Meet the people who could change the way we live

At some point the stark reality of what a net zero lifestyle would look like may sink in but I strongly suspect it would be too late by then, and without doubt the poor will be hit the hardest.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

 

image

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/science-environment-52685718/meet-the-people-who-could-change-the-way-we-live 

 

It emphatically shows not only how devoid of ideas they all are, but also how none of them have the slightest idea of what really is involved in getting to Net Zero.

I have summarised their conversations:

View original post 300 more words

CCC Analysis Reveals The Frightening Cost Of Decarbonisation

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

h/t Joe Public

image

https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/analysis-on-abating-direct-emissions-from-hard-to-decarbonise-homes-element-energy-ucl/

Last August, shortly after the publication of their Net Zero plan, the CCC released the above analysis which they had commissioned.

Although it was intended to study “hard to decarbonise” homes, such as heritage houses and older properties with limited space, the study included a dataset of assumptions made by the CCC in their Net Zero and other work, but never released in public (as far as I am aware).

These include the projected costs of energy:

View original post 470 more words

Why Not Offset All The UK’s Emissions?

Why not offset all UK emissions for a measly £2.6B rather than pay £11B in subsidies plus the imminent astronomical costs of net zero? Because carbon offsetting is a financial scam appealing only to virtue signalling environmentalists.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

I covered a Telegraph report into carbon offsetting the other day, which raised serious doubts as to whether the claimed carbon dioxide emissions savings had even been achieved.

It got me thinking though, that if they really did work, why would we simply offset the whole country’s emissions and carry on with business as usual?

Climatecare are one of the outfits offering offsets, and according to their calculator below the cost would be £7.50 per tonne CO2:

image

https://climatecare.org/calculator/

At the last count, UK emissions totalled 344 Mt, it would cost the country £2.58bn to offset.

A bargain surely, given we are already paying £11bn a year in renewable subsidies and the trillions that the Net Zero strategy is going to cost us in the next thirty years!

This is proof, of course, that carbon offsetting is in reality a meaningless, ineffective option, which does little other than…

View original post 16 more words

The Role of Distributed Generation in the UK Blackout of 9 August 2019

I cannot see how this issue can be ignored for much longer as it is clear that the technical limitations of renewables are finally coming home to roost.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

John Constable has taken a closer look at the final reports into last summer’s blackouts.

Hidden away is the critical role played by embedded generation, typically wind and solar farms.

John’s post is pretty technical, but the take home message is that the loss of this embedded generation was much greater than originally thought, and probably played the major role in the blackouts. As the share of such unreliable renewable generation rises, so the instability of the grid will increase.

image

The final reports into the widespread blackout of the 9th of August last year by the UK electricity regulator, Ofgem, and the British government’s Energy Emergency Executive Committee, E3C show that this is not the case. Distributed Generation is now under the spotlight as a leading cause of the severity of the 9 August blackout, and as a hazard increasing future risks to security of supply.

Both…

View original post 1,871 more words

Is The Telegraph Turning Sceptical?

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

Is the Telegraph becoming more sceptical?

Following on from Charles Moore’s recent forays against climate alarmism, last week we had Sherrelle Jacobs having a pop at St Greta:

image

Jeremy Corbyn, the wintry and discontented Ghost of Seventies Christmases Past, may have spent the past weeks rattling around the political margins. But the rapper Stormzy, the blingtastic Ghost of Christmas Present, has more than made up for this in a manner most befitting of the mass media age. His viral diatribe against our “one hundred per cent racist” nation flashed on millions of smartphones as households settled into holiday hibernation. Generating almost as much hype was a ghoulish visit from the Ghost of Christmas Future, Greta Thunberg, who lamented mass apathy towards our impending climate doom as a guest editor on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

Stormzy and Thunberg are the eerie pin-ups of an anti-rational age…

View original post 790 more words

Burning Forests Is Not A Very Good Idea, Decides Guardian (Six Years Too Late)

Doh! Yet more stuff that you really cannot make up.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

image

Plans to shift Europe’s coal plants to burning wood pellets instead could accelerate rather than combat the climate crisis and lay waste to woodland equal to half the size of Germany’s Black Forest a year, according to campaigners.

The climate thinktank Sandbag said the heavily subsidised plans to cut carbon emissions would result in a “staggering” amount of tree cutting, potentially destroying forests faster than they can regrow.

Sandbag found that Europe’s planned biomass conversion projects would require 36m tonnes of wood pellets every year, equal to the entire current global wood pellet production. This would require forests covering 2,700 sq km to be cut down annually, the equivalent of half the Black Forest in Germany.

View original post 449 more words

Roger Harrabin’s Alarmist Bubble

Is it just me or does Roger Harrabin and his acolytes come off as simply condescending and nasty?

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

image

https://twitter.com/RHarrabin

I called out Roger Harrabin a few days ago for blatantly breaking BBC political impartiality rules on his twitter feed.

So I thought I would take a closer look at his twitter. What is immediately apparent is the little alarmist bubble which he inhabits there.

Apart from one reaction from GWPF, every other comment on his twitter page in the last week or so comes from his alarmist chums, who naturally confirm and reinforce each others views and opinions.

For instance:

  • James Murray – Editor of Business Green
  • Bob Ward – Enough said!
  • Richard Black – Harrabin’s predecessor at the BBC, and now head of the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, the climate propaganda outfit
  • “The Bureau” – The far left, self described “unbiased” reporting website
  • Leo Hickman – Director of Carbon Brief, formerly of the Guardian
  • ECIU – The aforesaid Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit…

View original post 129 more words

The Tories should not have signed up to Corbyn’s alarmist climate ‘emergency’–Charles Moore

Great article. Why more people don’t get this baffles me.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

A very good article by Charles Moore today:

image

You have already been told that Jeremy Corbyn’s new Labour general election manifesto closely resembles Michael Foot’s manifesto of 1983, when Labour crashed to its biggest-ever postwar defeat.

You have been told right. Mr Corbyn, one must remember, is rather old. He came into Parliament in that election and has dreamed ever since of revenge on Margaret Thatcher. Labour is using the phrase “irreversible shift” in this campaign. It deliberately echoes Mr Corbyn’s hero, Tony Benn, who spoke of an “irreversible shift in the balance of power and wealth in favour of working people and their families”. By “working people and their families”, Benn/Corbyn meant/mean “the state”.

There are two important differences between 1983 and now, however. The first concerns climate change, a subject not mentioned then. Shakespeare’s Macbeth speaks of “making the green one red”. Mr Corbyn…

View original post 1,124 more words

EU Rules Expose Britain’s Flood Defences

So who or what is most to blame for the flood in Doncaster? Lack of wind mills or EU directives constraining the management of waterways coupled with poor incident management? I know where my money would be.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

According to the Express:

image

EU directives on “habitats”, “birds”, “water” and “floods” have dominated the UK’s river management strategy for nearly 20 years. The Government’s hands have been tied by a vast list of European Union directives, critics say. The Environment Agency must obey strict rules set in the EU Water Framework Directive to protect wildlife and plants when implementing its dredging strategy.

While the Government has the final decision on whether to clear water channels of silt build-ups, sources have told the Express.that the process is severely hindered by EU rules protecting the “ecological health of rivers”.

The EU insists flood risk management “should work with nature, rather than against it”, according to a note released by the bloc’s environment department in 2011.

Work dredging the country’s waterways has been significantly scaled back because of the huge costs of disposing of silt under the EU Waste…

View original post 696 more words