Europe can achieve Net Zero by demolishing historic buildings and starting again, Central Bank claims
By Paul Homewood
h/t Ian Magness
So that’s alright then!
A top central banker has warned of the economic damage that the rush to ‘Net-Zero’ could cause, and illustrates the point by stating that deleting Europe’s architectural history would be required to achieve severe green expectations.
Among the comments made by Paolo Angelini, deputy governor of the Bank of Italy, about European Net Zero ambitions that, in his opinion, risk inflicting more harm than good, the central banker outlined the level of change that Europeans would need to satisfy those demands.
While saying pushing Europe to net zero risks destabilising the continent’s economy and undermining Europe’s ability to lead on green issues globally, the top economist made his point by revealing he’d asked his team at the Bank of Italy what would be necessary just to make the single institution that he leads compliant.
Angelini revealed the shocking response, remarking in an interview with Politico: “They told me: ‘If you allow us to tear down all our historical buildings and build energy efficient ones, then we can do it’.”
The Bank of Italy wouldn’t be committing itself to net zero any time soon, said Angelini. This was not because he didn’t believe in the cause, but simply because with the technology presently available, he didn’t think it was physically possible.
He said: “For the time being I am refraining from raising my hand and saying at the Bank of Italy we’re going to net zero, because I don’t have the technology, the ability to be certain about the pledge.”
Reflecting on the central banker’s remarks — which may possibly have been tongue-in-cheek — Politico itself mused: “it’s a potent symbol of the trade-offs that the green transition demands: how much of Europe’s present — and past — is it willing to risk to secure its future?”.
The Bank of Italy itself is headquartered in the Palazzo Koch in Italy, an impressively grand 19th-century palace named for its architect which features a money museum and significant interiors and staterooms.
While survey after study demonstrates that the general public appreciates classic design, the issue is politicised to some extent. U.S. President Donald Trump issued an executive order requiring ancient architectural styles (Roman or Greek revival) for Federal structures, which President Biden reversed.
In the United Kingdom, a hard-left London mayor’s advisor stated traditional architecture is “offensive” because it “harkens back to oppression.”
While it’s obviously tongue in cheek, Angelini does raise a serious issue about Europe’s old buildings. But at least it appears that Komrade Khan will be happy!
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
A total unawareness of the “emissions” cost of pulling down the old buildings and contructing the new ones. The chance of the putative savings in emissions ever exceeding the “expenditure” of emissions involved in the project is slim to say the least.
Especially since climate history tells us that long before this massive project is complete global temperatures would be on their way down again, though there is just a chance that it would take so long that they may conceivably be yet again on their way up!!
😵💫
Good point Mike!
New constructions involve massive emissions, so would take decades to offset, if ever.
We are always advised that we should renovate rather than rebuild if we want to reduce emissions
Paul,
there is a disadvantage in the U.K. to renovate rather than demoplish and reconstruct. VAT is charged on all materials for renovation but can be reclaimed for construction, or so the builder that does work for us tells me? Seeing as they are basically the same materials, I don’t understand the logic.
Ian, oddly in France it’s the reverse. Renovations attract only 10% VAT. But beware of VAT, its not as simple as it seems in terms of “cost”.
King Charlie 3rd will no doubt want to demolish Buck Palace and replace it with Buck Passivpalace
Several Climate “scientists” pointed out that due to the melting arctic ice Buckingham Palace would soon be 7 foot underwater. That was back in 1981, so I subject that we wait until the water level rises before doing anything.
The whole global warming / climate change fraud is just an excuse to destroy Western economies and bring about a World Socialist Government .
After the net zero insanity destroys the UK economy , the next step will probably be to make it so that houses with below C rating energy efficiency cannot be sold or rented out , so will have to be taken over by the socialist state .
If you think this is a bit far fetched , look how far the rest of the scam has been going in the world .
Focussing on trace gases in the atmosphere leads nowhere good. How long before the penny drops with the public in general?
Lets start with the House of Parliament, preferably with the MPs and Lords inside!
Fingers crossed – it will fall apart of its own accord before parliament decides when whether and how to renovate the building.
In all seriousness, the Houses of Parliament be abandoned not renovated. Firstly, the cost of rebuilding would be ridiculous.
It always is with conservation projects. Secondly, it would send the wrong signal to our political class – namely that ‘they are worth it.’ Thirdly, the building is made of rubbish stone! Not all stone is the same for building use. If there are microscopic inclusions of certain minerals in the stone these weather to clays within a few centuries and everything literally falls apart! It was known at the time of building that the stone was wrong. There was another public building in London that was erected at the same time (I have forgotten which one*) with similar-looking stone, which was selected by experts who knew what they were doing.
It is as sound as the day it was opened.
* It was referenced in a technical book published around 1900 which I have lost. The book gave two comparative examples of stone work. The good stone was in the one building. The example of bad stone was – the Houses of Parliament!
Instead of demolishing the Palace of Westminster & building something else in its place, perhaps consideration should instead be given to externally cladding the building.
https://www.housingtoday.co.uk/news/grenfells-flammable-insulation-picked-to-hit-aspirational-sustainability-target/5108114.article
No doubt Guy Fawkes would have approved of that.
This aspect of the Grenfell case gets little if any coverage. I had understood that local authorities had been issued with a changed priority list that elevated thermal efficiency and low emissions to top spot. Brownie points were earned and awards given for LAs that excelled in this department.
Glimmers of sense in Europe?
Cut CO2 emissions by converting as many ICEs to burn methane, a low carbon fuel with vanishingly low NOX and particulate emissions, Added bonus would be the end of ULEZs.
JF
‘If you allow us to tear down all our historical buildings and build energy efficient ones, then we can do it.’
It’s a trick. When they have finished destroying your historical buildings, they’ll say, “Okay, we’re done.”
Insist replacement building are built BEFORE tearing the old ones down.
I agree with ITRW above. It is your history they wish to destroy. Energy efficiency is just an excuse to get you to accept it. They want to transform Britain into “a place where some people live.” Look for Big Box architecture.
All made out of Ticky-tacky of course.
I wonder what the emissions ratings are for the dwellings in Poundbury
The article may’ve been tongue in cheek, but it does highlight the question, which net zero proponents obviously haven’t bothered to consider, of how all our historic buildings can be zero emission. If a heat pump can’t keep an average sized house warm in cold weather what chance do they have of providing any meaningful heat for a stately home or parish church, for example? There’s very tough building regulations concerning alterations to listed buildings, do the eco lunatics just want to ignore them and see heat pumps the size of shipping containers ruining our built heritage? Given they’re happy to have turbines the height of a skyscraper ruining our natural heritage I think that, sadly, the answer is yes.
How dare you ..”Komrade Khan’ is imbued with connotations of Marxist secularism and you know Sadiq is Muslim …. So its “Uncle Tom ” [ unless he resents being cast as a moderate ] or Sadiq Farrakhan to you Paul
Reply to Iain Reid.
You’re right but in one sense it isn’t relevant. It’s up to government to make these decisions. It’s fairly typical of modern bureaucracy that they are stuck in one way of doing things even when changing them makes perfect sense. (Assuming this idea does make perfect sense which it doesn’t!)
Ask Sir Humphrey what would happen if VAT for renovations was put on a par with VAT for new-build and he would probably say it would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
Unless he had thought if it of course.
VAT in the UK makes no sense because it was originally brought in as a tax on supposed luxuries – hence VAT on biscuits but not cakes and on gingerbread men with chocolate buttons but not without. For some reason that distinction on some goods (wholly outdated anyway) has never been removed even though VAT is now a value added tax. What’s extraordinary is that it was raised to 20% as an emergency measure by Osborne but it has of course stayed there and nobody complains.
New builds are zero rated but they have to be “new builds” as defined by the bureaucrats. Thus an extension to your house is 20% rated but a new build next door on vacant land is zero rated.
“[VAT]…a tax on supposed luxuries.”
Its predecessor, Purchase Tax was originally so, but VAT itself was not sold as being merely a sumptuary tax by Edward Heath. There were hints it would replace taxes on individuals.
It was also about aligning with European “ways of doing things,” as the UK was entering the Common Market (the cover name at the time for The European Project).
Its all about year zero.
A massive ponzi scheme.
There is not a chance that we will be able to stop or reduce the steady rise in atmospheric CO2, natural or Chinese. So stop all this nonsense.
I hope Mrs May can now appreciate what a terrible mistake she made when she rushed to enshrine Net Zero in law before she was farced to resign as Prime Minister!
“…terrible mistake…”
When Bart Simpson went to Military School, he shot off six missiles on the firing range. Five hit the target. One sailed away, and blew up Principal Skinner’s car in the next State.
The Gunnery Instructor says “Good shooting Bart. Pity about the mistake with the last shot.”
Bart says evenly, “Did I make a mistake? Did I?”
Apparently Genghis Khan had a mild heart attack at COP26. Oh, well, next time….
I see on Jo Nova’s site that Exxon Mobile has hit back at the ESG fanatics by saying that Net Zero degrades human life so badly there is little chance of it happening by 2050 and no longer needs to be reported on in the annual report.
How soon I wonder before the government starts issuing grants to homeowners to tear down old Victorian and earlier houses and build ‘sustainable’ eco-homes in their place? Could be a problem when most of those homes are urban terraces.
A way to remove the history and culture of a people. Get them ready for Klaus Schwab’s new world order where everything looks like post WWII Soviet war memorials.
“A way to remove the history and culture of a people.”
But even a trace will regrow. There is an interesting Roman town on the Eastern end of Hadrian’s Wall. For the first two hundred years it was full-on Roman with all the cultural equipment and multi-cultural organization that was standard for a busy little town in a conquered Province. As the Western Roman Empire began to fail, the town continued to prosper but it threw all its earlier monumental architecture and statues into ditches. And went back to living like the Picts and Slavs and Germans.
Imagine, tearing down historical buildings,
Then you have no country.
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace,
You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope some day you’ll join us
And the world will be as one
Under Klaus Schwab and the WEF.
Updated 25May2023