The Stark Reality: Net Zero is a Tar-Baby

David Turver writes:

Outgoing Chief Executive of the Climate Change Committee (CCC), Chris Stark has been doing interviews with the BBC and the Guardian before his term finally comes to an end on the 26^th of April.

In his Guardian interview he seemed to suggest that all that was wrong with the Net Zero agenda is the name. He said, “Net zero has definitely become a slogan that I feel occasionally is now unhelpful, because it’s so associated with the campaigns against it.” He went on, “It’s the culture warriors who have really taken against it,” said Stark. “A small group of politicians or political voices has moved in to say that net zero is something that you can’t afford, net zero is something that you should be afraid of … But we’ve still got to reduce emissions. In the end, that’s all that matters.”

Climate the Movie is here.

Eight years ago, talkshop readers helped film maker Martin Durkin finance ‘Brexit the Movie‘, raising over £8000 towards the total cost of production. Now, Martin has made the long awaited sequel to ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle‘ with help from long time fellow sceptic Tom Nelson. It’s called ‘Climate the Movie: the Cold Truth’ and you can watch it for free here, right now. Enjoy!

Available at Vimeo vimeo.com/924719370
On X at twitter.com/TomANelson/status/1771682333738848477
On Youtube at youtube.com/watch?v=zmfRG8-RHEI
On Rumble at rumble.com/v4kl0dn-climate-the-movie-the-cold-truth-martin-durkin.html

Latest energy policy announcements show that the UK Government has gone Insane

By David Turver at his ‘Eigen Values’ substack blog

Introduction

Back in the summer, there were signs that the consensus around Net Zero policy was starting to crack. The Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak then made his speech that watered down some Net Zero commitments and promised “a more pragmatic, proportionate, and realistic approach that eases the burdens on families.” However, in the run up to Christmas, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) made several announcements about various aspects of energy policy that can only add to consumer costs. These included various announcements about their hydrogen policy, a statement on carbon capture usage and storage (CCUS) and an update on the business models for greenhouse gas removal (GGR) and power from bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS).

This article explains that unfortunately, the announcements mark the end of any serious fightback against the Net Zero insanity and demonstrate that the Government has no idea about economics, thermodynamics or energy and has gone completely insane.

Energy “transition” to be much more expensive

The cost deceptions of wind power lobbyists can’t be maintained any longer, as the UK government has closed off their favourite loophole. As this Net Zero Watch press release headlines it: ‘Wind industry confirms Great Green Lie’.
– – –
Campaign group Net Zero Watch says that the wind industry has effectively admitted that it has been deceiving the British public over the cost of the energy “transition”.

RWE Renewables has just told the Government that it needs its subsidy “strike price” to rise by 70% if any more wind farms are to be built.

Net Zero Watch director Andrew Montford said:

Rishi Sunak has said that there has been a long-term deception of the British public. RWE’s demand for more subsidy confirms it. The Green Blob has been lying about renewables costs for years. The truth is that wind power is expensive, and becoming more so. The energy “transition” is a transition to poverty, but few in Westminster seem to have the guts to say so.”

Full press release here.

Greenpeace loses legal challenge to UK’s new North Sea oil and gas licenses

North Sea gas rig [image credit: safety4sea.com]

Trying to subvert democracy with ‘climate lawfare’ fails again.
– – –
LONDON (Reuters)– Britain’s decision to authorise new licences for oil and gas exploration in the North Sea was lawful, London’s High Court ruled on Thursday, dismissing a legal challenge by Greenpeace, reports Yahoo News.

The environmental campaign group had argued Britain’s failure to assess the greenhouse gases produced by consuming oil and gas – so-called end-use or downstream emissions – rendered its offshore energy plan unlawful.

But lawyers representing Britain’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero said at a hearing in July that ministers were not required to assess end-use emissions, though they nonetheless considered them.

Judge David Holgate rejected Greenpeace’s case in a written ruling on Thursday.

Full report here.

Net Zero Watch calls for a clearout at the Climate Change Committee

Net Zero Watch expresses the mood of many observers who are fed up with the antics of the Climate Change Committee, who talk up pie-in-the-sky ‘Net Zero’ targets while sidestepping vital issues like their cost, feasibility and effectiveness (or lack thereof).
– – –
London, 13 October – Campaign group Net Zero Watch has called for a management clearout at the Climate Change Committee (CCC), accusing it of ‘shameless’ deceit over the costs of Net Zero.

The CCC yesterday criticised the Prime Minister’s delay of a few Net Zero plans, claiming that energy bills would be driven upwards as a result. But Net Zero Watch director Andrew Montford points out that the CCC is being highly misleading with their claims.

“If your landlord is forced to put in expensive insulation measures in your flat, you might end up with lower heating bills. But you will certainly end up with higher rent bills, and you could even find yourself out of a home”.

Mr Montford points out that such duplicity is characteristic of the CCC’s behaviour.

Ben Pile: Rishi’s Net Zero delay has outed the Green Blob’s threadbare theory

Green blob [credit: storybird.com]

Rishi Sunak’s ‘watering down’ of certain Net Zero targets is the first time that the green policy agenda has had ANY scrutiny of any consequence, despite many failures, starting with the ruinously expensive Renewable Obligation, extending into the totally failed CfDs that allowed wind farm developers to lie to achieve planning consent over rival generators and technologies. Not one part of the green policy agenda has lived up to any promise to deliver good to the British public.

It was the mildest possible reversal. It is in fact an attempt to SAVE Net Zero, not roll it back. Complaints that it has left Britain without an ‘industrial policy’ or has left ‘investors’ without ‘confidence’ are for the birds. It has put the UK in the same policy position as the EU (more on which in a bit), and there is no evidence of green policies having delivered any significant industrial development to these shores. No green jobs. No green growth. No green industrial revolution. Not even a BritishVolt. It is a farce.

Matt Ridley: I’ll buy a new petrol car in 2029

The rush to electric vehicles risks killing our car industry, shackling us to China and bumping up our taxes to reduce global emissions by just 0.044%. That’s why I’ll be buying a brand new petrol car just before the 2030 ban

Daily Mail July 8

BMW i3 electric car plus battery pack [image credit: carmagazine.co.uk]

Britain’s electric vehicle transition and the ban on petrol car sales from 2030 are a slow-motion car crash. The technology is not ready, the cost will be vast, the logistics are forbidding, the reliance on China is worrying and the backlash from the public is likely to be harsh.

Worst of all, the benefits are derisory at best and may not even exist.

Yes, you read that right. It is possible that we could replace all of Britain’s cars and vans with electric vehicles and still find that carbon dioxide emissions are higher, not lower. Cost-benefit, hello?

Green Omertà – Net Zero Watch

[image credit: beforeitsnews.com]

Conspiracy, mass delusion or a bit of both? Whatever it is, it’s not doing electricity consumers any favours.
– – –
There is a conspiracy of silence about wind power costs, says Andrew Montford @ Net Zero Watch.

I know, I do tend to be a bit repetitive about the cost of wind power.

How many times have I explained that the data is completely clear: that it’s expensive; and that if it’s getting any cheaper, it’s only doing so very slowly. In fact, for onshore wind the trend is clearly upwards.

My determination on the subject is prompted by the refusal of anyone in official circles to accept the facts.

To a man (and woman) they are absolutely resolute in their insistence that wind is staggeringly cheap because windfarms have agreed staggeringly low-priced “strike prices” for power. And because industry bodies and Whitehall says it is.

The fact that nobody has ever delivered power at such a price cuts no mustard with these people.

Nor does the observation that windfarm developers are all saying that new construction will not go ahead without further handouts.

And of course, if you point to the hard data in windfarm financial accounts, they really, really do not want to know at all.

Continued here.

Net zero is the reason we have empty supermarket shelves

Green blob [credit: storybird.com]

If officials think empty food shelves are a price worth paying for vain attempts to change the climate, they’re way out of touch with reality.
– – –
It wasn’t meant to be like this: rationing is back, now being introduced in some supermarkets for fruits and vegetables, says farmer Jamie Blackett @ The Telegraph.

Typically, the public debate remains stuck on Brexit – or “Vegxit”. But this is much more to do with cold weather in farming regions, poor harvests in North Africa and Spain, and continued high energy costs.

If public expectations are that they should be able to eat tomatoes, peppers and cucumbers in February, something previous generations could barely imagine, it is perhaps understandable that logistics along an attenuated supply chain will play a major part.

Friends of Science: Germany Teeters on the Brink of Energy Disaster – Global Food Crisis Looms

CALGARY, ALBERTA (PRWEB) JULY 14, 2022

The Financial Post of July 09, 2022, reported that Canada will release a sanctioned, overhauled gas turbine to Germany, for use in Russia’s Nord Stream 1 gas pipeline, hopefully preventing a further collapse of Germany’s economy, says Friends of Science. Critics denounced the move as conflicting with Canada’s “Stand with Ukraine” policy. According to Canada’s international trade website: “Germany, with the largest economy in the EU and the fourth largest in the world … Germany is Canada’s largest export market in the EU…with two-way merchandise trade totaling $25.8 billion in 2021.”

Germany is heavily reliant on natural gas from Russia. DW reported on July 11, 2022, that Germany was preparing for possible total Russian gas cut-off which would mean economic collapse and social strife due to rationing of low gas reserves and a cold winter ahead.

EChemi reported in April 2022, Germany chemical giant BASF warned that it may have to shut down production: “there is no substitute for natural gas as a raw material or energy source (in Germany), and a shortage of natural gas will result in it not having enough energy for chemical production and lack of key raw materials for manufacturing products.” Many BASF products are familiar and important to the daily life of millions of people worldwide. About 39,000 people work at BASF’s Ludwigschafen chemical processing complex in Germany.

EU energy geopolitics expert Samuel Furfari explains in his July 12, 2022, Atlantico article, “Towards a gas cut: the moment of truth on our dependence on hydrocarbons has come,” oil and gas provide the ‘horse-power’ to make large scale food production possible, but they are also the source of fertilizer. Skyrocketing fertilizer costs and blocked wheat exports from Ukraine will create food shortages and famine.

Freedom of speech: Stuart Kirk resigns as head of HSBC sustainable investing.

Back in May we reported on the suspension of Stuart Kirk, who dropped some truth bombs about climate finance at a Times newspaper conference. Stuart has now resigned his post, and issued this statement:

Today I wish to announce that I have resigned as global head of responsible investing at HSBC Asset Management.

Ironically given my job title, I have concluded that the bank’s behaviour towards me since my speech at a Financial Times conference in May has made my position, well, unsustainable.

Funny old world.

Over a 27-year unblemished record in finance, journalism and consulting I have only ever tried to do the best for my clients and readers, knowing that doing so helps my employer too.

Investing is hard. So is saving our planet. Opinions on both differ. But humanity’s best chance of success is open and honest debate. If companies believe in diversity and speaking up, they need to walk the talk. A cancel culture destroys wealth and progress.

There is no place for virtue signalling in finance. Likewise as a writer, researcher and investor, I know that words or trading shares can only achieve so much. True impact comes from the combination of real-world action and innovative solutions.

Which is why I’ve been gathering a crack group of like-minded individuals together to deliver what is arguably the greatest sustainable investment idea ever conceived. A whole new asset class. Sounds fanciful – but I am not one for hyperbole, as viewers of my presentation know well.

To be announced later this year, the first project will underline the central argument in my speech: that human ingenuity can and will overcome the challenges ahead, while at the same time offering huge investment opportunities.

Meanwhile, I will continue to prod with a sharp stick the nonsense, hypocrisy, sloppy logic and group-think inside the mainstream bubble of sustainable finance. Follow me on LinkedIn if you want to learn the right way to think about ESG – and let me tell you, most of what’s out there is bonkers.

Finally, can I take this opportunity to thank the tens of thousands of people – from chief executives and congressmen to scientists and mom and pop investors – who contacted me from around the world offering their support and solidarity over the past two months.

You have given me strength during what has been a tumultuous time for me and my family. It is for you that the next chapter in my career will be devoted. Please forward this to anyone you know who cares about money and planet earth.

Stuart

Update on the world’s progress eliminating fossil fuels

Coal-hungry China [image credit: democraticunderground.com]

Progress? There isn’t any worth mentioning, and that will continue. Meanwhile ‘net zero’ fantasies are served up daily to obscure the reality and make believe that politicians can be managers of the climate.
– – –
The bureaucrats of the world, particularly in the UN and developed countries, have the idea that they are going to eliminate all use of fossil fuels by somewhere around 2040-50, says Francis Menton at the Manhattan Contrarian (via Climate Change Dispatch).

They have no conception how to accomplish that, other than to order from on high that it shall occur and assume that somebody else will figure out the details.

This gives the rest of us the opportunity to sit on the sidelines and observe how bureaucratic fantasy gradually runs into the brick wall of physical reality.

Can the world stop investing in oil & gas?

By the Ageing Tiger

The International Energy Agency was set up in 1974 to ensure the security of oil supplies, if you are old enough, like me, you might remember the Arab oil embargo, queues at petrol stations and rocketing oil prices. So, if the IEA come out and say “that no new oil and natural gas fields are needed in the net zero pathway”, then that must be true and all of us oil and gas professionals can hang up our boots and head to the scrapheap.

When the IEA was formed, it was in response to the emergence of OPEC. When OPEC flexed its muscles in the early 1970’s the cartel supplied over 50% of the world’s oil, they had massive market power.

By the time I was moving to Aberdeen to work offshore on Forties, you see for a brief period I was a genuine North Sea Tiger, OPEC supplied less than 30% of the world’s oil. Oil prices which had been over $100/bbl in 2021 money, duly collapsed and it wasn’t until US shale oil started to chip away at OPEC’s market share that anyone really paid attention to OPEC again.

How the UK Climate Assembly manufactured consent

No coincidence that Ireland and France also held similar climate charades around the same time. All part of the promotion of useless ‘net zero’ ideology.
– – –
This stage-managed Assembly is a sham, says Spiked-online.

There is no democratic mandate for extreme climate policies.

As I have been pointing out for over a decade here on spiked, the political consensus on climate change is not shared by the public – or, at best, the public’s appetite for climate policy has not been tested democratically.

And governments are well aware of this, too.

UK Climate Assembly was undemocratic–Ben Pile

.
.
Just as undemocratic as the Irish version, the French version etc. Funny how they all came up with the same idea at the same time…

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

London, 29 January: The UK Climate Assembly, which claimed to have delivered a mandate for a green revolution, could not have delivered a mandate of any kind, according to a new analysis published by the Global Warming Policy Forum.

According to the report’s author, Ben Pile, the Assembly was set up to deliver a preordained result:

Pile says that the Assembly was actually set up because the public were unpersuaded of the case for radical action.

The UK Climate Assembly: Manufacturing Mandates can be downloaded here

https://www.thegwpf.com/climate-assembly-was-undemocratic/

Ben’s conclusion sums it up nicely:

View original post 59 more words

Carbon capture is vital to meeting climate goals, say scientists – but industrial-scale wood burning is OK?

Drax power station, generating 7% of Britain’s needs, is partly converted to burning imported woodchips.

More climate doublethink here. While supporting the burning of wood pellets to generate electricity, thereby creating massive carbon dioxide emissions that may reside in the atmosphere for a number of years, some climate obsessives insist that removing such emissions from the atmosphere is ‘desperately needed’. The illogicality of this has been largely ignored, but now Friends of the Earth Scotland and others have complained that CCS has a “history of over-promising and under-delivering”. Will CCS ever be viable either in terms of cost or practicality? If anything, current evidence points in the other direction.
– – –
Supporters insist that storage technology is not a costly mistake but the best way for UK to cut emissions from heavy industry, says The Guardian.

Engineers and geologists have strongly criticised green groups who last week claimed that carbon capture and storage schemes – for reducing fossil fuel emissions – are costly mistakes.

UK urged to save Cop26 UN climate change summit in Glasgow

The greenblob is right to think ‘COP-speak’ is a big turn-off for the public, but that’s about all they get right. Trying to manipulate the Earth’s climate by demonising the minor trace gas carbon dioxide is a vastly expensive exercise in futility. Seeing hundreds of planes full of delegates arriving in Glasgow (if it happens) will undermine any little public credibility the COP exercise, supposedly about ’emissions’, might have. People may be even less impressed if/when delegates start arguing for semi-permanent forms of lockdown, in pursuit of their long-term agendas.
– – –
UK ministers are under pressure to rescue the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (Cop26) in Glasgow this year amid concerns not enough energy is being poured into preparations for the crucial talks, reports The National News (N World).

Environmental experts warned the government must step up preparations after a report claimed at the weekend Business Secretary Alok Sharma offered to quit his government post to focus on his second responsibility as Cop26 president.

The November talks are seen as critical for accelerating global action towards meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement.

Participating countries are expected to hammer out new emission reduction targets to limit global warming to well below 2°C.

Ben Pile: How the CCC turns 10 opinions in 66 million.

Watch this excellent seven minute video and read the twitter thread here by Ben Pile. The climate change committee is using soviet style ‘citizen’s assemblies’ to justify their highly questionable ideas about how we should live to government.

Ben Pile on the cosy compact of Govt, Business and Civil Society

.
.
Hands up if you remember voting in favour of the UK’s ‘net zero’ energy policies. Or even being offered the chance to vote on them at all. Oh…

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

Ben Pile has a new video out, which needs to be widely spread:

View original post