British Climate Crusade Creates Economic Disaster

By Vijay Jayaraj

Across the Atlantic, a self-inflicted disaster is steadily unfolding. One of the United States’ closest allies, the United Kingdom, has surrendered energy riches and industrial prowess.

This decline is not the result of any shortage of capital, technological capacity or natural resources. Instead, it is the consequence of an ideologically driven climate agenda that has elevated “green” symbolism over engineering reality.

For years, politicians have beaten their chests about the U.K.’s “world-leading” renewable capacity. They paraded statistics showing wind and solar generating most of the electricity, conveniently ignoring that this only happens when the wind blows and the sun shines.

When “green” generation doesn’t perform, British taxpayers pay for natural gas-fired power plants to back up idle facilities and stabilize the grid. They also pay “constraint payments” to switch off wind turbines when it is too windy to operate them.

This is the great deception of the Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) metric the green lobby loves to cite. LCOE excludes the enormous price of grid balancing, backup generation, curtailment payments, transmission expansion and subsidies – all required to prop up the green sham.

In the real world – where bills must be paid – the U.K. has created for itself some of the highest electricity rates on the planet, up to four times more than in the United States. One-third of Scots live in energy poverty. But the real cost never shows up in glossy charts that promote manipulated data representing wind and solar as cheap.

The price caps of Great Britain’s Office of Gas and Electricity Markets now dominate household conversations, which are amplified by each winter’s anxiety over lifestyle choices. Heat or eat has shifted from a slogan to a lived reality. Once a power behind the Industrial Revolution, Britain has shamefully imposed on its citizens energy poverty. Families ration warmth while politicians celebrate decarbonization targets.

One reader told U.K.’s Independent of heating only a single room with a wood-burning stove, mimicking a 19th century living standard 200 years later. Such is the “Green Industrial Revolution” promised by know-nothing managers of energy policy.

And for what? So that the U.K. can reduce its negligible contribution to global emissions of harmless carbon dioxide. Meanwhile, China and India build coal plants to power the manufacturing exported to them by those who have frittered away British industrial might.

Manufacturers have little choice but to leave when a “carbon tax” and heavy-handed regulation on carbon dioxide emissions artificially inflate the cost of energy. Steelmakers are on their knees, facing energy bills that have surged by billions, rendering British steel uncompetitive against foreign rivals free of net-zero dogma.

Nowhere is the insanity more visible than in the North Sea. For decades, offshore oil and natural gas were the crown jewels of the British economy, providing cheap, reliable energy and revenue to fund public services.

Today, this resource is being sacrificed at the altar of climate theology. The Prime Minister’s punitive windfall taxes and refusal to issue new licenses have effectively killed North Sea energy development. Investors have fled. Rigs are decommissioning. Thousands of skilled jobs are evaporating.

Compare this to U.K. neighbor Norway, which continues to extract oil and natural gas from the sea and sell to global customers, including the U.K. While Britain dismantles its energy sovereignty to appease the likes of Extinction Rebellion, Norway enriches its citizens and funds its sovereign wealth fund.

The contrast is humiliating. The U.K. imported over 50% of its natural gas supply in 2024 from Norway.

Apologists for this British collapse point to anything but the truth. They blame Brexit and the Russia-Ukraine war. They blame a “global recession,” pretending that the U.K.’s de-industrialization isn’t an outlier. But the fundamental reason for the collapse is the “green” agenda espoused by the political establishment for 20 years.

It has been a bipartisan failure. Tories chased the “green vote” by banning fracking and demonizing diesel. The Labour party doubled down with net-zero mandates that defy the laws of physics and economics. They built a grid fragile to the weather and expensive to the user.

A crusade to avoid an imaginary climate catastrophe of the future has created a very real economic disaster in the present.

Originally published in Real Clear Markets on January 21, 2026.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India. He served as a research associate with the Changing Oceans Research Unit at University of British Columbia, Canada.

5 12 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Subscribe
Notify of
53 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Neil Pryke
January 22, 2026 10:07 pm

The UK is stuck in 1984

Nick Stokes
January 22, 2026 10:22 pm

Across the Atlantic, a self-inflicted disaster is steadily unfolding”

Wel, yes,it is. Its name is Brexit.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 22, 2026 11:08 pm

This is the facile argument of all foolish people who are upset about the result of a democratic process. Basically, every single thing that happens to or in the UK that they don’t like is definitely the result of Brexit or Climate Change in their simplified and ultimately confused vision of reality.

Colour me surprised that you are part of this particular group…

Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
January 23, 2026 2:38 am

It is true, in a sort of backhanded way. The persistence of the political class in telling stories and adopting policies that are contrary to the belief of the mass of the population, and opposed by them, has led inexorably to government restrictions on liberty. You insist on doing things the mass of the country regards as stupid, irrational and wrong, sooner of later you have to abolish free speech and trial by jury. So there is a connection between Brexit and the Bill of Rights – just not the one Nick might think. Its the consequences of Government and civil service attempts not to implement it that has led to the rise of Reform and that in turn to the cascade of restrictions on free speech, and now the ‘suspension’ of local government elections in May.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 23, 2026 12:31 am

Brexit has yet to be enacted.

strativarius
Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
January 23, 2026 1:46 am

They won’t do it, Parliament is busy cancelling elections, anyway.

Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
January 23, 2026 1:46 am

There are pros and cons to Brexit. The cons have actually been pretty fully enacted. The pros…not so many.

I was a tepid remainer. I didn’t think we’d extracted all the good that was to be had from the EU; we were leaving too soon, like jumping off the Titanic as it sailed out of Southampton so as to drown closer to home. And even at the time I argued the only bureaucracy that could exceed the EU’s would be our own post Brexit.

I am still waiting for the Brexit dividend. Being suffocated and frozen to the marrow by our own rules, while we continue to energetically recruit foreign labour, but now from the global majority, is not a win.

strativarius
Reply to  worsethanfailure
January 23, 2026 1:59 am

Parliament was and remains determined to spike Brexit. Traitor’s parliaments from May to Starmer.

Reply to  strativarius
January 23, 2026 2:13 am

That’s very true especially in the case of Starmer.Although Rachel Queen Of Thieves has said the UK can’t rejoin the Customs Union because of post Brexit Trade Deals.

The problem is that we spent 40 years arguing about being in and didn’t take advantage of the Pros and suffered from the Cons and now we’re going to spend another four decades doing the same about Brexit

strativarius
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
January 23, 2026 2:35 am

The fact is that a very lucrative career path was denied them. Think Brittan, Kinnock, Mandelson ad nauseam – and Kinnock fired the honest EU auditor who blew the whistle:

Commission Vice-President Neil Kinnock has defended the Commission’s decision to suspend the organisation’s former chief accountant for warning that EU budget was in danger of fraud.Euractiv

Then there’s the blame game; always easier to point the finger at Brussels than take responsibility.

Reply to  worsethanfailure
January 23, 2026 3:49 am

But they are not our own rules. We are still bound to the EU on energy policy.

strativarius
Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 23, 2026 1:45 am

You obviously have no idea how the Parliamentary dictatorship works.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 23, 2026 2:21 am

What is happening in the UK is indeed a dramatic and disturbing failure, but its not due to Brexit. Though Brexit is a player in it. Lets explain. What is happening is a gap between the political and media classes of the UK and the majority of the country. This has ramifications on much of social and political life. And its getting wider all the time. And it has wide consequences.

The British, by a substantial majority, on a well publicized and strongly argued referencum, decided to leave the EU. It was a decisive mandate. This decision was then either not implemented or actively obstructed by the then Conservative government, under Theresa May, until the Party removed her and installed Johnson, who became Prime Minister and did implement it.

I don’t think there is any evidence of social, political or economic harm to the UK from leaving the EU. In fact the striking thing is that none of the Remain tendency have ever made their argument on the merits of the EU as institution, and since Brexit it has become ever more dysfunctional. They have never been able to explain why this is an institution the UK should want to be part of. But real harm was done in the process, as the obstruction widened an already developing gap, and it led to the rise first of UKIP and then of Reform.

At the same time, illegal immigration became a hot topic. Labour, Conservatives and Liberal shared the same basic approach: tolerate and put the arrivals on welfare either in rented housing or hotels. The impact of this, on the scale that it reached, on the towns and villages where the immigrants have been housed, has widened the gap still further, and given even more impetus to Reform.

The gap is further widened by gender policies. All over the country institutions have been basically implementing self declaration of sex, and banning criticism of it. That is, if you are a man who just says he is a woman many important institutions, such as the National Health Service, will treat you as one, give you access to womens changing rooms etc. They will also discipline or even fire you if you express dissent from this.

The next thing that happens in this is a series of court cases which affirm that in UK law ‘woman’ is a biological category. The reaction of institutions is to continue their previous policies, and the Government reaction is to freeze the process of publishing revised guidance, so a fair summary is that the political class is just ignoring the court decisions. It is not an accident that Reform opposes this situation too.

Finally we have climate and energy. Here the government is claiming that electricity prices will fall, and supply made more robust, due to installing large amounts of wind and solar generation, and that its esssential to move heat to heat pumps and cars to EVs. Trucks too, most recently, have come under review. The practical effect of this has been rising prices and a supply teetering on the edge of blackouts when the weather doesn’t perform. Reform denounces this too. Are you getting a picture?

I won’t go into the craziness about race and decolonization, because there is an important next stage to this. The next stage is elections and the courts. When you have this kind of radical gap between governors and governed, one of the things that is likely to crack is the court system. The Government is thus proposing to abolish trial by jury for many offences on the grounds that it wastes court time. A second problem is elections.

There is no national election till mid 2029, but there are local elections in May, and Reform did very well in the last ones that were held. The Government, rightly fearing a landslide against it in May, has cancelled a big chunk of the local elections, curiously enough mostly places where Reform is polling well.

A third problem is speech. People are used to talking, and in ordinary life in the UK the open expression of dislike or something stronger for both government and Starmer himself is something to hear. But there is a remedy for it. Its the creation of no criminal hate incidents, where the police interview and caution people for having said something legal but politically incorrect. There is hate speech legislation, which criminalizes the expression of truly hateful speech, but has in practice been used to criminalize the merely offensive. Abolishing jury trials will help this process.

The disaster unfolding in the UK is the end of a democracy that has lasted in its present form since 1688. The thing to watch is 2029. It would not be at all surprising if a nationwide blackout in 2028 were to prompt the government to ‘postpone’ the national general elections then. Something which, a few years ago, was inconceivable, but is now becoming a real possibility. Maybe still unlikely, but the trend and destination is clear.

East Germany on the Thames, Coming closer every day to a town hall near you, and in many, already here.

Reply to  michel
January 23, 2026 3:57 am

I am not sure the government has the power to close down democracy in any real terms. The USA may have succeeded, but that is a less sophisticated electorate. Mark Carney’s speech at Davos was good – if globalisation is going to be used as a lever to achieve political dominance, then it behoves us medium sized countries to form loose alliances based on mutual gain rather than believe that the rule of law still holds at international level.

Russia, the CCP , the EU, and now the USA have all attempted to build isolated political blocs and acquire territory in a flurry of 19th century Imperialism.

It didn’t work then and it wont work now but every generation has to understand that.

Reply to  Leo Smith
January 23, 2026 4:44 am

In the UK its very easy to close down democracy and its well underway. There is no written constitution, no special provision for constitutional changes. They can be made by a simple majority vote of the Commons. Yes, there are a couple of sticking points with the Lords and Royal Consent, but they are not going to stop a determined government.

You can see this in action in the various restrictions on speech that have come into law in the last few years. There is no equivalent of a US First Amendment, no restrictions on free speech are subject to judicial review against a constitution.

It has turned out to be possible to ‘suspend’ = cancel local elections without even a vote in the Commons.

The unwritten constitutional conventions operating in the UK since 1688 are in the process of being ignored or abolished in practice, and there is no institutional protection for them. They depended on goodwill and shared values, and both of these have vanished.

George Thompson
Reply to  Leo Smith
January 23, 2026 4:56 am

You really believe the crap you posted? So soon you forgot Biden, Obama and beyond those two wannabe tyrants the rest of the Democratic party and the deep state? Or The very nearly totalitarian Blue states like Cali, Illinois, or the Peoples Republics of Mass and Minnesota? God help us poor US citizens…oh, I forgot NYC.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 23, 2026 3:34 am

Funny how you can look from the other side too and name it trump. Almost like right-wing populism is bad for its citizens or something. I don’t know.

strativarius
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 23, 2026 3:53 am

right-wing populism is bad for its citizens

The [un]democratic answer?

Government announces 29 local elections will be scrapped

Saving democracy… from the voting riff raff.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
January 23, 2026 4:10 am

Beware of simple labels. Trump reflects the USA. His progenitors have noted the corruption inherent in the ‘Liberal’ democratic movement in the USA and used that as a means to propel one of the ugliest and least sophisticated arseholes to power, ever,

Some of what he does to dismantle the woke empire of bureaucracy is good, but his foreign policy is a car crash.

The UK is more nuanced. Reform are not a one man band of sociopaths. They are accumulating real talent. All the people in the old UKIP and now Reform movement say the same thing – we are not radical populists, we are small ‘c’ conservatives, who want to concentrate on stuff that works and get rid of ‘moral’ ideology and replace it with conservative pragmatism.

As an independent country Britain would be able to do deals with whomsoever it feels suits its direction, and join (and leave) whichever security, legal and trade associations suit its purpose.

No one, not Russia, not the EU, not America, wants to see that happen. They all want to own Britain. .

But we don’t like being owned, We like to fuck up independently where the perpetrators are local …

…And as far as energy policy goes, it’s already doomed. Miliband is the ‘fool who persisteth in his folly’..although he wont become wise, people are becoming wise to him,…and his policies.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 23, 2026 3:48 am

Odd how the disaster has its roots in the EU policy not to penalise use of carbon fuel, but to subsidies useless intermittent ‘renewables’. Then made only by Germany and Denmark…

Now China is taking te market, they aren’t shouting so loud

ResourceGuy
Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 23, 2026 4:29 am

When is Drax freedom day for North American forests? They have suffered enough, along with that wood pellet shadow fleet.

Nick Stokes
January 22, 2026 10:26 pm

They also pay “constraint payments” to switch off wind turbines when it is too windy to operate them.”

Untrue. Consytaint payments apply when the grid cannot deliver generated electricity to an existing customer.

Ex-KaliforniaKook
Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 22, 2026 10:35 pm

“They also pay “constraint payments” to switch off wind turbines when it is too windy to operate them.”

Which happens when there is more energy being supplied by wind than customers can use. You almost say it, but maybe you don’t understand it. It’s pretty simple. Ever heard of a coal power plant being paid to reduce their power output because customers can’t use all of it? No – they just reduce power, and the grid stays safe and stable.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 22, 2026 11:11 pm

Hmmmm. Can’t deliver generated electricity. Switch off working turbines generating electricity that can’t be used.

I cannot help but wonder if these two concepts might be related….

Nice try Nit Pick Nick, but this particular nit remains unpicked by Nick.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 22, 2026 11:18 pm

Paying somebody not to do something for whatever reason is an incredibly stupid thing to do.

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
January 23, 2026 2:23 am

In fact about 75% of the money goes to gas generators, not wind farms. The reason is that NESO has an obligation to supply the purchaser.

Leon de Boer
Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 23, 2026 2:47 am

The game Nick is playing here is the gas generators are being paid to “Turn Up Supply” that is the payment is for actual power consumed that the generator didn’t want to run at for efficiency. It’s the equivalent of driving your car flat out as opposed to cruising it the fuel economy goes thru the floor.

It’s well described by the operator
Types of Payments & Generators

  • Gas Generators (Turn-Up Costs): The largest share of constraint payments, often over 70%, goes to gas plants to ramp up power when renewables are curtailed, ensuring supply meets demand.
  • Wind Farms (Turn-Down Costs): Paid to reduce or stop output (curtailment) when the grid can’t handle excess wind energy, particularly from Scotland to England, due to transmission limits.
  • Solar Farms: Also receive payments for curtailment, though often less prominent in reports than wind,. 

So comments are talking about Turn Down costs and Nick is doing what Nick does trying to muddy the water and dribble crap to confuse.

You really are a troll Nick and you don’t care how you do it lie, deflect or obfuscate.

ResourceGuy
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
January 23, 2026 4:00 am

It’s called farm policy and the ag econ majors can tell you all about it.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 23, 2026 12:34 am

Consytaint” (sic)?

Is this a new tactic, inventing a word so you can define it any way you like?

strativarius
Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
January 23, 2026 2:09 am

Could it be the new word of the year 2026?

Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 23, 2026 2:32 am

No, Nick, both are true.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 23, 2026 2:57 am

Its the inevitable results of building generating capacity where there is no demand and no transmission links to demand.

The next step is, you build the links, and charge the operator for using them. At which point the power they generate has to be priced so high no-one can afford it and they object vociferously that their mission for saving the planet and making energy cheap and reliable is being undermined..

So you then redefine building this transmission from the north coast of Scotland to the Midlands as ‘modernizing the grid’, and bill it to taxpayers. Despite the fact that the links are white elephants and have nothing to do with modernizing anything.

One way or another you cannot get around the fact that wind may be free, but using it is ridiculously expensive. All you can do is try and disguise the costs and pass as much as possible on to the taxpayer in smaller chunks under other names.

Same thing with intermittency.

Leon de Boer
Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 23, 2026 5:02 am

>> Consytaint payments apply when the grid cannot deliver generated electricity to an existing customer. <<

Bullsh*t that is exactly HALF the definition and I am pretty sure you know that and just trolling or are you going to admit you are that stupid?

The other half is when the supply is constrained and they pay FF generation to ramp up.

Both halves are caused because of weakness in Renewable generation

Michael Flynn
January 22, 2026 11:32 pm

It’s fairly obvious that many ignorant and gullible politicians believe that adding CO2 to air makes thermometers hotter!

Oh well, they are just representing people who are even more ignorant and gullible – otherwise they wouldn’t have voted for them, would they?

January 22, 2026 11:53 pm

One reader told U.K.’s Independent of heating only a single room with a wood-burning stove, mimicking a 19th century living standard 200 years later.

Wood-burning stove!? Luxury! We ‘ad to get under a threadbare blanket and share body heat with whatever rats and mice we could catch!

Richard Rude
January 23, 2026 12:27 am

Suicide is a terrible thing.

January 23, 2026 12:33 am

For decades, offshore oil and natural gas were the crown jewels of the British economy, providing cheap, reliable energy and revenue to fund public services.

And then Thatcher sold it all off.

The UK government, under Margaret Thatcher’s conservative party, ended state participation in North Sea oil and gas production during the 1980s. Thatcher started privatising UK state assets in 1982, sold its shares in BNOC and Britoil (subsequently acquired by BP) then privatised British Gas and sold its remaining stake in BP by 1987. That was the end of the UK government’s role as a gas and oil a producer. Thanks, Conservatives!

strativarius
Reply to  TheFinalNail
January 23, 2026 1:48 am

It isn’t the oil and gas companies that are overtaxing and closing the fields down…

It’s your glorious Labour government. And they’re ramping it up.

Reply to  strativarius
January 23, 2026 2:47 am

I’m not allowed to vote Labour, strat. They don’t stand in my part of the UK

strativarius
Reply to  TheFinalNail
January 23, 2026 3:55 am

Tough luck, eh. But Ireland is a complete basket case just the same.

Reply to  TheFinalNail
January 23, 2026 4:12 am

Lucky you.

Reply to  TheFinalNail
January 23, 2026 2:02 am

I reflexively want to disagree with you comment, but the comparison of UK management of the North Sea versus Norway is not flattering.

strativarius
January 23, 2026 1:42 am

Welcome to our nightmare.

Reply to  strativarius
January 23, 2026 2:17 am

My hope is that we have a cleaning of the Augean Stables very soon

Reply to  Ben Vorlich
January 23, 2026 2:49 am

Not soon enough.

strativarius
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
January 23, 2026 2:49 am

Not in at least 29 councils, Ben.

missoulamike
Reply to  strativarius
January 23, 2026 3:48 am

Sounds like you guys need your own replay of 1776…….

strativarius
Reply to  missoulamike
January 23, 2026 3:55 am

Or 927AD

missoulamike
January 23, 2026 3:45 am

What I don’t get is why people across the pond put up with declining living standards year after year. 20 years ago the EU share of global GDP was the same as the USA, both around 25%. The US’s is up a few %points while the EU has dropped to around 17%. We are now something like 40% higher….In 20 years!!!! It almost like your governments are trying to create paupers and dip s**t trolls like Nicky poo just wave their hands, “oooh, look over here while I pull a rabbit out of my hat. Greenland will have to wait, lololol.

strativarius
Reply to  missoulamike
January 23, 2026 4:01 am

You get a vote every 5 years.
The parties control who becomes MPs etc – on message etc
They promise to do things in a manifesto and then do things people never voted on or for, instead.
That’s it… until the next election when it starts all over again.

No recall, no means of enacting the will of the people whatsoever – unless a referendum is granted. I doubt there’ll be another one for a very long time. What most people seem to forget is Parliament is supreme above monarch (fig-leaf) and people. (Copyright 1660, 1688)

Reply to  missoulamike
January 23, 2026 4:33 am

Well the EUs loss is probably entirely due to the UK leaving it.

Europe is a complicated place with a lot of history.

Whilst we are historically the best at wars there has ever been, we really dislike them.

It is a moot point as to how much the EU has held back growth as promoted it. It is a very traditional organisation based on the USSR and developed by communists. Europeans have tolerated it as long as living standards went up, but now they are not, it and the whole political elite that comprise it are being called into question.

The EU for example , has no control over NATO – that rests with the individual countries that comprise it. As has been highlighted by the Ukrainian position and the USA’s desertion of its allies and responsibilities.

Europeans don’t want to only have a choice between being enslaved by America, Russia or the EU.
Nor do they want the US choice of economic slavery or poverty. The French ideals is work from 8 till 1pm then lunch till 6pm, then a few drinks at the bar and then home to the hot sex and good cooking French women are famous for. They don’t want 60 hour weeks simply to be able to earn enough to pay their medical bills.

Neither do they want the Russian experience. And increasingly they are not happy with the EU experience.

And that is why slowly European nations are looking for alternatives, Some on the Left, some on the Right.

And what stands in the way of progress is Russia, America and the EU. All of who espouse ‘my way, or the highway’ coercive political stances.

Renewable energy being simply another one of those coercive stances from the EU.

Britain is ultimately struggling to arrive at its independence, and, betrayed by its politicians, about to sack all of them and put a new lot in place. The current idiocy of the Labour party has relegated them to the same desert as now houses the Tory party.

Unlike the USA, it is now seeking to elect a party and leaders that are nothing to do with either of the previous party elites.

This is new territory. And the script has not yet been written.

GDP is not the only mark of a nation’s success.

ResourceGuy
January 23, 2026 4:24 am

Is nationwide subsidy for basics like electricity a tradeoff for other basic services like health care or education? That’s after eroding defense budgets and goods making industry.

January 23, 2026 5:01 am

There is another crusade that we Brits are being screwed over – Water use.

The UK Climate Change Act and it’s effect are well known but most Brits are blissfully unaware that the 2021 Environment Act that mandates our daily water consumption to be a maximum of 110 litres per person by 2050.

As we currently consume around 142 litres per person per day there will be similar hard choices to be made; Flush or wash springs to mind.

The act was, of course, introduced by the last Conservative government. Other legislation ensures that there will be mandatory metering and time of day charging.

The scale of the stitch-up surpasses anything Mad Ed has managed so far yet it seems to have gone largely unnoticed by the public.

Background: https://cw50b.wordpress.com/net-110-2050/