Channel 4 Biased? Whatever Next!
By Paul Homewood
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-great-climate-fight/on-demand/74985-001
Channel 4 has launched its latest climate change series, The Great Climate Fight. Even by their standards, this has to be one the most one-sided, untruthful documentaries I have seen on TV.
You can also watch it on YouTube here.
It is presented three luvvies with no expertise in climate or energy:
Kevin McCloud – Designer, Writer and TV Presenter
Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall – Chef
Mary Portas – Retail Consultant
They all admit at the outset that the whole purpose of the series is to campaign for Net Zero. And the following opening statements by them prove just how grossly misleading the series is:
“What if I told you that solving the climate crisis is possible”
“The good news is that we have the tools”
“The problem is our politicians”
“We’ve got a plan. We can get to Net Zero” (With a photo of the Sixth Carbon Budget)
“Global warming can be stopped”
“But our politicians are failing us”
The whole of their emphasis is on the UK Government, but there is not a single mention as far as I could see of the fact that the UK only produces 1% of the world’s emissions, which continue to rise as ours fall. But the impression they want to give viewers is that the UK really could stop climate change on its own.
Nowhere of course are there any counter claims or challenges to the opinions expressed. Maybe I have lost the plot (!), but I thought OFCOM were supposed to ensure balanced reporting!
And Series 1 is based on some outright dishonesty and misinformation:
First off, their Battle Bus claim that “We give the oil and gas industry £42 million a week in tax breaks”.
However the official data shows that taxpayers don’t pay a penny to the oil and gas sector. Instead North Sea oil and gas paid £9 billion in tax last year:
The second big lie concerns onshore wind, which one of the presenters claimed had been “effectively banned” by David Cameron. As even the BBC have been forced to admit, this simply is not true. All that happened was that subsidies were abolished and wind farms were to be subject to local planning permission. Very few new wind farms were built after that decision in 2016 because they were not economical.
In any event, HFW’s demand that the government “stop blocking” onshore wind is rather out of date, as many projects were given subsidies again last year!
But the programme ignore this, repeating the grossly misleading claim that gas power was nine times as costly as wind, for a few days last year. Indeed, it goes on to claim that our energy bills would have been much lower now but for that “ban”.
There is no basis for this claim. Last year energy users had to pay £1.7bn in subsidies to onshore wind. Since 2016, subsidies for onshore wind have totalled over £9 billion. And that figure does not include the wider costs involved. Even the newest wind farms are not cheaper than gas power – they have CfDs at a price of £110/MWh.
But the biggest lie of the lot is the claim that we would all be better off under Net Zero policies.
They don’t explain how we would be better off paying ten grand more for EVs.
And they don’t explain either how would be better off with heat pumps that cost fifteen grand.
Nor do they explain how people will be better off, who will lose their well paid jobs in the energy sector, steelmaking and other manufacturing businesses which will not be able to compete under the burden of high energy costs and Net Zero regulations.
Unfortunately in luvvie world, none of these things matter. Another ten grand for a car? Don’t worry, Channel 4 will pay me a fortune for making another rubbishy documentary!
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
There’s plenty of onshore wind going on in the UK. Just visit Scotland, you’ll be blown away by it.
Proof: 16 million trees go missing…
https://www.wind-watch.org/news/2023/07/20/snp-admits-to-felling-16-million-trees-to-develop-wind-farms/
Two years ago that was ‘only’ 14m trees so a million more each year since then. Is this the SNP’s homegrown ‘highland clearance’?
Time for another letter of complaint, Paul.
Can it be taken straight to Ofcom?
In a word “yes”.
Simply propaganda claims produced by quite dim Left-wingers.
Mary Portas has probably done more damage to the environment than your average luvvie.
All that work with retail, packaging, fashion, airmiles, disposable fashion and the rest
Oh we can put this documentary on the mantle piece alongside the documentary the BBC made about Climate Gate – a matching pair!
Yes but she’s an expert on Economics, the fossil fuel industry globally and taxation…
In late October 2022 the spot natural gas price was (briefly) negative, meaningless of course but less so than the 9:1 nonsense.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/10/26/energy/europe-natural-gas-prices-plunge/index.html
Good to see they used experts!
They may well have used experts (and others) to litter the cutting room floor.
They would not have used knowledgeable experts as they would have contradicted their propaganda.
I was one of five independent people who were interviewed for this programme at Den Brook Wind Farm, Devon, back in June. We were given just two days notice and were told by Keo Films, who produced the documentary, “Hugh [Fearnley Whittigstall] is an advocate for onshore wind and as such, he is keen to understand people’s concerns and arguments against it”. In interview I explained to HFW why onshore wind was a major factor in rising electricity prices and that to buy cheap is to pay twice. I doubt if he took in a word I said and, after he’d interrupted me far too many times, I walked off the set. i don’t think he liked hearing the truth and it was no surprise when I was told just a day before broadcast that all our contributions at Den Brook had been dropped. I also understand that planned interviews with campaigners in the Scottish Highlands were cancelled. The whole of the two programmes were single sided pro climate change, pro wind farm and anti-government propaganda. My complaint to Ofcom went in just after lunch today.
+1
Well done Roland!
Roland
In what context and field of expertise were you interviewed as an independent person? Whitigstall and others imposed a solar farm near us on a local beauty spot without it going through planning. From that day to this I don’t know how they managed it nor why the promised landscaping to obscure the ugly panels has not been carried out
I am reluctant to reply to anyone hiding behind a pseudonym.
On the subject of renewables’ subsidies, the latest edition of your favourite bedtime reading was released yesterday:
https://obr.uk/efo/economic-and-fiscal-outlook-november-2023/
What’s interesting, is that like Paul Daniels could magic-away a white rabbit, the promised “Offshore wind power is now so cheap that UK wind farms could soon be paying back government subsidies” has now disappeared.
https://inews.co.uk/news/environment/offshore-wind-power-cheap-explained-pay-back-government-subsidies-563941
Oh, and the £1.6/£1.7 billion pa FiTs subsidies are again winning the hide-and-seek game.
Oh, well, expecting the Chris Packham programme that was on about the same time gave the balance that this programme obviously needed I watched a few minutes then switched off when the young woman who had climbed above a motorway, thus stopping it, was doing her hysterical rant to camera. No, dear, no-one but you has “stolen your future” as you put it – you have chosen to be this ridiculous person incapable of evaluating biased claims and farcical scaremongering stories. But you are not alone and, speaking of Packham, are his threats to commit illegal acts anywhere near the truth? I sincerely hope so, as to have him sent down and off our screens for a few years would be sheer bliss.
Such a great shame given Channel 4 made perhaps the only documentary critical of the Global Warming scam !!
They aired the “Great Global Warming Swindle” but certainly had nothing to do with making it. That was Martin Durkin
There was a time, about 16 years ago, when Channel 4 was OK and showed “The Great Global Warming Swindle”. Since then all its presenters have been as bad as the BBC, being totally biased and ignorant of science and scientific evidence. Just like the BBC, it should be defunded and forced to stand on its own feet, and not be reliant on taxpayer subsidy.
I would say they outBBC the BBC recently
I’ll take your word for it as I try to ignore both broadcasters and get the facts from elsewhere.
“First off, their Battle Bus claim that “We give the oil and gas industry £42 million a week in tax breaks”.”
These figures come from an anti-hydrocarbon fuel organisation (I don’t know which one) who make their calculation for the cost to the environment of burning hydrocarbon fuels and call this a “subsidy” or “tax break”. This organisation doesn’t believe the current carbon taxes imposed are anywhere near sufficient.
In actual fact, as shown by Happer & Wijngaarden there is no global warming caused by increasing levels of CO2 (natural or anthropogenic) because of IR saturation. Happer & Wijngaarden’s calculations on the real atmosphere, including water vapour (omitted in the IPCC models), fit perfectly with the measured data above the equator and at Mediterranean latitudes and fit so well that they even show correctly that CO2 COOLS rather than warms above Antarctica:
Tax breaks is an absurd claim. The oil and gas industry is far more heavily taxed than the renewables industry and receives neither subsidies nor guaranteed base prices.
Your wrong on the organization. They would be too thick to be able to calculate the subsidy on their abacus. The real culprits of the subsidy nonsense are the IMF and UN. COP 26 refers to subsidies and there is a 2023 IMF update available if you are bored. Total drivel.
Happer & Wijngaarden papers do not show “there is no global warming caused by increasing levels of CO2”. Those papers perform calculations for the warming effect of doubling CO2 concentrations, in clear skies conditions (and also for other gases like CH4). They show that the warming effect is modest – about 1.4C. And yes, they do show that there is a cooling effect over Antarctica, to be expected because of the major and persistent temperature inversion present there.
My take on the lies that wind is 9 x cheaper than gas:
The claim is a lie, even before taking in the ancillary costs and pressures on the National grid associated with coping with intermittent and unreliable renewable energy.
Story from a friend: he was recently in an NHS hospital ward and remarked to a nurse that it was excessively hot. Off she went and returned to tell him is was 28 degrees but she’d turned on the air-conditioning so it would soon be down to 24 degrees.
No doubt that hospital has official net zero ambitions. What we need is a League Table of Official Insanities.
It is odd that OFFCOM is attacking GB News regularly for the most trivial of issues, yet lets this sort of drivel be aired without comment on the total lack of balanced views.
The idea that the Sixth Carbon Budget presents a feasible path to net zero is utterly risible. It is a work of fantasy and fiction. Simply referencing the recent Royal Society study that shows the extent of storage needed, and the new strike prices for the next CFD auction is enough to kill that idea entirely.
This really was the most extraordinarily dishonest propaganda programme I think I have ever seen from any TV channel on this subject. I am writing to Ofcom too.
BBC Covid propaganda with Hannah Fry would be a contender for ‘GOAT’. Norman Fenton tried holding their feet to the fire but got the usual delays and brush-off.
https://wherearethenumbers.substack.com/p/mhra-and-bbc-fail-to-meet-their-own-deadline-for-responding-to-complaints-about-unvaccinated
Why?
Mary Portas – Retail Consultant
A look on the web suggests Mary P. is a propagandist for herself.
I guess she is in demand because she is colorful or something.
She might be good at selling coat hangers and vitamins, but has
no business selling windmills – they are not a retail item.
Oh I don’t know ; I was a climate sceptic until I saw the programme , but now I know that a poncey interior designer , a posh hippy chef and a woman who knows how to sell biscuits are true believers I’ve been converted to the path of righteousness . In fact I’ve just ordered a pinup of gorgeous Greta Thunderbird . Or whatever she’s called .
Biased little tits for sure . .
Biased little tits for sure . .
If we are paying for environmental levies through our bills, are they covered by our standing charges?
Channel 4 is many things, none of them good
If we can stop climate change then we should be able to stop the Iceland Volcano and could have stopped the earthquake in Turkey. Why didn’t we ?