That is the question posed by the BBC article below which looks at several innovative ideas to reduce the CO2 emissions from aircraft, such as bio-fuel and improved engine efficiency. You can read the whole piece from the link, but to cut to the chase the answer is NO.
Can flights hit net zero by 2050 and at what cost to passengers? - BBC News
"I have tried and failed to get Mr Pocklington (the civil servant with a conflict of interests) to tell ministers the truth about the cost of Net Zero.Indeed, somewhat mysteriously, he seems determined to avoid the subject altogether. Many will conclude that the explanation lies in his conflict of interest. The rule in Westminster and Whitehall for Net Zero people appears to be that it is perfectly acceptable to have a conflict of interest, so long as it is declared, and if it isn’t, or if there are undeclared payments, a blind eye is turned anyway. It’s shocking."
Whitehall Permanent Secretary has “shocking” conflict of interest
Despite all the whitewash thrown at it, there is still the strong smell of a conspiracy between the tight-knit community of scientists who were at the heart of efforts to push their own narrative of man-made CO2 emissions controlling the world's surface temperature. Take a look down memory lane by reading this article which recalls those damning emails:
What percentage of UK Electricity is renewable by type?
Total 43.1% Wind alone 30.4% Biomass 6.6% Solar 4.7% Hydro 1.4%
Electricity is 20% of total energy, so these must be divided by 5 to get their percentage of total energy.
Total 8.62% Wind 6.08% Biomass 1.32% Solar 0.94% Hydro 0.28%
So it is clear from these figures that over 90% of the UK energy comes from fossil fuels or nuclear, despite all the massive drive to build wind and solar. The government has just declared that by 2035 we will have become 81% net zero. That looks like a very difficult task, but this government is unlikely to be in power when that date is reached. I wonder what odds a bookmaker would give on that?
Getting the public to be convinced that the climate is somehow in an emergency is a difficult job when most of us see nothing much seems to have changed within our (mostly short) living memory. One way of doing this is to allow one-sided conversations to be played out on radio shows, like the one exposed in this video. The video shows how one hapless listener called Dave was be-littled on air for daring to suggest that the alarmism was misplaced. Admittedly he didn't help himself by saying he got his information from a blog, but even so he deserved a fair hearing. Listen to it here and see what you think:
"IF THIS IS TRUE …”, a compilation of campaigning/debunking climate posts by a blogger, Bernie Spofforth, who was recently banged up for 36 hours for an inaccurate tweet with an “If this is true” qualifier: https://www.youtube.com/@Bernie-is-Artemis.
She describes her ordeal with the police here: https://x.com/Artemisfornow/status/1836322109934407779.
Here is a piece taken from the BBC report on the latest climate meeting in Azerbaijan. What I find unbelievable is the complete faith implied in the quoted projection of temperature change by 2100. Why should anyone have such faith, when virtually all the predictions that have been made in the past have proved false, such as the summer ice-free Arctic, and the rise in world temperatures from computer programmes. Doubt is simply not allowed, despite the many failures. It seems much more like a religion than a scientific study.
Climate change: Where do we stand?
A recent UN report warned that current policies put the world on track for around 3C warming by the end of the century, with other organisations mirroring those figures.
This is well above the target set out in the Paris agreement - which about 200 countries signed in 2015 - which aimed to limit warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.
The 1.5C target is still "technically possible", the UN says, but would need significant cuts to emissions in the next 10 years.
To reach net zero this is one idea that is being seriously considered. But is it an economic possibility? Or even feasible on a scale that would be needed? This article looks at it:
That is the future of electricity production. It would seem that, belatedly, our leaders have realised that renewables simply won't do the job of producing reliable electricity, according to this piece:
Regular readers may remember that I wrote about a group of residents who were challenging Colchester Council about their decision to declare a "climate emergency". They have attended council meetings and spoken eloquently, but felt they were not taken seriously. A lot has happened in the time since I last reported on them.
Do take a look at the videos they have made recently here: WANTED - 30 GOOD people - the council needs to go! and here: INCONVENIENT Climate Emergency Scrutiny - Rachel Rants!
Event attribution research is a form of tactical science — research performed explicitly to serve legal and political ends. Key motives in conducting such studies is, “increasing the ‘immediacy’ of climate change, thereby increasing support for mitigation. Otto and others have been very forthright that the main function of such studies is to create a defensible scientific basis in support of lawsuits against fossil fuel companies — She explains the strategy in detail in this interview, From Extreme Event Attribution to Climate Litigation.
In other words it is a type of propaganda.
The Hague Court of Appeal was not impressed by FoE’s “go green or go extinct” rhetoric and rejected its case that Shell must reduce its emissions by 45% by 2030. Nevertheless, the Court of Appeal’s ruling leaves much to be desired and did not eliminate the threat of activist NGOs launching climate cases to effect “system change” in the future.
Climate case of the century won, but threat remains - Clintel
Following on from yesterday's post, here is an interesting take on COP 29 and Starmer's climate policy from Richard North. Here is a flavour of it:
"We are now seemingly entering the end game where the pursuit of the impossible is about to hit the rocks of reality and demonstrate for all time that the targets are a chimera, fraught with dangers as the inevitable consequence will be economic degradation and the certainty of prolonged and damaging power cuts." Read it all here:
I think we are about to see an even starker contrast between the USA energy policy and that of the UK. They will be reducing energy prices while ours will be increasing even more steeply. Of course Ed Miliband claims our electricity prices will drop as a result of increased wind, but I am very doubtful. Time will tell!
Trump’s New Energy Secretary | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
Lord Frost,who was our chief negotiator for Brexit under Boris Johnson's government, has proved to be a formidable speaker in favour of honesty on the cost of renewables. You can see his 14 minute speech in the link below where he makes a powerful case for a thorough debate to establish the truth about renewable energy costs, taking into account the cost of back up for when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining.
Although we are often told from surveys that the majority of people believe that increased CO2 is causing a 'climate emergency', their willingness to pay to do something about it is a totally different thing. Of course if someone else is paying the bill they are quite willing to let them.
What is happening at the latest climate conference (COP29) is that a lot of poor countries are demanding payments of large sums of money from the wealthier countries to help them to cope with the so-called emergency. The sums being asked for are so big that they have no hope of reaching them, but, no doubt this is simply to get a lesser sum, which they hope we will think is a 'good deal' in comparison. Here is a good video exposing the unfolding disaster
These climate conferences are simply ignored by most of the UK population as seeming to be quite irrelevant to us - but they should not be, as they have dramatic consequences for our finances, as we will soon find out if Starmer and Miliband get their way. This piece from Jo Nova gives an insight into the insane demands of so-called developing nations on us. Read it and wonder!
Power restrictions get a bit nearer as the wind drops across Europe. Luckily we still have some fossil fuel generation at present. Once this is reduced below a critical level the inevitable result will be disaster, when the people will at once wake up to the lies that they have been told by their political leaders.
Green Blues…As Fog Persists For Days In Germany, Green Energy Output Falls To Near Zero!
That is according to a new paper about the changes over the past 30 years. So the threat from sea on our coasts remains the same as it has always been. The coast still needs protecting and that is where we should be spending the money. Instead it is being wasted on a pointless quest for net zero which will have zero effect on the weather, climate or temperature.
New Paper: Wave Height, Storm Surge Changes Over Past 30 Years Too Small For Measurable Impact!
The new UK Labour government's obsession with net zero has led them to impose yet another tax on farmers on top of the inheritance tax on farms valued above £1 million. This time it is a tax on fertiliser which is likely to lead to lower crop yields and an increase in prices and imported food. Read more details here:
This time it is about York Minster being damaged by "climate change". What they really are referring to is that it has been exposed to the weather for over 600 years and so requires a lot of repair to undo the damage caused. Nothing to do with any recent change in the climate because, as the linked article shows, there has not been any change in the climate. But how many readers would look up the data to check that?
York Minster Sell Its Soul For Solar Panels | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
I used to be a landlord about 20 years ago and I had to have my properties inspected by the local council to see if they conformed to the fire regulations and they were in a fit state of repair. Since I sold them there has been a steady increase in the demands placed on landlords, including the requirement to have an Energy Performance Certificate giving a rating from A to F. Now they have been told that they must reach a level C or above, but as you can see from the link below it is a bit of a lottery to achieve this. I expect a number of landlords will be quitting the business. Things will get a lot worse in the mad pursuit of net zero!
Getting building energy performance right is essential for net zero - part I - Watt-Logic
In 2017 President Trump announced the US would pull out of the Paris climate agreement, the most important UN process to tackle climate change. The agreement saw almost all the world's nations - for the first time - agree to cut the greenhouse gas emissions which cause global warming.
But the shock of Trump's decision was limited. The treaty's rules meant the US was not able to withdraw until November 2020, a few months before he left office.
If Trump withdraws again, he will only have to wait a year before the US is completely out. That would give him three years to chart his own course without any need to report to the UN or be bound by its rules.
While President Joe Biden's negotiators will be at next week's COP talks in Azerbaijan, nothing they agree to will be binding for the Trump administration.
So, if Trump cuts off funding and simply ignores the UN it will be interesting to see what happens.
This story has not been given much publicity at all here in the UK, which is odd since normally such a thing would be headline news. It is yet another example of the way in which the media appear to not want to draw the public's attention to anything which runs contrary to the ideology of climate change. How can £41 billion not be accounted for? This money has come from our taxes and shovelled into the World Bank and then disappeared. Watch the excellent Paul Burgess video linked below to see the whole story.
How to Lose $41 Billion (and go unnoticed)
Will the Western governments now think twice before putting any more money into this black hole? I bet Donald Trump will be more careful when he takes over the USA presidency next January! The voters are fed up with this kind of ridiculous nonsense, which is one reason why they voted for Trump.
The report, by the National Energy System Operator (NESO), says there will need to be ‘significant growth’ in schemes which allow people to lower their energy use at peak times. Around 4,500km of undersea cables will have to be installed along with 1,000km of new power lines, including pylons - doubling the total amount built in the past ten years. Labour’s plans could see the countryside blighted by wind farms and pylons.
About £40billion of investment will be needed annually by the end of the decade, the report states, which will be passed onto taxpayers in the form of higher bills. Read it all here:
The letter in the link below highlights a catalogue of omissions and failings by the Met Office in relation to temperature measuring stations in the UK. These failings are quite extraordinary for any professional organisation to be charged with, but when the data they produce is being used as a basis for billions of pounds of government expenditure it is even worse. The conclusion that can be drawn is that the very foundation of global warming is based on unreliable evidence.
The letter is quite long, but well worth reading in full.
Here's another thing the new Labour government didn't mention before the election. They promised us cheaper electricity, but it looks very unlikely as you can see at this link:
Environmental Levies To Cost £108 Billion By 2029/30 | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
The problems affecting people by living close to wind farms is something which seems to have gained little publicity. With more onshore wind farms being put forward these issues are going to be more prominent. This new video from Paul Burgess gives the details:
After its politically driven foray into electric vehicles, Volkswagen is facing significant financial challenges…plans to close at least three of its German factories…unprecedented move in the company’s history…. tens of thousands of jobs will be lost!
How did a company so successful for a century get into this position so quickly. You can read some details in the link below:
Don’t Feel Sorry For VW… Liberal Arts College Dropout, Anti-Auto-Activist On Supervisory Board!
High project costs, regulatory uncertainty, and weak demand have led to a roll back of investment in this supposed replacement for fossil fuels. You can read more details here:
Hydrogen Stocks Crash as Hype Faces Reality Check | OilPrice.com
