructions to further our economic suicide.

    Meanwhile we will see that in the real world not much is changing weather wise.

    • dennisambler permalink
      November 14, 2021 11:21 pm

      “our Government will copper plate the wording and cite them as necessary instructions to further our economic suicide.” I believe you are right.

  13. jamesgarethmorgan permalink
    November 14, 2021 11:53 am

    Great stuff Paul – keep up the excellent work!

  14. Dr Ken Pollock permalink
    November 14, 2021 11:56 am

    Can we all promise to comment, next time Tuvalu is mentioned, that its land area has increased by 2.9% in recent years, so it is growing, not drowning!
    Remember that Vanuatu was to sue the USA about rising sea levels, and was the stimulus for Michael Crichton’s book “State of Fear” – the first time I read about “urban heat islands” – published in 2004!
    Neither island complex is remotely at risk from rising sea levels – 1 foot every 100 years!
    But don’t tell the media, especially not the BBC! Don’t let the facts spoil a good story, especially when it makes us all, in the West, feel guilty…

    • ThinkingScientist permalink
      November 14, 2021 12:08 pm

      There was a bloke on GB News saying the same thing about Tuvalu land area increased. I then realised it was Lembit Opik. Call me amazed, the man speaks reason!

  15. November 14, 2021 12:17 pm

    Our Mayor flew across the Atlantic to spend 4 days at COP. His message was plant more trees, urban forest, and build more bicycle lanes at present unused because of cold and rainy soon to be snowy weather. How many “useful idiots” attended this useless meeting and who paid their expenses? What was the carbon footprint for this meeting?

    This shows the corruption of science to try to convince the “delegates” of the urgency of action.

    My Gift To Climate Alarmists – YouTube

  16. Gamecock permalink
    November 14, 2021 12:20 pm

    ‘if they want to grown their economies and give their people a better life’

    It’s bigger than that, Mr. Homewood. They need fossil fuels simply to stay alive. Today. Maldives lobbying to reduce use of fossil fuels is surreal – they die without them.

    It is a stark example, but just as TRUE for UK. Net Zero is suicidal.

    “Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good” – Thomas Sowell

  17. November 14, 2021 12:32 pm

    According to this website a 1.3 degree rise in air temperature is likely to happen by 2100 with no additional CO2 reductions;

  18. Cheshire Red permalink
    November 14, 2021 1:12 pm

    .36 states pretty-much what most normal sceptics have been advocating from day one; use technology to develop cleaner, more efficient energy sources.

    It’s a perfect representation of how an innovation-led free market operates. Don’t blag us with fake ‘solutions’ that are nothing of the sort. Don’t patronise us with ‘build back better’ sales pitches, instead build a better energy-generating mousetrap. Then we’ll be interested.

    This is Checkmate for alarmism. They’ve screamed Apocalypse from every rooftop and still not got their way. If not now then when? Where else is there for them to go?

    Pragmatic, effective solutions has just won this entire climate debate hands-down.

    • Gamecock permalink
      November 14, 2021 2:03 pm

      Reports of their demise are grossly exaggerated. They have been surviving without substance since their beginning. Nothing has changed. The parties will continue.

    • Sceptical Sam permalink
      November 14, 2021 2:15 pm

      I just can’t write the cheesy grin off my dial.

      When did you accept that man-made CO2 was the predominate driver of the miniscule global warming that has been fraudulently estimated to have occurred over the last 100 years or so?

    • Michael M. permalink
      November 14, 2021 5:10 pm

      Brilliant. In a nutshell.

  19. Jack Broughton permalink
    November 14, 2021 1:12 pm

    If CO2 were really taking us to “Five-to-Armageddon” would the west have been at COP-out 26 or stopping all CO2 production by force? While CO2 based AGW is good political science (as on Yes Minister) it is very bad real science, and the USA, Russia and China all seem to know that even if our bozos do not.

    A referendum would quickly sort the wheat from the chaff.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      November 14, 2021 3:32 pm

      Referendum? They’d give the kids a vote ‘ having spent the time in their early years pumping the CV propaganda into them.
      But then, should they win, it would be their future. They’d be welcome.

      • Dave Ward permalink
        November 14, 2021 6:05 pm

        “But then, should they win, it would be their future. They’d be welcome”

        Just as long as I’m allowed to finish off my days in reasonable comfort – THEN they will be welcome to it!

        Selfish??? Moi???

        P.S. One of the few things I look forward to is the thought of millions of brainwashed youngsters pulling their hair out when the power goes off and they can’t post on Farcebook / Twatter / TickTock etc… Maybe they won’t feel quite so morally superior when old farts like me are able to call on decades of “Hands On” experience to keep things going…

      • November 14, 2021 6:56 pm

        An old engineer was ‘let go’ from his company. His job was to keep the machinery working, which only he really knew how to do, but the younger ones thought they could manage. When the machine, VH was viral for their business, broke down, none of the younger ones could fix it, so they called in the old guy. He agreed, but for a fee of £1,000,001. They asked why that specific amount? “Well” he replied, “£1 for the use of my hammer, and £1,000,000 for my knowledge of where to hit it” 🤣

    • Cheshire Red permalink
      November 15, 2021 10:45 am

      Jack Broughton

      Precisely. Alarmist rhetoric simply doesn’t match the actions. On that I agree with Greta!

      If CO2 *really was* cooking the planet there’d be no discussion beyond an immediate and 100% embargo on all Chinese goods, plus any other country that wasn’t playing ball.

      Termites would be slated for mass extinction and there’d be an absolute bonfire of bans against almost everything that produces CO2.

      None of that is happening as we all know it’s a giant scam. At some point perhaps it’ll even be seen as criminal?

  20. Ian PRSY permalink
    November 14, 2021 1:17 pm

    What’s happening with the Cumbria coal mine? The economic case is unanswerable.

    • November 14, 2021 1:46 pm

      That case was deliberately delayed until post-FLOP26. If UK had approved that beforehand any failures would’ve been blamed on the UK decision.

      Given global security issues it’s now plain to see it should be approved.

      NB There’s just one fly in the ointment that I can see; if we go with the Cumbria coal mine but China closes its UK steel making plants then we’re stuck with a white elephant.

    • November 14, 2021 1:47 pm

      It’s gone for legal review or something. Hopefully it was just parked there till after COP26

    • It doesn't add up... permalink
      November 14, 2021 3:51 pm

      Miliband said this morning Labour would ban it.

    • Jordan permalink
      November 14, 2021 6:47 pm

      … and what happened to Justin Rowlatt after he had to be unclamped from BoJo’s trouser leg? Last heard making up scary stories in California. Sigh .. distance cures a broken heart.

  21. Barrie Emmett permalink
    November 14, 2021 1:31 pm

    Another excellent expose of this ridiculous hot air bubble. Thanks

  22. Broadlands permalink
    November 14, 2021 1:38 pm

    When will all these well-fed people (well-intentioned or not) understand that nothing of significance can be accomplished without fuels for transportation. The only fuels that can do that are renewable biofuels or 100% fossil fuel. And biofuels are 90% fossil fuel. So, who are they kidding when they talk about phasing in or out this or that. None of it can be done without fossil fuels for transportation. That includes food delivered anywhere. Even all-electric vehicles need biofuels for their manufacture and transportation to where they deliver food… made possible by plants that sequester CO2.

    • Ben Vorlich permalink
      November 14, 2021 11:42 pm

      I’ve been reading lots of reports that E10 petrol/biofuel mix means a reduction of several miles per gallon in economy. For a vehicle doing 40mpg was using E5 then anything less than 37.9 mpg on E10 means more petrol is being used per mile driven.

  23. mervhob permalink
    November 14, 2021 1:42 pm

    I posted this on my faceboook page as it became obvious what the outcome would be. No body at Cop-26 said a word about the two elephants in the room:

    Many years ago, while in Singapore with the Royal Airforce in the 1960s, we had in the air traffic control tower, a local Malay domestic worker who cleaned the area and made excellent tea. We had a visit from a group of local WVS women who made it their business to check up on the morality of us dissolute service men overseas.
    One of the women started a conversation with our domestic worker and asked him how many children he had? He answered 9 – ‘Gosh’, she said, ‘That is a lot of children!’ He made a gesture of passing his left index finger through a ring of the fingers on the right hand ‘Yes missy’, he said sadly, ‘Too much Pooki!’ Her face at this response was a picture!
    You do not need mastery of the Malay language to understand what he was talking about. This was one elephant in the room at Cop -26 – the pressing problem we face is not the direct result of the industrial revolution, rather it is that huge beneficial changes that it has made in the condition of the human population, has led to massive overpopulation of the planet.
    Trying to support a population of approaching 8 billion with what are Victorian technologies is clearly impossible. We might ask, in a parody of ‘The Life of Brian’ exactly what we have done to improve on what the Victorians bequeathed to us. With the use of continuous power, thanks to the steam engine, they supplied manufactured goods, clean water supplies, developed the achromatic microscope that led to the understanding of infectious disease, produced gas lighting and heating which stayed the wholesale destruction of forests, developed the production of electrical power and the theory of its transmission, developed the internal combustion engine, developed the beginnings of vaccine use to control pandemics, developed the electrical transmission of data via the telegraph and the telephone and electric lighting, started the development flight, started the use of antiseptics and aseptic methods in surgery, opened up the world to maritime trade via the triple expansion steam engine and the surface condenser. We now had anesthetics to remove the terrible pain of surgery, greatly improved food supply, clean water and good medical care. This is a very small part of huge beneficial improvement made in the human condition as a result of the scientific and industrial revolution. Infant mortality plummeted, life expectancy improved – all as a result of burning coal and then oil. I have a picture of my grandfather’s family stood outside their home in Sussex in the early 1900s – nine children survived to adulthood.
    So, what have we done to improve on this marvelous legacy? Well, we use nuclear power to boil water to provide steam to drive Charles Parson’s turbines to drive Professor Faraday’s electrical machines. On the high seas the steady chug, chug, chug of the Diesel engine reigns supreme, on our roads the good Doctor Otto’s magic cycle resounds, suck, squeeze, bang, blow is all. And, production of manufactured goods is dominated by giant, highly inefficient corporations, whose leaders only concern is the size of their share options, their yachts and their expensive whores. Turn on your television and you are bombarded with requests to buy some economically worthless product, which at the expense of excessive use of resource, adds zero value to your life. Junk corporations pushing junk products. All this was predicted by H.G. Wells in his ‘A Story of the Days to Come’, a world where a descendant of a Victorian family lives in a world strangely like our own, with processed food produced by giant corporations, multimedia at the push of a button, where advertising is omnipresent at every turning in the street, flying machines traverse across the world and electricity is generated by windmills. The majority live in poorly paid servitude to the great corporations, on the equivalent of a minimum wage – the property elite and the administrative class live very well with all the techno-toys of the age. What a prescient picture of our current world! But Wells was a writer of uncommon social insight. His vision of the swarming, unhappy cities that dominate our world has come to pass in a terrible way. Most people are forced to work in scam commercial enterprise, pushing dubious products with high pressure sales technique. Well’s ‘vast and desolate braying’ of advertising dominates the populations senses. As Wells predicts, “Nearly a third of the world are serfs and debtors from the cradle to the grave.”
    It is this aspect of Well’s prediction that locks us into ‘fossil fuel blame’ game. In reality, it is not the industrial revolution, which has put us into this situation, but the social organization which grew out of its misuse. The benefits of fossil fuel use have been enormous but their abuse and misuse have brought us to this sorry pass.
    So, will COP-26 address these egregious abuses of the human condition? We cannot depend on so called ‘green’ energy sources while we have only Victorian technologies to exploit them – too much of our lives needs continuous power. There are probably better technologies possible, but they will not be forthcoming from academics ensconced in ivory towers, masturbating over wave equations. Or from the manipulations of executives whose only motivation is the increase of their personal wealth.
    These primary problems have received no mention at COP-26 and the blaming of fossil fuels will merely push the world into intellectual property and resource stockpiling to gain economic advantage – this is already happening. And, overpopulation? No-one dares mention it – fearing cries of restricting human rights. But without some action on that particular issue, no real progress can be made.
    The cause of the current ‘crisis’ is now clear – the world population in 1960 was 3 billion, it is now close to 8 billion and is predicted to reach 9.7 billion by 2050. And the so called ‘markets can offer no rational solution, other than the further wasting of the precious remaining resources of this planet. As H.G. Wells makes clear, an elite driven society has no answers, other than to donate a tiny fraction of its wealth to worthy causes.
    The two elephants at COP-26 now loom over us all – corporate manipulation of markets and gross overpopulation. And, ‘Too much Pooki’ will be written on the tombstone of a humanity destroyed by greed, bovine stupidity and political mendacity!

    • Broadlands permalink
      November 14, 2021 2:45 pm

      The question of population was well-defined in a short paper published in 1987: “Carbon Dioxide and People” (Newell & Marcus). The correlation between people (population) and Mauna Loa CO2 was shown to be almost perfect. As population has increased since then, the correlation is still perfect (although the slope is a bit lower). The authors discussed the dilemma that creates. Well worth a read. Especially by those who choose to ignore the “Elephant” but require plant-derived food for themselves and for the fuel energy they need.
      The Sun has provided the warmth, photosynthesis the food…and the fuel. Why give that up because of some models with dire results coming out from garbage going in?

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      November 14, 2021 3:55 pm

      Being ex-RAF….Singaporean joke:
      A westerner takes pleasure with local lady and, in extremis hears her shouting, ‘Push on, push on!’
      He thinks he’s a stud and keeps going.
      The next day he’s playing golf with friends, basking in the success of the previous night, and tees off. Then a Malay breaks cover and runs across the course yelling, ‘Push on, Push on!!! ‘
      The man was so alarmed he asked his caddie what he meant…..
      ‘Wrong hole’, said the caddie.

      • Harry Passfield permalink
        November 14, 2021 4:24 pm

        Apologies….Nice bottle of Malbec and good fillet steak for lunch… 🙂

      • Graeme No.3 permalink
        November 14, 2021 8:27 pm

        was the Malbec from a developed country like France or an ‘undeveloped’ one like Argentina?

      • Harry Passfield permalink
        November 14, 2021 8:40 pm

        Graeme… I can assure you, it was CC-free…..or, to be correct, the bottle was free of any CCs when I finished. Hic!

    • watersider permalink
      November 15, 2021 5:19 pm

      Thank you for the extensive and interesting history lesson.
      How sad that you subscribe to the disgraceful Malthusian propaganda of Bill Gates Satanists who would be our rulers.
      One question for you. Who will decide which people are worthy of being saved when this great population cull will takes place?
      Would it be those who are forcing an unproven gene therapy injection the world by any chance to combat the Chinese Wuflu?
      My abiding memory of the Queen’s late husband was his stating he wished to return as a virus ‘to control the population problem’

  24. November 14, 2021 2:02 pm

    What is this fossil fuel subsidy referred to in the text?

    I thought that nonsense of highly creative warmist accounting had been knocked on the head years ago?

    Or when I fill up with petrol should the garage actually be giving me a rebate on the price as no tax at all goes to the government?

    • November 14, 2021 2:19 pm

      It’s the subsidy UK motorists pay to the national exchequer, to which VAT is added.

    • November 14, 2021 2:26 pm

      It’s widely thought that fossil fuels are subsidised. Firstly, the reduced rate of VAT (5% versus full rate of 20%) is said to be a subsidy. Then, governments give tax breaks to develop new resources, another subsidy. The biggest subsidy is the fossil fuel industry does not pay for the climate damage that its products cause. All the flooding, bush fires, and heat deaths etc.

      To remove these so-called subsidies would basically double the price of fossil fuel energy. This is what they actually propose !

      • bobn permalink
        November 14, 2021 3:44 pm

        So you confirm there are no subsidies, just a propaganda fantasy narrative. How do we reduce the anti-fossil fuel propaganda subsidies?

      • Harry Passfield permalink
        November 14, 2021 4:20 pm

        Bobn. Countering the subsidy-propaganda should be easy: just recalculate the cost of fuel had the tax breaks and reduced VAT not been available, not to mention the loss of revenue from ff exploration companies as they take the hit for costly exploration. That should be enough to make a few people sit up.
        Pretty soon we’d all be walking of riding horses.

    • November 14, 2021 6:56 pm

      I discussed the (UK’s) alleged subsidies at Cliscep in July ish:

      The TLDR; is that the only subsidy worthy of the name is also available to green investment.

    • Ben Vorlich permalink
      November 15, 2021 3:24 pm

      From the Office Of Budget Responsibilit.

      UK oil and gas revenues consist of offshore corporation tax (which includes ‘ring fence’ corporation tax and the supplementary charge) and petroleum revenue tax. These taxes apply to the profits of companies involved in the production of oil and gas in the UK and on the UK continental shelf (UKCS) (“The North Sea”). In 2019-20 oil and gas revenues raised £1 billion. The three streams of revenue are:

      ‘Ring fence’ corporation tax (RFCT) is calculated in the same way as onshore corporation tax, but with the addition of a ‘ring fence’ and the availability of 100 per cent first-year allowances for virtually all capital expenditure. The ring fence prevents taxable profits from oil and gas extraction in the UK and the UKCS being reduced by losses from other activities. The current rate of tax on ring-fenced profits is 30 per cent.
      The supplementary charge (SC) is an additional charge on a company’s ring-fenced profits (but with no deduction for finance costs). The current supplementary charge rate is 10 per cent. It was reduced from 20 per cent on 1 January 2016.
      Petroleum revenue tax is a ‘field-based’ tax charged on the profits arising from individual oil and gas fields that were approved for development before 16 March 1993. The rate of PRT was permanently set at zero per cent effective from 1 January 2016 but it has not been abolished so that losses (such as losses arising from decommissioning PRT-liable fields) can be carried back against past PRT payments. PRT was deductible as an expense in computing profits chargeable to RFCT and SC.

  25. mwhite permalink
    November 14, 2021 2:18 pm

    They agreed to disagree on everything except meeting again next year.

    • Jordan permalink
      November 14, 2021 7:41 pm

      They’ll all be looking forward to a good drink in the Last Chance Saloon next year.
      Charlie told them they were literally in the Last Chance Saloon two weeks ago. I suppose this Last Chance Saloon must be the UN’s mobile public bar.

  26. November 14, 2021 2:34 pm

    Anyhow it is game over now. This was the last chance to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees, and now we are headed for 2.4 degrees.

    This means ecosystem collapse, a mass extinction event, catastrophic sea level increase and the end of civilisation. We can expect billions of climate refugees with nowhere for them to go.

    Why are governments not telling people to prepare for the end?

    So what are your plans? Full-on survivalist ?

    • bobn permalink
      November 14, 2021 3:46 pm

      Hahaha. You get your delusions from watching too much ‘hunger games’? All a fantasy.

    • Gamecock permalink
      November 14, 2021 4:09 pm

      I plan to take a walk around the neighborhood. (You don’t scare me, KB.)

      “We can expect billions of climate refugees with nowhere for them to go.”

      Uhh . . . if they have no where to go, they aren’t refugees. You can’t be a refugee at home.

      “now we are headed for 2.4 degrees”

      You use a decimal point to show you have a sense of humor.

      Global mean temperature rising from 288K to 289K is supposed to do WHAT ?!?!

      Get a grip, man!

      • November 14, 2021 5:05 pm

        Never heard of irony ?

    • Javan permalink
      November 14, 2021 8:37 pm

      Never left a comment on this climate sight but have followed for 6 years. I have no empathy for end of the world cultists that believe spending trillions of dollars on renewables isn’t enough. We will not be toasted to death in a mass extinction event or drowned by a 10 foot polar meltdown sea rise or collapse the ecosystem. You could probably find 10 other chicken littles on this sight to join you in a healthy dose of Jonestown Punch – it’s OK, get it over with.

    • John Hultquist permalink
      November 15, 2021 2:57 am

      You ought to read this:'s_law

  27. November 14, 2021 2:36 pm

    Come 2022 after the midterms, Brandon won’t be able to sign toilet paper and the ones that he has already signed will be unwound. America will not finance third would demand no matter what Branson promises and with no new money, finance will switch to China and India. From then on America will slip down the world rankings especially concerning Taiwan, never mind Belarus.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      November 14, 2021 4:04 pm


  28. JimW permalink
    November 14, 2021 3:09 pm

    Problem is Paul that the only speech of any relevance was made by Sunak. Here he referred to all the groundwork done by Carney as chairman of the relevant BIS committee. Every financial/investment/insurance decision made ( at least by the majority of western nations) incorporates the ‘environmental targets’ and will be judged against them.
    Net zero is now baked into our financial architecture. The argument the financiers/corporates/governments will make is that the present financial system post 2008 is broke and without a new paradigm vast numbers will suffer if/when it collapses. Hence the need for a new global financialisation of the ‘global commons’ and the creation of financial markets that dwarf the old one. The disruption created by the net zero targets is a necessary part of this.
    What of course they leave out is the bit about winners and losers in this transition, ie the 0.1-1% getting unbelievably more wealthy/powerful and the 80-90% getting poorer, colder and dying earlier ( which answers mervhob’s points above).

    • It doesn't add up... permalink
      November 14, 2021 3:56 pm

      It is indeed these side agreements that we really need to evaluate and understand just how effective they might be. I can’t even find the texts and signatories.

    • bobn permalink
      November 15, 2021 2:01 am

      The Luvvies in the finance world can play their ESG games. But its likely it will just make them poorer. For example AngloAmerican sold off their Sth African thermal coal assets so they can comply with the ESG green agenda. Result is the coal assets (thungela) have nearly doubled in value in their new stock market listing to the loss of AngAm investors. Answer is sell out of any ESGgreen wailing company and buy real energy producers. Yes i bought Thungela when they listed earlier this year and the profits will pay for Xmas. Carney’s mates will just decline. BP has done well this year for smart investors. I’m buying all the cheap oil drillers as the luvvies sell out and give them away for a song. Anything the greenies boycott will likely become a very good investment.

  29. MrGrimNasty permalink
    November 14, 2021 3:09 pm

    In case you hadn’t noticed, the climate agenda metastasized long ago and has infected all levels of everything. The COP charade/fiasco/lunacy/impenetrable world salad agreements/whatever is pretty irrelevant to the threat and the progress of the real coup.

    • Gamecock permalink
      November 15, 2021 2:34 am

      Yes. I saw a pic of protestors carrying signs for “climate justice,” etc. It’s not about the weather at all.

  30. Jackington permalink
    November 14, 2021 3:24 pm

    Michael Shellenberger was on GB News last night (ok pushing his new book Apocalypse Never) but commenting on what COP 26 has achieved. He said these conferences will never achieve anything until they recognise the fact that thousands of people in India and Africa etc will not benefit from COPs and are already suffering terribly due to the lack of a reliable. affordable electricity supply. Wind and Solar are no help. It’s scandalous that this seems to completely outside the COP remit.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      November 14, 2021 4:30 pm

      The conferences are a side-show. Planned to distract from what the Elite are planning – to make the useful idiots think they are making a difference. Classic play.

    • November 14, 2021 8:34 pm

      It’s a very good book, I recommend it. Also lomborgs ‘false alarm’ which goes into great detail on costs and has numerous references

    • John Hultquist permalink
      November 15, 2021 3:03 am

      Michael Shellenberger has a new ‘new’ book:

      San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities

  31. jimlemaistre permalink
    November 14, 2021 3:53 pm

    As always Paul . . . Excellent review !

    #1 . . .

    Nature 97 % . . . Man 3 % . . . The Paris accord 0.6 %

    Elephant – 10,000 lbs. . . English Mastiff 300 lbs. . . . Chiwawa 6 lbs. . . .

    This is the truth . . . Why are we not told?

    M. Ragheb in Global Climate Variation, Change and Energy Use, 2019 on pages 16 and 17, he spells out clearly the natural sources of CO2 and man’s contribution. Of the 186 billion tones of CO2 entering the atmosphere annually, 180 billion tones come from nature and 6 billion tones are man’s contribution. My simple math says 6 divided by 186 is 3%. He did not do this calculation in his text. Furthermore, The IPCC in its own research produces a similar finding in a published graph “Global Natural and Anthropogenic Sources and Absorption of Greenhouse Gasses in the 1990’s”, finding, CO2 from natural causes is 793 billion tones, Man-Made sources is 23 billion tones. 23 divided by 793 is 2.9%. Again, no calculations are presented for summary or review.

    This ratio of Natural CO2 versus Man-Made CO2 is never brought forward mathematically, in context, in any discussions of the causes for Climate Change. This is not any kind of conspiracy; it is quite simply strong assumptions. If you track the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere it follows exactly with the burning of fossil fuels since the beginning of the Industrial revolution and the selling of coal fired steam engines. Also, it corresponds directly with proven increases in Global temperatures. You put 2 and 2 together you get 4 . . . a no brainer. Unless you go back in time and compare previous cycles of Climate Change on Planet Earth. You find NO correlation between Global Warming and CO2 going back at least 10,000 years. See Dusmma tracking levels of atmospheric CO2 that looks at our most recent 4,000 years of CO2.

    4,000 years of CO2 – Remaining stable throughout Warming & Cooling CO2 through the Ages –

    The Natural melting of Glaciers during Natural warming periods and the Natural melting of Permafrost . . . Exceeds ALL the Global CO2 production by Humans.

    During The Roman Warming period and The Middle Ages Warming Period . . .

    IT WAS WARMER than it is now !


  32. William Birch permalink
    November 14, 2021 4:29 pm

    Really enjoyed reading the posts. Gives me hope that all this pseudo religious climate apocalypse now nonsense can be dumped soon. Great that flop 26 has actually achieved net zero.

    • dennisambler permalink
      November 14, 2021 11:42 pm

      They never give up, they won’t stop now. It has never been about the climate:

      Gro Harlem Brundtland XIX Congress of the Socialist International
      “Social Democracy in a Changing World”
      15 -17 September 1992

      “At the Rio Conference on Environment and Development (1992) it was made clear that we are heading towards a crisis of uncontrollable dimensions unless we change course.

      Today we are faced with global challenges that can be addressed only through international cooperation.

      Securing peace, sustainable development and democracy requires that nations, in their common interest, establish an effective system of global governance and security.

      In an increasingly interdependent world, we must find new ways to live – both within our own countries and on a global level – that are socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable.

      What we need is a new social contract. Monetary stability will not suffice. And just as democracy originated in Europe some 2500 years ago, just as social democracy developed in Europe over the past 100 years, so must we again take the lead.

      We must curb population growth and reinforce the links between population, poverty-alleviation and the rights of women.

      A new social contract must be based on our overriding principles – freedom, solidarity and justice.

      To pursue social justice, freedom and democracy will require that we pool our collective experiences and national sovereignties.

      There is no alternative to obligatory coordination of financial and monetary policies.”

  33. David Wojick permalink
    November 14, 2021 4:39 pm

    Here’s my take on COP 26. The decision was a nice failure but some heavy duty promises got made along the way. This ain’t over.

  34. November 14, 2021 4:56 pm

    Reparations doesn’t build an economy.

    Give a Man a Fish, and You Feed Him for a Day. Teach a Man To Fish, and You Feed Him for a Lifetime.

    • David Wojick permalink
      November 14, 2021 5:21 pm

      Give a man a billion dollars and he can hire someone to teach him how to fish. Capital investment builds economies but first you need the capital. However the reparations are to pay for supposed loss and damage so they might not be available for investment.

      • Broadlands permalink
        November 15, 2021 12:51 am

        “Give a man a billion dollars and he can hire someone to teach him how to fish.”

        Even the man with a billion (or the others) cannot get to where the fish are without carbon fuels for transporting them there…unless it’s walking distance. Even snake-oil salesmen need reliable transportation to get to the next climate summit with the money they extracted from the rest of us to pay for those renewable biofuels that are 90% fossil fuel.

        “For every complex problem, there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” H. L. Mencken

  35. cookers52 permalink
    November 14, 2021 5:35 pm

    But there now is existential climate emergency one created by government policy.

    No new reservoirs built since 1991.

    Flooding, if the 2007 debacle happened the same lack of oversight, regulations etc no management of watercourses would be exposed government have done nothing.

    Energy security weakened to the point of collapse, cost out of control.

  36. Stephen Lor permalink
    November 14, 2021 5:56 pm

    Hooray. Time for common sense, cheap reliable energy and worldwide economic growth to lift everyone out of poverty. The UK needs to get fracking in the North of England and bring the North out of poverty with a new industrial revolution based on clean cheap British gas.

    • John189 permalink
      November 14, 2021 7:05 pm

      Hear hear!

    • November 14, 2021 7:56 pm

      Common sense? There is none of that in Westminster, so no cheap reliable energy and growth in the UK; in fact more fuel and food poverty.

  37. November 14, 2021 7:40 pm

    Thank heavens that’s all over with for another year. One gets heartily sick of hearing about it day in, day out.

    • November 14, 2021 8:27 pm

      COP26 may be over, but we’ll keep getting it rammed down our throats by the BEEB etc. Even the churches have sold themselves out to the god of gaia. Not a hint of determining what the truth is.

    • Rodger Harrabin permalink
      November 14, 2021 8:49 pm

      I’m not finished yet !
      Re-packaged and Re-labled.
      Maybe ecology or environmental change ?
      I WILL be back …

  38. Jordan permalink
    November 14, 2021 8:04 pm

    If the words “phase-out” have been diluted to “phase-down”, it is a slap in the face for the UK’s high-minded declaration to close all coal fired power stations by 2025.
    The UK has a pending decision on the Cumbrian coal mine, plus the ongoing demonstration of dependence on coal fired generation for security of power supply. There is no inconsistency between these and some vague concept of “phase down”.
    Coal fired generation diversifies the UK’s energy supply. This has both security and economic benefits. These advantages will be lost if coal fired assets are replaced by gas fired generation.
    There needs to be intense pressure put on the government to delay or repeal diktat to close the UK’s coal fired assets. If this is too much of a climb-down, it will eventually be remembered as a bloody minded and meaningless act of self-harm.

    • November 14, 2021 8:11 pm

      Your last sentence applies to the whole decarbonisation process and describes a national economic and political suicide note, based not on science but .idiotic policies engendered by destructive forces,of ? Identities.
      Johnson epitomizes the folly.

  39. Phil O'Sophical permalink
    November 14, 2021 10:28 pm

    ‘In my view, we have seen the beginning of the end for the UN’s climate agenda.’

    I only wish I could agree, but it has never been about the climate; that’s just a useful smokescreen and tool. Misdirection. And whether or not that agenda fails is probably past mattering.

    Ottmar Endenhofer said, in his capacity as co-chair of an IPCC working group, as long ago as November 2010:
    “We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.”

    Rishi Sunak said:
    “Nearly 500 financial services firms from across the world have agreed to align $130trn of these assets they hold to the climate goals in the Paris Agreement.”

    Mark Carney said:
    “The architecture of the global financial system has been transformed to deliver net-zero. We [sic] now have the essential plumbing in place to move climate change from the fringes to the forefront of finance so that every financial decision takes climate change into account.”

    Note that ‘has been’; not will be, nor will be put to the people, but ‘has been’. Watch this space.

    It’s about changing society and the complete economic domination of the planet, not about saving it. Thats why real world data is irrelevant to them.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      November 15, 2021 9:34 am

      Very true!

  40. John Hultquist permalink
    November 15, 2021 3:08 am

    Did they agree to close Drax Power Station?

    I don’t see how they can refuse to, because wasn’t stopping deforestation on the agenda?

    • November 15, 2021 10:08 am

      Yet ironically, it was 2 DRAX coal-fired plants that were fired up that kept the lights on during COP26.

  41. Geoffrey Williams permalink
    November 15, 2021 5:26 am

    We can be thankfull to China, Russia, and India for standing up to these ridiculous claims . .

  42. Harry Passfield permalink
    November 15, 2021 9:33 am

    An interesting perspective from David Rose in the DM on the CCP’s infiltration of the West’s Green organisations and especially Grantham. He is especially scathing about Stern and Ward:

    “Take, for example, Professor Lord Stern, chairman of the Grantham research institute on climate change at the London School of Economics, which advises government.

    Having taught in China since 1998, in 2009 he told a Chinese magazine he had ‘close contacts’ with CCP officials. In 2014, he wrote a paper for the World Economic Forum claiming China was ’emerging as a global leader in climate policy’. In 2016 he claimed China’s emissions ‘may already have peaked’. They hadn’t. The following year, he insisted there was ‘compelling evidence’ China’s coal use had also peaked.

    Stern even praised president Xi’s ‘personal commitment to driving climate action’, concluding: ‘The world is looking for a climate champion. In China, it has one.’ But in March he sounded less optimistic, saying it is ‘crucial’ China stops building new coal-fired power plants and stops increasing its emissions by 2025.

    Nevertheless, Bob Ward, Stern’s spokesman, told me China was taking ‘significant action’ and the rate of increase in its emissions had slowed enormously. He said China was ‘keen to learn from the UK’s example of world-leading action on climate change’.”

    (My bold) People like Ward live on a different planet!

    • November 15, 2021 9:45 am

      China was ‘keen to learn from the UK’s example of world-leading action on climate change’

      They should know the UK government believes the Earth’s climate is linked to ‘behaviours’ now. This is way beyond a joke.

      A net zero society – scenarios and pathways
      Published 10 November 2021


      The UK government is committed to achieving net zero by 2050, requiring a reduction in UK net greenhouse gas emissions of 100% relative to their levels in 1990. Achieving net zero will be as much a societal challenge as it is a technical one. Societal norms, practices and behaviours will play a significant role in emissions reduction, but these are uncertain and likely to change in the future. We can’t therefore rely on assumptions based on present trends in planning for net zero.

  43. europeanonion permalink
    November 15, 2021 9:43 am

    The idea that we can stuff the mouths of poorer countries with gold demonstrates how risible the whole thing is. Quite obviously, we are being pushed to use more of the worlds resources to create the wealth to sustain them in addition to our own concerns. In the past, when dogmas have threatened the world, there have been wars. An impasse is reached, pacifism fails and it is deemed right to blow up all of the worlds resources to imprint your values on them. The fact that China is not being threatened is guide to the magnitude of the problem.

    I know we are all of a mind here and in our efforts we are reaffirming not changing, but just to give us heart, life expectancy is, currently, the world’s biggest polluter, where life expect6ancy has gone from 65 years in 1970 to a projected 77 years for next year, China. The lives of the indigent in ages past, here, were unaccounted. Life in the countryside, as witnessed by Hobbes, was ‘nasty, brutish and short’. Now we account not only for our own poor, proselytise for the barely coping, give succour to 1800 migrants in a week and rising; have a Copout in Glasgow and divert attention from the doings of a feckless, aggressive and hopeless basket case, Russia on the Polish border (a country whose major pollutant wars, aggression and scheming, maintain a hugely expensive arms culture the world over.

    But what is Russia when there are millions of tons of coal underground threatening mankind? There seems to be a tranche of people in our country who have no recollection of bathing in a tin bath in front of a meagre (coal) fire. A society that runs parallel with our own, that enforces the fact that in their frugally suggested lives they have never wanted for anything. We are in the middle of a civil war. History repeats the Roundhead – Cavalier scenario. The latter fights to maintain one set of values, the former wish to aspire to having the time and space to even contemplate such esoteric arguments.

    At the moment, the working class are silent on the subject of AGW. Could the reason be that they are too busy working and fretting about about the sequestration of their disposable monies? Thinking how, at a stroke, their gains in stature and presence over the last four hundred years can be wiped-out in the next four years. Perhaps more aware of the leisure and certainty fossil fuels have endowed, unshackling untold numbers from necessity and allowed them to pursue the arts, travel, even idleness. This is all about how they view normality and how you view it. Peoples’ powers of self-delusion focused on some future that they can contrive is a power hard to resist. How do you oppose maybe, perhaps, what if? Especially when it has no actual facts, no actual metrics, would be called hearsay in court. But here we are with a leadership that contrives it and a bureaucracy commanded to employ it. A dystopian conglomeration that, before today, has been the preserve of the imagination of Asimov, Huxley and Orwell, this movement has to be opposed, we can do no other.

  44. November 15, 2021 10:24 am

    Of course little has changed, the science and technology is not there to enable large-scale change. For example right now Coal is supplying more power to the national grid than all of those Wind turbines. Or put another way Wind power is supplying <3% of demand. 1GW out of 25GW capacity. By 2030 even if the plans/demands for 70GW wind capacity are delivered then in weather conditions like today Wind contribution would be <10% of demand (that's before the additional demand from growth and EVs etc.). I really hope the Small modular nuclear reactors prove technically and economically feasible.
    I'm in the camp of thinking that the plans are for the cost of battery storage is to be pushed onto users with the mandating of EV ownership combined with Smart Meters. I.e. charge your EV when the wind blows and use the stored power when the wind doesn't blow. But my BoaFP calculations show this simply isn't enough. Assuming each EV has 20KWh of capacity that the user allows for V2G storage then to cover a 4 day period of 20GW average power supply (typical of CCGT power supply in low wind situations) would require 100,000,000 EVs – clearly not possible.

  45. November 15, 2021 11:10 am

    We should concentrate on localized pollution issues.

  46. Dave Cowdell permalink
    November 15, 2021 11:50 am

    Oh what irony, they had to spark up a coal station because wind power only 0.9 GW

  47. David Wojick permalink
    November 15, 2021 1:04 pm

    While the decision document was a fiasco, the numerous COP24 announcements are a big green success. IEA says that together they reduce warming to just 1.8 degrees, which meets the Paris target of between 2 and 1.5 degrees. The gap is gone!

    The alarmists ignore this success because there is still big money to be made.

    See my

    • November 15, 2021 3:12 pm

      Of course that assumes everybody gets to Net Zero by 2050 or 2060 as promised!

    • bobn permalink
      November 15, 2021 3:17 pm

      Given the latest projection ive read for natural climate warming on the natural cycle (willie soon) is 1.86deg by 2100 from 1800, then the tgt is exactly what we achieve naturally. CO2 and all the Crap26 hysteria is totally irrelevant to the NATURAL climate change that is happening.

  48. November 15, 2021 1:54 pm

    I would like every one of the climate crazies who either attended COP26 or support net-zero to answer just 1 question:
    “If fossil fuels were taken out of use tomorrow, globally, as you seemingly desire, what would your life be like the day after tomorrow?’
    I would bet they have never thought through the very severe consequences of their demands.

  49. Broadlands permalink
    November 15, 2021 3:43 pm

    “But as the Climate Action tracker reaffirms, emissions will carry on growing, despite the new plans submitted to COP26:”

    Look at the vertical axis on that chart… 50 GtCO2. That’s 500,000 million metric tons, ~65 parts-per-million. What that means is a return to 350 ppm from today’s 415 ppm. A totally impossible goal. Why they cannot see that is beyond comprehension. Maybe they think that lowering emissions takes CO2 out? Of course it does not.


  1. COP26 ends in utter failure - Frustrated by that? - News7g
  2. COP26 Ends in Humiliating Failure | 828cloud
  3. Not Enough Energy To Keep 8 Billion People Warm On A Cooling Planet : Cold Climate Change

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: