Another victory for sceptic lobbyists : Europe’s politicians start to wake up from the Green Energy Dream

From EUractiv:

Europe’s plan to decarbonise its economy by 2050 could be turned on its head at a summit today (22 May) if EU heads of state and government sign off on measures prioritising industrial competitiveness over climate change in draft conclusions seen by EurActiv.

The draft text says that EU policy must ensure “competitive” energy prices, and declares it “crucial” that Europe diversify its energy supply and develop “indigenous energy resources” – a reference to renewable energies, but also coal, nuclear power and shale gas.

One high-profile German MEP Holger Krahmer (ALDE), hailed the end of “climate hysteria” in a jubilant press statement.

“For the first time, rising energy costs and the declining competitiveness of the European economy will be rated higher than obviously unenforceable global climate change ambitions,” he said.

“The economic and social consequences of collective hysteria can no longer be ignored, as the governments of the EU member states admit in this paper,” Krahmer added, saying that it was right to give more attention to energy sources such as gas and coal.

Ed Davey: “there are some issues where you have to draw the line”

A report about an Ed Davey speech not yet given, that has been leaked to the Grauniad by… presumably, Ed Davey. It seems Davey still doesn’t understand that on issues where the science underpinning the policy evolves, ‘drawing a line’ is a pretty feckin stupid thing to do. He needs to wake up and start thinking about using the provisions in the climate change act for changing the co2 reduction targets, before he finds his political career curtailed.

From the Garunida:

Ed Davey, the energy and climate change secretary, is to use a major speech at Clarence House on Wednesday afternoon to fight back against the increasingly vocal climate change scepticism of other sections of the coalition.

His uncompromising speech, seen by the Guardian, promises stronger action on global warming and follows the admission by his party leader Nick Clegg that green issues are now some of the most serious flashpoints between the coalition partners. The Liberal Democrats have long sought to be seen as strong on the environment, a core issue for the party’s voters. But they have suffered setbacks in government as the Treasury has cut renewable energy support and an increasingly vocal number of Tories oppose windfarms, money for low-carbon projects and tougher targets for UK emissions cuts, all of which the Lib Dems support.

The extent of some of the divisions was on display in the European parliament recently, when rebel Tory MEPs played a pivotal role in scuppering plans to rescue the EU’s carbon trading system.

Davey struck a firm stance:

“As a politician, you quickly realise that compromise is a part of the game. But there are some issues where you have to draw the line – where you have to stand up and be counted, and you have to do the right thing. I think climate change is firmly in that category.”

He quoted David Cameron as saying “we can’t afford not to” act on the problem.

The week in politics: Grassroots UKIP comes up trumps

On May second 1200+ UKIP local government candidates took the country by storm. More than half of them came first or second in the elections. Congratulations to them all. This has ignited debate in the media, primarily over EU membership. Lord Lawson write a strong article in the Times calling for a referendum giving the opportunity for Britain to get out. He has been followed by Bernard Jenkin, Sir Gerald Howarth and Lord Tebbit. Old Tory grandees are putting Prime minister David Cameron under pressure. Climate policy doesn’t figure high on the public’s radar these days, apart from those unfortunate to live close to (occasionally) spinning wind turbines which cause noise disturbance and flickering of sunlight. Party Leader Nigel Farage made it clear that although he wasn’t subjecting the successful new councillors to a party whip, he does “expect them to oppose every planning application for a wind turbine”. Go Nigel.

visit http://cartoonsbyjosh.com and buy something!

Flashback: Institute of Physics Submission to Parliamentary Inquiry on Climategate

Always worth a reblog. The climate establishment’s response to this submission was to get the IOP sub-committee which produced the report abolished, and to smear its members.

Memorandum submitted by the Institute of Physics (CRU 39)

The disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia

The Institute of Physics is a scientific charity devoted to increasing the practice, understanding and application of physics. It has a worldwide membership of over 36,000 and is a leading communicator of physics-related science to all audiences, from specialists through to government and the general public. Its publishing company, IOP Publishing, is a world leader in scientific publishing and the electronic dissemination of physics.

The Institute is pleased to submit its views to inform the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee’s inquiry, ‘The disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia’.

The submission details our response to the questions listed in the call for evidence, which was prepared with input from the Institute’s Science Board, and its Energy Sub-group.

What are the implications of the disclosures for the integrity of scientific research?

Sir Mark Sets Out his Priorities

Sir Mark Walport, the government’s new chief scientific advisor has given a talk at Cambridge University setting out his stall for the job ahead. It’s fairly dry and I doubt many here will sit through all of it, but I just thought I’d highlight minutes 12 to 16 where he discusses energy. In giving a passing nod to ‘sustainability’ as “one of three lenses” energy policy needs to be looked at through (the others mentioned ahead of it being energy security and energy affordability), Sir mark, unusually for a policy wonk, gives a mention to space-weather; “the ionising, the electromagnetic radiation from the Sun”. Now that’s a bit of a curve ball to throw in to a talk about the science-policy interface, and I think it’s a coded message to the enviro-lobbyists that they’re not going to find Sir Mark compliant on the issue of ‘the science’. It’s not so much a shot across the bows of Greenpeace as a gesture towards a box of limpet mines. Maybe my missive really did hit it’s mark, or maybe Sir Mark was already alive to the Climate and Solar uncertainty issues. Either way, I’m glad to see we have a chief science advisor who has a broader perspective on the thorny issues around energy policy than his predecessor.

A Presidential Punt of the Climate Change Political Football

Well, this ramps up the political game a bit. Climate hearings, should be good for some home truths being brought into the open I think. Who’s on-oath attendance should be required, and what questions should be put to them?

Our Children Won’t know What ‘Peak Oil’ is.

a remarkable new oil and gas find that has gone almost unremarked:

U.S. Reserves up to 2010. The balance sheet now looks much healthier, but extraction costs are rising.

There it was, a remarkable stat buried among many that should have made everyone at the Dallas Convention Centre take a deep breath. According to the source, just one oil play in the Texas Midland Basin, the Spraberry/Wolfcap shale, may have a total recoverable resource of up to 50 billion barrels using new tight-oil extraction technologies. This revelation presents us all with an arresting number, if indeed that much oil is producible from a region already famous for its hydrocarbon potential. For one thing, supplementary data from the U.S. Energy Information Agency shows that only 1.3 billion barrels have been produced from the legacy region since its original discovery in 1949. So tapping into the multizone Spraberry/Wolfcap with horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing processes is a like finding a virgin oil field – a very big one at that.

Repatriation of Sovereign power for the UK ‘impossible’ says Labour MEP.

Labour MEP Mary Honeyball thinks we’re trapped. I think I prefer UKIP’s message.

It is quite clear to that there will never be the agreement required from the 26 other EU member states for repatriation of powers to the UK – claims MEP

British Prime Minister David Cameron and his family visited Angela Merkel last weekend at the German Chancellor’s guest residence Schloss Meseberg. We do not, in any detail at least, know what they discussed other than what was issued in a brief statement from Number 10 Downing Street. It revealed the two leaders discussed the need for reform of the single market and both reportedly called for “urgent action to make the European Union more competitive and flexible”.

It is well documented that the German chancellor has been anxious regarding Cameron’s plan for a referendum on the issue of Europe. Along with the French President François Hollande, Merkel has formed an alliance to illustrate the level of disapproval.

EU rejects ‘backloading’ of CarbonCreds – Price immediately falls to barrel bottom

Psst, wanna buy some junk bonds?

Letter to Sir Mark Walport putting a question to the Government’s Sci-Tech Committee

On Twitter this morning, I was delighted to see the government’s new chief advisor, Sir Mark Walport, asking the public for questions to put to the Science and Technology Committee. This is a refreshing change from the imperious attitude adopted by the previous incumbent, Sir John Beddington.

UPDATE 18-4-2013
I don’t know whether my missive had any impact or not, but Sir Mark is making noises which are music to my ears:

#Walport on #WatO: Climate change undeniable but affordable energy “essential”. Less bullish on clean energy than #Beddington.

— roger harrabin (@RHarrabin) April 18, 2013

=================================================================================

Dear Sir Mark,

Thank you for making yourself accessible to the public and for inviting questions to be put to the Science and Technology Committee.

I am one of the UK’s more prominent ‘sceptical’ climate bloggers (No.2 for site traffic not far behind Andrew Montford’s ‘Bishop Hill’).
My degree is in History and Philosophy of science, and I’m also a qualified mechanical engineer.

My question for the S&T committee is this: