Well-known London prison
Cue intensified attempts to reach so-called climate targets at inevitably vast public expense. An exercise in futility.
– – –
Grant Shapps, the Energy Security and Net Zero Secretary has revealed during a meeting of the Environment and Climate Change Committee that he faces the risk of being sent to prison for contempt of court if he fails to deliver on the government’s net zero targets, says Energy Live News.
Shapps, who was asked about the current arrangements that support his role in achieving these targets, stated that he has the greatest incentive among his government colleagues and anyone globally to reach these exacting goals.
Mr Shapps said: “I have the greatest incentive of anybody in government here and probably anyone globally, for us to reach these very exacting targets because, on a technical basis, I can be sent to prison for contempt of court for not having a proper plan in place.”
He emphasised that the Parliament has made it a legal obligation to achieve net zero by 2050 and that he is personally invested in solving this issue.
While Shapps expressed hope that his commitment might encourage his Cabinet colleagues to lend their support, he acknowledged that he may have this the wrong way around.
Full article here.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
Importing Moroccan sunshine is in the plan…
Simon Morrish, CEO of Xlinks, said the company had the ambition “to supply British households with secure, affordable, and green energy all year round. With this investment and support from our partners TAQA and Octopus, along with the support received from both the UK and Moroccan Governments, we take another step toward achieving that ambition.”
The company said the UK’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero had established a dedicated team for the project.
https://www.energyvoice.com/renewables-energy-transition/498925/xlinks-morocco-taqa-octopus/
Oldbrew, ‘ importing sunshine my ( got a sniffle).’ Shapps: “emphasised that the Parliament has made it a legal obligation..” why doesn’t the par-liar-ment to tell the truth for once and CANCEL the legal obligation. And as for ALL those in authority, they should be held responsible and charged / jailed etc.. Why not?
I’ll say O/T but, Nuremeberg tryed and found guilty , people who were “doing as instructed…” No need to execute here, BUT the idealogy still holds, oder ? How many people have ended lives one way or t’other, in this country, through Parliament’s decrees recently and the zealots who abound away from Westminster. Perhaps WE are not sufficiently zealous in our appetite for the truth and freedom in our lives.
“I told you, I told you,I told you,I told you,I told you,I told you,” no matter how shrill is of no help and will never return the water back up under the bridge. The Cow is dying – the Milk is spillt.. … think about that one.
I think all those in the climate change committee and parliament should be in prison for their utter stupidity and gullibility for falling for the Net Zero scam. Don’t they realise we need all the Carbon Dioxide we can get in the air to keep the food crops growing, but then real science and engineering are no longer taught in schools and university – everything is supposed to work on feelings which are useless.
Aye Ivan, like the farmer getting Jail for preventing village flooding through rivermaintenance (long overdue maintenance) or the GreenBlob damaging property and being let off, … SO how long will WE demand that those Plonkers in gubbermint get ?
Slightly O/T and from USA ( not united then? ) ‘ ruling stops the administration from enforcing what’s considered to be a burdensome rule’ .. https://www.beefmagazine.com/news/court-issues-another-blow-wotus?NL=BEEF-02&Issue=BEEF-02_20230426_BEEF-02_712&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_2&utm_rid=CPG02000003393405&utm_campaign=75964&utm_medium=email&elq2=bc1829fc49f748e5bcdc0c65a40c33c2&sp_eh=246848a92c53a85456ba776c405922f1de36ce616297c6c2a37279b7e73a9cc9 So if it can happen there, why not ANYWHERE else ?
“secure, affordable, and green energy all year round”
Then he woke up and found the sun doesn’t shine 24/7/365, except in greencrap press releases.
When vanity, arrogance and ignorance meet, you have legal commitments to do something people probably don’t want, using technologies that probably won’t exist, at a cost you don’t know. To call it folly is to insult the foolish.
Old good Britain .. Secretary Shapps’s deliverable is a plan, in the best bureaucratic traditions. Maybe his name is misspelled, how about Schnapps?
More wishful thinking on ‘net zero’…
NEWS RELEASE 25-APR-2023
The role of hydrogen and batteries in delivering net zero in the UK by 2050 analyzed in new report
The complementary roles of battery and hydrogen technologies: Navigating uncertainties towards net zero
Reports and Proceedings
THE FARADAY INSTITUTION
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/987270
– – -.
‘Uncertainties’ indeed. Two paragraphs on that under the heading. Someone’s been on the hopium again.
They also forgot hydrogen has its own pollution problems…
The bad news is that H2 combustion can produce dangerously high levels of nitrogen oxide (NOx). Two European studies have found that burning hydrogen-enriched natural gas in an industrial setting can lead to NOx emissions up to six times that of methane (the most common element in natural gas mixes). There are numerous other studies in the scientific literature about the difficulties of controlling NOx emissions from H2 combustion in various industrial applications.
. . .
This emissions problem is not a secret but a longstanding industry problem. [bold added]
https://www.cleanegroup.org/hydrogen-hype-in-the-air/
“If it sounds too good to be true, it probably isn’t”
The opposite works also. If they seem too stupid to be real, they probably aren’t.
Time to look behind the curtain.
Please note the following simple proof that our CO2, nor any CO2 emission, affects global temperature.
I would appreciate any comment upon it, particularly if there are doubts about it, or problems with it that I should know of, because I commonly use it and would not wish to discredit myself or the claim against the Anthropogenic Theory of Global Warming (AGW).
The proof is so simple that I would think it accessible to those of minimal scientific understanding.
The AGW depends on the idea that our CO2 emissions dangerously accelerate an already potent Greenhouse Effect (GE).
The Potency of the GE is not empirically established, but both sides of the argument agree that without its atmosphere the Earth would be 33C cooler, which 33C is known as the Atmospheric thermal Enhancement (ATE).
IPCC et. al. say this is proof of the potency of the GE since the ATE can have no other explanation.
They are in serious error here for the following reason.
If its pressure was less the Atmosphere would be less compressed, and therefore more voluminous, but with the same thermal energy being conducted into it from the Earth’s Surface (c.f. the 1st Law).
Since this energy is then distributed between more units of volume the atmosphere would be cooler of course.
Atmospheric pressure is determined by its own weight bearing down on itself and the extent of this weight is determined by the particular strength of gravity affecting it.
Accordingly it is the extent of the loss of volume caused by Gravity that determines the ATE – which is therefore a constant – the GE cannot be responsible for that which is attributable to Gravity and since there is no real empirical evidence for its potency the claim that the GE is known to warm the atmosphere is manifestly false.
I have had people argue against this on the basis that Gravity is not energy and an energy source must be found, whereas continuous negative work is performed by the act of compression in continuous equilibrium with the forces of expansion.
the simple fact is that the size of an appreciable atmosphere determines the extent of its ATE.
This proves that temperature variation on Earth is the result of changes to net insolation.
Any physics teacher who ignores this and argues in favour of the AGW needs to be asked to deal with the facts laid down here.
If you disagree please explain where it is in error in order to save me from folly.
Pete Rogers says:
– – –
This is all a bit off-topic, but the temperature at 1 bar atmospheric pressure (as an example) is one yardstick to use. At 1 bar Earth and Venus have a very similar temperature when adjusted for distance from the sun.
Of course 1 bar on Venus isn’t at the surface but that’s not the issue. The facts are that Venus has about 96% CO2 in its atmosphere, whereas Earth has hardly any (0.04%).
Net zero Britain will be unable to keep the lights on, MPs warn
Green power unlikely to generate enough energy to run the country without radical reform, says Business Select Committee
28 April 2023
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/28/net-zero-britain-will-be-unable-to-keep-the-lights-on-mps-w/
– – –
MPs legislated for net zero. Now they, or their committee at least, don’t like the look of it.
Germany leading the way…to net zero unrest?
Leading German Politician Warns Proposed Climate Policies Could Lead To “Uprisings” And “Riots”
26. April 2023
“Ecological madness”
AUF 1 reminds that the proposed government ‘s green policies “will force ruinous retrofitting on millions of homeowners.” and that many citizens would simply not be able to afford the required renovation of their house or apartments. Homeowners would face renovation costs of at least tens of thousands of euros.”
Kretschmer called the Greens’ policy “ecological madness”.
https://notrickszone.com/2023/04/26/leading-german-politician-warns-proposed-climate-policies-could-lead-to-uprisings-and-riots/
Thanks for responding oldbrew, I appreciate it given that what I am saying seems a little off-piste.
I am raising this now because it proves – with penny-drop simplicity – that CO2 is of no warming consequence and do so in the middle of a spat based on the belief that – to the contrary – our 3% of it is The Angel of Death
What you say is true, but may I draw your attention to the central point, which is that our 1 bar of pressure dictates the loss of our Atmospheric volume at the base and it is this which leads to Thermal Enhancement.
That which is accomplished by Gravity cannot be ascribed to the GE which, accordingly, is not known to warm anything after all since the 33C of the ATE is supposed to stand as proof of its thermal effect and the only proof.
If you think there are any mistakes in this reasoning I would be pleased if you would advise me since I raise this argument as often as I can in order to achieve traction. I would not wish to do so if in error as that would embarrass opposition to the AGW.
The point is that for the AGW to be true the 33C ATE must be entirely attributed to the GE and this shows that it is not.
And that is what is so wrong about the system. It’s personalised rather than being objective. The reality is, that those inflicting mass harm, by way of net zero policies, are the ones that should be facing jail time.
April 28, 2023
Grant Shapps assures the UK’s oil and gas industry it has his full support to continue drilling
Meanwhile, at the Royal Courts of Justice, campaigners celebrated a High Court ruling that granted charity Greenpeace permission to proceed with a judicial review of new oil and gas licensing in the North Sea.
. . .
Shapps told an audience mostly composed of energy sector professionals that it “simply makes no sense whatsoever to deny our own oil and gas, and instead import it – with twice the embedded carbon – from elsewhere in the world”. He added that it is “very important” to understand that even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recognises the need for “some” oil and gas production in 2050 when the UK has reached net zero. [bold added]
https://www.energymonitor.ai/sectors/industry/grant-shapps-assures-the-uks-oil-and-gas-industry-it-has-his-full-support-to-continue-drilling/
Blinkered Greenpeace numpties don’t understand it, or don’t want to.
If the UK courts become obstructive to drilling, import options won’t be drying up, e.g…
Exxon Greenlights New Multibillion-Dollar Guyana Project
Exxon will go ahead with a $12.7-billion oil development off the coast of Guyana after the country’s government gave its final approval to the project
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Exxon-Greenlights-New-Multibillion-Dollar-Guyana-Project.html