By Paul Homewood
With the public finally rebelling against the cost of Net Zero, the government has published its latest Climate Change Risk Assessment, warning us that climate change will cost tens of billions in “climate disasters”:
The Government has today (Monday 17 January) published the UK’s Third Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA3), recognising the unprecedented challenge of ensuring the UK is resilient to climate change and setting out the work already underway to meet that challenge.
The five-year assessment, delivered under the Climate Change Act 2008 and following close work with the Climate Change Committee (CCC), identifies the risks that climate change poses to multiple parts of our society and economy.
For eight individual risks, economic damages could exceed £1 billion per year each by 2050 with a temperature rise of 2°C, with the cost of climate change to the UK rising to at least 1% of GDP by 2045.
As required by the Climate Change Act 2008, the UK government has undertaken the third five-year assessment of the risks of climate change on the UK. This is based on the Independent Assessment of UK Climate Risk, the statutory advice provided by the Climate Change Committee (CCC), commissioned by the UK government and devolved administrations.
The risk assessment considers sixty-one UK-wide climate risks and opportunities cutting across multiple sectors of the economy and prioritises the following eight risk areas for action in the next two years:
- risks to the viability and diversity of terrestrial and freshwater habitats and species from multiple hazards
- risks to soil health from increased flooding and drought
- risks to natural carbon stores and sequestration from multiple hazards
- risks to crops, livestock and commercial trees from multiple climate hazards
- risks to supply of food, goods and vital services due to climate-related collapse of supply chains and distribution networks
- risks to people and the economy from climate-related failure of the power system
- risks to human health, wellbeing and productivity from increased exposure to heat in homes and other buildings
- multiple risks to the UK from climate change impacts overseas
The report is largely based on last June’s Independent Assessment of UK Climate Risk, published by the CCC, who seem to now be in charge of every aspect of climate policy. Unsurprisingly, given their involvement, the latest assessment is pure fantasy.
Three basic factors undermine and discredit the new Risk Assessment throughout:
- Despite claims to the contrary, no evidence is offered that our weather is getting any worse, or will do. Flooding is a good example, which we are told will become disastrous in future. So where is the data which shows it has already got worse?
- The report totally ignores adaptation, as this section reveals:
It is absurd to assume that, for instance, farmers won’t adapt to slightly warmer weather.
- Whatever may be the impacts of climate change, and no mention seems to have been made of the undoubted benefits, they will be dwarfed by natural variability and other human influence. Moorland wildfires, for instance, are mentioned several times, even though the actual data proves that the UK is not getting drier. But where is there any acknowledgment of the overwhelmingly key factors in wildfires – arson and accidents, both aggravated by easy accessibility nowadays. If we are so concerned about wildfire, surely we should be addressing these factors, and not trying to control the weather?
In terms of the specific risk areas, the first four all seem to revolve around floods and drought, with a few wildfires thrown in:
They really are making a meal out of wildfires, which only affect a miniscule proportion of our moorlands.
As for the other two, where is the evidence that either floods or droughts are getting worse? If they have not in the past, why should we believe the CCC when they tell us they will in future.
The idea, anyway, that floods will diminish soil fertility is ridiculous. It is flooding which restores fertility.
The CCC talk about land management and new crops and technologies, as if farmers have not been doing these since time immemorial. But England is not suddenly going to turn into Texas in climate terms, and the enormous year-to-year, as well as month-to-month, variations will continue to dwarf longer term climate changes. If these happen at all, they will occur so slowly as to be barely noticeable, and will allow plenty of time to adapt
They go into the realms of fantasy when it comes to supply chains:
According to the CCC, extreme weather is already causing disruption:
But what does “extreme weather” have to do with “climate change”. There is certainly no evidence that it is getting worse.
We have already learnt from the pandemic that it is dangerous to be over reliant on China for so much of what we buy, and it should be a top priority for any government to reduce this.
But the danger is that Net Zero policies will destroy our industrial base and place even more dependence on imported goods.
But this next section must surely take the biscuit!
Again from the CCC:
So the the weather related risks to our electricity system will grow as we become more dependent on wind power.
WOW!! I did not see that one coming!
It gets worse:
Obviously whoever wrote this gibberish did not read the ONS’ latest report, pointing out that global warming has saved half a million lives in Britain.
The CCC perpetuates the lie about 2500 heat-related deaths in 2020, failing to point out that death rates in recent hot summers have actually been lower than cold, wet ones.
Apparently we are all going to be too hot to work as well! Have they not heard of air-conditioning? Or mechanisation which takes the hard labour out of most jobs?
And what about all of the lost productivity during cold winters, when the whole country can seize up with a few inches of snow? We are told these are things of the past now.
And finally, even if none of these calamities come to our shores, there is always the rest of the world to worry about:
I think the CCC have been watching too many disaster movies!
The whole report is just another attempt to scare the children and persuade people to accept the high costs of Net Zero.
“with the cost of climate change to the UK rising”
Perhaps all the vineyards that can be established (reestablished?) will be very profitable. No doubt there will be other benefits.
British wine? No thanks.
nobody thought Americans could produce wine either but it’s now a big industry
It may be big, but is it good?
The American wine industry is now big but the product is still crap.
You mean English wine? No thanks.
Pauleta, it’s actually very good. White and sparkling white especially.
Not ‘British’ though.
Which one to pair with kidney pudding?
Excellent. That leaves more for me. The whites and the fizz are bloody good. Even my German mates say so.
It really is good stuff: give it a try!
Do you feel pangs of guilt if your drink is bubbling CO2 into the atmosphere?
Do you avoid carbonated beverages like Coke, Prosecco, Champagne, or even beer etc?
What the hell? Something you get correct?
Even a broken clock is correct twice a day
only obsolete tick-tocks
English and Welsh wine is very good. British is made from imported grapes…
UK wine is shit!
Anyone that thinks you can produce anything of value so far north is happy drinking battery acid!¬
English sparkling wine has been judged the beat in the world.
Those will be the ones growing up the road then…
First pressing from a friend of mine`s vinyard in Lewdown in Devon was a little acidic, from imported grape “vines” of course but the grapes grown in England and bottled in Cornwall, 5 th year now and its passable.
I live only ten miles or so from Denbies, and their whites are good. Expensive, though.
It’s good enough for Chuckle’s Aston Martin. 😉
Nyetimber, try it
(from someone who likes a nice bottle of Napoleon occasionally)
I have a written response from the CCC, including from one of the ‘scientists’, where I asked them for evidence of the scientific method to substantiate these claims, and with no shock at all, they could not only not answer, but provided two completely irrelevant citations, followed by the usual ‘IPCC says’, where I also have reply from them that they don’t know either.
There needs to be a massive pushback that informs how there is literally zero burden of proof from this rhetoric, and I will be publishing a video this weekend showing the various failures to provide evidence from the various UK Gov. Dept’s where not one can give anything but a diversion answer, or more hysterically, one response asking what the theory of AGW is!
No burden of proof, no legislation.
It’s a circular proof. You know damn well with solar and wind there’ll be risks to people and the economy from climate-related failure of the power system
Ipso facto climate related change is real silly. You’re not still on catastrophic anthropogenic global warming are you? Do keep up as this an emergency crisis.
If you’d like to ‘keep up’ yourself, if there is no burden of proof for the policies and legislation creating this whole farce in the first place, then there is no justification for any of the measures causing this ‘crisis’.
Did you turn your sarcasm meter off?
There was no sarcasm according to all meter readings and dictionary definitions.
Britain is still a climate where news sites report 20C as a “heat wave”. One would think they would welcome better weather.
translating that figure for we yanks
griff would report it as a major catastrophe
LOL. Scots certainly have complained when it got to about 25 in Edinburgh in recent years…
(The Met Office defines a heatwave in Scotland as at least three days in a row with temperatures hitting 25C or higher.)
It is the storms and floods though which are the current and constant effect of climate change in the UK.
“It is the storms and floods though which are the current and constant effect of climate change in the UK.”
You obviously missed the 1987 hurricane. And numerous events since.
The climate never ceases to change. Why do you believe it could be made to stop changing?
Well, people like Griff want to pump loads of toxic chemicals into the atmosphere to block out the sunlight, you know the kind of thing, contaminate the atmosphere to achieve their Nervana!!!
I think you’ll find climate scientists are against geo engineering
1987 was something that was completely new to the UK, wasn’t it?
This century we’ve had storm after storm of the same damaging proportions…
(I missed 1987 as I was in California: when I went into the office next day someone said ‘hey dude, your country blew away’)
“The same damaging proportions.”
It cut a swathe through England,bringing down millions of trees alone.It was the most catastrophic storm I have ever witnessed in my four score years.
Returning to the present day,here in Cambridge we are frosty most mornings.It has been remaining cold through most days.
What’s it like where you are?
As I have Scottish heritage and hence the “wool sweater that cannot be removed”, I must admit that we do not suffer heat gladly. Natural selection has rendered our gene pool to favor traits needed for colder climes.
However, it seems not to have deterred Scottish scientists and engineers from showing up around the globe.
Ok Bucko, one last chance, please tell me when the Earth’s climate has ever stayed the same & never varied in any direction??? Still waiting for two so-called climate scientists to come back to me on that one, it’s now 2+ years!!!
but now there is a new, additional driver of climate operating on top of the historical and natural climate drivers… human CO2.
and it is causing rapid warming change, in a very short period of time geologically speaking… the natural world and the human world are finding it difficult to adapt
Only in your imagination.
And back to form
f//k g Nutter!
And all this lack of wind, is that due to Global Warming.
“But it means also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary.”
I think there is a lot of this going around.
Humans talk themselves into believing things that are not true. Even more so, when the Powers-that-Be promote these untrue things as being real, like is done with Human-caused Climate Change.
“statutory advice provided by the Climate Change Committee”
The people who brought you Grenfell Tower and the cladding crisis.
If they still listen to Ferguson on epidemic modelling, it’s no surprise that Selwyn-Gumboot’s CCC has their full attention.
Today as a result of Johnson’s sleaze a new Red Wall Tory MP crossed the floor of the house and joined Labour….
Christian Wakeford MP wrote that Labour is: “ready to provide an alternative government that this country can be proud of, and not embarrassed by”
Not one that is good for the people, I note….
“Why we need a Cabinet Minister for Net Zero – By Christian Wakeford MP
As part of our COP26 legacy, a Cabinet Minister for Net Zero can show the world how to lead cross-government action on the matter. “
That’s what we’re up against.
I confess that I had never heard of Christian Wakeford MP until after his stunt this lunchtime.
And if he is a believer in the Climate Scam, then Kier is welcome to him.
Kier is a lawyer, who – presumably – has no regard for fact, preferring argument, that is who can shout loudest.
And with the media etc. behind them, it seems that the alarmists – unhappily – are shouting loudest.
As a Chief Geologist for two Mining Exploration Companies I taught “Fatal Flaws and Risk Management” as the exploration process has now become a mix of figuring out geology and assessing political factors. So, is Britain asking are we exposed to Climate Fatal Flaws? No we are between the two extremes, hot and cold, where humans have flourished, for instance, sea level varies from 50 meters higher to 150 meters lower, so No Fatal Flaw. Risk Management? If it gets hotter plant the seeds a week earlier? Switch to more adapted crops? Start wine grape production again? Move to Ireland? No problem. Next.
Move to Ireland?
You can always stay with Father Ted
That would be an ecumenical matter?
Feck, drink, gels…
No country, repeat – no country will even come close to acheiving ‘net zero’. It is a physical impossibility…
Of course not, but in today’s doublethink they “identify” with being carbon neutral, and that’s all that really matters.
I am starting a campaign to rid the Earth of ALL carbon, fact, ASAP!!! We must rid ourselves of ALL carbon to survive into the future!!! SARC full on!!!
Independant Assesment ……
It is not really a government report in the sense of a report produced by disinterested civil servants. It is a report that was out-sourced to a more-or-less self-selected lobby group (the Climate Change Committee) and the government has nodded it through. That happens a lot in the UK: reports from the Law Society passed off as government policy; reports from Stonewall passed off as policy, and so on. The list is probably much longer than I guess.Such things should be a scandal but seen against the current clownscape they look almost proper.
Kinda scary for those not working the system.
You would burden the poor elected officials with details?
You want to see your supply chains collapse, might I suggest banning the fuel needed to power said supply chains? Or even the fuel needed to mine and process the materials needed to make the imaginary electric-powered supply vehicles they keep on nattering about?
Extraction of lithium from Cornish geothermal sources is starting… battery factories being built…
“Extraction of lithium”
Will make China clay extraction look really environmentally friendly. Lets hope these miners have the same rules on restoration….
Pilot plant Griff, from the link you provided the other day. Care to hazard a guess on the economics of it? Neither do they, hence “pilot” project, to see if it can work
Yes, it is a pilot… but that pilot is because investors see a real chance it will work.
There are dozens of pilots of new renewable technologies underway these days…
Despite claims to the contrary, no evidence is offered that our weather is getting any worse, or will do. Flooding is a good example, which we are told will become disastrous in future.
But the evidence is there: the UK is 6% wetter than 30 years ago on average by Met Office figures (and the extra is not evenly distributed).
There are annual multiple extreme rain events, floods and flash floods we did not have last century; there are annual damaging storms (like Arwen recently). There is damage to infrastructure.
No there is no evidence.
You say it’s 6% wetter and the Guardian says we’re running out of water.
You have to get your ducks in a row – in that water.
Because the excess isn’t evenly distributed, geographically or across the year – parts of the East are actually drier and there are more heat waves.
But the point is, griff, that all these things are just weather and the effects or not of more or fewer molecules of CO2 has nothing to do with them. Sure we are warming slowly in fits and starts but we are still coming out of the Little Ice age.
As for the floods, most of the damage is caused by the planners allowing building on flood plains. The floods always happened but there was little damage because not many people lived in the flooded areas.
Now go away and bother other people, or start backing up your statements with facts. You will find most of the facts in Willis’s paper about “What Climate Emergency?”.
From my previous self-employed engineer status, when designing for drainage systems for new housing areas, an allowance of 10% used to be included to take into account the effects of Climate Changes, which as an engineer, was a subtle admission that drainage systems were inadequately designed in the first place, & most flooding is as result of such poorly designed systems!!! There is a road gully opposite my apartment which floods badly from road run-off, if it was actually positioned a few feet further down it would receive most if not all the surface water run-off with ease!!!
Well, dog, most of the places which flood have been there for decades, if not centuries – they aren’t new builds. Carlisle has seen its 1820s flood record beaten twice in a decade, for example – stuff that hasn’t flooded in 200 years and more…
Maybe look to see what has changed outside of Carlisle in the surrounding area.
Looked at the annual rainfall figures for the last 150 years or so. there are amazingly some years that are wetter than others, & some years that are dryer than others, but the average turns out mysteriously to be a flat-line!!!!!! How very strange!!!
Now some facts enter the conversation. Flat line, Griff.
See my link above, tom
Climate change continues to be evident across UK – Met Office
‘As well as increased temperatures, the UK has been on average 6% wetter over the last 30 years (1991-2020) than the preceding 30 years (1961-1990). Six of the ten wettest years for the UK in a series from 1862 have occurred since 1998.’
In my area we used to have water bailiffs amongst whose responsibilities was managing the local river levels using water meadows, mill streams, and systems of sluice gates. We no longer have them. No one controls the water flow and the sluice gates are rotted.Twice in the last 20 years we’ve had flooding that filled homes to knee-deep. Nothing to do with changes in the rainfall. In fact the existence of the water meadows and sluice gates prove that kind of rainfall was expected historically.
Once again, griff claims as evidence, things that are clearly not.
For the 6% claim, first off the data is not fine enough to claim a 6% increase with any kind of confidence.
Secondly, 30 years is half the AMO cycle, if the 6% actually does exist, a better explanation would be the AMO cycle.
griff likes to claim that if something hasn’t happened recently, it never happened. As you go back in time, bigger floods are clearly documented. Then when you add in the lack of maintenance on the flood control systems and all of the new asphalt and concrete that have been put down in recent decades, any claim of unprecedented flooding is completely unsupported by the actual facts.
The point is Mark the number and scale of floods this century, the last 22 years…
The UK precipitation record is longer than 30 years, mate
Big one in 1880, in anticipation of industrial revolution, I suppose, and again, big ones between 1920 and 1930.
Mr W..nker Griff did you know what it was like in 1968???
The Thames valley turned into a gigantic lake and we went canoeing across the flooded fields.
The local lock had flood markers from previous years (I think 1947?). and it well exceeded those.
You are literally so stupid and dumb, every time you post on here I can remember events from well before you were put in pampers.
Ie. get out of creamed up pampers and grow the f.ck up. or shut the f..ck up!
Some of us are older, wiser and have to make a living dependent on the weather.
Yes: I saw that.
and the flood defences they put in after – which I have also seen overtopped on several occasions in the last 2 decades.
You might like to advance your argument without the obscenity? It hardly reflects well on the skeptic point of view if you resort to abuse.
“the UK is 6% wetter than 30 years ago”
This is the most pathetic malediction that you parrot endlessly.
You should work out exactly what it means one day.
Griff is 6% wetter behind the ears .. FACT
Pure hand waving, written from the pulpit, facts need not apply.
Facts will be, er, checked…
Yes, but only by the officially approved “checkers” appointed by Civil Servants to placate their political masters, who must be seen to be doing something, purely perfunctorily!!!
“Pure hand waving, written from the pulpit, facts need not apply.”
I love politicians, as the late great comedian Dave Allen said, he has a soft spot for all of them,…………………….”It’s a bog in southern Ireland!!!”
The best thing about the vast majority of our technically & scientifically pig-ignorant political classes, is that they are full of bovine faecal, every time they open their mouths, or worse, think!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh & please don’t think I am being biased, I’m very open minded where they come from!!! Oh their honesty & decency about their own corruption, self-enriching, self-promoting, self-agrandising slime, after all, it’s only taxpayers money, & as we all know, there’s plenty where that comes from!!!
Dave Allen was great Has he been cancelled yet?
“[…] the late great […]”
I took that to mean that God punched Dave Allen’s ticket, fretslider.
You must get used to the idea of climate blessing as an exercise in labeling. Kiss the foot of the statue and get a prize.
U.S. allocates $14 bln to expand ports, shore up waterways (yahoo.com)
I would have normally ventured that “Prozac may help” but it is no antidote to what’s actually going on.
Is it Boris?
btw: Did anyone do a Weasel Word count on their pronouncement?
Just one little nugget to demonstrate the truly hideous extent of Climate Change here in the UK.
Be seated and hold on to yer ‘ats – we are talking an actually recorded 40% over 5 years here and for one of the very things they wail about….
See what I mean when I say that This Country is A Dump – I really do mean it
edit to PS. Have checked my links and cannae immediately see my 40% figure, its in there somewhere 🙂
I was looking at the UAH Satellite data which I am told is the most accurate way of measuring how much the temperature on Earth has changed. The UK, and most of the world has warmed 0.15 degrees C per decade since Jan. 1979. How noticeable is this warming? Is that a lot and should I be worried? I am new to this whole climate skepticism FYI so please don’t think of me as a dumbass.
It is not noticeable to any human.
And yes, you are supposed to see the apocalypse coming in a temperature change you can never hope to notice, and that isn’t even rising anymore
I live in Salt Lake City, which has also warmed at least 0.15 degrees C since 1979, and we here have not seen any snow since December 31. The last three or four winter seasons have seen considerably less snow than normal (our normal is around 55 inches btw). I always tell myself these facts that the warming is very slow and like you pointed out has stopped but when I see these numbers I get uneasy.
Normal recovery from the devastating LIA.
The problem is that the late 1970’s was the coldest period for this planet in the last 100 years.
This will give you a better perspective on things. It is a regional surface temperature chart of the United States (Hansen 1999).
Hansen 1999 is the chart on the left on the website link.
As you can see, it was “cold” in the decade of the 1910’s, and then the temperatures warmed 2.0C+ from the 1910’s to the 1940’s; then from the 1940’s to about 1980 temperatures cooled by about 2.0C, at which time, the “cold” temperatures in 1979, were the equivalent of the cold temperatures in the 1910’s.
Then, the temperatures began to warm again and from 1980 to 1998, the temperartures climbed again by about 2.0C to the highpoint in 1998, and now the temperatures are 0.5C cooler than 1998, which is tied for the warmest year in the satellite era of temperature measurement.
Here’s the UAH satellite chart from 1979 to the present day:
As you can see, 1998, is statistically tied with 2016 for the warmest year in the satellite era. The measurement error for the satellite is 0.1C.
So what we have is a cycle: The temperatures cool down for a few decades and then they warm up for a few decades and the process repeats itself. The highs and lows of this cycle operature within a narrow band.
Why do I use Hansen 1999? Because it is the least bastardized U.S. chart I can find.
Why do I put “cool” in parenthesis? Because i lived in the cool 1970’s and it was chilly but it wasn’t like the next ice age was descending on us. A little more snow and ice, but nothing that couldn’t be handled and was handled.
Look at the UAH satellite chart.
The current temperatures are cooler now than in 2016 and 1998 by about 0.5C. We are cooling, possibly into another several decades of cooling. Time will tell. But one thing we do know: More CO2 is going into the atmosphere every day, but the global temperatures are cooling. It is short-term cooling admittedly, but should it be cooling at all if the alarmist claims about CO2 are correct?
The alarmists have not made the scientific case. They claim they have, but they provide no evidence for such, they just express confidence levels in their speculations. It’s not science.
I tried to correct that double posting of the UAH chart but the edit function said I was too late.
But the thing is, no matter how dire the consequences of global warming will be, the Net Zero project has absolutely no effect on it or them.
Its one of the real mysteries of our time, why the alarmists, fully persuaded that there is an imminent danger to the UK, keep advocating doing things which not only will have no effect in protecting us from it, but will actually expose us more.
Because they soak up in pointless savings of tiny amounts of emissions money that could be sensibly invested to safeguard the population.
Its as if the crew of the Titanic were to say to passengers use these teacups and start bailing. Lifeboats? Stop being a bunch of deniers, and start bailing!
Because they are morons.
michel, it’s because the establishment and their cronies want to make lots of money out of the projects they want to force us to pay for.
OFF Topic but not really as this goes to the heart of most of what this site talks about daily.
I did a “risk assessment” on my future financial condition. Risk’s identified include:
There’s no way to survive the terrible future that might occur. Might as well just pack it in now.
There’s that “could” and “might” again – so beloved of climate activists and today’s non-journalists!
Climare change committee’s job is to produce scare stories. They have no other reason to exist.
So many people know about these issues, why doesn’t the government? It will do us no good to be right if Boris doesn’t listen
I can believe the drivel being served up on Whatsupwiththat. How IS the flat earth community?
It does not stand the simplest sniff test of there being nothing but catastrophe from a country at average latitude 55N getting a bit warmer.
And the Scottish government with even more to gain from a little bit of much needed warming is even more in thrall to the climate absurdists..
This is where the worst of it comes from, the Met Office:
“Heatwaves, like that of summer 2018, are now 30 times more likely to happen due to climate change.UK winters are projected to become warmer and wetter on average, although cold or dry winters will still occur sometimes. Summers are projected to become hotter and are more likely to be drier, although wetter summers are also possible. By 2050, heatwaves like that seen in 2018 are expected to happen every other year.”
Well the summers have become on average wetter since 1995, and summers like 2018 are dependent on short term indirect solar forcing not the global mean surface temperature. Their precipitation models are backwards as they don’t understand the inverse solar forcing of the AMO, and their major heatwave attribution is also backwards, as the heatwaves are a cause and not a product of climate change.
It is a degree warmer in northern France, yet we have the same crops, apples, cider, cream, milk, beef cheese etc
This report is utter junk and I am staggered the UK government can produce such crap.
But of course, it comes from the Climate Change Committe, that thing run by Lord Deben, who has made a million bucks out of green backhanders.
“Lord Deben’s company, Sancroft, had been “paid more than £600,000 from. ‘green‘ businesses that stand to make millions from his advice to Ministers””
The text has changed since you wrote this, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1047003/climate-change-risk-assessment-2022.pdf