Live at 1 pm ET: British Voters Dumps the Greens – The Climate Realism Show #202

Voters in this month’s elections in Great Britain delivered a shocking win for Reform UK, and was a clear rebuke of the “green” Net Zero agenda of the political elites. Politicians and parties that put the environmental movement over the real-world concerns of Britons, especially energy costs, have no future. On Episode #202 of The Climate Realism Show, we will talk with special guest Lois Perry, director of Heartland UK/Europe, to break down what happened, why it happened, and what it means for the climate agenda on both sides of the Atlantic.

We will also cover the Crazy Climate News of the Week, including how masculinity is supposedly bad for the Earth, Danish nursing home residents are restricted to just 2.8 ounces of meat per day as punishment being “the biggest climate sinners throughout their lives,” and an big Hollywood producer says oil companies (or climate change) were responsible for the devastating Palisades fire in LA. If you believe it was an arsonist, you’ve been “misinformed.”

Join us LIVE at 1 p.m. ET on YouTube, Rumble, X, and Facebook. Participate in the show by leaving your comments and questions in the chat.

5 2 votes

Article Rating

36 Comments

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Ronald Stein

May 15, 2026 9:51 am

Net Zero Green Energy Ideologists are OBLIVIOUS to reality that wind turbines and solar panels ONLY generate electricity but CANNOT make any of the 6,000 products or transportation fuels for life as we know it.

Consequently, with the products and transportation fuels made from crude oil, the world sustains 10 times more people today (8.3 billion) than at the start of the Industrial Revolution (approximately 700 to 800 million people in 1750)

The world is not dependent on natural fossil fuels, as no one uses “raw” crude oil that is only black tar, BUT has become dependent on the products and transportation fuels MADE FROM oil, the same products and transportation fuels that Wind and Solar CANNOT make!

Brent Taylor

Reply to Ronald Stein

May 15, 2026 10:34 am

It may be that humans are foolishly rushing to consume now, an almost certain limited amount of fossil fuels – and expecting ever-increasing economic growth and ever-expanding human populations (although recent reductions in birth rates might suggest some sort of natural control coming into operation). Can this be maintained? Does the word ‘Ponzi’ come to mind? A new form of energy might appear but, even so, how sustainable is the present approach? What will our great-great-grand-children think of it?

-9

Frank from NoVA

Reply to Brent Taylor

May 15, 2026 1:46 pm

‘What will our great-great-grand-children think of it?’

If the Marxist Misanthropic Malthusians have their way, not very much at all.

Harold Pierce

Reply to Brent Taylor

May 15, 2026 1:59 pm

There is enough coal to last several hundred or more years. There is enough conventional oil to last at least 100 years.

Greenland Energy has just discovered 18 billion barrels of light sweet crude oil in the Henderson basin on the east coast of Greenland. Production is scheduled to start this summer. The Brits won’t have to worry about Mad Ed’s vendetta against oil and natural gas.

The tar sands can supply crude oil into the next century.

The Russian claim there a billion million kg of oil in the British zone of the Antarctic ocean. However, Antarctic is for now off limits for resource extraction.

Chuck Higley

Reply to Harold Pierce

May 15, 2026 9:03 pm

“ There is enough conventional oil to last at least 100 years.”

Read my post above. Abiotic is NOT a limited resource, butt limited in the limited minds of the alarmist activists.

Harold Pierce

Reply to Brent Taylor

May 15, 2026 5:34 pm

FYI:
There are at least several century worth of known coal deposit deposit.

There is enough conventual oil and gas to last at least 100 years. Greenland energy has discovered 18 billion barrels of light sweet oil in the Henderson basin on the east coast of Greenland. Recovery of this oil will begin this summer.

The tar sands deposit in Alberta have huge amounts of bitumen that can be upgraded to oil.

The Russian claim there is a billion million kg of oil in the British coastal zone. Antarctic is off limits for any type resource extraction.

Venezuela has at least 300 billion barrels of extra heavy sour crude oil.

We do not have to worry about running out crude oil for at least 100 years.

BTW: Do a search on Suncor Energy to learn about the huge amounts of gas, diesel and jet fuel produced everyday by this company.

Chuck Higley

Reply to Harold Pierce

May 15, 2026 9:04 pm

Drill down anywhere and deep enough and you will find abiotic gas and oil.

Chuck Higley

Reply to Brent Taylor

May 15, 2026 9:00 pm

ABIOTIC OIL—produced by Earth’s core and percolating even now up to Earth’s crust as a replenishment mechanism we can use. Oil and gas are NOT fossil fuels—we abuse the term. Coal is organic material that has been treated by this gas and oil under heat and pressure and might be limited, but there is indeed a lot of it.

wilpost

May 15, 2026 10:09 am

Since 1990, Europe, which lacks fossil fuels and all sorts of materials, including rare earths, has played a leading role in shaping global climate policy, highlighted by the launch of the European Green Deal in 2019—Ursula von der Leyen described it as a “man on the moon moment.”
.
The initiative was aiming to make Europe the world’s first climate-neutral continent by 2050 while fostering innovation and strengthening its industrial base. Europe was also more or less forcing the rest of the world to go with wind, solar, batteries, biofuels, EVs and Heat Pumps.
.
Europe’s elites saw themselves as the “climate leaders”, and saw it as a big opportunity to expand its wind, solar, etc., systems to the rest of the world and make lots of money in the process, a new way to colonize the world and extract wealth from it.

The Results are Deeply Disappointing.
.
Instead of meeting its goals, the Green Deal is increasingly associated with higher energy costs, weakened competitiveness, and growing political backlash. It has deepened divisions within the EU, strained global relations, and increased pressure on households and businesses—raising serious doubts about its feasibility and long-term economic impact..
The main problem of wind and solar are the hidden costs.
.
Hidden Costs: At a future 30% W/S annual penetration on the grid, based on UK and German experience:
– Onshore grid expansion/reinforcement to connect far-flung W/S systems, about 2 c/kWh
– A fleet of traditional power plants to quickly counteract W/S variable output, on a less than minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365, which means more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
– A fleet of traditional power plants to provide electricity during 1) low-wind periods, 2) high-wind periods, when rotors are locked in place, and 3) low solar periods during mornings, evenings, at night, snow/ice on panels, which means more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
– Pay W/S system Owners for electricity they could have produced, if no curtailment, about 1 c/kWh
– Importing electricity at high prices, when W/S output is low, 1 c/kWh
– Exporting electricity at low prices, when W/S output is high, 1 c/kWh
– Disassembly on land and at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites, about 2 c/kWh
Total: 2 + 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 2 = 11 c/kWh. This cost is rarely talked about, but shows up in many ways.

https://willempost.substack.com/p/europes-energiewende-is-unraveling?r=1n3sit&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true

Denis

Reply to wilpost

May 15, 2026 1:03 pm

You left out wind and solar maintenance and replacement cost. Fossil fuel backups and regulation plants last 50 years, 75 years, or more? Windmills ashore last about 20 years, at sea less. Solar panels about 20 years. Maintenance for millions of windmills, billions of solar panels, vs maintenance for thousands of fossil plants???? I think your number is way too low.

Harold Pierce

Reply to Denis

May 15, 2026 2:05 pm

Copper is now ca. $6.50 a pound. It won’t be too long before pirates break into the pylon and nacelle and steal the copper.

Dave Andrews

Reply to Harold Pierce

May 16, 2026 7:17 am

They have already done that in several remote windfarms in the UK

D Sandberg

Reply to Denis

May 15, 2026 3:33 pm

Agree. Yes, they need to be at least doubled, tripled would be better, There is no cost effective role for sunshine and breezes power on a modern grid above 10% grid penetration unless it’s tied to flexible hydro.

Dave Andrews

Reply to Denis

May 16, 2026 7:15 am

Re solar panel life the IEA say there is

“Mounting evidence that solar panels installed in the early 2010s, particularly in utility scale projects, are now being replaced in many instances after just 10 – 15 years of operation because the technology is outdated or performance has degraded”

IEA ‘World Energy Outlook 2025’ (Nov. 2025)

Mumbles McGuirck

May 15, 2026 10:10 am

I want to be a “pro-meat influencer”. Where do I apply?

Bellman

May 15, 2026 11:01 am

Silly headline. The Greens increased their share of the vote in the local elections. In terms of projected share of the vote they were 2nd slightly above all the old mainstream parties. Not sure how this amounts to the voters dumping them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_United_Kingdom_local_elections

Sweet Old Bob

Reply to Bellman

May 15, 2026 11:31 am

How much influence did they lose or gain ?

michel

Reply to Bellman

May 15, 2026 12:51 pm

Yes, this is correct, they did very well. With an important qualification however. The current Greens are not the old environmentally focused Greens. This is not the party of Caroline Lucas, and their success does not imply any wave of enthusiasm for Net Zero.

The elections have to be seen in a different way. There was a swing against Labour and the Conservatives. This is very marked – between them they now account for less than 40% of the vote. It was whoever is most likely to get these two out. The scale of the feeling was remarkable. To give an instance, Norfolk had 58 Conservative Councillors last Wednesday, and Reform one or none. On Friday the Conservatives had 8 and Reform 40. Manchester, in a very different part of the country in the North was similarly disastrous, but in that case for Labour.

I don’t think Net Zero figured in either campaign. It was just, send the bums home. The BBC interviewing voters a couple of days later. What would you say to Keir Starmer? A pause, then a smile, then “Goodbye”.

Where the vote goes depends on the area. In Scotland to the SNP, in Wales to Plaid. In Muslim areas to the Greens on a Gaza/anti-Israel/antisemitic line. In university towns and London also to the Greens but here on an extreme socially liberal line – legalizing drugs, self declaration of sex/gender, curbs on police, jail, open borders. Student politics. In the old Labour working class areas in the North, to Reform from Labour. And in a lot of more rural, small towns and cities, also to Reform, but there from Conservatives.

What the UK is going through is the collapse into irrelevancy of the Labour Party, and to a lesser extent of the Conservative Party. Not on account of Net Zero, but out of general dissatisfaction with the two old parties. A rising anger, turning slowly to rage, on welfare, immigration, gender, tax and cost of living.

Thatcher remarked once that Tony Blair was her greatest achievement. Blair could have said that the last Conservative government was his own. Farage, looking at the results, must be thinking that if they had been trying to drift into irrelevancy in the eyes of the electorate, there is not much the two old parties would have had to do different.

But Net Zero is not explicitly a key campaign issue yet. Though it may yet become one as its disastrous effects on the economy unfold.

KevinM

Reply to michel

May 15, 2026 1:10 pm

“The current Greens are not the old environmentally focused Greens.”
Did the people change or the words they’re saying?
If the old Greens are gone, where did they go? They’ve still got decades of life expectancy to pay for.
Were the old Greens _really_ environmentally focused?
If the people have advertised more than a few conflicting opinions, which opinions were real? How do I find out?

philincalifornia

Reply to KevinM

May 15, 2026 2:43 pm

Yeah, as I posted above on what actually happened, the Greens seem to be a collection of the old bearded, unwashed hippie types from before (who I kinda like actually, I know several), and the muslim immigrants. I don’t know how this happened, but the guy michel, who you responded to, can probably educate us both.

To find out, you have to spend time sorting out which are the propaganda channels on YouTube and watching independent videos and their commenters.

michel

Reply to philincalifornia

May 16, 2026 1:37 am

I’m afraid I don’t really know how it happened – I have just registered the change. One correction however which may help explain it: they are not now the old bearded hippie types from before. Their support is much more among the young. So you have a sort of alliance of convenience between the student politics of the young and the radical Islamists.

The catalyst may be the assumption of the leadership by Polanski, who has some charisma, and who has been prepared to say whatever it takes to get votes by reaching the parts of opinion that the mainstream parties will not.

That, and there is a general move of the Greens to the latest progressive ideas, so they are very big on LGBTQ+ ideology (though probably don’t make a big thing out of that in Muslim areas!).

Perhaps what has happened is that they have become a home for the floating radical left fringe of British politics – the fringe represented by Militant Tendency, Socialist Worker, the Corbynite left, Stop the War Coalition and all those fringe groups. In rather the same way climate turned into an issue that progressives clustered around. And under Polanski, at least so far, they have managed to combine this with appealing to the Muslim vote with slogans about Gaza.

philincalifornia

Reply to michel

May 16, 2026 9:50 am

Thank you for your excellent response. I will be in England this coming week. I hope I can play a part, albeit a small part, in helping with some truths among the oppressive mountain of fakery and propaganda in the UK and Europe.

Thanks again.

michel

Reply to philincalifornia

May 16, 2026 3:07 am

From the UK Telegraph, what happened to the Greens. How and why is a different matter though.

In a disturbing snapshot of today’s Britain, the Henry Jackson Society published figures after this month’s local elections suggesting that more than 570 of new councillors were what it classed as “sectarian-style” candidates. The criteria used to define this were the emphases those candidates had, in their campaigns, put on issues of “Muslim communal grievance” and “transnational Muslim causes”. The Green Party, illustrating how it has stopped focusing on the environment or ecology, accounted for 350 of those councillors.

bnice2000

Reply to Bellman

May 15, 2026 2:12 pm

Labour is essentially part of the rabid far Greens with mad Ed Millibrain in charge of energy…

… It is the Green slime agenda that took a massive thumping !!

The scrapping of Net-Zero idiocy may be at hand. !

philincalifornia

Reply to Bellman

May 15, 2026 2:33 pm

I never thought I would agree with Bellman on anything, but I even gave him a like. He’s right, it was the Labour phony party that got crushed. The Greens took votes from the idiot-led current ruling nitwit party to the point where Sir Stalin may have to f-off and die (except he won’t, his puppeteers won’t let him). The Greens made gains. The irony here is that the Labour Party, like the demoRats here have been importing anybody that will put up with living in squalor and s*** weather (over there) to vote for them. Ha ha ha, and they voted against them. It’s where the muslim vote went.

It gets even more loonie. Those people are so detached from reality because of the apathy of the regular potential UK voter, that they might even run the energy fraudster Miliband for prime minister (in lower case). They have a couple of years to get the job done – total destruction of the UK’s prosperity, unless something else happens. I’ll be over there next week. Was hoping to see a soccer playoff final but that didn’t happen. If I’d known, I would’ve got in for the rally tomorrow where the Guardian will be saying a couple of thousand showed up. Get ready for two million you phony, parasite “lefties”. No violence and the police will be marching with them.

This revolution won’t be televised.

John Hultquist

May 15, 2026 12:13 pm

Confusion reigns because the “Greens” are no longer green.
“The Green Party in the UK has increasingly positioned itself as a suitable political home for eco-socialists, advocating for policies that emphasize social good over private profit. Their recent manifesto includes redistributive policies aimed at shifting power back towards workers, reflecting a more leftist approach in response to the political landscape.”

John Hultquist

Reply to John Hultquist

May 15, 2026 12:17 pm

Labour is currently the main British party advocating for climate action.
Re-interpret the voting accordingly.

John Hultquist

Reply to John Hultquist

May 15, 2026 12:23 pm

Labour lost 1,498 councillors, while Reform UK gained 1,452 councillors

bnice2000

Reply to John Hultquist

May 15, 2026 7:27 pm

A small number of the Labour councils went ever further left.. to the loony left Greens.

Most of them, plus a lot of ex-tory councils went to ~~One Nation.~~.. oops, I mean Reform… 😉

isthatright

May 15, 2026 12:14 pm

Germany uses the term “Dunkelflaute” for nights without wind. In Deutschland, calm nights mean no renewable power. They need to use their natural gas and coal fired power plants. Since the shuttered all their nuclear plants, they either import massive GW of electricity from Poland and France, use carbon fuel sources or freeze in the dark.

Harold Pierce

Reply to isthatright

May 15, 2026 2:13 pm

As it has been said many times, they only learn the hard way and “When will they ever learn” (cf. Pete Segar, “Where have all the flower gone?)

Harold Pierce

Reply to isthatright

May 15, 2026 5:54 pm

As it has been said many times, they only learn the hard way and “When will they ever learn” (cf. Pete Seger, “Where Have All The Flowers Gone”).

bnice2000

May 15, 2026 2:20 pm

Same surge appears to be happening in Australia.

One Nation is totally against Net Zero, and is now polling above the far-left Labor Party

New leader of the Liberal (semi-conservative party) has also come out with policies against Net-Zero.

There is hope. !

bnice2000

May 15, 2026 2:36 pm

Re “El Nino” scare.

This PROVES that they KNOW the warming is TOTALLY NATURAL.

Humans and human CO2 cannot cause or influence El Nino events.

Chuck Higley

Reply to bnice2000

May 15, 2026 9:16 pm

Better yet, CO2 and methane do nothing regarding the climate. No gas at any concentration in the atmosphere can warm Earth’s surface. Also, a key point is that there is no such thing as greenhouse gases (regardless of the source) and there is no greenhouse effect, which was cobbled up from failed junk science to suit a political agenda with the goal of demonizing human activities and lie to the public

rtj1211

May 16, 2026 2:09 am

Actually, if you were capable of being honest, you’d admit that the elections we’re a rebuke to Tory and Labour, but the big gains came to two insurgent parties, Reform UK and the Greens.

OK, Reform UK got 26% to Greens 18%, but that was mostly due to greater financial backing for the former, allowing them to run candidates everywhere, whereas the Greens are still focussing on target seats/areas, leaving some in effect to others.

The Greens are fairly fanatical Net Zero folks, so clearly their success was not a ‘No Net Zero’ message.

The election was about the collapse of the ancient regime and different voters had different priorities for an alternative.