The contradictory Green policies to limit CO2 emissions
August 12, 2022
By Paul Homewood
Ed Hoskins has carried out a detailed analysis of CO2 emissions from biomass:
Full analysis here.
10 Comments
Comments are closed.
“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert”. – J Robert Oppenheimer.
Recent Comments
John Hultquist on Chinese handcuffs: How China e… Nigel Sherratt on Greta’s Halo Slips Nigel Sherratt on Greta’s Halo Slips Nigel Sherratt on Greta’s Halo Slips Gamecock on Greta’s Halo Slips Gamecock on Chinese handcuffs: How China e… micda67 on Greta’s Halo Slips gezza1298 on Scottish oil industry sheds 10… gezza1298 on Scottish oil industry sheds 10… neilsoncox on Greta’s Halo Slips
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
To call this a damning indictment of the UK’s madcap energy policy is an understatement.Net Zero is akin to a cult and needs redacting before we plunge ourselves into darkness.
Net zero is a very stupid idea and anyone who believes in it should stop exhaling CO2, right now!
Lots of slimy snouts in that trough including “Potato ‘Ed” Davey, John Gummer and Jailbird Chris Huhne.
I’ve got three points I’d like to take regarding Chris Huhne…but it would appear someone already has!
I did like Ed’s use of the phrase ‘nominally “CO2 emissions free”’. I’ve been fairly busy in the last couple of weeks commenting on the (ab)use of trees as fuel along with comparing the overall emissions of the ‘whole life’ of wind generators compared with that of natural gas.
Some figures are obviously debatable — nobody’s perfect! — but there is no way of coming to an agreement as long as green policy decides what is and is not to be called “emission free”.
It’s clear to anyone who cares to stop and think that the entire process of creating wind farms is anything but emission-free. Anyone who believes biomass is emission free because sooner or later an equivalent amount of CO2 *might* be sequestered is most definitely in the market for this sooper-dooper bridge I have for sale!!
Greentards. Never knowingly correct.
‘Controlling climate change’ will always be a fool’s errand, but of course controlling you/us is another matter entirely. There are many far greater variable forces at work in the climate system than puny trace gases.
You were well advised to avoid the issues of hydrogen production and transmission. Carbon capture is also problematic. Policicians are driving out proven systems and demand rapid adoption and roll-out of unproven ones with huge costs attached for the network and for individual homes and businesses.
Carbon capture is more than problematic. It is costly and risky and in the end can never store enough to possibly affect the climate. The IEA estimates that from all sources about 7,600 million metric tons would have to be stored by 2050. That amount is not even one part-per-million. The atmosphere would not miss it. Yet, the technology is being heavily subsidized. A scam?
That lengthy analysis refers to “power generation” but ignores and does not include the power that is generated by fossil fuels that are in conventional vehicles used to transport people, food and all of the materials needed to install renewables…solar, wind, nuclear. That omission is a huge gap.