Net Zero goals to turn the electricity system green risk the lights going off, MPs on the powerful Public Accounts Committee have warned, as they suggest that Government policy should be for “people not to have cars”. The Telegraph has the story.
The Government wants the electricity system to be fully green by 2035 by boosting wind, solar and nuclear power to end reliance on coal and gas.
But MPs on the powerful Public Accounts Committee have cast doubt on the credibility of the plans, and called on the Government to come clean on costs to households.
Despite the ambitious push for renewable power over the last decade, around 40% of the U.K.’s electricity is produced with gas. The country is only at 25% of the necessary capacity for nuclear, solar and offshore wind to hit the 2035 target.
“There are just 12 years left for the Government to meet its low carbon energy target, and much still to do if this is to be achieved – and at a cost the taxpayers and bill payers can bear while ensuring the lights stay on,” Dame Meg Hillier, the Chair of the committee, said.
The report said the committee was “sceptical that the Government’s plans for expanding nuclear, solar and wind power are credible.”
The Government is also failing to take into consideration the full potential for electricity needs to grow to meet the demand for technology such as electric vehicles and air conditioning, Dame Meg said. As a result the Government may need to step in to nudge people to change their behaviour such as reduce car use, she said.
“We’re going to have new demand in electric vehicles while we’re still trying to ramp up on green technologies to meet the capacity. Is that capacity enough to meet the new demands?” said Dame Meg.
She added: “Going electric is all very green and clean, until we have too many people going electric.”
“Maybe we just encourage people not to have cars and that could be Government policy.”
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
So we rejoice at this, do we?
Bugger off, Curzon..
Is there a way I can be vaccinated against 15 million people? If only.
Go Britain!
Go Lucan Grey.
We can hope that the vaccine doesn’t enhance disease. There is lots of evidence it is a possibility (SARS, MERS etc). We just have to wait and see – vaccine enhanced disease shows itself after the initial antibody response has died down. This winter probably start seeing things if it does exist. Let’s hope not but it would be better to test vaccines before using them (as is traditional).
The vaccines are likely meant to enhance disease and it’s a fairly safe bet they’ve made sure they will do just that.
But they’re not “fully inoculated against covid” are they Mr Curzon? The manufacturers, the government, and the poor sods who’ve had the gunk injected into their arms, have no actual real idea how much, if any, protection is offered by these jabs.
It’s a bit like me saying that unsalted butter offers protection against covid, because I eat unsalted butter and I haven’t had covid.
I fell off my bike two weeks ago and covvicorpse rates have been plummeting ever since,
For months I have only
pretended to wash my hands ( apart from normal toilet hygiene) and use hand sanitizer.
I think that has driven down the Covid? death rate figures.
But then again, it could be herd immunity?
Or seasonality?
Both.
Seasonal respiratory viruses always plummet at this time of year hence the seasonal bit in the name. Now Covid-19, whatever it really is, also disappeared last summer and that was without a single person being vaccinated. Food for thought Curzon.
I’m not sure what you are driving at, but you are just an old Maid, so perhaps we’ll stick with your milk maid analogy.
If you had 20,000 people who had plenty of milk and another 20,000 people who had no milk, and few of those with milk got brittle bones, while many of those without milk did get brittle bones, then, you would possess a real idea of how much protection milk gives against brittle bones , wouldn’t you? And that’s how information is painstakingl obtained. How else could we know things?
Actually no you wouldn’t unless you first separated the groups and attempted to eliminate other variables such as diet, physical health, ethnic makeup,age and so on.
How many of the no-milk group obtained calcium from elsewhere? How many of the milk group contained genetic adaptations to producing bones and so on.
Was the brittle vs non brittle bone age demographic balanced ?
You can get that information sure, but unless you factor in all the potential variables the data is useless.
The hardest part of any research is balancing the samples and reducing/eliminating as many variables as possible.
Having said that, there is plenty of properly audited, balanced data showing vaccines, the mRNA in particular work. In the mRNA case, possibly better than any other vaccines in history.
please link to said data.
are you mad, it is an imaginery example. milk does not cure covid19!!
yes it does, I drink a glass every day and I am still alive !
Indeed you are, and I’m glad to see it. Alive and cheeky.
Its got about the same rigid data showing it does as Ivermectin…
It’s the principle you fool as you well know.
I reject the government’s thinking, they are too slow to accept the efficacy of the vaccine! Be careful, Splatt. The “absolutism” mode of thinking you are using is the mode of thinking the government is using to prolong lockdown.
Trials must be very carefully designed towards some ideal to pass regulatory frameworks run by panels of experts. That is the scientific procedure.But one can also look at real world outcomes. Let us use the first example of 20,000 random people in each group and forget all the details for a minute. I’m not saying I would, if it would be wasteful, but let us suppose, as Old Maid supposes, that trials shows nothing. But then we use the vaccine and see cases fall roughly in line with what the trials would have suggested they would. What then? Say we saw a curve like below. With that and the trial that passes muster in a dozen national regulatory domains. Would you still contend “no you wouldn’t unless you….“, or would you say then that some knowledge has been obtained, or that trials were chance outcomes and results in the world was due to other factors? For most people there is a point where it is wiser to assume rational drug design has produced an effective product. Think about where your line is. If you want absolute proof, then you must accept the government’s need for absolute certainty of safety before releasing the lockdown. I reject the government’s thinking. They are prolonging lockdown unnecessarily. The vaccines have worked, that’s that.
Don’t the manufacturers explain that the vaccine doesn’t reduce the infection rate? Nor the rate of transmission? The vaccines are only designed to reduce symptoms? So everything else you write is basically shite????
Covid: One dose of vaccine halves transmission
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56904993
Bad headline.
Astrazenica = 38%
Pfizer 49%.
(Page 11)
Only a fool would believe ANYTHING the BBC say, they are far lefties
Yep and we all believe the BBC. MHRA latest figures 722,732 adverse reactions, 1034 deaths. That’s just here what about the rest of the world? Oh and good luck next autumn!
‘If’ a significant proportion of the spread is due to infectious presymptomatic and symptomatic individuals, a vaccine could in theory reduce the spread as the purpose of a successful one would reduce the number of symptomatic individuals contributing to said spread. However, reducing spread isn’t what vaccines are there for, it’s a side effect at best and isn’t always achieved/achievable – success factors in vaccine trials are never about reducing transmission. Probably because it’s impossible to measure due to the number of variables that can affect whether someone catches a particular illness or not in the real world.
The above naturally leads to questions about whether those who are not susceptible really need an intervention since they pose no threat to anyone. No research on that of course, no money in it for govt cronies and big pharma…
You haven’t got it, Fon. Lockdown et al isn’t to protect us now. Measures are fear mongering are being continued in order to coerce higher take up of the jabs.
And higher profits for Pfizer,
That’s all.
What data is showing is irrelevant.
>Having said that, there is plenty of properly audited, balanced d
>ata showing vaccines, the mRNA in particular work. In the
>mRNA case, possibly better than any other vaccines in history.
Well there is 40 years of work behind it or more. It’s just too hard to store and transport for some parts of the world. It’s just a fact.
Clear off you lying pos.
See above. You obviously work for the manufuckturers and are only concerned with the bottom line. Shame on you.
The AZ vaccine is made on a non profit basis, no reason to ramp it except to exit lockdown.
https://www.ft.com/content/c474f9e1-8807-4e57-9c79-6f4af145b686
Did the BBC say that! only a fool will accept its made on a NOT FOR PROFIT, they are part of Big Pharma
That’s true, the pressure there is political. We paid for it, and it has to be used.
The Imperial backing is for Pfizer though. Those given the Pfizer in some hospitals are told that it is the “Waitrose of vaccines”, and Vallance has muttered “get a good one”, by which he meant the rnas.
Moderna isn’t. Standard storage.
And Pfizer got extended to 2 weeks after defrost pretty much everywhere except the UK.
There are very very few places in the world that can’t use these. Cost and supply are the limiting factors.
There is good evidence of them working quite well, yes, though since real world current trials are run in Israel by a Government completely politically resting on their success, working with Pfizer itself, balanced is not the word to pick.
How long they work for is not yet demonstrated, Pfizer has said it pins hopes for future profitability on variants, ie, not working for long, and the adverse events are still unknown, though they have clearly already killed some. And caused some very disturbing side effects. But it is good news that they work in a good percentage of the elderly vulnerable so far.
Natural immunity is far better, of course, for the young.
Gosh, you are a genius, fon! Of course! Now I see it!
Mind you, no idea how you get from old maid to milk maid or what milk has to do with it … but then that’s probably just another manifestation of your genius.
My point is that one cannot say with any degree of certainty – or, indeed, uncertainty – that this jabbed person or that jabbed person would have ‘caught’ covid anyway, all other things being equal, especially at a time like this when infection levels are so miniscule. So how ‘scientists’ can say that this jab or that jab provides x per cent protection has always been entirely beyond me, especially given the parameters they tell us they work within.
There is certainty, but not in the absolute sense.
The study found an imbalance, in symptomatic “CoViD-19” infections, between the, randomly-assigned, injected and control groups. The scientists then calculate the probability of such an imbalance occurring by chance alone. Thus, they attain a level of certainty that the treatment caused the outcome.
Note: I’m not endorsing the finding, but merely describing the method.
Sorry, but you lost me at “scientists then calculate”… !!
These ‘studies’ might persuade me a tad more were all the triallists in all of the groups put at exactly the same chance of contracting the disease. They are not.
At least you are honest about your ignorance. It’s a valid point, your only valid point btw. However trials are irrelevant now, since the vaccines have provided sufficient real world data now, via millions of observations.
Old Maid may be honest, but sure as hell you aren’t.
it’s true, there have been 35m doses in uk alone.
Wot about the deaths?
tell me about them.
>There is certainty, but not in the absolute sense.
That is where the govt is stuck, we are sure enough. The govt want certainty, we cannot run things like that. Godd enough is enough.
So you are saying end the lockdowns and all other restrictions now. Well said.
yep, the others would prefer to spend more time wondering about the vaccines. I say let it rip, now.
thanks Rowan. Meet you in the blue bell somtime tpo sink a few when this is all over, in a few weeks?
Excellent that you want it to stop.
but you are endorsing the method, quite right too. The old milk maid is a trouble maker.Ironically Jenner discovered vaccination by the simple observation that milk maids always had clear skin, unmarked by small pox, the cow pox they were exposed to had accidentally innoculated them! true story.
The old milk maid is a trouble maker.
But you on the other hand are a good hearted honest soul.
I am. thanks for your kind healing words.
We all know how it’s suppose to work, but only the utterly gullible would trust Big Pharma reporting on itself.
Yes,I agree the regulating authorities are required to be sceptical.
Well, the “Old Maid” didn’t, and, even after I’ve tried to explain it, she still doesn’t.
I’m certainly not going to suggest you couldn’t proffer a clearer explanation, but I’m thinking blood and stones.
> another manifestation of your genius.
thank you for your kind words.
You won’t get many.
I’m getting planty tonight, since vaccination, it is safe to open the pubs. let it rip!
it’s true on an individual basis, old maid, and that is why the government will not release us from lockdown, we might still get covid19, as you make crystal clear, but the chance is low. I reject the government’s thinking, and I say it is safe enough now. But you reject that idea and wish to continue lockdown until no cases. It is low enough vaccine have worked!
And is that bridge, you own in Brooklyn, still for sale?
Correlation not causation – the point made, I think, by Annie.
Point made still better here:
https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
well done ! The government relies on the very same idea to prolong lockdown, saying vaccine is insufficient. You must be very proud of yourself. Keep it up, and lockdown will go on forever, thanks in part to your contribution.
It’s a good guide, sometime esp. for rational drug design. look it up.
What by making unfounded assumptions?
That’s the government line. By rejecting vaccine efficacy the government prolongs lockdown.
The question, my dear fon, is vaccine efficacy at doing what, precisely?
stopping covid19 and lifting lockdown.
Go on then, if it will get rid of you, I’ll buy that bridge you have in Brooklyn.
Dear, dear fon; you do make me laugh. ‘Stopping covid19’? Even the gunk’s manufacturers don’t make that absurd claim.
covid: One dose of vaccine halves transmission – study
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56904993
there you go again quoting the BBC, they are untrustworthy
Lockdowns and vaccines are here to stay, surely even you know that.
vaccines are here to stay, lockdowns are not.
I eat salted butter on toast every day and have not had the Wuhan Flu. Maybe it’s not the salt that’s the key to immunity?
well if it works for you, stick with it, you can have vaccine as well as salted butter.
Most with AZ.
None of that ever permitted in CH.
No longer in Norway.
https://de.rt.com/europa/116915-astrazeneca-norwegen/
Let’s see whether the vaccination program will still be deemed a success in the future, or whether it will be deemed a Titanic success then.
of course, if the facts change we change policy. It goes without saying, or it should. The trouble is govts today wany certainty, that’s why we are stuck in this vice they call lockdown, all normal people know it is safe enough and that vaccines work well enough. It’s time to chill out a bit.
Governments actually want the certainty of permanent lockdowns, Covid or no Covid and they will still want to vaccinate you with Bill Gate’s poisonous shit, until it kills you. Now get that through your thick skull and roll up your sleeve.
it’s sad you wish me dead. you do not know me.
there are no zero risk options.
Very insightful.
it’s how it is, even vaccine has risk, lockdown has bigger risks than vaccine in my view. Anyway, it’s near enough done now, no use getting worked up now it’s almost done.
Well they’re not really vaccinated are they? Because they can still get infected and they can still transmit the virus.
It’s certainly some sort of logistical achievement to stick needles in so many arms in such a short space of time. And it’s some sort of Machiavellian triumph to mislead so many people into volunteering to submit themselves to a global medical experiment with entirely unpredictable and in some cases, already deadly, result. But is it really something we should be celebrating?
Well they are vaccinated obvsly, but not immune, just more immune than they were. Vaccine has been sucessful is stopping most cases, hospitalisation and nearly all deaths.Is it perfect, no. it is not. Is it good? yes it is. should we celebrate, I’ve been to the pub 3 times so yes, join in if it is not too cold.
You are spouting incoherent nonsense. Do they actually pay you for that drivel?
they certainly don’t take your contributions into account.
Going by your definition of a vaccine – you cant get infected or transmit, i’d love you to tell me what vaccines exist for any human disease in history. If any…
From what i can see, we dont have a single vaccine for any disease so the last 200+ years of medicine has accomplished nothing in that area.
I fear you have strayed in here by accident Splatt, there is no hope for many of the denizens of the comment section.
I’ll give you a tick for effort… good man, but you are thwowing strawberries to donkeys.
With 15M fully vaccinated I think Big Pharma is going to know for sure if Antibody Dependent Enhancement and Pulmonary Immunopathology are really a problem with the vaccines within the next 12 months!
If it is i’m not sure who’ll be left to clap for the NHS !!!
On the plus side, at least they didn’t kill a few dozen fluffy ferrets this time, they just went straight to large scale human trials.
Anttibody Dependent Enhancementm if it exists at all, it is very rare.
Forget the yadda-yadda argy-bargy stuff.
Bottom factual line :
(1) Absolute risk reduction is minimal from the vaccine when properly examined in trials.
(2) The curve of mortality since the autumn shows nothing to suggest any amelioration by the vaccine. If anything, the visual evidence works the other way, with a steepening of mortality after the start of vaccination, and a slower decline from the peak than in April 2020 when there was no vaccine.
Just saying.
This is what you get when you try to reason or argue with fon – a comments section full of fon nonsense. No doubt that’s the goal. Best to ignore it.
I’m just throwing bags of strawberries to the donkeys…. as a treat.
I agree. Why waste time on a paid troll?
Welcome to the fonathon.
Groan. Who fed the troll?
Our youngest son (32) in Denver, forced to take 2 Moderna jabs by the Uni, otherwise he would lose his permit and visa has been very ill after the second jab, we are waiting to hear more.
Nazi criminals, the lot of them.
Very, very sorry to hear it. I hope he gets better soon.
And sues the university.
15 million walking spike-protein factories. What could go wrong?