WILL GERMANY BE FIRST TO DITCH NET ZERO

Here again we see a country which has made a grand commitment to reach net zero CO2 emissions come up against the harsh reality of how costly it is, as the date gets nearer. When it comes to a choice of severely damaging the economy causing millions to suffer or to defer the date of achieving an arbitrary and meaningless target there can only be one rational decision.  

Ross Clark: Will Germany be the first to ditch its net zero commitments? | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

IS RISHI SUNAK WAKING UP TO REALITY?

Read the latest news from the Prime Minister's spokes people

 Rishi Sunak considering weakening key green policies - BBC News

THE SKEPTICS HANDBOOK VOLUME 2 - WHY CO2 DOES NOT CONTROL THE EARTH'S CLIMATE

I have only just come across this second volume of the Skeptics Handbook which is packed with interesting facts that you will never see in any mainstream publication or on TV. Jo Nova has a great way of putting across difficult material in a simple and direct style. The whole thing is well worth reading, but I particularly like this section:

The one flaw that wipes out the crisis

Carbon dioxide only causes 1.1°C of warming if it doubles. That’s according to the IPCC. Did you know? The real game changer is water. Researchers made guesses about humidity and clouds in the early 1980s and they built these guesses into their models. We now know they were wrong, not about carbon, but about water in the form of humidity and clouds. Here’s how the models can be right about carbon and wrong about the climate. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and it warms the planet. The modellers guessed that as the world warmed, more water would evaporate, and the rising humidity would lock in more heat. Makes sense. Humid nights are warmer than clear nights. This is called “feedback” — carbon warms us, which lifts humidity, which warms us even more, at least in theory. But water is complex and fickle. Humidity can stay ‘humid’, or turn into low clouds, high clouds, or fall out as rain, hail or snow.

  And they all have a different effect. Every prediction over 1.1 degrees relies on “feedback” of some sort. But what if that extra humidity turned into low clouds? What if it just rained out? What if fewer high clouds formed? Any of these would cool the planet. Without the effects of feedbacks to amplify carbon’s minor warming, there is no disaster, and that’s exactly what the observations tell us. Lindzen found that as the planet warms it gives off more radiation. Spencer found that as the planet warms, we get fewer high clouds. Paltridge found that humidity levels have fallen. The missing hot spot shows the models are wrong. There goes almost all of the warming. The models exaggerate by a factor of six. The 3.3°C scare is really only about half a degree of extra warmth. Who needs to transform economies to prevent half a degree of warming, most of which has already happened? Who indeed? 

Sources: Feedbacks: (projected) IPCC Assessment Report 4, Chapter 8. (Measured) Lindzen et al 2009. Clouds: Spencer et al 2007. Humidity, Paltridge et al, 2009.

the_skeptics_handbook_IIj-sml.pdf (joannenova.com.au)

BLOG READERSHIP AT RECORD HIGH!

I often wonder who the bulk of you, my readers, are and where you come from. Most of you never leave a comment, though Renewable Guy has made up for some of you! Over the years my readership has varied a lot, but this year it has definitely seen a big increase, which is very encouraging. It is interesting because it is now much harder for people to find it because the big search engines, like Bing and Google do not come up with this blog on their first pages, which they used to. Climate sceptic websites are not given any prominence these days. 

Despite all this, my number of hits for this month is already at 43000 with half the month to go and my previous best month was January this year at 42562, so it is going to be a new record. 

I started the blog back in 2007 when many of the now top blogs had not started, like Paul Homewood's superb NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT . Even Watts Up With That?  was only just starting. I started as a means of keeping a catalogue of informative articles for my own use and to show other people that there actually were a lot of scientific arguments to rebut what was being put out by the likes of Al Gore who's new film was gaining a lot of coverage at the time.

Let me be absolutely clear, I have never disputed that the climate has changed in the past and in some parts of the world it is changing now. Of course it could change any time at any place. What is definitely in dispute is that CO2 is a major driver of the climate. It is beyond doubt that there are many natural factors that have affected the climate. Particularly clouds.

Even if man-made CO2 had a measurable effect, the nations of the world could not possibly reduce the level in time to make a difference to the temperature or the climate. The answer must be to adapt to the climate rather than a futile attempt to change it. 

 

CLIMATE EXTREMIST MESSAGE NOT BELIEVED BY MANY

There have been so many extreme climate change messages in our news media that you would imagine that everyone would be completely convinced. Indeed in the political world in public debates this seems to be largely the case. However this consensus is, in reality, false, as in private I find most people actually think more like the comments of Telegraph readers in the article below. 

 Telegraph Scrape The Bottom With Latest Climate Scare | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

GREEN JOB LOSSES - THE TRUE COST OF NET ZERO

We are constantly being told about the new green jobs which are going to be created by pushing for net zero, and yet the reality is the complete opposite. What we see is the loss of good well paid jobs in the traditional economy as we increase the price of fuel and electricity. Here is a prime example: 

Labour In A Spin Over Green Steel Job Losses | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

I have heard some extreme green activists state that saving CO2 emissions should come before economic benefit. This is not the view of the majority of the public.

IT WAS WARMER IN ROMAN TIMES THAN NOW

Nothing at all about the modern era stands out as unusual

 2,500 years of wild climate change in southern Europe: It was warmer in Roman Times than now « JoNova (joannenova.com.au)

Thanks to David Whitehouse at NetZeroWatch who has found a remarkable paper: Pyrenean caves reveal a warmer past

The new study on stalagmites in caves of the Pyrenees shows that modern climate change is nothing compared to natural fluctuations in the last 2,500 years, when it was at times  much hotter, colder, and more volatile. Rapid shifts between temperatures were common.

Yet we are constantly bombarded with propaganda telling us our climate is going off the scale. It is amazing how many people pay lip-service to this idea, similar to a religious ideology. 

WHY SCIENCE JOURNALS CAN NO LONGER BE TRUSTED

 Wesley J Smith: Why we can’t trust the science journals

National Review, 5 September 2023

A climate scientist has written that he pulled his punches in a climate-change article in order to be published by the prestigious journal Nature. From, “I Left Out the Full Truth to Get My Climate Change Paper Published,” by Patrick T. Brown:
 
"The paper I just published—“Climate warming increases extreme daily wildfire growth risk in California”—focuses exclusively on how climate change has affected extreme wildfire behavior. I knew not to try to quantify key aspects other than climate change in my research because it would dilute the story that prestigious journals like Nature and its rival, Science, want to tell.
 
This matters because it is critically important for scientists to be published in high-profile journals; in many ways, they are the gatekeepers for career success in academia. And the editors of these journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives—even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society."
 
In other words, if Brown provided a thorough and nuanced study, it would never have passed the ideological blockade he knew controls the scientific discourse on this important topic.
 
Brown explains why we see such an anti-science paradigm:

"In theory, scientific research should prize curiosity, dispassionate objectivity, and a commitment to uncovering the truth. Surely those are the qualities that editors of scientific journals should value.

In reality, though, the biases of the editors (and the reviewers they call upon to evaluate submissions) exert a major influence on the collective output of entire fields. They select what gets published from a large pool of entries, and in doing so, they also shape how research is conducted more broadly. Savvy researchers tailor their studies to maximize the likelihood that their work is accepted. I know this because I am one of them."

Brown left academia so he could engage in better science. And, that allowed him to write this article. [...]

Brown has done a true service in illustrating how science has been distorted by nonscientific agendas at the highest level of “expert” discourse — aided and abetted by the media. Until and unless that changes, public trust in the scientific and medical sectors will continue to fall. 
 
Full post

ONLY 16% OF UK VOTERS WANT TO PRIORITISE NET ZERO

 Matt Goodwin: The Sun, 8 September 2023 

If Rishi Sunak is to have any chance of winning the next General Election, then he should be doing a lot more to tap into people’s growing sense of exasperation with the spiralling costs of Net Zero.

That’s the message from my latest ­polling on what ordinary people who took a punt on Boris Johnson in 2019 really think about the expansion of green policies such as the Ultra-Low Emission Zone in London, where the owners of non-compliant vehicles must pay £12.50 each time they drive.

Were you to listen only to the expert class, to London Mayor Sadiq Khan or the new elite who dominate the institutions, then you might be forgiven for thinking that these kinds of policies are incredibly popular among the public. But the reality, as my polling shows, is quite different.

Much like globalisation in the 1990s, or the rise of mass immigration in the 2000s and the 2010s, many people today are becoming sceptical, if not outright opposed, to the spiralling costs of this agenda.

Only one in four say they would like to see a Ulez-type scheme operating in their own local area. The vast majority would not.

But it’s the coalition of voters from across the political spectrum who backed Boris Johnson and the Conservative Party in 2019 — many of whom are the same people who backed Brexit — who are especially opposed to footing the bills for things such as Ulez and the creeping influence of Net Zero.

These voters, remember, are absolutely critical for Sunak’s chances next year.  Sunak is currently only holding on to half of Johnson’s 2019 voters.

Ask people whether they want their leaders in Westminster to prioritise Net Zero even if this increases people’s bills or prioritise lowering their bills even if this undermines the quest to achieve Net Zero and the vast majority strongly favour the latter.

Only 16 per cent want to prioritise Net Zero.

Ask Conservative voters from 2019 — the very people who will determine whether or not Sunak remains in power — and just seven per cent want their leaders to prioritise Net Zero while nearly three-quarters (72 per cent) want them to prioritise slashing the cost of living.

Full post

TEXAS ON THE BRINK OF ROLLING BLACKOUTS

 Texas declared its first power emergency since a deadly winter storm two years ago and came close to rolling blackouts as soaring temperatures roasted the second-largest US state.

High demand, lower wind generation, and the declining solar generation during sunset led to lower operating reserves on the grid and eventually contributed to lower frequency,” the grid operator’s CEO said.

The declaration of a so-called Level 2 emergency late Wednesday came in response to shrinking supplies of available power and meant the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, the state’s grid operator, had to draw on reserves while pushing consumers to curb usage.

Texas hadn’t experienced a grid emergency since February 2021, when a historic freeze triggered blackouts that led to hundreds of deaths, stranded millions inside freezing homes, and paralyzed the Lone Star State for almost a week.

Conditions deteriorated so quickly on Wednesday that the grid operator skipped calling emergency level 1. A level 2 emergency means power reserves have dropped to critical levels and allows the operator to call on more supplies to prop up the grid. It’s unclear what led to ERCOT call a second-tier emergency.

As the crisis deepened late Wednesday, utilities in San Antonio and the state capital Austin warned blackouts might be imminent and urged customers to take conservation efforts such as not charging electric cars and turning off pool filters. Medically fragile residents who need oxygen and similar aids were urged to have backup plans in place.

Spot power prices surged to more than the $5,000 a megawatt-hour, exceeding the price cap, multiple times Wednesday evening, Ercot data show. That was quadruple the cost of power supplies for that period in the day-ahead market.

Full story

IS IT THE END OF MASS MOTORING?

 Over the last few years, the Government has thrown everything it can think of at forcing us to switch to electric vehicles. There are big subsidies on offer, both for the car itself and for a home charging port. There are tax breaks for company vehicles, long since phased out for the petrol equivalent. There are exemptions from resident’s parking permits, and from the increasingly bewildering array of congestion and clean air charges that now mean driving from one British city to another involves almost as much paperwork as getting a visa for North Korea.

And from next year onwards, the auto manufacturers will have to meet a target of selling 22pc electric vehicles, rising to 52pc by 2028, ahead of a complete ban on the sale of new petrol cars by 2030.

There is a problem, however. Despite all the incentives, most of us are not yet convinced about making the switch. According to a survey this week by Auto Trader, only 47pc of drivers believe that an electric vehicle will work for them, while 56pc of drivers felt that they were too expensive to buy. In fact, there are a whole range of reasons why people don’t want them. They are expensive, with average prices above traditional models. The charging network is hopelessly inadequate, especially if, like most people, you don’t have your own driveway. There are doubts over how long the batteries last, minor collisions can cost thousands to repair if the power unit is damaged, and there is even a risk of them catching fire in enclosed space.

And yet, at the same time petrol cars are becoming increasingly unaffordable. There already was a trend for new cars to get more and more expensive: from 2011 to 2021 the average price of a new car in the UK rose by 39pc, compared to a 22pc rise in average wages, according to research by Moneybarn. But as quotas are introduced, that will only accelerate, since the only way the manufacturers can meet the target, at the same time as protecting profit margins, will be to make fossil-fuel driven models pricier and pricier. Add in the soaring cost of insurance, and the vast range of Ulez-style charges, and one point is clear. A petrol car will be a high-end luxury product, restricted to a tiny minority.

The result? Car ownership will soon be following home ownership into dramatic decline, driven off the road by central planning, and short-sighted, chaotic government policies. Instead, people will be forced onto shambolic public transport that might just about work in inner London, and within a few other major cities, but is practically non-existent in the suburbs, small towns or villages. In reality, the end of the car era will be the greatest backward step in living standards in recent memory. In terms of mobility and freedom it will take us right back to the 19th century - and it will be entirely our own fault.

 

CHILLING DETAILS OF THE UK ENERGY BILL

Most of the public seem blissfully unaware of how their government is taking away their freedom in the pursuit of net zero. A few of them may be better informed now, as a result of this article:

 RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: No heat pump? Put your thermals on, you're nicked | Daily Mail Online

ZERO BIDS FOR OFFSHORE WIND

Not net zero - just zero! This should be a wake up call for the government and for the people of the UK. Clearly offshore wind is simply much too expensive. 

Offshore wind auction fails to attract any bids - BBC News

DATA TO MAKE YOU THINK HOW MUCH THE WORLD HAS IMPROVED.

 

We seem to hear nothing but doom and gloom in our daily news. The following is an interesting article taken from a website which answers questions on every topic and is well worth looking at for a wide range of information. The following article by Patrick Boschmann can be found at this link:

(37) Extreme weather is not increasing, and the world is getting healthier and wealthier and safer all the time. Is the whole Global warming/Climate change narrative simply a world-wide experiment in mass hypnosis? - Quora

The world wasn’t broken and it didn’t need fixing. The world was getting healthier and wealthier before the Climate Change© agenda came along and put a stop to all of that.

FATHER OF CLIMATE CHANGE

BBC's EXTREME WEATHER CLAIMS DEBUNKED

The things the BBC forgot to mention in their quest to make us believe that we are facing a "climate crisis"

 BBC’s Extreme Summer Weather Propaganda | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

UK GOVERNMENT MUST STAND UP TO CLIMATE ACTIVISTS

Here in the UK we are reaching the point when the government has to make some very difficult and unpopular decisions. Even though the Conservatives had an 80 seat majority there are enough Conservative climate activist MPs to defeat them with the support of the opposition. One such decision is the ban on onshore wind farms. Faced with defeat, the government is now doing a u-turn to end the ban and pass the buck onto council planners.

 Government divided on climate issues (netzerowatch.com)

WILL NORTHERN EUROPE FREEZE OR FRY? - GULF STREAM IS NOT THE AMOC*

*AMOC = Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation

A lot of climate alarmists confuse the AMOC with the Gulf Stream. They are both currents which circulate through the Atlantic Ocean, but they are distinct separate currents, as explained in this link:

 The Guardian's (ocean) circulation problem - Net Zero Watch

Luckily the Gulf Stream is the one which is the least likely to be affected. But that doesn't stop fear-mongering articles peddling the idea that climate change will mean that northern Europe will be driven into an ice-age by global warming. Either we will freeze or fry, it's a win-win for the alarmists!  

COST OF DECARBONISING HOUSING

Anyone who gives a little thought to what is involved must realise that our 38 million houses rely on a lot of fossil fuels to power all our appliances and cook our food and keep us warm. The figures are so huge that doing the calculations is not to be taken lightly. Fortunately the Global Warming Policy Foundation has done the sums and come up with the answer £1.8 trillion extra to the cost of staying with the present system. Read the details here: 

Cost of Decarbonising Housing (netzerowatch.com)

HEAT PUMP SAGA GOES ON

 I don't envy the new minister for net zero, appointed yesterday. The fact is that most people are, understandably, reluctant to spend at least £10000 to change their central heating system from a relatively cheap gas boiler system to a less powerful and more costly heat pump. Even those who can afford it are not buying. Of course the majority cannot afford it. It is hardly sensible to put in a heat pump system unless you have good insulation as they will not give enough heat. Read all the details below.  

Heat pumps: mythology and actuality - The Global Warming Policy Foundation (thegwpf.org)

Net Zero Watch slams Government’s 'desperate' and 'unethical' heat pump proposals - Net Zero Watch

UK FOOD STRATEGY - A POINTLESS ACT OF SELF HARM

The following report is a very comprehensive and interesting read.

UK Food Strategy and Net Zero (thegwpf.org)

Here are one or two highlights:

In 2019, the total CO2 emissions from the UK (i.e. production, not consumption figures) amounted to 369 million tonnes. In 2020, emissions dropped to 329 million tonnes. These figures ignore land use. In 2020, this represented just 0.95% of global emissions, down from 2.64% in 1990 (world CO2 emissions totalled 36.7 billion tonnes in 2019). Consumption-based emissions for the UK in 2019 (the most recent year for which data is available) were 520 million tonnes, bringing the country’s contribution to 1.4% of global emissions. Achieving Net Zero for the UK would be effectively a rounding error in global emissions, which continue to increase. China, far and away the world’s largest CO2 emitter for over a decade, will not compromise its economic growth in the cause of climate change mitigation.

Look at what the UK has achieved in recent decades. Total emissions have fallen very significantly, now standing at about the same level as in late Victorian times. This is for a country of 67 million, compared to about 31 million in 1870.  

To re-engineer the UK’s agricultural sector and food supply chain will inevitably have a massive impact on farmers, the countryside and diets, whether or not people conform to policymakers’ expectations and move to plant-based diets or whether they simply eat more imported meat and dairy produce. Decreeing the effective end of much livestock farming would be devastating. Doing this for the sake of 10% of the country’s overall emissions of greenhouse gases would be pure folly.

WORLD'S "HOTTEST DAY" WAS FAKE NEWS

 Apparently, all those people missed the fact that they were looking at the output of a climate model, not actually measured temperatures. Only one news outlet, The Associated Press, bothered to print a sensible caveat…The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration distanced itself from the designation, compiled by the University of Maine’s Climate Reanalyzer, which uses satellite data and computer simulations to measure the world’s condition….

The AP updated its story on July 7th to include this single yet very important paragraph: “NOAA, whose figures are considered the gold standard in climate data, said in a statement Thursday that it cannot validate the unofficial numbers. It noted that the reanalyzer uses model output data, which it called ‘not suitable’ as substitutes for actual temperatures and climate records. The agency monitors global temperatures and records on a monthly and an annual basis, not daily.”

So, in the space of two days, we went from temperature data that was “totally unprecedented and terrifying,” to temperature data that was not suitable for purpose.

‘Supposed’ Record Temperature In China Not All It Seems– Paul Homewood: “There is a highly coordinated effort taking place to persuade the public that the world’s climate is somehow out of control, with extreme weather everywhere and heatwaves on every continent.” … “Quite clearly, any record temperature set in the Turpan is meaningless and cannot be compared to other locations in China. It is merely the product of a micro climate. There is also a second issue here. Sanbao has no official listing or any historical data…In short we have no way of knowing whether it has been hotter in Saobao in the past, or whether the thermometer there is even properly sited and maintained.”

Read the whole article here:

Top Climate Scientists Rubbish Claims July was the Hottest Month ever – Public being ‘Misinformed on a Massive Scale’ • Watts Up With That?

ANOTHER TAX-PAYER FUNDED PART OF THE CLIMATE BLOB

There is a massive industry which has grown up around the climate change issue. It is costing the UK taxpayer many millions of pounds. Most of it goes unnoticed by the public. Occasionally something comes to the surface like this organisation:  

About Us - Climate Ambition Support Alliance (CASA) (casaclimate.org)

Looking at their website we see their purpose set out as follows:

To increase the capacity and capability of climate-vulnerable country negotiators to engage in international climate negotiations, helping to preserve and enhance the rules-based international system and increase appetite for higher ambition.

Or, in simple terms,  to get third world countries to lower their CO2 emissions and to help them to extract more from the West in return. 

Hat tip to Not a lot of people know that, see here:

More Taxpayer Money Going To The Green Blob | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

NEW SCIENTIST CLIMATE ARTICLE ANALYSIS SHOWS NO NEED TO PANIC

The New Scientist seems to be completely captivated by the climate scare. In this article Dr David Whitehouse analyses their latest article to find some surprising results:

New Scientist: How worried should we be about climate change? - Net Zero Watch

In a New Scientist Climate Special Report senior reporter Michael Le Page asks if climate change is worse than we thought it would be?

It’s first question is: Is the world is warming faster than expected?

In short, the conclusion the article draws is no, it isn’t; 

Next comes the question, are we seeing more extreme weather than predicted?

The jury is still out.” So, scientifically speaking that would be another no.

Then the magazine asks: Are we closer to tipping points than anticipated?

New Scientist says “Yes, we are, though a great deal of uncertainty remains.” In other words, the answer might equally be: No, we aren’t, or We actually don’t know.

Read the full article at the above link.

THE JUST ENERGY TRANSITION PARTNERSHIP (JETP)

 Have you heard of  this? It seems to have received very little publicity. But apparently it involves several Western countries, including the UK providing capital and loans to get foreign countries to agree to end their use of coal. Unsurprisingly the countries are not very keen to give up on cheap energy, as the articles below explain:

Net-zero: Green colonialism backfires | Turbulent Times

Net-zero: dead in the water | Turbulent Times

UK ELECTRICITY PRICE SAGA - ALICE IN WONDERLAND

 Have you ever wondered why our electricity is amongst the most expensive in the world? Well the answer lies in the crazy pricing system which could not be more bizarre if they tried. Read it here from Ross Clark:

Energy prices really are a conspiracy against the public-Ross Clark | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com) 

PAPER STRAWS - ANOTHER ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTER!

While plastic straws had their drawbacks, we now find that replacing them is not as easy as was first thought. This is yet another example of rushing to do something without thinking it through. A bit like net zero, though a lot cheaper!

 Paper straws have ‘forever chemicals’ that may be worse for us and the environment than plastic « JoNova (joannenova.com.au)

BUY A 40 YEAR OLD CAR TO DODGE ULEZ

This is a tale of unexpected consequences, as Londoners are buying older and higher CO2 emission vehicles which are, ironically, exempt from the ultra low emission zone (ULEZ) charge. As a bonus, these cars are also exempt from road tax. These taxes are driving us into becoming a third world country.  

Sales of old fossil cars are booming in Ultra Low Emission London… « JoNova (joannenova.com.au)

HOW SCIENCE IS DONE THESE DAYS

Any serious scientists who wish to write a paper which goes against the hypothesis of man-made warming is finding it is likely to destroy their reputation.

The Climategate leaks showed co-compiler of the HadCRUT global temperature series Dr Phil Jones emailing Michael “Hockey Stick” Mann, July 8, 2004:
"I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin [Trenberth, a colleague] and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"

Thanks to a science whistle-blower, there’s now documentation of a current exercise as bad as that captured in the Jones-Mann correspondence. This new and horrid saga – again involving Dr Mann – sets out to deplatform and destroy a peer-endorsed published paper by four Italian scientists. Their paper in European Physical Journal Plus is titled A critical assessment of extreme events trends in times of global warming and documents that extreme weather and related disasters are not generally increasing, contrary to the catastrophists feeding misinformation to the Guardian/ABC axis and other compliant media

.

Full story here.

 How Science is Done These Days – Quadrant Online

IS RECENT WEATHER BECOMING MORE EXTREME?

We are being told on a daily basis that our weather is becoming more extreme, but is this born out by the data? Below is an article that disputes this claim: 

Is Weather Really Getting More ‘Extreme?’ - CO2 Coalition

40000 DEATHS FROM DIESEL POLLUTION DEBUNKED

This is a 2017 article, but it gives such a thorough debunking of an oft repeated fake piece of data that I felt it should be included here, in light of the Ultra Low Emissions debate.

 Mortality from Diesel Car Pollution in the UK | Energy Matters (euanmearns.com)

LONDONERS FIGHT BACK AGAINST LOW EMISSION ZONE

It's not only climate extremists that are taking action to support their cause; as you can see below, motorists are also very angry, now they realise the cost of motoring is to rise so dramatically. I am sure there are a few vandals happy to join in to cause mayhem as well. Just imagine how angry the people will become if they are told their gas central heating is going to become obsolete in a few months time! 

 Over 300 “low emission” surveillance cameras stolen or damaged in London since April « JoNova (joannenova.com.au)

RELIGIOUS SACRIFICES FROM THE CHURCH OF CLIMATOLOGY

 Here is an interesting article from Spiked Online: 

Net Zero is a neo-pagan religion that is seriously harming people’s liberties and livelihoods.

We look back with bewilderment at the ritual sacrifice of animals by our ancestors. Whether it was the Celtic people’s sacrifice of livestock to appease pissed-off deities or the Ancient Romans’ slaughter of oxen so that Jupiter might be more sparing with his stormy weather, it was all a bit mad. We would never be so superstitious, we tell ourselves. I’m not sure that’s true. Consider the proposed slaughter of hundreds of thousands of cattle in Europe in the holy name of Net Zero. This is the return of pagan lunacy, surely.

Irish farmers are under pressure to ‘cull up to 200,000 cows’ in order that Ireland might meet its ‘climate goals’, reported the Financial Times at the weekend. The Irish government is considering proposals to bump off that amount of cattle over the next three years to help it achieve a 25 per cent reduction in its agricultural emissions. Cows produce methane, you see, and methane is bad. It’s a greenhouse gas. Farming accounts for 40 per cent of Ireland’s greenhouse-gas emissions, so it has become a natural target for the Net Zero zealots. Every EU member state is under pressure to make strides towards Net Zero, and if that entails the sacrifice of livestock, so be it. Save the planet, slaughter the cows.
 
It’s so superstitious. A ‘mooted cow massacre’ to try to offset the angry climatic conditions apparently caused by man? If someone can explain how this is any different to an ancient people’s ritualistic killing of a poor bull in a desperate bid to placate the weather gods, I’d be most grateful. In fact, if anything, the proposed cow-culling in Ireland is worse than the paganistic antics of our ill-educated forebears. At least they were wise enough to offer up only one or two beasts to the gods of thunder – the neo-pagans of the Net Zero cult are offering up whole herds to try to assuage the heatwaves and floods they think furious Mother Earth has in store for us.

And they seem to care little for the consequences of their heathen carbon-offsetting. Irish farmers are seriously worried for their livelihoods. The dairy industry is worth €13 billion a year to the Irish economy. It provides 54,000 jobs. It brought in a staggering €6.8 billion in exports in 2022 alone. What will become of all this fruitful work if cow slaughter in the name of Net Zero takes off? We’re portrayed as ‘climate killers’, complains one Irish farmer. Indeed, eco-activists marched in Dublin with banners saying ‘Meat + dairy = climate crisis’ – a perfect snapshot of out how out-of-touch the urban elites are, who probably never give a second thought to the question of who produced the luscious cream that appears atop the €20 pancakes they scoff for Sunday brunch in a hip Dublin eatery.
 
Full post

UK GOVERNMENT TO OFFER VOTE ON ELECTRIC VEHICLE SALES POLICY

 Under plans to reduce new petrol and diesel vehicle sales to zero by 2030 (a so-called “ZEV mandate”), British car makers would from 2024 have to ensure that at least 22 per cent of all their new cars, and 10 per cent of their vans, are electric-powered.

Those manufacturers who fail to hit the target face fines of up to £15,000 per car if they miss the production target and Business Secretary Kemi Badenoch has lobbied for more flexibility on the timetable after complaints from some car firms.

Normally, the statutory instrument used to enact such measures would be passed through Parliament using a “negative” procedure, with little chance for a vote.

But the DfT is planning to use a rare “affirmative” procedure, which would need to be passed by a vote in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords. The vote would allow rebels to join forces to vote against the plans.

The procedure may be used as a way to allow backbenchers to register a protest, but if the rebellion grows then ministers may pull the whole vote rather than have to rely on Labour votes to get it through.

The 2024 start date for the new vehicles mandate will be followed by a ramping up of production targets to 2030, when no new petrol or diesel cars will allowed to be sold.

So we see, yet again, that the government is getting nervous about the drastic measures which they know would have to be taken to reach the wretched net zero by 2050 target. Most of the public are still blissfully unaware of the costly mayhem that is gradually approaching 

THE INCONVENIENT FACTS THAT GET IGNORED BY THE MEDIA

Amidst all the talk of recent hot weather I have not heard any mention of one possible cause:

Hunga Tonga & Its Role In Rising Global Temperatures ‹ NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT ‹ Reader — WordPress.com

How strange?

NET ZERO: WHAT, WHEN, HOW AND WHO PAYS?

 These are the questions we should all be asking and demanding our political leaders answer. So far we have been given only vague hand-waving style avoidance. To start with what does net zero actually mean? Does it mean we can simply carry on emitting CO2 but pay to have some trees planted somewhere, which seems to be what a lot of companies are doing. Then what about aviation, shipping, and imported goods? Should their CO2 be counted towards our total?

"When" seems to be in 2050, though there are a few targets along the way and as we get nearer to those, people are beginning to realise the full implications. It all seems so easy to say we will accomplish some goal in 5 or 10 years time. Take oil-fired central heating, which is no longer to be fitted beyond 2026; now there is a dawning of the reality and resistance building. This only affects 1.5 million homes. Imagine the enormity of phasing out gas boilers and gas cookers in 20 times as many places. I fully expect this deadline will fail to be met. It is simply inconceivable that it could be, even if the public were all compliant, which they won't be.

This brings us on to "how". How will we muster a large enough workforce of skilled engineers to keep to the schedule? We have failed to even persuade everyone to have a smart meter fitted, and that is a doddle compared with a complete change of central heating system. Then there are gas cookers and gas fires.

Finally there is the biggest question of all - Who pays? In simple terms the answer has to be US, the taxpayers. But a bill running into hundreds of billions of pounds, or maybe trillions, is simply beyond the government to find - on top of the covid rescue, and before that the banking rescue. We are already up to our collective necks in debt. But until they have an answer to that question, we must assume that net zero is just a pipe-dream, albeit a very costly one. For even if it ends in failure we will have invested a huge amount even to get only part of the way.

My final question is - when will the bubble finally burst? Who will be in charge when it becomes beyond doubt that net zero is unachievable and when? There are already some extremists who want us to go even faster, like the "Just Stop Oil" mob. We need strong leadership to resist their lunacy, It is time for a sensible, rational debate.  

THE DEMISE OF GLACIERS AND ICE SHEETS HAS BEEN EXAGGERATED

Read all about how we are being fed exaggerations and lies about the state of our glaciers. Like everything to do with climate it is not simple and certainly not a uniform trend. 

Glaciers And Ice Sheets: Here Today And Here Tomorrow | PA Pundits International (wordpress.com)

UK OFFSHORE WIND LOOKS DEAD

The capital and operating costs of wind power, particularly offshore are still very high. This technology is unattractive and imposes very high system costs when compared to gas generation even at today’s elevated prices. It is completely uneconomic if the gas prices continue to revert to their historic levels. 

UK offshore wind is dead in the water - as predicted - Net Zero Watch

The UK is heading for a very costly energy future which will hold our economy back and increase our whole cost of living. It is self-inflicted damage being carried out with no useful result. It will have no effect on the level of CO2 in the atmosphere and no effect on the climate either here in the UK or in the world as a whole.  

UK PUBLIC SHOW LITTLE INTEREST IN HEAT PUMP GRANTS

Despite the government offering grants of £5000 to "upgrade" their heating system to a heat pump, the take up of the offer has been much lower than they hoped. The second year of the Boiler Upgrade Scheme has seen only 13,766 of the available 90,000 vouchers redeemed. 

The lack of installers and the expenses associated with adequately insulating homes for heat pump readiness have been identified by experts as the primary factors responsible. I would imagine it is not only the cost, but also the major disruption of ripping out and replacing pipe work in every room. This is a massive inconvenience as well as cost. 

The problem for the government is that if they have to force millions of people to replace their heating system they will become very unpopular, which is why they are trying so hard to convince them that climate change is such a danger. Unfortunately they are not winning that argument with the majority remaining sceptical.

Read the details of the scheme here:

 Only 15% of the available Boiler Upgrade Scheme vouchers have been redeemed, Ofgem reveals | Homebuilding

CLIMATE HYPE VERSUS REALITY

Those pushing the climate change scare often claim that the "science" is settled and that no serious scientist disagrees. But, in reality that is far from the truth. Some of the most celebrated scientists have said that they completely disagree with the idea that CO2 emissions control the world's temperature. Fortunately, because of their achievements, these scientists cannot be silenced, though their objections are rarely mentioned in the news. Younger scientists who wish to have a successful career are much easier to control and seldom disagree publicly for very obvious reasons. In the following video the true extent of disagreement is made clear:  

 Climate Fakery Part 17 - NewTube

TIME FOR A DOSE OF REALITY

 Amid the myriad of dire tales of climate Armageddon put out by our TV news reporters, I thought it was time again for a reality check from my favourite climate commentator, Tony Heller. Tony has seen it all before and he has the written records to prove it. Here is a recent short video putting the record straight:

Climate Fakery Part 21 - NewTube 

If you haven't seen his other videos you can see some of them on my Tony Heller page at the top right of the blog.

WILL NEW OIL BOILERS BE BANNED IN THE UK FROM 2026?

 The government is clearly thinking of a ban on all new and replacement oil burning boilers from 2026, but now the date is getting closer they appear to be getting cold feet (just like the folk with no replacement boilers!). A big factor in their consideration will be how to win the next election, so it is likely that this deadline will be deferred. Read the details here:

Plans for oil boiler ban from 2026 dubbed a 'ULEZ' for rural households | Homebuilding  

NATURAL EFFECTS ON THE CLIMATE

With all the media concentrating on "man made climate change" it is easy to overlook the fact that there are huge natural forces at play which can profoundly affect the climate. These forces are far more powerful than the effect of man's CO2 emissions. Here is a link to an interesting lecture on some of them.

James E. Kamis: Geological Impacts on Climate | Tom Nelson Pod #121 - YouTube

WIND POWER - THE BIG LIE

 For years the wind industry have told the public and politicians, incessantly, that wind power is now the cheapest form of generation. In recent weeks, they and their supporters have changed tack, arguing that material price rises and inflation mean that they can no longer make a profit without further subsidies and tax breaks, and that Contract for Difference (CfD) Round 4 developments, such as Hornsea 3, will not come on line unless ministers assent. Industry bodies that have insisted for the last six years that offshore wind can deliver power at less than £50/MWh now expect us to believe that they cannot make a profit. This doesn’t so much strain belief as blow it to smithereens. Market prices have averaged over £130/MWh this year, so even if input prices had doubled, windfarms should still have operating margins of 25%, an extraordinary level of profitability.

Read the whole report here:

Wind-briefing.pdf (netzerowatch.com)

COLD, HEAT, WET OR DRY - IT'S ALL "CLIMATE CHANGE"

 One of the main reasons why the public are so sceptical about the climate change hypothesis is the way any extreme weather is attributed to it. This is  made clear in the following article:

Is Our Cold, Wet Summer Due To Global Warming? | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

BREAKING THE CONSENSUS IN UK

It's starting to crumble:

Conservative voters are starting to push back, with The Times offering details of a YouGov poll which finds that 68 percent of Tory voters are opposed to the 2030 deadline on abolishing the sale of new petrol/diesel vehicles, as against 27 percent in favour.

Even the obsessives in Starmer’s Labour, and in other parties, can’t carry the day: overall, while 42 percent of voters opposed the net-zero plans, only 42 percent backed them.

When confronted with the costs of actually implementing the policy, 55 percent of those polled said that they would be unwilling to accept “additional costs for ordinary people”, while only 27 percent said they would accept extra costs. And this is in the context where none of the politicians (much less the media) are being straight about the real costs.

 Politics: breaking the consensus | Turbulent Times

ANOTHER MET OFFICE FORECAST SEEMS OFF THE MARK

How much can we rely on the Met Office forecasts? The following forecast was made on 19th June during the hot spell here in the UK:

"The Met Office says we can expect the hot weather to continue.

It says there is a 45% chance - significantly higher than usual - that the UK will have what it describes as a "hot summer". The quote is at the end of the BBC article below:

 Climate change: Sudden heat increase in seas around UK and Ireland - BBC News

Since then the UK has experienced cooler than average temperatures with higher than average rainfall.

"HOTTEST MONTH" - NEVER!

In this article we read of top climate scientists calling claims of July being the hottest month ever as "rubbish"! 

Top Climate Scientists Rubbish Claims July was the Hottest Month ever – Public being ‘Misinformed on a Massive Scale’ • Watts Up With That?

IS THIS THE BEGINNING OF THE END?

Interesting thought....

 Is this the week that Net Zero died? - The Post (unherd.com)

BBC CATALOGUE OF DECEPTION OVER CLIMATE

There can only be one reason why the BBC puts out such biased information on climate, and that is because it believes its role is to influence the public, rather than to inform it. They seek to stifle debate rather than to encourage it.  

 BBC still playing fast and loose with climate facts | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

SEA LEVELS WERE 2 TO 6 METERS HIGHER SIX THOUSAND YEARS AGO

Two new studies have shown this to be the case. The idea that sea levels are rising to unprecedented levels is simply not true as the report below tells us.

 Two More Studies Indicate Mid-Holocene Sea Levels Were 2-6 Meters Higher Than Present (notrickszone.com)

CLIMATE MODELS ARE USELESS - SAYS EXPERT CLIMATE SCIENTIST

Here is yet another scientist coming out to say how useless the climate models are, with much of the world's data being missing until the twentieth century. The whole basis for the very costly policies to reduce CO2 emissions is based on a false basis.

 ANOTHER CLIMATE SCIENTIST WITH IMPECCABLE CREDENTIALS BREAKS RANKS: “OUR MODELS ARE MICKEY-MOUSE MOCKERIES OF THE REAL WORLD” | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

BEWARE THE BEHAVIOURAL INSIGHTS TEAM (BIT)

 The BIT, also known as the Nudge Unit is a body which is tasked by the government to change our behaviour by teaming up with the media to put out articles to get us to follow their preferred actions. 

A report by the BIT in collaboration with Sky TV called "The Power of TV: Nudging Viewers to Decarbonise their Lifestyles" says: "Behavioural change on climate can be driven by TV..... experts now widely accept we must shift the behaviour of millions of people to deliver our collective net zero goals."

There is something rather sinister about the idea of broadcasters plotting to manipulate the public into reaching "our collective goals". Whose goals are they? Why is there no questioning of whether this is in the population's best interests or not? Where are the alternative points of view?

It looks very likely that the BIT is involved in the sudden change in TV weather maps, from pale greens and yellows to vivid reds and deep purples. Even the Foreign Office has now added an "Extreme Weather" section to update the Greece and Spain information, detailing how to stay safe during the heatwave, as though we are travelling to a war zone. 

If the weather was so bad you would not expect anyone to want to to there, and yet despite all this the resorts are packed with tourists, keen to escape from the damp and overcast British weather. 

The BIT have over-reached with their lurid weather maps and their brazen attempt to get us to cancel our summer hols. Rebellion is stirring. People are mocking.

"In Cyprus, we're just about holding our own", report one ironic holiday-maker".

"Locals simply call it summer, but what would they now?" says another pool-side sun-worshiper.

The above article is adapted from a piece by Allison Pearson in the Telegraph for 19th July 2023 

AVERAGE UK TEMPERATURES HAVE NOT INCREASED OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS

The headline has been disputed by someone at news agency Reuters, who have relied on information from the Met Office. The dispute is answered by Paul Homewood as follows:  

“If UK temperatures in the last 20 years were increasing as rapidly as the Met Office suggest, it should be obvious from their own data. Yet according to the Met Office’s State of UK Climate 2022 report, published today, UK temperature between 1998 and 2007 averaged 9.35°C, compared to 9.44°C between 2013 and 2022, a statistically insignificant change.” 

Reuters inaccurate fact check | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

Clearly these statistics can be used to show different results depending on how they are used. 

BATTERY BREAKDOWN - BEWARE THE DANGERS!

There is growing concern over the rise in fatalities, injuries and devastating fires from electric bikes (e-bikes) and electric scooters (e-scooters). These are lithium-ion batteries which are widely used in many other devices. Clearly this is a major concern as we move to use more and more battery devices.

Battery breakdown | Electrical Safety First