Skip to content

Chris Morrison: Net Zero is coming apart before our very eyes

March 31, 2023

By Paul Homewood



The collectivist Net Zero political project is starting to come apart before our very eyes. Making everyone poor, cold, hungry and confined to small living territories was always a tall political ask, but decades of green virtue-signalling, backed by a ‘settled’ version of science that cannot be debated in polite society, has kept the show on the road.
Writing in the Daily Telegraph last Wednesday, Sherelle Jacobs said there comes a time when the sacred mythology that underpins
an orthodoxy simply crumbles. She was writing about liberalism in general, and the pieties behind mass illegal migration, but she could easily have been referring to Net Zero.
recent decision by the European Union to allow the sale of internal combustion cars after 2035 was a small sign that reality is starting to intrude on those overseeing the destruction of Europe’s industrial base. There was a fig leaf to hide the blushes in the announcement suggesting that the cars must be run on carbon captured from the air and mixed with hydrogen produced from ‘green’ energy. As always with such hypothetical green technologies, one is inclined to discount those based on pure wishful thinking. The U.K. is still committed to banning the sale of internal combustion cars after 2030, but developments in Europe may produce a rethink.
The hard politics behind this decision is that Germany has enjoyed 70 years of unprecedented prosperity based on heavy industry reliant on cheap energy, recently secured from Russia. Its car industry is one of the most innovative and competitive in the world, and faces near destruction in the move to battery cars. This fate of course is likely to be shared by most European countries including the U.K., with China monopolising both the production of electric cars and the refining of vital minerals.
recently in the Daily Sceptic, Andrew Montford, the Deputy Director of Net Zero Watch, said that inhabitants of the Westminster Village were happy to hype up fears of climate purgatory and fib about the cost of the renewable road to redemption. “Once the public understands the depth and extent of the deception, and the damage done to the economy and the prospects for our children, the trickery over Covid is going to look decidedly peripheral,” he added.

Read the full post here.

  1. Realist permalink
    March 31, 2023 9:19 am

    Surely there must be a better way than simply typing “x” to get notified about new comments

  2. Douglas Dragonfly permalink
    March 31, 2023 9:51 am

    Proof to those that need it of what bloody useless leaders we’ve got.
    Proof also of what bloody useless we will have in the future if people do not learn from this.
    The time, effort and money wasted by those that think they know it all is a crime against humanity. In the meantime –
    ‘Throw another log in the fire will you grandad !?’

  3. Caro permalink
    March 31, 2023 10:06 am

    In all the nonsense that I have heard and read from those who think we can reduce the global temperature, I have never read by how many parts per million they think the carbon dioxide will have to be reduced to achieve this. Has anyone else on here?

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      March 31, 2023 11:40 am

      Only in terms of the ridiculous group of alarmists.

  4. March 31, 2023 10:25 am

    Frack onshore UK methane. Use that eco-friendly, clean burning and excellent gas to drive our cars, heat our homes and run our industry. This, at a stroke would dramatically cut our “carbon footprint”*, and revive our industry.

    Anyone who believes that reducing our CO2 emissions is important and who thinks that we could do that without using the most efficient fossil fuel while transitioning to nuclear is deluding themselves and lying to the public.

    *And, because ICE cars burning methane produce almost zero NOX and negligible particulates, clean up the air in our cities.

    • Jordan permalink
      March 31, 2023 1:58 pm

      “while transitioning to nuclear”
      Why would we be transitioning to nuclear?

    • Mikehig permalink
      April 1, 2023 10:59 am

      Plus it can be processed into liquid fuels, if needed, Shell’s V-Max diesel being a good example.

      • Realist permalink
        April 1, 2023 11:57 am

        Is that why there are TWO diesel instead of one and a significant higher price? It’s not only Shell stations though.
        I always put the less expensive diesel in my car.

        >>Plus it can be processed into liquid fuels, if needed, Shell’s V-Max diesel being a good example.

      • Mikehig permalink
        April 5, 2023 11:32 am

        Realist: Yes, most fuel brands have a high performance diesel option. In Shell’s case their V-Max was touted as made from natural gas at their Pearl project in Dubai (iirc). It was claimed to give better performance and economy while producing less particulates.
        However I haven’t seen those claims for quite a while.

  5. Malcolm permalink
    March 31, 2023 1:08 pm

    This mess is largely to be blamed on the BBC for deliberately and formally “no platforming” any alternative views and challenges to distorted or imaginary information.
    Freedom of speech on “global warming” and the very much bigger, and more certain, problem of over population is now suppressed in broadcast media and amongst the chattering class in north London.
    I hold the University “humanity” departments as equally responsible as the BBC – with which they are in close conspiracy.

    • Micky R permalink
      April 2, 2023 8:24 am

      ” I hold the University “humanity” departments as equally responsible as the BBC – with which they are in close conspiracy. ”

      The poisoning of young minds starts earlier than University, pdf from “Education Scotland” :

      Click to access weatherclimatechangeclimatechange.pdf

      which includes the lie ” In equilibrium, the natural greenhouse effect maintains the average temperature of the Earth at about 14°C. ” What equilibrium is this then?

      The document refers to beliefs rather than proven facts, you’d think that a teacher somewhere in Scotland would protest about this.

      Is it beyond hope that a teacher or student would openly criticise the use of beliefs to support the teaching of science? Or perhaps this is a form of religious education.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: