Skip to content

New Footage Reveals Netflix Faked Walrus Climate Deaths

November 19, 2020

By Paul Homewood

London, 19 November: In a GWPF video released today, Dr. Susan Crockford, a Canadian wildlife expert, provides new evidence that the 2019 Netflix documentary film series, ‘Our Planet’, withheld facts behind the controversial walrus story it promoted as evidence of climate change.

Tiny homes to fix the climate crisis, UN report suggests

November 19, 2020

By Paul Homewood

 

h/t Patsy Lacey

 

 

Presumably this only applies to the peasants!!

 

 image

People should move to "tiny homes" with less floor space to help fight climate change, a UN report has said.

The International Resource Panel, an international group of scientists, said that "trendy" smaller homes and group living could cut carbon emissions.

Lead author Edgar Hertwich, international chair in industrial ecology at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, said: "Limiting the growth in the size of our homes, and sharing rides and vehicles turned out to be the most effective ways to reduce emissions."

The group’s analysis showed that reducing demand for domestic floor space by up to 20 per cent could lower greenhouse gas emissions from building materials by 73 per cent in 2050.

Policies making energy more expensive and larger houses less desirable could be one way of achieving this, the report said, as could policies encouraging downsizing such as stamp duty cuts.

While average home sizes have been growing, a "social movement" to encourage downsizing has emerged driven by concerns about resource use and efficiency, the authors added.

Homes as small as 20 square metres have been showcased by architects as solutions to the high cost of living space in some cities, though critics argue that they represent a step backwards for people’s quality of life. 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/environment/2020/11/18/tiny-homes-fix-climate-crisis-un-report-suggests/

 

BTW

As usual, this Telegraph article is behind a paywall. I cancelled my subscription months ago, but have found out that you can still download the articles simply by disabling javascript on your browser.

Disabling this, of course, is not a good idea normally, but as I never use Chrome, I have simply disabled it there.

Try it, it works!

The Fatal Flaw In Boris Johnson’s Ten-Point Carbon Manifesto

November 19, 2020

By Paul Homewood

 

 

Ross Clark writes:

 

image

There is nothing wrong with the general direction of the policy contained within the government’s ten-point plan to cut carbon emissions announced today. Who doesn’t want clean energy and more energy-efficient homes and vehicles?

The problem is the perverse target that lies at its heart: the legally-binding demand, laid down in the Climate Change Act, to cut carbon emissions to net-zero by 2050.

This is so badly defined that the government’s ten-point plan becomes really little more than a manifesto to export much of British industry, food production, and power generation.

The UK’s definition of carbon emissions, as used in the Climate Change Act, covers only ‘territorial’ emissions – i.e. those spewed out physically within the confines of Britain.

It excludes carbon emissions from factories in Southeast Asia which are making products for UK consumers.

It excludes the emissions from container ships bringing those goods to Britain – at least until they reach the last few miles before docking at Felixstowe.

It also excludes international aviation, emissions caused by producing and transporting imported food, and imported electricity.

To underline the importance this makes: UK carbon emissions in 2017 stood at 460 million tonnes. That was down 42 percent from the 794 million tonnes emitted in 1990 – which makes the UK appear incredibly successful at cutting emissions.

Indeed, in some ways, we have been successful: coal, once the beating heart of our electricity industry, has all but disappeared as a source of power.

But once you add the carbon emissions embedded in food and goods imports, as well as those from shipping and aviation, UK emissions in 2017 were a whacking 784 million tonnes.

What we have really done is offshore our emissions. Huge swathes of the UK’s manufacturing industry have drained away to Southeast Asia, taking their territorial emissions with them.

Meanwhile, we are importing more food – our self-sufficiency in food has fallen from 74 percent in 1990 to 60 percent in 2019.

We are also importing more electricity – last year three percent of our electricity was generated on the near-Continent, and this figure is inevitably going to grow sharply as we build more and more solar and wind capacity without the necessary storage capacity.

Last week, when wind speeds were low in Britain and solar farms were producing little power, over 10 percent of our electricity came from abroad.

It is all too easy to foresee the day when a UK government announces the net-zero target has been reached.

But it will have been achieved by offshoring the remains of UK manufacturing, by ending steel and cement-making in Britain (two industries which are going to prove very hard to decarbonize), by importing far more of our food, and by making up the shortfall in electricity-generation with imports via subsea cables from Europe.

And it won’t matter if our imported goods and electricity are carbon-intensive – all that counts for the government’s target will be that emissions don’t physically occur in Britain.

As long as the government proceeds with the net-zero target, we are doomed to follow perverse policies that make the country poorer while doing little or nothing to reduce global net carbon emissions.

Read more at Spectator UK

Donegal: Peat landslide linked to wind farm raised in Dáil

November 18, 2020

By Paul Homewood

 

h/t John Smyth

 

So much for that wonderful “Green Energy”!

 

image

The river flows into the Foyle catchment which has EU protection as an important salmon habitat.

Work on the wind farm development has been suspended and several agencies on both sides of the border are investigating how it happened.

Donegal independent TD Thomas Pringle raised the incident in the Dail and said concerns about the wind farm had been well flagged by environmentalists.

He said pictures of the collapse made for "stark viewing".

Taoiseach Micheál Martin said he was aware of the case and wanted to progress guidelines on future wind farm development.

The Irish Environmental Protection Agency, a statutory body, said there would be another meeting in the coming days involving all those investigating, to co-ordinate any further necessary response.

The Ulster Angling Federation (UAF) has warned the river may struggle to recover fully from the landslide, which a spokesman labelled one of the largest pollution events in the history of Northern Ireland and Ireland.

He said anglers were devastated and were expecting a complete fish kill in the Mourne Beg.

The company building the wind farm, Invis Energy, said they were working with the authorities and there was no risk to public health on the day of the landslide.

Authorities on both sides of the Irish border have moved to assure the public there is no risk to drinking water quality.

However, NI Water temporarily suspended drinking water supplies connected to the river as a precaution.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-54994865

 

This no doubt is an uncommon occurrence. But it is symptomatic of peat degradation in the vast majority of upland wind farm constructions, so typical in Scotland particularly.

Read more…

Boris’ 10-point Climate Plan

November 18, 2020

By Paul Homewood

 

 

h/t Robin Guenier

 

 

 

 image

New cars and vans powered wholly by petrol and diesel will not be sold in the UK from 2030, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said.

But some hybrids would still be allowed, he confirmed.

It is part of what Mr Johnson calls a "green industrial revolution" to tackle climate change and create jobs in industries such as nuclear energy.

Critics of the plan say the £4bn allocated is far too small for the scale of the challenge.

image

  1. Offshore wind: Produce enough offshore wind to power every home in the UK, quadrupling how much it produces to 40 gigawatts by 2030, and supporting up to 60,000 jobs.
  2. Hydrogen: Have five gigawatts of "low carbon" hydrogen production capacity by 2030 – for industry, transport, power and homes – and develop the first town heated by the gas by the end of the decade.
  3. Nuclear: Pushing nuclear power as a clean energy source and including provision for a large nuclear plant, as well as for advanced small nuclear reactors, which could support 10,000 jobs.
  4. Electric vehicles: Phasing out sales of new petrol and diesel cars and vans by 2030 to accelerate the transition to electric vehicles and investing in grants to help buy cars and charge point infrastructure.
  5. Public transport, cycling and walking: Making cycling and walking more attractive ways to travel and investing in zero-emission public transport for the future.
  6. Jet zero and greener maritime: Supporting research projects for zero-emission planes and ships.
  7. Homes and public buildings: Making homes, schools and hospitals greener, warmer and more energy efficient, including a target to install 600,000 heat pumps every year by 2028.
  8. Carbon capture: Developing world-leading technology to capture and store harmful emissions away from the atmosphere, with a target to remove 10 million tonnes of carbon dioxide by 2030 – equivalent to all emissions of the industrial Humber.
  9. Nature: Protecting and restoring the natural environment, with plans to include planting 30,000 hectares of trees a year.
  10. Innovation and finance: Developing cutting-edge technologies and making the City of London the global centre of green finance.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-54981425

 

There is actually nothing particularly new in any of this, other than filling in a bit of detail. We really need to await the forthcoming Energy White Paper, which will hopefully include some proper detailed costings.

The buffoon Ed Miliband naturally complains that the government (ie taxpayers) should be spending much more:

Read more…

Electric cars are good fun for wealthy virtue signallers, but a dreadful way to save the planet

November 18, 2020

By Paul Homewood

 

h/t Philip Bratby

 

A dose of reality from Bjorn Lomborg:

 

 

image.

In a move to burnish Britain’s green credentials, Boris Johnson is to announce a ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030. He is following other political leaders, including Joe Biden, in promising lavish carrots to energise the market for electric cars along with sticks to outlaw petrol cars. Unfortunately, electric cars will achieve only tiny emissions savings at a very high price.

Read more…

Go Back To Work–The Planet Needs You!

November 16, 2020

By Paul Homewood

 

h/t stewgreen

 

 image

https://twitter.com/C4Dispatches/status/1328399376797065216

There’s no satisfying these lunatics, is there?

For years they have been ordering us to work from home to save the planet. Now the bright sparks have cottoned on that it has made bugger all difference!

They won’t be happy till we are back in the dark ages, with no technology and no life.

Road Charging Moves Closer

November 16, 2020

By Paul Homewood

 

It was of course always inevitable:

 

 image

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8951969/Rishi-Sunak-considers-plan-charge-motorists-mile-drive-Britains-roads.html

As I have been saying for years, the government would have little choice but to go for road charges to replace the lost fuel tax once EVs took over.

It was always inconceivable that electricity could be taxed in the same way, as it would generate massive energy poverty and would obviously discriminate against poorer non-car households.

Equally to raise £40bn from other taxes would be political suicide.

In my view, road charging could become the equivalent of the next government’s poll tax. In theory of course, it only swaps one tax for another, but so did the poll tax.

One particular consequence is that all cars would pay the same rate, disadvantaging drivers of smaller, more economic cars which would use less fuel.

In any event, it is inevitable that the revenue from road charging would quickly outstrip current revenue from fuel duty. Quite apart from the administrative costs which would need to be recovered, it would be far too tempting to start ratcheting up rates on the flimsiest excuse, such as road congestion.

It is after all the stated aim of climate zealots in Parliament and elsewhere to cut the amount of travel we do in our cars. What better way to do it than make it unaffordable for the average driver to use his car on a regular basis?

 

Ironically, drivers of electric cars may be put out more than most. Currently freed from paying fuel duty and vehicle excise duty, they will find themselves much worse off, once the cash cow provided by other motorists disappears.

And it’s not even as if their cars are much cheaper to run anyway. According to WhichCar, the cost of recharging a Tesla in the States may be greater than refuelling a petrol car, if done on the Tesla supercharger network.

China has started to ‘walk the walk’ on climate crisis–Guardian

November 16, 2020
tags:

By Paul Homewood

 

h/t Robin Guenier

 

 

Today’s instalment of Guardian misinformation!

 

 image

Ma Jun experienced a strange role reversal during Donald Trump’s presidency. Over more than two decades as one of China’s top environmental campaigners, American encouragement for Beijing to cut carbon emissions and temper the damage of rapid industrialisation had been part of the background music. Ma never imagined he would see the US renege on environmental commitments while China began to face up to the challenge.

“It’s been frustrating,” says Ma of the past four years as we speak on the phone, the bustle of Beijing audible in the background. “When it comes to environmental collaboration between the governments, it has been hard to do anything.”

Before the US election, the Chinese foreign ministry issued a 12-point excoriation of Washington’s record on the environment, criticising the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement and failure to protect wildlife – even condemning methane gas leaks from fracking. While the criticisms were likely made in response to a similar State Department factsheet in September, the old dynamic between the two powers on the environment appears to be over.

“China has started changing its course. We have seen a lot more ‘walk the walk’ action. China has adopted some tough measures to try to deal with the pollution and environmental damage problem. And we have seen some progress made because of that,” Ma says.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/nov/13/ma-jun-china-is-beginning-to-walk-the-walk-on-climate-crisis-action-aoe

 

And so it goes on, with a paean of praise for the Chinese government.

Read more…

Who Wrote The Climate Assembly Report?

November 15, 2020

By Paul Homewood

The new survey on the Climate Assembly’s recommendations reminded me to take another look at their report, which was published in September:

 The Path to Net Zero Climate Assembly UK full report

https://www.climateassembly.uk/report/

First thing we need to remind ourselves is that the Assembly was originally set up by the six Select Committees of the House of Commons. Government was never actually involved in it, and it is Parliament which is responsible for this new survey., not government, as some people wrongly believe.

The purpose of their creation was quite clear, to put pressure on government to take action, as the Climate Assembly’s own website makes clear:

Read more…