Earlier this week the Labour backbencher and Chairman of the U.K. Parliament’s Energy Committee Bill Esterson noted that people will have to adjust their habits to meet Net Zero emission goals for 2030. Such honesty, emerging as it does from the Parliament of Net Zero nodding donkeys, is to be applauded. As far as it goes. Try a 30% reduction in energy demand. After 2030, consider that all beef, lamb and dairy will be banned and “replaced by new diets”. Then there is a massive 45% cut in most common building materials such as cement, along with a similar reduction in road freight traffic. The attack on farming will be remorseless with fertiliser restriction halving “direct emission” from the soil. To sum up: widespread rationing and blackouts along with food, holiday and travel restrictions, all within about 60 months.
Look at what they fund and write and whom they consult, not what they say, is the best advice to counter all the whoppers that are being told about Net Zero. Sir Keir Starmer’s statement at the recent COP29 that he didn’t want to tell people how to live their lives can only be explained by noting it came from a British Prime Minister who has difficulty telling a woman from a man. Thankfully we have the Government-funded U.K. FIRES project to give us an honest heads-up on the near-term implications of Net Zero. All of the substantial reductions in energy, food and industrial materials mentioned above arise from its “pragmatic approach”. Its evidence-based conclusions rely on technologies that are available today. It excludes processes such as carbon capture and hydrogen that have yet to be proven at meaningful scale.
Its conclusions warm the hearts of the most committed green ideologues. Its reports also happen to be the most honest representation of the horrors that await if the Net Zero fantasy ever becomes a reality.
By 2028 a total of seven million heat pumps will need to be installed and massive retrofits undertaken in domestic homes. Meanwhile, all rented and non-domestic properties will need to be EPC A rated by 2030. The desire to “manage land use for Net Zero emissions” means a massive cut in chemical fertilisers, so expect food supply to fall off a cliff.
U.K. FIRES notes, correctly, that there is “insufficient time for the planning, development and construction of new large-scale infrastructure to contribute to the 2030 target”. Again correctly, it is observed that increased use of wind and solar power creates a problem with intermittency. “Eventually, this must be addressed by either demand-shifting or storage,” it states. Storage at scale is more or less impossible with current technology, and another word for “demand-shifting” is rationing. To enforce these consumption restraints across the broad range of modern industrial lifestyles, a “whole society” approach must be mobilised.
U.K. FIRES received a £5 million grant from the British Government and its warnings – or should that be wishes – about 2030 are contained in a report called ‘Minus 45’ prepared ahead of the Glasgow COP26 in 2021. It is based on a U.K. Government promise to reduce carbon emissions by 45% from 2018 to 2030. Its recommendations are relevant today, not least because Starmer tried to curry favour at the recent COP29 in Baku by promising to reduce emissions further.
That would be the COP29 conference that made great progress in destroying the system of bribes paid out as so-called climate aid to developing countries to stop them developing with the aid of hydrocarbons. Nobody knows who will pay for a promised £1.3 trillion a year by 2035, not least because President Trump will sweep away any American commitment with a stroke of the executive pen come January 20th. Helpfully, if anyone cares enough to move from lip service to actual action, creative climate accounting is still possible. A requirement to ban the construction of coal-fired power stations was removed from an early draft and it failed to make it into the final communiqué. This will no doubt please the Japanese who backed the building of the Matarbari ultra-supercritical coal-fired power station in Bangladesh on the grounds that it used Japanese technology to generate more energy with less coal. At COP29, diplomacy was “truly the art of agreeing to nothing”, notes David Wojick from CFACT.
The shamble at COP demonstrates that the world is moving away from the idea that hydrocarbons can be removed from a modern economy. But an accident of recent electoral politics has left Britain with a fanatical Government of Net Zero zealots. The anti-working class Labour party was returned to power with a popular vote count less than its losing Marxist leader obtained in 2019. The U.K. FIRES work demonstrates what lies in store. A resurgent America bounding ahead on cheap energy and unleashed entrepreneurial spirits will contrast with its European allies shutting down industrial manufacturing in pursuit of an increasing unpopular state-mandated doomsday cult.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
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.
As an ecologist, I have been familiar with the concept of ‘tipping points’, and attempting to prevent catastrophic and a reversible declines, in both natural communities and in the social context, around the world. It is clear that our society has reached just such a tipping point, and unless the irrational and unavoidable catastrophic plans of the current government are halted, the future of this country will assuredly be intolerable.
Any system at such a tipping point is extremely sensitive to very small interventions. An apparently trivial action in the right direction can retrieve the situation, whereas an ill-considered one can render the situation irretrievable. The question now is, of course, precisely what sort of remedial preventative action is necessary to ensure that this government does not take us into chaos and catastrophe. This is the most important question we can demand that our politicians address. Failing to do so will be terminal.
We’re already into the chaos and catastrophe stage. Keir Stalin is just accelerating the process.
They think they’ll Build Back Better, but then I guess the barbarians who destroyed the Roman Empire thought they would as well.
Instead they created the Dark Age.
The dark age was about a thousand years of tyrannical rule by the Roman church which tried to suppress all progress humans had made in the area of science in the last couple of thousands of years before it had arisen because it was at odds with the primitive cult promoted and enforced by it.
The dark ages ended with the so-called renaissance, engl the rebirth (of Europe), after the church had been pushed back to a sufficient degree that people daring to read old Latin or Greek texts wouldn’t immediately be burnt at the stake for that anymore.
All those hospitals and universities built. Tut tut.
And all those people put brutally¹ to death for daring to read the bible. Like the Albigenses in France.
¹ The pope at that time (Innocent III) basically issued a license for anybody, ie, any nobleman with a retinue, to enter the territory where these people were living, do with them whatever he liked provided they were dead afterwards, destroy whatever could be destroyed and plunder whatever seemed to be valuable enough to merit taking. On top of that, these highly beneficial deeds guaranteed a place in paradise in the afterlife.
All those hospitals and universities were a terrible mistake I suppose.
Very apt. I hadn’t though of that analogy. Sadly I think you will be proved right.
From an engineering perspective, the term “tipping point” appears to be a phrase of polemic output. However, there are often mechanical relations between physical objects which are all independently subject to tolerances, which lead to noticeable differences when they approach the tolerated limits, even though each one is fine on it’s own. E.g. I was recently reading an article about the disputes about the ride quality of a certain type of train, which appears to have gone that way, in as much as it depends on the relationship between rolling stock and track maintenance. Both are within their standard tolerances, but not good enough from a human perspective when they are close to the limits, i.e. they can ride rough from time to time.
The terms “tolerance” and “accuracy” have specific definitions in the field mentioned. Perhaps they are more flexible in meteorology or agricultural areas – although the laws of physics are universal in principle. As ever, there are bound to be disputes about the cause and effect relations between some issues, along with the efficacy of something or other; often, money says no, whatever else one thinks.
Yes, I think that you are correct – socio-environmental ‘tipping points’ are more complex than engineering ones, since they occur within astoundingly ‘complex systems far from equilibrium’. The collapse of the Mekong Basin river ecosystem and the consequential social disaster, that I warned of many years ago, was caused by political decisions to prioritize hydropower development over the protection of the stability and resilience of the entire system. It could have been at least minimized for some time before the first mainstream dams were actually constructed. A simple change of policy would have done it, just as in our own present situation.
These forms of tipping points tend to be slow-motion affairs, and there is usually time for reflection before it’s too late. That’s precisely where w are now, here in Britain. Mr. Trump’s ascendency is just one example of how a change in one element of the complex dynamics of this socio-environmental issue could have a dramatic effect worldwide on the fate of the climate catastrophism lunacy. It has the potential to totally reverse the malignant direction that we here are being forced to travel, by a tiny minority – the Parliamentary Labour so-called ‘elite’. The elimination of the insane ‘Net Zero’ polemic would slowly but surely permit a balanced return to a more rational and appropriate future.
Perhaps, or perhaps not.
Read up about the Sun’s influence on the Earth, and then you will understand just how out of touch with Reality the Met Office, the BBC and Ed Miliband are
They are not concerned with reality, only with ideology
And the lovely “Seaons’ Greetings” cards they expect to receive from Soros, Gates, Schwab etc.
And with the reality of the income streams related to pushing their ideology.
They are in touch with the reality of their pay cheques.
Yup. That’s why you ‘blue print’ an engine.
What are you talking about? You don’t say.
Our politicians have specialised in the Arts and Humanities, probably sprinkled with Marxist Theory, so have no understanding of the Physical World, including normal human beings. So they will only continue to screw things up.
For a start, all this ‘tipping point’ talk is pointless if we don’t know what we are talking about. For a start, the Earth has been much hotter and colder in the past, and had much higher levels of atmospheric CO2, and many Geologists have said, along with evidence, that we aren’t at any temperature or CO2 tipping point. It’s natural variability.
The Climate is greatly influenced by the Sun, and without that input, there isn’t much credibility in them.
Getting the Met Office to improve their weather station readings, and their locations, would be a start.
From the preamble to FIRES Minus 45, very instructive of the sort of government and leadership we have been suffering from for a very long time now:
Even if all planned new generation is delivered on time, the government’s pledge can only be met with significant restraint across all sectors. The [then Tory] government’s “Net Zero Strategy” released on 19th October 2021 describes big ambitions but small commitments. The total spending in the strategy is around 0.05% of GDP, and the delivery commitments add up to only a small fraction of the government’s pledge to COP26. The strategy places all its hope in technologies that don’t yet operate at all in the UK, fails to account for the new electricity demand created by its plans for greenhouse gas removal technologies and synthetic jet fuel, and includes no commitments on key areas such as rail electrification, reducing demand for aviation or reducing ruminant herds.
Wow. What a grim scenario. If I were young again, I’d leave the country. But as it is, I will be here to fight (in whatever way I can) against such awful prospects. God help us if Labour wins the next GE. Not that I trust the Tories.
There are plausible outcomes even worse than a Labour govt, such as Lib Dems and/or “Greens” holding the balance of power. Germany has suffered badly from Greens in govt.
And the kids won’t put up with it either: the ban on American candy’n’vape shops and on mobile phones in schools will alienate a whole new cohort of new voters. And don’t even get me started on how young adolescents, especially males, feel petrified of making any sort of approach to other adolescents, or of expressing their feelings and opinions of each other and of the Government, for fear of reprisals from their peers, teachers, social workers, mental health practitioners and police. Which will they choose: assimilation or the gulags?
That’s why they are determined to implement a Chinese-style Social Credit System. CONTROL.
They also want to copy Australia and ban them from the internet before 16. Yes online can be harmful is some context but not all. If they film themselves playing Cricket, and put it Online, they have still played outside and got some exercise etc. As most of us on here know it is a Trojan Horse, they don’t give a toss about the welfare of kids and teens, this is another way to get digital I.D by the back door, along with economic and illegal migrants. Funny thing here in Wales I saw what looked like a migrant three times in one day walking along three different roads. Where he was going and who he was looking for who knows. The third time is was just about dark. I was curious but past him so fast I only realised after.
“Time for Starmer to Be Honest About What Net Zero Means: Rationing, Blackouts and Travel Restrictions in the Next Five Years”
The most vulnerable in our society such as disabled, pensioners, unemployed and generally those on low incomes have de facto been experiencing all of these inevitable Net Zero consequences due to sky-rocketing energy and transport prices and knock-on general inflation for many years now.
This has been up to and including vast numbers of excess deaths due to cold / insufficient heating.
Net Zero is not just scientifically illiterate but absolutely morally repugnant.
Depopulation.
Isn’t there an assisted dying bill floating around somewhere?
We already have one. It is called Net Zero.
With any policy that impoverishes people to the level of starvation there is always a risk of mass rioting.
Once you have nothing to lose, you tend to lash out.
Things might turn interesting.
That’s a two-edged sword: The masses of global majority immigrants in our towns and cities who are blissfully unaware of “climate change” and what it demands from us, will certainly lash out once they’re supposed to go hungry in the cold and dark. But if we get a caliphate instead, this might not be that much of an improvement.
It didn’t work out well for the Ukrainian Kulaks, despite their fierce resistance. They were starved to death in their millions.
Thanks Chris. It will be interesting to see if the unhindered US economy with massively cheaper energy will exert any influence by example on our net zero obsessed politicians.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
The inference is Starmer sees NZ as a noble thing, something to be desired.
He doesn’t.
It is just a mechanism to steal your money and limit your freedom.
That, is his agenda.
No, it’s Punishment For A Purpose, and the purpose is a to idolise the twin gods of Net Zero and “Our” NHS.
““manage land use for Net Zero emissions” means a massive cut in chemical fertilisers, so expect food supply to fall off a cliff”…..They meaning their WEF partners in the Netherlands branch have form on this as we know, and as the Dutch farmers are all too aware of.
“Time for Starmer to be honest”
Hardly think he’s going to start now!
The comment about the EPC rating for domestic rental properiesto be rated ‘A’ will sound the death knell for rentals. Despite new loft insulation, cavity wall insulation, cladding my house still only rated ‘E’.
No account is taken of how warm people want to have their properties when these ratings are carried out. in 2025 all rental properites have to have central heating installed – what is the point when no-one can afford to put the heating on?
Numpties the lot of them.
And all for WHAT? —-This will do nothing for global climate. If doing something will have no effect it almost always means you are not doing it for the reasons you say you are, and NET ZERO is the classic example of this. All it does is destroy our Industrial Base, puts millions into energy poverty, and the planet is entirely unaffected. —-So why do it? Because it isn’t about the climate.—-Climate Change is the Marxist Bureaucrats dream policy. So no wonder Miliband is so full of zeal for climate policies. It allows them to put in place policies they always dreamed of with the seemingly plausible excuse that they are saving the planet. But as we already see, these impoverishment causing policies do nothing for the planet.
Starmer? Being honest? Ye’r ‘avin a larf aren’t yer?
The absolutely ridiculous thing about this is that, even if carbon emissions are causing global warming, the UK achieving net zero would have no impact on it whatsoever as it’s too small to make any difference. How people can’t see that and continue to support this nonsense is mind boggling.
I note the usual linkage has emerged in the U.K. between climate wackos running government and assisted death initiatives. Good planning on behalf of the climate wackos as Net Zero is designed to kill the people off at a much quicker rate. In the US all ten states that have such initiatives are governed by far left folks anxious to turn out the lights, with the exception of Montana (they have the excuse that their most famous inhabitant was Evel Knievel, the patron saint of the suicide cult). One hopes the coming abundance of cheap energy and a booming economy in the US will reduce the need for far lefties to kill off their citizens.