Skip to content

The Green Agenda’s Role In Global Inflation–Ben Pile

May 24, 2022

By Paul Homewood

There’s a very good piece by Ben Pile in TCW, on how green policies have led to the current, inevitable energy crisis:

ScreenHunter 10

AS inflation rises and the prospects for our return to normality following the pandemic fade ever more into the distant future, criticism is rightly focusing on financial institutions and regulators. They claim that printing money, which has inevitably caused prices to rise, was necessary to mitigate the economic chaos of lockdowns. But now they appear to be behind a third act of immense self-harm to help to steer the world to inflation and deliberately prevent economic recovery. The rise in energy prices the world has seen were not the result of an unforeseeable supply crisis, but engineered by those charged with managing the economy.


Well worth reading in full here.

  1. It doesn't add up... permalink
    May 24, 2022 6:33 pm

    As always with Ben, a well argued and well researched piece that I’ve also drawn attention to elsewhere. Our problems are with the policy makers and those that inspire them. They do not have the interests of ordinary people at heart at all.

  2. tomo permalink
    May 24, 2022 8:04 pm

  3. Jack Broughton permalink
    May 24, 2022 8:13 pm

    An excellent article showing how obscenely rich capitalists are almost as dangerous to the world as the deranged dictators. If only I could overcome a lifetime of despising tories I’d join the Conservative Women: the only sensible political grouping that I have come across.

    • Cheshire Red permalink
      May 24, 2022 11:02 pm

      Those women are superb. They’ve changed their website moniker to TCW, as they’re so embarrassed (and livid!) at the fake ‘Conservative’ party and government.

      There’s a clear disconnect between the Conservative party and their grass roots voters, who are being outrageously ignored.

      As a lifelong right of centre conservative I know exactly how they feel; the Tories were elected to deliver Brexit and sensible polices and have responded by delivering absolutely nothing they were elected to do.

      If the Sale of Goods Act applied to politics 12.7 million Tory voters would be demanding their money back.

    • Robert Christopher permalink
      May 25, 2022 10:54 am

      “… obscenely rich capitalists …”

      The problem is that “the likes of Jeremy Grantham, Sir Christopher Hohn and Michael Bloomberg” are ‘obscenely rich’. If they were capitalists, they wouldn’t be involving government and ‘philanthropic foundations to organisations of various kinds’.

      The problems were initiated by government’s interference, including the 2008 Climate Change Act as well as the Bank of England, not Capitalism:
      “But green ideology is a fetter on public institutions’ grasp of reality. And so we should look to the origins of green ideology to try to understand what is behind the BoE’s climate activism.”

      The UK Energy market is an example of the Mises train of thought, especially paragraphs b and c:

      “Ludwig Heinrich Edler von Mises (1881–1973)
      One of the most notable economists and social philosophers of the twentieth century …

      For Mises was able to demonstrate
      (a) that the expansion of free markets, the division of labor, and private capital investment is the only possible path to the prosperity and flourishing of the human race;
      (b) that socialism would be disastrous for a modern economy because the absence of private ownership of land and capital goods prevents any sort of rational pricing, or estimate of costs, and
      (c) that government intervention, in addition to hampering and crippling the market, would prove counter-productive and cumulative, leading inevitably to socialism unless the entire tissue of interventions was repealed.”

    • Dave Gardner permalink
      May 25, 2022 1:00 pm

      A lot of right-leaning voters regard this sort of capitalist, who are sometimes known as ‘Green capitalists’, as an embarrassment and wish they would go away.

      An example of this viewpoint is given in this Daily Express article (published today) by Matt Lesh of the Institute of Economic Affairs:

      When I first started looking at AGW sceptic material on the internet about twenty years ago, I noticed that an American organisation called the “Competitive Enterprise Institute” (CEI) seemed to be one of the leading critics of the Green agenda. The CEI campaigned against “crony capitalism” in general, and against one version of it, Green capitalism, in particular.

      The Conservative party actually recruited a Green capitalist in 2005, Zac Goldsmith, to advise them on environmental policy, and he’s been doing the job ever since.

  4. Mike Jackson permalink
    May 24, 2022 8:51 pm

    An excellent shower of commonsense from Ben. As ever. Unfortunately I’m not the only one who gives TCW a wide berth since it degenerated into a hotbed of anti-vax conspiracy theorists!

    • Phoenix44 permalink
      May 24, 2022 9:49 pm

      I’m not sure saying people at little or no risk from a disease shouldn’t be forced to get a vaccine for it is either “anti-vax” or a “conspiracy theory”. And even less sure when it’s not a sterilising vaccine. Why waste vast sums in that way?

    • roger permalink
      May 24, 2022 10:40 pm


    • bobn permalink
      May 26, 2022 10:14 am

      Mike, they’re not anti-vax. they’re anti untested and unproven vax. The people at TCW might have campaigned for thalidomide to be fully tested before being gaily issued to pregnant women. The wuflu vaxes were allowed to bypass and short-circuit all the normal testing rules

  5. Phoenix44 permalink
    May 24, 2022 9:59 pm

    What Carney and others are trying to do is to bypass democracy under cover of institutions such as the UN, and force changes that a majority do not want by threatening businesses. We will notionally retain “choice” but businesses will not be allowed to provide us with what we want but only with what Carney thinks we should have. This is a socialist/fascist revolution behind our backs but a revolution nevertheless. Huge power has been taken by unelected individuals and small groups and they are using that power to change our economies and societies hugely. That our elected politicians are collaborating in their own destruction as well as ours is one of the strangest things I’ve ever seen. Perhaps they are simply too stupid to see it?

  6. Ian PRSY permalink
    May 24, 2022 10:43 pm

    It gets worse. Check out this link:

    In an article on the WEF’s agenda (which you can read here##), The Counter Signal used a hypothetical carbon footprint tracker as an example of how digital IDs could be used to coerce citizens’ behaviours and reduce their quality of life.


    All this talk of the Great Reset world government is becoming less comical by the day.

  7. dennisambler permalink
    May 24, 2022 11:14 pm

    Tyndall’s Kevin Anderson was pushing carbon allowance cards in 2005:

    Tyndall was at it again in 2009:
    “Personal Carbon Trading: a critical examination of proposals for the UK”

    Imagine, we carry bank cards that store both pounds and carbon points.
    When we buy electricity, gas and fuel, we use our carbon points, as well as
    pounds. To help reduce carbon emissions, the Government would set limits
    on the amount of carbon that could be used.”
    (Miliband, 2006)

  8. StephenP permalink
    May 25, 2022 7:34 am

    “Tyndall’s Kevin Anderson was pushing carbon allowance cards in 2005”.
    No doubt the elites would claim an opt-out as their work will of course necessitate first class travel and five star hotels such as at Davos.
    BUT I can bet that they will also have increased allowances for their homes, personal and recreational lives, leaving the plebs to get by on a minimal ration allowed us by the elite.
    Come to think of it, this sounds like life under Stalin and Mao where the elite enjoyed luxury while their people starved and suffered the gulag and the “great leap backwards”.

  9. E L Wisty permalink
    May 25, 2022 9:06 am

    Let’s face it, the only “green” Grantham, Hohn, Bloomberg, Carney and Gore et al are interested in is $$$$$.

  10. Stephen Bowers permalink
    May 25, 2022 12:59 pm

    I follow this blog not because I am in full alignment with much of the rhetoric but because I am not convinced that climate change is anywhere as serious as many have claimed. One could say the numbers do not quite add up. As a graduate of the 1970’s I was acquainted with the writings of the Club of Rome and the Limits to Growth which was riduculed on this site and TCW. Perhaps it might have been a good idea to first read the Limits to Growth, preferably the 30 year update and reflect on what it actually suggests. It findings were never lmeant to be definitive, but more a pathway of what is likely to happen, whcih by the way impacts more in the next 30 years, rather than the previous 50 years. A similar heckling response was made towards the Theory of Peak Oil which was widely ridiculed as wrong by various clueless experts, but perhaps the cornucopians might be now wondering where the future oil supply will come from (not shale by the way). Oil will be with us for many deacdes to come irrespective of the outcome of light vehicle electrification or even the over hyped hydrogen economy which is the next boondoggle.
    By every metric, the quality of natural resources that we have available is declining year on year. Ores from which we produce metals and minerals essential to our well being are being exploited at an exponential rate that cannot be sustained. Fresh water is becoming an issue in many parts of th world- even parts of the UK are classified as water stressed. Soil degradation is happening on a world scale basis that is requiring the ever increasing use of synthetic fertilizers to maintain crop yields. Where I live the endless loss of farmland to ghetto style housing estates goes on relentlessly. Our popuplation is increasing and yet we cannot see the wood for the trees( that is what is left of them) and still we allow tens of thousands of illegal immigrants into the UK adding further pressures and astronomical cost to the beleaguered taxpayers.
    Quite simply the carrying capacity of our planet has most likely been exceeded by a wide margin and yet our politicians are so spineless that they do not even mention it.
    Some on this blog promote hydraulic fracturing as a means of maintaining our economy. It might be a good idea if those promoting the technology actually knew what they are talking about. I am not anti- fracing (correct spelling), far from it. Done well it works but it comes at a very high cost, both monetarily and environmentally especially as the facturing fluid will require large volumes for fresh water ( I am not concerned about groundwater pollution as the wells will be far below freshwater aquifers). The wells are expensive and not particularly productive, and very many will be required. If you do not believe me then consider this. The US has about 1.1 million oil and gas wells ( half the global total). The oil wells number about 600k and produce about 11 million bbl/d. Saudi Arabia does about the same volume with UNDER 4000 highly proiductive wells.
    We do not have a gas or oil gathering networks in the UK so this would add to the cost. Very roughly 1 well drilling pad would be expected for every square mile. Now go to a satellite map website (recommend not Google as they spy relentlessly) and look the lanscape around Midland Texas and you will see all of the drilling pads. Something similar would be necessary in the UK to produce enough gas to make us energy independent, and by the way the wells do not last long. Generally they are all but done in 5 years.

    • Colin permalink
      May 25, 2022 5:46 pm

      As one who lost a well paid job in North Sea Oil, I’ve been hoping for fracking to fail for years. I had believed that this technology could only be sustained by $100 oil prices, that conventional oil would come roaring back when trackers went broke. Turns out fracking is more effective than I hoped! If it wasn’t you wouldn’t see the US switch from coal to gas, done for cost reasons, not for the environmental benefits. As for forest cover. It increases. Every year agriculture productivity increases, marginal land returns to forest, we can only eat so much. If we abolished subsidies even more upland would return to forest. You can dig through old forest in the NE United States and find the remains of 19th C farmsteads. This has been happening for many years.

  11. tomo permalink
    May 25, 2022 1:28 pm

    @Stephen Bowers

    Energy is what sustains our world – and enables you to post here.

    In the long term nuclear power seems (in the absence of a Black Death style reduction in demand) the only viable way to sustain the human appetite for energy – while that is getting done, other methods will have to meet demand.

    The case for testing enhanced recovery of gas from The Bowland Shale is clear and at the very least a pilot scheme should be progressed as a matter of national importance.

    Take your sneering ignorance elsewhere.

    • Stephen Bowers permalink
      May 25, 2022 2:57 pm

      Sneering ignorance! What a shame that some people cannot debate is a civil adult manner. I am far from ignorant on energy matters. I have worked for a few months shy of 44 years in the oil, gas and petrochemical industries. I have also worked on drilling rigs so I probably have a better insight than most on this blog on the machinations of oil and gas production, and the refining of crude oil into fuels.

      Nuclear is certainly an option, though the french design does appear to have issues and maybe the RR modular units will be the path forward. What concerns me more is where is all the energy going to come from to make this happen?

      You ignorance on shale is not surprising. Read my post carefully. I am not against shale but in my opinion it is unlikely to be workable in the UK both economically and environmentally. We simply do not have the wide open spaces that the US has, and that goes for much of Europe as well.

      • Wellers permalink
        May 25, 2022 4:52 pm

        tomo’s comment was totally uncalled for…
        However I cannot see much difference in space and infrastructure requirements between gas (conventional and unconventional) and renewables such as wind farms, solar panels and geothermal.
        If you go to Barenburg, Saxony in Germany there’s a large network of gas wells, but they are extremely difficult to spot due to their small size relative to the adjacent wind turbines. The gas is from sandstone, rather than shale rock, but I understand that they were hydrofractured in the 1970s to improve recovery like the Wytch Farm wells in Poole Harbour, where I was walking on Monday. The oil well there was similarly impossible to spot.

      • Colin permalink
        May 25, 2022 5:52 pm

        The footprint for a well pad is pretty small. A conventional wellhead producing 6000bbls per day would fit in your front room! I worked on coal bed Methane pilot project near Stirling. So unobtrusive, very difficult to find, tended to get lost amongst adjacent farm buildings.

      • Vernon E permalink
        May 26, 2022 11:37 am

        Steven Bowers. I agree completely with your response to the previous poster but still there is not a comment thread that pulls together all the revevant features. First of all, Bowland shale has been tested and didn’t deliver. The shale is too impermable. Second, I agee that that the whole prospect should be rejected because of one failure. By all means end this debate by having another try. Next, regarding the intrusion of wells. Even if the minimum viable gas flow of 600 MCFD can reached it will take hundreds of wells to deliver even ten percent of UK demand – with all the coplexities of gathering and manifolding the wells. Finally, fracked wells are not like conventional oil or gas wells. They have to be accressed to be re-fractured regularly because the flow rates drop so dramatically. A further opoint about the seismic effects. These are normally brushed aside but this approach ignores the fact that the first seismic damage to occur is to the wells themselves.

  12. Wellers permalink
    May 25, 2022 4:22 pm

    I would highly recommend Tim’s video at the bottom of the article on the effects of ESG on energy supplies and costs. Well worth the time.
    Also available on YouTube:

  13. Chilli permalink
    May 25, 2022 9:31 pm

    Another brilliantly researched, argued & presented video by Ben Pile. Well worth watching.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: