Often I have referred to the situation that the UK, Germany, California and others have set themselves up for as “hitting the green energy wall.” But now that the UK has actually gotten there and has begun to deal with the consequences, I’m not sure that “hitting the wall” is the best analogy. A better analogy might be “driving into the green energy cul-de-sac.” After all, when you hit a wall you can probably just pick yourself up and turn around and be on your way. In the cul-de-sac you are trapped with no evident way of getting out. You might be in there for a long time.
This is where the UK finds itself today. For well more than a decade, they have been aggressively and intentionally pursuing the green energy fantasy. The Net Zero emissions target was made mandatory by legislation in 2019. They have built hundreds of wind turbines and solar panels, while at the same time closing almost all of their coal mines and coal power plants. That has left them largely dependent on natural gas to back up the intermittent renewables. They have plenty of natural gas right under their feet in a large shale formation, but for years they dithered about allowing fracking to produce the gas, and then in 2019 they imposed a blanket moratorium on fracking. With production from their North Sea gas fields declining, they must buy gas on the European market. And although they don’t buy much gas directly from Russia, the European market has been driven to great heights by the cutoff of Russian supplies. Result: average annual residential energy bills in the UK, which were around £1000 as recently as earlier this year, went up to about £3000 this month, and have been projected to go as high as £5000 by this coming April absent some sort of government intervention.
And only now has it become apparent that there is no good exit strategy. That would be true even if everyone in the UK were on board with exiting from the green energy delusion, but of course that is not the case either. For years they have been prohibiting the things they have needed to do to maintain a low-cost energy system, and now they are facing years if not a decade or more to get back to where they were.
Consider some possibilities:
- Perhaps the most obvious first step to get back to energy sanity would be to lift the ban on domestic fracking. Prime-Minister-for-a-month Liz Truss did just that during her brief term in office. Then new Prime Minister Rishi Sunak took office on October 25, and on October 26 — the very next day — he announced that he would reinstate the fracking ban. From Reuters, October 26:Fracking will be banned in England under Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, reversing a decision made by his predecessor Liz Truss, as the new British leader returned to a 2019 Conservative Party manifesto pledge.. . . . In parliament, Sunak was asked about fracking, and said he stood by a 2019 manifesto commitment on the issue. In the best of circumstances, it would take several years after fracking is allowed before full-scale production can be up and running to alleviate the energy crisis. But with a regulatory environment that reverses by 180 degrees every few weeks, who exactly is going to put up millions of pounds to start big fracking projects? Even if they reversed course again and opened up fracking tomorrow, it would at a minimum be multiple years before large scale new production would come on line.
- How about importing more natural gas from the U.S., where prices are much lower due to the fracking revolution that has enabled vastly increased production over the past decade? That is much easier said than done. There are multiple bottlenecks in the system, each of which could take multiple years to resolve. The biggest immediate bottleneck is that all U.S. facilities for cooling and compressing natural gas into LNG for export are already operating at capacity. (From Reuters, March 25, 2022: “All seven U.S. LNG export plants, however, are currently operating at capacity and liquefying about 12.7 bcfd of gas. So, no matter how high global prices rise, the U.S. cannot produce anymore LNG – at the moment.”). Other bottlenecks include shortage of LNG tankers to transport the fuel, insufficient pipeline capacity from the Permian basin gas fields to the export facilities on the Gulf coast, and insufficient LNG import capacity on the European side. The existence of all of these bottlenecks preventing U.S. exports to Europe is precisely the reason that natural gas prices are so much higher in Europe than the U.S. We’re talking years to alleviate all of these bottlenecks.
- What about the coal option? As recently as 2012, the UK got close to 20% of its energy (not just electricity) from coal; but by 2020, as part of the forced green energy transition, coal produced only about 2% of the UK’s electricity (and almost none of its energy for other purposes). The recent plan was to close the last coal plants by 2024, although in the current crisis the talk is that the last plants will be kept open for a little while longer. (From Reuters, May 30, 2022: “Some of the British coal-fired power plants slated for closure this year might need to stay open to ensure electricity supply this winter, the government said on Monday.” ). But there is no real possibility of going back and reopening the many plants that got closed in the last decade. In many cases they were blown up. Here is a picture of the Longannet plant in Fife, Scotland, getting blown to smithereens just last year in 2021:
Here’s the comment of the CEO of Scottish Power, Keith Anderson, quoted in the Express: “In 2016 we made the decision to close Longannet after over 40 years of generation. This step marked our commitment, and that of our parent company Iberdrola, to decarbonise the economy. This commitment has been strengthened time and again over the past five years – two years after Longannet’s closure we closed our remaining coal plants and sold our gas business, making us the first integrated energy company in the UK to generate 100% green electricity.” Such virtue Keith! The Express (February 2021) adds: “Longannet, which closed in 2016, was Scotland’s largest coal-fired power station and had been generating power since 1970. The station was capable of producing enough electricity to power two million homes each year.”
- Nuclear? Given the regulatory morass and activist opposition, we’ll probably all be long dead before it can make a significant contribution.. The UK supposedly has two nuclear plants in the works, Hinckley Point C and Sizewell C. The Hinckley Point plant started construction in 2016, and is currently supposed to be finished in 2027, after lengthy delays and massive cost overruns. Sizewell C just got its green light from the UK government in July 2022, so don’t expect that one to produce any electricity before some time in the mid-2030s. According to the AP at that link, activists continue to seek to block Sizewell through litigation.
- Yet more wind and solar? Don’t be ridiculous. As discussed many times here, it doesn’t matter how much in the way of wind and solar facilities you build, you will still have long periods of blackout absent full backup from some dispatchable source. In the UK, all the dispatchable sources are at the minimum many years away, if not completely blocked.
Here’s one more idea: hand out hundreds of billions of pounds of subsidies to utilities to bring the costs to households down below the £5000 annually otherwise projected. This will assure that the private sector has no incentive at all to work to alleviate the crisis, and that the crisis persists essentially forever, as public debt explodes. Of course, this is the “solution” they are actually putting into place.
So they are in a cul-de-sac. And on top of everything else they can’t even muster a solid political majority for trying to get out. A substantial bloc of what they call the “Green Tories” continues to advocate for doubling down on the green fantasies. From the Evening Standard, October 29:
Green Tory MP Nadine Dorries condemns Rishi Sunak for not attending COP27 summit. . . . Ms Dorries said on Twitter it was wrong for Mr Sunak not to attend because global warming was one of the “biggest crises facing our planet”. . . . “Global warming is the biggest crisis facing our planet and net zero creates many 1,000s of jobs, which is good for the economy. COP in Glasgow was most successful ever … but don’t expect media to report that.”
For the full article click here.
Parliament isn’t going to change tack
In Europe there is no real debate on anything relevant. It’s like 50 shades of Democrat policies supported by a multitude of “parties” which don’t do politics.
Parliament, once the public appraise themselves of the facts, will have to change tack or declare martial law.
Perhaps that is the intention. To freeze starve and bully the population into submission.
Rishi Sunak’s appointment by the City ,and the EU and US elitists, without a single vote being cast for him by anyone, would make Putin proud. And the EU blush.
The problem is at root simple. The UK and to a large extent Europe, no longer really make anything. All the wealth is created in China, India, Pakistan, Russia or by a very few people as in farming and the very little mineral exploitation we have left. Cash – but not wealth – is generated by a few people in the city who really are parasitic to the wealth creation process. They are its money lenders, not its builders. Likewise the service industries that do export world wide – think ARM microprocessors, in every mobile phone there is – are a distinctly small sector.
In short the vast majority of Europeans work in parasitic or at best symbiotic roles, in the public sector. Or they are on the dole. They have zero economic leverage. And without economic leverage, they have no political power, and without political power, they can be safely ignored by the establishment.
Putin has come up with a cunning plan, Instead of feeding them, send them to get killed. He doesn’t need them to pump oil and gas. They are simply a burden on the Oligarchs’ wealth. Snatch the oil and gas in the Donbas, and kill most of your less skilled population. Win-Win! What’s not to like?
It’s not just the UK, though, still less just Europe. Its not even the West. China, the Birmingham (“we make everything from a pin to a locomotive”) of the 21st century is itself in dire economic straits.
A class of people have been allowed – because no one knew how to stop them – to take control of a world that they dont actually understand anyway, let alone its economy.
The problem is that they are manifestly elitist, self serving , ruthless and totally incompetent at anything except remaining in power in a world they simply do not know how to manage.
It can’t last and it wont last. It is in mathematical terms, unstable. With the education level of the population (deliberately) declining to the pint where they are more or less illiterate, innumerate and unable even to speak the language correctly, bombarded with utter poppycock in the media, and induced to spend money on things they really don’t want and certainly don’t need, in order to bind everyone into a state of debt that gives the money lenders absolute control over them…
…but the money lenders, who have all the power, have no competence in anything else. They cant create a viable electricity grid, replace failing fossil resources, build or program a computer, or even change the oil in their cars.
This is the perfect scenario for Joseph Tainter’s ‘collapse of a complex civilisation’. The point of inflexion, the tipping point, where the mechanisms that keep a civilisation alive and functional have become simply too complex for the people who comprise it to manage:
Renewable energy is so like the Roman system of giving someone in Gaul a farm, on the basis that it would supply 20% of its crop to Rome. Unfirtunately, the cost in terms of horse fodder to get that 20% TO Rome, exceeded the sum total of the harvest. A farm in Gaul, was a liability, not a profit centre.
So Rome starved, and in Gaul, some rabid Celt said ‘hey, give me 10% and I’ll get Rome off your back’
It has to collapse. It is in modern parlance, unsustainable. The question is how far it has to collapse before the power of the moneylenders is broken, and all their debts are reneged on by a populations who simply cannot afford to pay them, and their power to send in police or miltary to enforce their Law, is broken, because they have no money to pay them with, and people just manage things as best they can, themselves.
Reality is, as Reality does, no matter what people believe. If Britain – and maybe the rest of the world too – is to survive as a technologically advanced culture, a strong dose of Reality as an antidote to the bullshit narratives created by the money lenders to justify everything they want to do, even when they know they don’t really know what they are doing…
…is going to be necessary.
In short the question is, not to disagree with this post, but to examine the consequences of it.
Just how bad does it have to get before people simply take matters into their own hands?
In Iran, they are fed up with religious minorites telling them what to do. In Russia mysterious ‘accidents’ are hampering the war effort. In london people are dragging climate protesters off the streets and ripping their placards to bits. A so called ‘far right’ pensioner petrol bombed an ‘immigrant centre’ before committing suicide. If he had known how to make a suicide vest, he would have used that, I am sure.
There is a policy that will save the nation, and that is put it on a war footing, drive a cart and horses through all the legislation especially EU legislation, that prevents a nuclear power station being put up in less than 10 years and get that down to two years. Remove all bans on fracking and strip all renewables of subsidies. Our Prime Minister tried it and was promptly removed from office.
The question is, how bad must it get before that is the only answer, and even then will the countries legally constituted government be allowed to carry out the necessary steps by the world economic community?
President Biden indicated that he would treat the UK like Venezuela, if any people centric government challenged the money lenders.
The quandary is we need the money lenders. But the price being charged cannot be paid.
They got a taste of their powers during the lockdowns. Heady stuff.
If history tells us anything, it tells us that Parliament will not give a smegging inch without a serious fight and they control the means of violence – the Suffragettes discovered this to be true.
“Or even change the oil in their cars”
They won’t need to do that once the “Transition” to EV’s has been completed.
but anyone who knows electrics knows they will need to change capacitors batteries circuit boards etc
an industrial control system / electric motor (3000 starts) only lasts typically 10 years then they will be FD
At least with an ICE car you can make it last for 100 years – model Tees still on the road
You need mines for resources, electricians etc etc etc
So the skilled person changes but they are now much more skilled
Scary summary of our current quandary, and I suspect it is also spot on.
I was going to comment on just how did Britain get itself into the situation where just one person turns things like fracking on and off like a light switch when the results affect so many, but you sure nailed the problem with that post. A well presented analysis.
It was in the 2019 Tory party election manifesto and they won that election.
While it makes sense to remove the ban, its was Truss who overode her partys policy ( but ran out of time to really do anything apart from ‘announcement’)
I dont know what actual changes were needed for fracking to begin , but it would have either been a law change or a change in government regulations allowed by laws which are done by the Cabinet in the name of the King …its sort of like US does Presidential executive orders
What has to change is confidence of investors that any fracking they are allowed to do they will continue to be allowed to do so as to make back the investment. Think how silly you would feel now if you had, on the basis of Ms.Truss’s announcement, plunked your life savings into a fracking play.
The government is playing that game in Canada. While they haven’t got the guts (or are not nuts enough) to actually enforce their emissions cap on the oil and gas sector, they are letting it be known that anyone who invests in a new play will likely find their investment a stranded asset as the regulatory environment becomes more hostile.
Rishi Sunak has reneged on everty single part of that manifesto
Except the fracking ban.
One of the key differences and problems is how we now communicate. Its instantenous nature has allowed the reigns of power to be centralised, bureaurocratised, popularised and allowed to float in its own echo chamber.
The way out is for the country to be subdivided to the point where an individual can make a difference and can make a change. Waiting for a once in a generation politician/statesman like Margaret Thatcher to pop up is not an option.
once the public appraise themselves of the facts
That’s making a rather large assumption. Maybe the pain will finally become severe enough but I remain skeptical.
People need to stop with this. Sunak was elected in the same way every previous Prime Minister since Walpole, in around 1720, has been elected, that is, by his constituents. They are the only ones who can vote for him, and they vote for him as their local MP.
He was then selected by his party to become its leader. Like every other modern Prime Minister from either Labour or Conservatives. The method of selection has varied over time and from party to party, but one way or another someone is selected as Party Leader.
He was then invited by the Crown to form a government. Again, like every other Prime Minister since Walpole. This is just how politics works in the UK, and has for 300 years. There is nothing special about the way Sunak came to office. Its the way all UK Prime Ministers come to office and have for 300 years.
No, he was not appointed by the City and the EU and the US Elitists. He was chosen by his party to be leader because he was judged to be a safe pair of hands who would remedy the catastrophic mistakes of judgment made by Truss and Kwarteng.
Please, please, stop posting nonsense about the UK political system and Constitution!
Michel, what you say may be the truth, but it isn’t the whole truth. Truss was selected as leader, ultimately, by a ballot of members of her party. Sunak was “elected” in a rigged way that entirely bypassed the party members. Neither was democratic, but Sunak has even less right to be prime minister than Truss had.
You can say it was rigged, but the other candidates probably assessed the job was a truly poisoned chalice, as they dropped out.
The last Tory leader elected by the membership was . Boris , but it almost never happened before that as the only process was selection by the partys MPs, and even before that it was selection by the senior MPs who chose from amoung their own ranks. And up till the late 50s or early 60s , its was the Monarch who chose from a few possibles but only when there was a leadership change like the recent situation . The Labour has always selected its leader to be PM and no choosing by the Monarch
This is not quite right. The Monarch hasn’t made any real choices for a very long time, at least a century. The process is nominally that this is what happens, but the emergence of strong parties has meant that the only candidate for PM is the leader of the largest party in the Commons.
The appointment of Labour PMs has followed the exact same pattern as Conservative ones. In both cases the Monarch invites the party leader.
Labour has never ‘selected their leader to be PM’. Its impossible under the Constitution. They have had a variety of different ways of choosing a leader, as have the Conservatives, but this is irrelevant. What counts is that the candidate is the leader, not how he or she came to that post.
The reason is, being the Party leader is the only way they can command a majority in the Commons, and they need that to be able to govern.
Neil, you say:
Sunak has even less right to be prime minister than Truss had
The problem is, Sunak and Truss had exactly the same right to be PM, and that is the same right that all other PMs in the UK have had for the last 300 years. Yes, that is correct: Sunak has the same right to be PM as Gladstone, Pitt, Churchill, Attlee, Wilson… etc.
Why is this so difficult for people to see? Let me repeat it again.
The British do not vote for a PM and never have. Never! They only vote for a local MP.
All Prime Ministers, including Truss and Sunak have come to office in the same way for the last 300 years.
They always in modern times, (in the past they could be Peers) get elected as a local MP. They then become leaders of the party which has a majority of MPs in the Commons. They are then invited by the Monarch to form a government.
How they become leaders of the party has nothing to do with this. It has happened in a variety of ways over the years, but it makes no difference. Both the Labour and the Conservative leadership have changed their methods of appointing a leader over the years. Its completely irrelevant. The leader who becomes PM does not get his or her legitimacy from how they became leader of their party.
Truss and Sunak were both properly appointed under the Constitution and had the exact same right to be PM as had Johnson, May, Cameron, Brown, Blair, Major, Thatcher, Heath, Wilson, Callaghan…. etc etc. Every Prime Minister going back to Walpole in the 1720s has come to office in the same way.
I understand that people may wish to replace the Conservative Government by a Labour one, and the only way to do this is to have an election, and so they want an election. And so they invent stories to the effect that there is something unusual or illegitimate (or even unlawful in one deranged post!) about the appointment of either Truss or Sunak.
It is just making stuff up. Its completely wrong.
I also understand people may wish the UK had a presidential system, in which the British DID vote directly for their Prime Minister. But the fact is, they don’t, never have had, and people need to stop talking as if they do.
Sorry Neil, you are mistaken, Sunak was not elected “in a rigged way”, he was elected unopposed because no other candidate achieved the required number of (100) MP’s to back them, or withdrew their candidacy. Sunak easily received the backing of a substantial number of MP’s and had already been voted a close runner up to Liz Truss in the previous leadership election. The UK (hyped up by the other parties and the left wing media) would not have put up with a further delay in electing a leader, it would have forced a General Election, and with the Conservatives in disarray, Sir Kneel-A-Lot, from the party of identity and offence politics (Labour) who can’t say what a woman is would have been Prime Minister.
posting nonsense about the UK political system and Constitution!
As if we even have a Constitution!
We could let you have ours. We aren’t using it anymore.
Of course there is a British Constitution!
Its just that it is largely an unwritten one as a Constitution. It is similar to Common Law, its a mixture of statutes, decisions and precedents. The Bill of Rights of 1689 is one of the most important components, but not the only one.
As an example, when Johnson tried to prorogue Parliament, and was overruled by the courts, the argument turned on constitutional questions – the proper limits of the Prerogative, the extent to which judicial review of such exercises of it was legally possible.
Brilliant summary/explanation. The stoicism and stiff upper lip mentality of the Brits just adds to the problem and they will just muddle on. ( whilst wrapped up in clothes and blankets proclaiming that the weather is OK ) I know because I left the place 40 years ago.
Very apt analysis. Sadly, it appears the UK is opting for a very long, cold winter, i.e., reality. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could corral the globalists & greens and let them live in their fantasy world without dragging the rest of us along with them.
the sad thing is people with pay with their lives
I would not be surprised to see deaths from cold exceed 100,000 in UK and Europe this year
but the climate zealots get excited that a few died from heat related (dehydration -not drinking enough water) this summer
Sorry, but what absolute tosh.
… condemnant quod non intellegunt.
You believe in an arbitrarily defined statistical abstraction to give your life meaning and then have the gall to call Leo’s comment tosh? The shallowness of your thinking is astounding.
Yes it would seem that some people known all about ‘tosh’ . .
“Rishi Sunak’s appointment by the City ,and the EU and US elitists, without a single vote being cast for him by anyone, would make Putin proud. And the EU blush.”
Michel explains above why this is wrong.
“The UK and to a large extent Europe, no longer really make anything.”
UK manufacturing accounts for 45% of total exports.
The EU is the world’s biggest exporter of manufactured goods.
We obviously manufacture less than we used to, but let’s not lose all perspective.
“In short the vast majority of Europeans work in parasitic or at best symbiotic roles, in the public sector. Or they are on the dole. “
Vast majority? EU government jobs range from 10 to 30% depending on the country, the average is about 17%. EU unemployment rate is 6%.
I won’t go on, but what’s shallow about getting the facts?
I received a WhatsApp note from my brother-in-law, who lives in Devon, extolling the great idea of the UK rejoining the EU because everything is going so much better inside the EU than in Brexit UK. I wonder where he is getting his data from.
The Guardian, or his children which is worse.
Spot on Leo.
We are heading for torches and pitchforks, I fear. Maybe then my MP will listen?
Or read the Riot Act and impose martial law?
Sounds like a cunning plan…
Oh that will happen. Lockdown may or may not have been intended as a test…
Mine is heading off for “I’m a celebrity – get me out of here”. I hope no one does.
The first grid wide blackout will be the turning point. Loss of power supply in any modern economy is inevitably a disaster of massive proportions. Only those with their own power generators get by. And there will be a lot of government departments without back-up generators.
Has Charlie got a back-up generator in the palace?
the sad thing is if there is a UK wide grid failure it may never get restarted as you dont have a large enough rotating mass to overcome the grid – solar panels and wind turbines wont cut the mustard
No. There is provision for a cold start for the Grid which relies on the pumped storage at Dinorwic. Let’s hope the Grid managers resist the political pressure to run down its capacity to stagger through a cold spell with little wind and solar.
Glad to hear – probably will be tested in 2023
May be. In fact what is far more likely is that a policy of phased blackouts and load shedding will be implemented.
Oh, black start is perfectly able to be achieved. Dinorwig or Scottish hydro to start, and gas later. You dont start the whole grid. You do it in stages.
Once its stable you can add the intermittents and the interconnectors
Leo, you should produce a version of this article for TCW.
Re nuclear: the European Pressurised Reactor design chosen for Hinkley and Sizewell is faulty. One of the first, built in China, has begun to leak and there is talk of a pressure vessel redesign for Sizewell C to address this flaw, so we will are buying yet another prototype from the French – expect further delays.
The UK has a naive and technologically illiterate ruling class. This is the inevitable result.
What is TCW Julian?
Agree the EPR is pants. But EDF were the only consortium prepared to take the financial risk in the regulatory and economic context insisted on by the government. All other contenders washed their hands of it.
Actually, it’s the whole world. The people in power are manipulators of narratives and of money. They cant DO anything.
Time for another Cromwell moment?
Quo vadis? Ad rem publicam
The people will have to change Parliament’s tack.
In France the greens are lobbying for a moratorium on … storing water for agriculture.
Blanket? I assert there is no such thing as a really non blanket moratorium.
A moratorium is to last forever.
What is the progress of the GMO farming debate in Europe? In France? After a moratorium on GMO until things clear up, we stopped debating.
No PM can fight all the fights at once, and a nation cold and hungry is a nation that will demand corrective action eventually. I don’t admire Sunak but I see the sense of waiting for that day. Of course it will be too late to save our industry but we already piddled that away years ago and there’s no getting it back, so why waste our little remaining treasure trying?
The UK got what it voted for and I have no sympathy for us. The rest of you, look and learn.
PS: I am always baffled to see politicians telling us green jobs are so unproductive we will have tens (or hundreds) of thousands of them. The economics of that are chilling. They can’t be well paid jobs.
As economic univ prof and univ president Sandrine Rousseau says, we need a shock of unproductivity.
Also, she isn’t joking. She wants less productivity and less days of work per week. That made her “qualified” to teach eco.
No, the UK did NOT get what it voted for – it got virtually the complete opposite. What we get is what the MPs vote for (as controlled, of course, by the WEF etc): a totally different proposition.
Your comment reminds of the supposed informed consent of those receiving the jabs.
A vanishingly small proportion of the electorate voted for parties other than the Tories, Labour, the Lib-Dems, or the SNP. And all those parties ran on manifestos incorporating some variant of Net Zero. You may have voted for something else and I wish I could have done, but as a nation we did vote for it.
Given a choice of disasterous, anti-democratic, extremely bad, and pretty bad, voting for pretty bad is primarily a vote against the others! The fact that pretty bad included much of the same tripe as the others does not mean that tripe is the choice of the electorate.
My apologies. I goofed.
I read “A vanishingly small proportion of the electorate voted for parties other than the Tories” and somehow misunderstood everything else in that very same sentence.
Guess I shouldn’t comment while mainly focussing on work.
Er, you realise that the Tories did not get over 50% of the votes at the last General Election.
Conservative 43.6% of the vote
Labour 32.1% of the vote
Lib Dems 11.5% of the vote
And then the SNP, Northern Irish parties, Brexit, Greens and other minor parties made up the 100%.
It was the Conservatives best result for a long time. But they did not make up a majority. The two main opposition parties combined got the same share of the vote as the Conservatives.
We don’t have proportional representation (thankfully), we have first past the post hence the Tories had an 80 seat majority. What is broken is the party system where there is a cigarette paper difference between the 3 main parties and the Greens. I have had no-one I could vote for in 30 years. They all believe in this insanity.
Eh? Where did he say they did? The issue at hand is eco-lunacy. He pointed out that the Tories, Labour, the Lib-Dems, and the SNP all ran on manifestos incorporating some variant of Net Zero. The three parties you list add up to over 87% of votes, hence he can say that the UK got what it voted for. The only difference that a different outcome (in terms of who ended up in government) would have made is that Labour, the Lib-Dumbs and SNP are even more fanatical about eco-lunacy than the psuedo-Tories.
Quelgeek, you’ve been suckered. You “wish” you could have voted for a party that didn’t want nett zero, yet you still voted to give one of those parties a mandate to act against your interests?
Myself, I haven’t voted in a general election since 1987. I don’t feel part of any political “nation.” And I consider anyone that votes for any of the mainstream parties to be, at best, stupid.
Which is the intention all along.
Free poor peoples money for all rich elites.
Welcome to Hell UK style.
In The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression, Amity Shlaes wrote that beyond increased regulation itself the uncertainty caused by rapid regulatory changes were a major factor in prolonging the Great Depression
Mark Carney and his “stranded assets”. Central bankers don’t open their mouth except to give guidance. That was unambiguous. Thanks Mark.
Turns out it appears that Carney is shilling for nuclear power. What better way to hugely and prematurely increase the value of his Brookfield holdings of Westinghouse nuclear than to put coal and gas on the blacklist with his previous investment banking buddies ?
Nothing will change in the UK because the 2 main parties the Conservatives and Labour are as one when it comes to Net Zero and the virtue they believe that generates for them. The only thing that could change things would be a 6 week blocking high pressure causing blackouts and many deaths from the cold this coming winter. Back in the 60’s when we didn’t have central heating the average age of death was 70 years and old folk were prepared for freezing domestic temperatures . Now it’s 82 years and so we have many millions more living but significantly more infirm because of their much greater age. At least we’re 0.6 deg C warmer. It’s a disgrace and gross failure to put real protection in place for the real vulnerable. Oh, where have I heard that before?
Not quite the same – the ignorant Ed Milliband (Labour) wants a much faster transition to “cheap” renewables to “solve” the energy crisis. Yes, it would be cheaper, because they couldn’t charge you for failing to supply power – or could they? You can bet that all the politicians would say is that they needed more failed intermittents not supplying power to back up the other intermittents when they fail to supply power.
With the price of fuel (taxation), even the third-world patch-up of portable generators becomes unaffordable. Historically, the UK grid was deliberately diverse in order to improve reliability. The increasing penetration of intermittent non-dispatchable generators is costing us a fortune, and is set to get worse. It astounds me that politicians can be so technically and scientifically illiterate.
You seem to assume that they have our best interests in mind but are just lacking in foresight. I’m getting to the stage where I believe their behaviour is more malevolent.
It goes beyond energy now to include public choice on saving retirement systems and the nhs. The cul de sac is multi dimensional.
Ads surrounded on its sides by very tall, very heavy walls that are crumbling and shortly to crush us all.
This piece is a good thumbnail sketch of what is going on in the UK energy/political scene.
On top of these devastating energy decisions the politicians have already taken to destroy reliable energy supply here in the UK, we have additional impositions coming through.
Speed limits are being imposed in towns and cities of 20 MPH (32 KPH) everywhere. Our national speed limits are already being brought down to 50 MPH but then chopped down by additional limits of 40 30 and 20 MPH along the way. The ability to travel in the UK is becoming next to impossible. A recent story of a resident in London taking his ill mother to hospital 10 miles away was a 2 hr journey there and 2 hrs back!
ICE vehicles will be banned from the roads early 2030.
Wood burning stoves will be banned this decade unless you are DRAX of course.
Rewilding of our prime food growing UK lands will ensure total reliance on importing food.
The open borders officially established since the 2018 UN protocol on assisted migration signed into law by a Tory PM Theresa May, ensures more and more people arrive unchallenged all demanding state funding support of course.
The ongoing ban on any domestic fossil fuel extraction will result in a destroyed economy long before 2030, so maybe the penned in conditions for post that date are of little interest.
Nearly all true – though I would point out that it is SALES of ICE vehicles that is to be banned in 2030 and NOT their presence on roads. Cuba for the plebs thus beckons as existing ICE vehicles are coaxed into health for many years.
Sorry Ian, I missed of the ‘s’ from 2030. When I said ICE vehicles will be banned in early 2030s I was being optimistic.
Though sales of new ICE powered cars will be banned by 2030 as you point out. The date for ceasing their use on the roads has yet to be confirmed. 2032 to 2035 is being advanced by advisors to policy makers.
I doubt we will still have a functioning government by 2030, so it is all a bit moot.
The government has other means than an outright ban. The reducing number of ICE vehicles on the roads will result in less availability of fuel, and increased prices. Taxation will punish those trying to maintain their fuel-efficient cars on the road, and increased MOT fees will further penalise ICE vehicles. Costs will increase as mileage decreases, and only the rich will be able to afford the luxury of private transport. The situation with solid fuel stoves is similar. Regulations now mean that wood has to be kiln dried to be sold as firewood in England – pushing up the price. House coal has been banned from sale in England, but manufactured “smokeless” briquettes are permitted – increasing the cost. Pushing up the cost will reduce the availability, and eventually an expensive licence will be required for the few remaining users. Only the rich will be able to access what we currently take for granted.
Different sources have varying figures but let’s say there are 477,000 EVs and 790,000 PHEVs in the UK at the moment.
That means there are over 30m ICEVs on the road. There is no way that all those vehicles will be electric by 2032 or 2035. Millions of ICEVs are still going to be in use by those dates. Government of any stripe is not going to want to pi$$ off that many people.
Plus the zealots don’t really like PHEVs either.
As I say, if the present energy policies are carried forward there won’t be a working government in 2030, because we won’t have a working economy. With that in mind whether we are wanting to continue to drive or not will be out of our hands. Only the very rich or connected individuals will have any options worth thinking about.
the indecent haste to blow up coal power plants(same as in Sth Aus, decomm in Victoria) was pretty weirdly rushed..but they were determined to stop the possible reopening
well now we are all wearing the costs of their fanaticism, and theyre STILL deludedly trashing us all and demanding more useless solar n wind.
gods help us all
I suddenly realised just how bad things were in the UK when I saw that Mini was moving its plant from Oxford to China. China is facing huge problems: the zero covid policy means that supply chains in the country are sketchy, at best, and the demographic situation means that labour will rapidly become more expensive. And yet it is still better to invest huge sums of money to move production from the UK to China. Once production in the UK is gone, will it ever come back?
Why would it? There’s Vietnam, Turkey, Croatia, Colombia—thare are all sorts of places that aren’t China. What’s the irresistible attraction to manufacturing in the UK or the EU?
China’s Belt and Road – Who controls most of the rare earth metals etc….
China’s share of critical resource minerals (CRMs)
Heavy Rare Earths (HREEs) 95%
Light Rare Earths (LREEs) 95%
Natural Graphite 69%
Lots of coal?
As they say in Lidl: When its gone, its gone.
£3000 energy bills are a fantasy. 2 of us live in a 3 bedroom house. Our current gas and electricity prices my annual bill is £1600. Our neighbours with 3 in a house exactly the same pay £1750
This is but hike #1 and support will end sooner than Truss planned. It works out at ~£400 per household.
Then we’re on our own.
My energy bills are around £1200 for electricity and about £2500 for oil.
Round and round it goes, where it stops, no one knows. The powers that be, and wanna be, are underestimating the majority of the population. And their willingness to push back against the green wokies. Note the recent events of folks moving the ER movement outta the streets. Look for more of that, intensifying to the point where some of the snowflakes become speed bumps. Sad, but true, they will be sacrificed on the altar of the climate cult to make no point whatsoever.
There is no climate crisis, never was and doubt there ever will be. The planet does not need saving, and will be just fine in the future. With or without its human inhabitants.
It’s a green energy cult-de-sac
All of this everywhere (UK, Germany, U.S., etc.) is at least partially rooted in the belief that there is a climate emergency of our own making because of human GHG emissions. There does not appear to be anyone in a top position of power anywhere in the Western developed world who realizes the scientific problems with that belief and is ready to take on the climate alarmist narrative.
If any of them do know about the issues with the alarmist narrative, they are not talking. It’s like being between a rock and a hard place. They are damned if they do, and they are damned if they don’t. If there is someone in the wings coming up the political ladder who is willing to take on the scientific credibility of the alarmist narrative, I do not know who it is. Whether Trump gets the nomination for president here in the U.S. in 2024 remains to be seen. He did not take on the climate alarmist narrative the first time when the opportunity was there.
Civilizations throughout human history have risen and then fallen for a number of reasons. War with your neighbor was certainly one of them. A persistent drought might have contributed to the downfall of the Mayas. If the belief in the climate alarmist narrative brings down Western Civilization sometime in the future because of energy issues, we will have no one to blame but our own ignorance for it. The cause of it will be seen in the nearest mirror.
Trump did try to take on the climate alarmist narrative. While Trump is a great self promoter he is not a great communicator. Trump is not a details guy. He doesn’t do nuance, either. And anything Trump said was drowned out by the fascists trying to stop him from being heard.
I’m sorry Jeffery, but I do not recall Trump making much of an effort to push back against the CAGW narrative while he was in office. If he did at all, it was largely inadequate. There is and has been considerable science with which to push back against it, and I do not recall him making much use of it, if any.
Perhaps it is indeed because he is not a details guy as you say. I believe I have heard it said that he has little interest or faith in science to begin with.
What did Trump say when he pulled out of the Paris agreement? What did Trump say during his campaign(s)? I recall conflicts with his first SOS, Rex Tillerman, over climate change issues.
I remember what Trump said when he pulled us out of the Paris Accord. He was critical of the climate models to justify it, and he was probably right. I don’t recall the circumstances that led to Tillerman quitting as SOS nor do I remember Trump talking about climate change much during the 2016 election cycle.
My point here is that he did not do anywhere near enough to put a serious dent in the credibility of the CAGW narrative. It’s still going as strong as ever, and George Daddis’ explanation below probably tells us why.
Don’t get me wrong here. Trump did a lot of good with domestic energy production and securing our southern border, to name a few. I just wish he had done a lot more to discredit CAGW and bring an end to this green energy and climate fear mongering silliness.
I believe DJT is human, and wanted to keep peace in his family.
Not going all the way to crush the “Climate” nonsense was appeasement to his daughter.
Lesson for next time; don’t allow family, including son in-law, in your circle of advisors.
That would certainly explain it George. It is unfortunate if true.
I think the real reason is that there is no political support, on either Left or Right, much less Rino, for a frontal assault on the Cult of AGW. Trump decided to take on issues where he had a chance of making a difference, such as pulling US out of the Paris Accord, rather than outright fighting the cult, where no one would have had his back.
It is much worse in the UK than Francis Menton describes. The UK has gone down a number of cul-de-sacs. One of these is education. Not only do students seem to be incapable of clear and cogent reasoning but seem to be lacking an understanding of the basics of Chemistry, Physics, Geography, Mathematics and more when it comes to discussing the issue of climate change. Watch Julia Hartley-Brewer interview various UK young adults on climate matters and weep.
Time was when an educated numerate and literate workforce was to the advantage of the powers that be. Now all they want is docile consumers who will ‘own nothing, and be happy’
Will nobody in power accept that there is no scientific evidence that carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels affects the climate at all significantly? manmade CO2 consists of 0.04% of greenhouse gases, clouds and water vapour 90%. The climate has always changed due to the sun and nature. Man cannot change this. The power elites net zero policy is impoverishing people needlessly. They must be stopped and fossil fuels be used until there is a real alternative. There is no crisis and no hurry.
Correct, no on in power wants to risk lifetime canceling by openly taking on the Cult of AGW.
Oh they all DO accept it.
Don’t listen to their words, look at their actions.
Have they stopped buying beachfront properties?
Have they stopped using private aircraft to get around?
Have they instigated a crash program to build out all nuclear grids?
Have they stopped importing things using fuel guzzling global transport systems?
Every single ‘initiative’ has resulted in profit for big companies, and less disposable income, and loss of personal freedom, for citizens. And has no impact whatsoever on carbon emissions.
The point is, that the plebs are no longer useful. They will be drained of money, savings, everything – so only those in control have any quality of life at all.
Climate change is just a plausible and emotive narrative. It’s not, and never has been, anything to do with science.
Need really smart electric and gas meters to shut off energy flow to homes of all anti fossil fuels politicians and bureaucracts first when the supplies get tight. Followed by homes of XR, JSO, college professors, and other protestors against dependable energy. Save it for the elderly, schools, and supporters of fossil fuels.
If global warming paused 8 years ago and CO2 has kept on rising incrementally, WHY are ‘all scientists’ and Greenies not shouting from the rooftops telling people of this terrific achievement? They can ‘claim’ they have saved the world from disaster /s. BUT all I hear is silence! Nothing from the media either. What can I conclude from this (?) – Is it, possibly, because too much (worldwide) Moolah is involved?
Why would a Turkey vote for Xmas, even if the failure of the models is simmering away in the IPCC chapters it will have a chance of getting to the summary until a number of the doubters get close to retirement and no longer need the research funds.
How many political movements just fade away when they reach their goals? Instead of saying “mission accomplished,” they invent new problems, even imaginary problems, to justify their continued existence.
This would make no sense if the goal was the end of AGW. But since the various goals go from gaining and keeping political power, all the way to ending Capitalism, actual facts about the climate are irrelevant.
An appropriate title, given that much of our utility providers are now owned by French (and other foreign government backed) companies.
On the nuclear front, there is some hope that the Rolls Royce Small Modular Reactor could gain approval and be in production by the end of the decade. Basically, the sort of technology in nuclear powered submarines where the reactor is built in a factory, and then fuel is installed for an extended duty cycle with only routine maintenance required in between. Not a solution in the current crisis, but there is some possibility of a bright future (with electric lighting) after the storm.
As I see it from Australia the UK has all the ingredients for a civil war to take place.
Parliament has totally failed the people..
I recall a BBC doc-drama called The Guardians where the Military & the Police combined & took over the country.
It could well come to pass.
Possibly. In the UK the approval comes from the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR). They were asked to assess the RR design in April, but it is still today not on the list of reactors undergoing approval.
The couple of paragraphs on that page appear to be the sum total of their effort to date. Assessment of other reactors has taken 5 years, and those were for pretty bog standard 1GWish light water reactors. So it will be late in the 2020s before approval is even granted, even assuming the non-standard aspects of the RR design don’t derail the progress.
Then they have to build one.
Beside keeping its three nuclear plants, Germany is re-opening
Niederaussem E & F, Neurath C (~300 MW each), & Jaenschwalde E & F
(500 MW each). The first two plants are < 10 miles from the Garzweiler
coal field & the last one is near Poland. The additional ~2 GW nameplate
coal & ~4 GW nameplate nuclear is ~10% of Germany’s electrical use.
Unfortunately, the “green energy delusion” is true in Germany, too, as
the nuclear & coal “fixes” are only temporary. I’m hoping the reality
of winter will help jolt all of the NH West out of its delusion!
Forbes- The Iron Law Of Electricity Strikes Again: Germany
Re-Opens Five Lignite-Fired Power Plants
Looking at that Longannet demolition photo, the demolition produced more airborne particulate than that stack would have emitted in a year. So much for environmental protection.
In the UK we have a terrible habit of closing things like coal fired powe statiins. But not only closing but Destroying them as well. Quite often selling the machinery and flattening the building.
I live near the location of four Trent Valley power stations only one remains operational the other three have been demolished.
We’ve done it with textiles in the past.
‘Donkey up the minaret’ is also a good analogy.
Net Zero is not electricity generation. Net Zero is not electricity generation. I’ve seen nothing about decarbonisation of aviation, shipping, motor transport, construction, agriculture, forestry. Fiddling with EVs vs thousands of diesel artics? Wake up you silly middle class arts graduates and do the sums
Read the following quotes from https://climatesense-norpag.blogspot.com/
“The Rules of the Lebensraum game with no CO2 Climate Crisis.
1.The earth has now reached a population level which has generated a battle for Lebensraum, i.e. energy and food resources, in Ukraine. The associated covid pandemic, and global poverty and income disparity increases, threaten the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. During the last major influenza epidemic in 1919 world population was 1.9 billion. It is now 7.8 billion+/ – an approximate four fold increase.
The IPCC and UNFCCC post modern science establishment’s “consensus” is that a modelled future increase in CO2 levels is the main threat to human civilization. This is an egregious error of scientific judgement. A Millennial Solar ” Activity” Peak at 1991 correlates with the Millennial Temperature Peak at 2003/4 with a 12/13 year delay because of the thermal inertia of the oceans. Earth has now entered a general cooling trend which will last for the next 700+/- years.
Because of the areal distribution and variability in the energy density of energy resources and the varying per capita use of energy in different countries, international power relationships have been transformed. The global free trade system and global supply chains have been disrupted.
Additionally, the worlds richest and most easily accessible key mineral deposits were mined first and the lower quality resources which remain in the 21st century are distributed without regard to national boundaries and demand. As population grows inflation inevitably skyrockets. War between states and violent conflicts between tribes and religious groups within states are multiplying.
2 The Millennial Temperature Cycle Peak.
Latest Data (1) https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.0.txt
Global Temp Data 2003/12 Anomaly 0.26 : 2022/9 Anomaly 0.24 Net cooling for 19 years
Tropics Temp Data 2004/01 Anomaly 0.22 : 2022/9 Anomaly 0.03 Net cooling for 19 years.
USA 48 Temp Data 2004/03 Anomaly 1.32 : 2022/9 Anomaly 0.59 Net cooling for 19 years.
There is obviously NO CO2 Caused Climate Crisis…………………………………..
see Figs 1,2,3 in link…………………………
5. CO2 -Temperature and Climate.
The whole COP Net Zero meme is founded on the flawed assumptions and algorithms which produced the IPCC- UNFCCC model forecasts of coming dangerous temperature increases.
The “consensus” IPCC models make the fundamental error of ignoring the long- term decline in solar activity and temperature following the Millennial Solar Activity Turning Point and activity peak which was reached in 1990/91 as shown in Figure 1
The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is .058% by weight. That is one 1,720th of the whole. It is inconceivable thermodynamically that such a tiny tail could wag so big a dog. (13)
Stallinga 2020 (14) concludes: ” The atmosphere is close to thermodynamic equilibrium and based on that we……… find that the alleged greenhouse effect cannot explain the empirical data—orders of magnitude are missing. ……Henry’s Law—outgassing of oceans—easily can explain all observed phenomena.” CO2 levels follow temperature changes. CO2 is the dependent variable and there is no calculable consistent relationship between the two. The uncertainties and wide range of out-comes of model calculations of climate radiative forcing (RF) arise from the improbable basic assumption that anthropogenic CO2 is the major controller of global temperatures.
Miskolczi 2014 (15) in “The greenhouse effect and the Infrared Radiative Structure of the Earth’s Atmosphere “says “The stability and natural fluctuations of the global average surface temperature of the heterogeneous system are ultimately determined by the phase changes of water.”
Also See AleksandrZhitomirskiy2022 Absorption of heat and the greenhouse gas effect. https://independent.academia.edu/AleksandrZhitomirskiy (16) which says:
“The molar heat capacities of the main greenhouse and non-greenhouse gases are of the same order of magnitude. Given the low concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, their contribution to temperature change is below the measurement error. It seems that the role of various gases in the absorption of heat by the atmosphere is determined not by the ability of the gas to absorb infrared radiation, but by its heat capacity and concentration. ”
Zaichun Zhul et al 2016 (17) in Greening of the Earth and its drivers report “a persistent and widespread increase of growing season integrated Leaf Area Index (greening) over 25% to 50% of the global vegetated area from 1982 – 2009. ………. C02 fertilization effects explain 70% of the observed greening trend.”
Policies which limit CO2 emissions or even worse sequester CO2 in a quixotic attempt to greenwash or mitigate these natural cycles would decrease agricultural food production and are antithetical to the goals of feeding the increasing population and bringing people out of poverty.”
Both Germany and the UK are trapped. They needed natgas to back up their overbuilt renewables. NORD1 and 2 are gone, and the US is maxed out on LNG for a few years until more capacity can be built. So it is likely their grids will go dark. That is definitely NOT a good thing in the dead of winter.
The interesting thing will be what it does—if anything—to change their insane energy policies.
Not quite true. The UK is capable of importing all the gas it needs, the quesion is from where?
Currently IIRC its Kuwait, Norway and the USA mostly. Some comes from Belgium and I think Holland, but that isn’t where its drilled.
This is a very penetrating analysis of the UK situation, of where the green mania and the Net Zero manias have led. Its spot on. And unfortunately its right in its conclusions, this really is a cul-de-sac, and there is no visible way out.
One hopes that government and civil service are now waking up to it. The two places that have not and show no signs of doing so are the Guardian and BBC, both of whom seem lost in a dream world where intermittency doesn’t matter and global warming is the greatest threat to the planet since…. and the UK moving to Zero Carbon will somehow fix it, or make a material difference to it.
Having politicians and bankers setting energy policies is a very dangerous trend.
Blowing up closed coal-fired power plants was purposeful as they want to make sure they could NOT be reopened. This is called burning your bridges.
It’s horribly destructive as it is the destruction of wealth right up front. The steam electricity generation part of such a power plant could be hooked up to a modern nuclear reactor and there would also be not change in land footprint as the nuclear reactor would take up my less area.
This is identical to the Obama-era buy back of used cars in the US and then putting diamond dust in the engines to make sure that parts, let alone the car, could never be used again. This not only hurts the used part industry, aimed to decrease our ability to keep our existing cars going, but also was more destruction of wealth.
At the same time the Detroit government decided in the Obama era that empty houses were bad, so they tore them down, which was more wealth destruction and made sure no one could come back and buy the house as the economy improved. This is all about taking apart our culture, society, and economy. Nothing more, nothing less.
Condense it all down and it’s what has overtaken almost everywhere/everything and everybody in the UK and is a culture of ‘Just saying no‘
It affects all aspects of UK life, especially UK people themselves.
The only folks in this country now who are open, affable & friendly, helpful, useful even, are the immigrants. Especially the Poles
Nobody else can be bothered.
Are they frightened of something? Overly cautious. Fearful of doing something criminal, or new, or adventurous or just ‘different’ but wherever you go, ask an English person for almost anything and you will get a look of outright indifference and the one word ‘no’
If you’re lucky. Plenty times you’re simply ignored or left in a queue until you simply get pissed-off and walk.
Similarly, here in the US, the CEO of Ever
StupidSource is now urging Biden to use the Federal Power Act to ensure adequate electricity for the region in the event of an extended cold snap, whining that investments in “renewables” like solar and offshore wind have been made, but power from them are still some years off. The Stupid, it burns. These are the folks in charge. Let’s jump off a cliff and hope we sprout wings. Wheeeeeee!!!!!
If enough people jump off the cliffs eventually we will surely evolve wings 🙂
The craziest thing about this is the continued acceptance of the term “green” energy for what is actually ANTI green energy or FAKE green energy.
Fossil fuel emissions of CO2 are massively greening up the planet and causing a booming biosphere. Nobody has repealed the law of photosynthesis.
It should be enough to just know that we are taking that away by eliminating fossil fuels which means LESS planet greening.
But the worse part is replacing it with a source like wind…………the energy source from environmental hell………..and calling THAT the green energy!
Wind turbines and fake green energy is what’s wrecking the planet.
Death by Greening:
Photosynthesis using the building block for life and beneficial gas, CO2. All animals eat plants or something that ate plants.
Wind turbines KILL birds and bats. Fossil fuels increase food for them.
The planet was close to CO2 starvation before humans rescued life with beneficial CO2, during this current SCIENTIFIC climate optimum.
The fake climate crisis, is entirely manufactured based on science DISinformation.
We were this warm 1,000 years ago during the Medieval WARM period, the last climate optimum. During the Holocene climate OPTIMUM just over 5,000 years ago, it was 2 deg. C warmer than this in the higher latitudes(that always warm the most) with LESS Arctic ice that we have today.
With today’s fake climate crisis, ALL extreme weather events caused by natural variability(most that have occurred numerous times in the past) by the new, political/non scientific definition of climate change……..were caused by the fake climate crisis as a result of the 1 deg. C of beneficial warming(that is saving lives) the past century.
The goal is clear: restoring the Victorian era. The average citizen will have little-to-no access to electricity or private transportation.
Only wealthy and connected people like Sunak will live in modern comfort. The woke police, of course, will be granted privilege as long as they toe the party line.
Charles will perfect his royal wave, and, damnit, the plebes will be grateful for their 30 minutes of electricity per day and the local warming stations.
The goal is clear: restoring the Mediaeval era. The average thrall/serf/vassal will have little-to-no access to anything.
Why? Because of the way society works. In the days when agriculture was wealth, agricultural labourers had value. But the top man was the warrior who could keep them safe from other warriors.
Today the top man is in fact a money lender. He owns everything – on paper. The thrall/serf/vassals are simply superfluous. All they do is consume wealth. Especially energy. They no longer have any part to play in creating it. Nor do they own or control capital.
If all the post industrial towns of the North of england were nuked tomorrow, it would be a huge gain. We have far too many people who don’t do anything, and more importantly, have no power.
We could have built a golden age of production all done by robots, powered by nuclear power, in which everyone had a fantastic education, lived a comfortable luxuriuous life and no one had to work.
But that would mean that certain other sections of society would have become superfluous. And they are very scared of that. They like their power, privilege and influence.
The CoP in Glasgow was the most successful ever????
Until the next one, of course.
Yep prostitutes and restaurants did good trade.
This is all so stupid. Number one no country that outlaws fracking should be allowed to buy or burn fracked gas. Number two the energy mess Britain finds itself in is purely the result of dreadful government actions. We know which government officials are responsible for this mess. They all need to be personally held responsible. As soon as you start doing that all of the so called roadblocks will magically disappear.
“Building green creates jobs” – but high costs of energy drive industries overseas, destroying jobs.
Smashing windows builds jobs – in glazing companies.
Job creation is the biggest socialist myth there is.
We, the people, dont want no stinking JOBS, we want MONEY, WEALTH COMFORT and PLEASURE.
And washilst we might get that with nuclear power, and robots, we never will with windmills and smart meters
I have to laugh at the claim that the Glasgow COP-26 last year was the most successful ever. Didn’t the IEA reveal that coal consumption worldwide has increased this year to 8 billion tons, the highest since 2013? And doesn’t India plan to double its use of the fuel by 2040? And aren’t China’s emissions greater than those of the entire developed world combined? So if this is what is considered a successful COP conference result, I’d hate to see what a failure would look like
NutZero will never be achieved in the developed countries because China does not have enough coal to manufacture all the stuff needed.
Current internal coal reserves are down to 34 years consumption. They would need to massively accelerate coal consumption to make a fraction of the stuff needed to start the journey to NutZero in the developed countries.
They simply cannot replenish reserves fast enough to meet the rising demand for stuff.
Explainations about party’s 2019 manifesto as a reason to ban fracking are retarded. 2019 was a year of abundance of natural gas, but the situation has changed – now we have deficits. As such a new plan is necessary, based on current situation, not something based on radically different past state. A new prime minister should be expected to have a new plan, based on current state and predicted future state of the world, and not rely on ancient history (2019), that is radically different from present.
That may be so , but its difficult for a party to abandon a clear promise I wouldnt call 2019 an abundance as even then they needed LNG tankers were coming from Russia
But there is no real possibility of going back and reopening the many plants that got closed in the last decade.
But there is a problem here. We didn’t put them into mothball status, we put explosives under them in yet another virtue signal of ‘commitment’ to ‘the cause’.
Oh dear …
We are going top vote Reform UK. Eventually we will kick this Marxist crap out of Britain!
The problem is that even Reform would not be able to govern.
The UKs ability to borrow would be forced to junk status, the pund would be crashed deliberately, until a Rishi Sunak equivalent zombie was appointed to do what the money lenders said.
The world is in debt, and whoever owns that debt, unless law and order breaks down, controls the world.
And climate change, and banning all new fossil and nuclear power, is what they want, to protect the value of their investments.
Thank you Francis for all your very good work.
My co-authors and I published almost every important fact on the Climate scam in 2002. I even warned Baroness Verma (British Undersecretary for Energy and Climate Change) in 2013, predicting the exact scenario that is unfolding now – see:
It was obvious even in 2002 that the Climate-and-Green-Energy campaign was a scam and the left’s technological “solutions” would lead to a catastrophic energy shortfall. The only difficult part was our correct prediction of natural solar-driven global cooling by ~2020, which started either in Feb2016 or Feb 2020 – I prefer the latter.
I fear the cold polar vortex will hit Western Europe hard this year – hope to be wrong.
IF the great cull of Europe’s elderly and poor happens this Winter as I predicted, there is criminal culpability on the part of the climate scammers, and prosecutions and imprisonment should result.
I’ve been saying for ~20 years that the Climate Scam has been promoted by “scoundrels and imbeciles” – the scoundrels knew they were lying; the imbeciles believed them.
I just updated my paper at CorrectPredictions.ca – it is now over a year old, and records how we accurately predicted the catastrophic outcomes of both the Climate and Covid scams – the latter I nailed 30+ months ago on 21Mar2020. In both cases I was ignored and the killing machine has been working overtime and there is much more carnage to come.
Tough, suck it up, the vast majority of MPs from all parties support this garbage and the public have voted for it.
Time to test “net zero” to destruction – destruction of a modern, industrial, society that is.
I’d love to know what Nadine Dorries is referring to when she describes COP26 as the “most successful ever”! The energy crisis has exploded since then.