I’m baffled by how you can think we can get to a net zero electricity system by 2030 that won’t involve gas.”
Andrew Neil quizzes Jon Ashworth on the Party’s Green Mission Pledge
Some of the quote tweets are hilarious. My favorite is:
Do Labour’s energy plans stack up? Andrew Neil Quizzes Jonathan Ashworth
Subscribe
Please login to comment
29 Comments
March 13, 2023 11:15 am
Just who actually **is** in charge: Here’s a clue and a glimmer of hope.
Headline:London, 13 March – Net Zero Watch has welcomed the decision by the Bank of England to demote its Net Zero agenda and cut its spending on climate change.
(I only have the mailchimp link – it’ll be at NetZeroWatch.com somewhere)
It seems that since BoE governor and eco-zealot Mark Carney was ‘moved aside’ – things are returning to a modicum of normal..
And I’m within viewing range of a real live TV (scary innit) and BBC is running a story complete with PolarBearPictures and Stressed-Out-Greenpeace-Girl ## telling that Brandon has given the OK to 180,000 barrels per day off of the North Slope
## She had A Full Barrel (refined and processed of course) plastered over her face in the form of make-up. Are you gonna tell her or should I
Link for the above comment
March 13, 2023 11:29 am
No serious political party in the UK can have a believable energy policy.
Two reasons.
A) If they did they would be vilified and then banned from SkyNews, ITN and the BBC.
B) Also, the Green vote is not large enough to win many seats (maybe in three constituencies) but they are spread wide and can tip many seats.
The sound energy vote is non-existent. As anyone smart enough to see renewables cannot work on their own is also smart enough to recognise points A and B and so will ignore the policy statements.
The sensible policy is to neutralise the issue by all agreeing to say you’ll do something stupid and then not doing it.
All the main parties in the UK do this with the possible exception of the Greens who might (just might) mean what they say.
March 13, 2023 12:17 pm
I used to wonder what would happen if most of the college grads were communications majors. I think we are finding out. Just put someone in front of the camera that is naive enough to believe press releases from advocates and continually repeat talking points rather than directly answer critiques. No wonder the liberal media loves Greta T.
March 13, 2023 1:37 pm
Number one get the government out of the energy generation business. They are not qualified.
Number two government should only be involved as a regulator. Not to tell power companies what to build but to see that what they build is made and run in the safest and cleanest manner as is practical.
Number three government should request a list of all power sources possible. The list must include all pros and cons of each source. The list must include things like affordability to the customer, availability of fuel sources, dispatchability, availability 24/7, ability to power up and down, disposal of waste, recyclability, pollution to land and water, life of generators, harm to flora and fauna, ability to connect to grid, compatibility with grid, cost to build, cost to maintain, footprint, reasonableness of regulations and probably lots of other stuff I didn’t think of or am unaware of.
WUWT should build this list and spread it wide and far. All of the concerns should have a priority, affordability and dependability being number one and two. I know little to nothing about all this stuff but I would bet wind and solar would be at or near the bottom of the list.
That’s where we are now.
Our only hope is that we’ll be halfway back to where we were 13 years ago with a Labour government.
Economic failure of austerity has wrecked everything; the NHS, the transport infrastructure, schools and teacher training, the pubs are closing… there’s nothing British of Britain left. Even the rugby is going bankrupt, in Wales.
The long-suffering UK population have done enough, since the early 1970s the CO2 emissions per head have about halved mainly due to ditching coal, assuming the majority believe CO2 emissions are bad.
2020 -2021 UK CO2 emissions dropped by around 8,500 KT which could amount to merely an arithmetic error in China’s CO2 increase of 518,196 KT (Trading Economics).
At the same time the standard of living has fallen to the same level as 2007 the year before the Climate Change Act was passed.
March 13, 2023 2:23 pm
WUWT has an international audience.
Sometimes I think it should have a glossary of what different parties in different countries stand for.
The NAZI Party was “National Socialist German Workers’ Party”.
I doubt if any “socialist” party in any country wants to be identified with them.
“Liberal”, “Conservative” are other words that may mean different things in different countries. (“Labor’s” from the article could easily be taken as “Labor Unions” here in the US or even “… Workers’ Party”.)
Such a glossary would be tough to make. But it would help.
What “Party” pushes what in which country?
March 15, 2023 7:57 am
Interesting as it was also a Labour person who commented that what was in the manifesto didn’t matter as they would just ignore it if they won. Contrast that if you complain to our current Blue Labour government that you didn’t vote to destroy the economy with Nut Job Zero they respond that you did as it was in the manifesto. Of course there are things in their manifesto that they have ignored but then we have had a revolving door of unelected Prime Ministers.
