In this newsletter:
1) Tories could U-turn on petrol and diesel ban as green policies face axe
The Times, 24 July 2023
2) Rishi Sunak says he does not want to ‘hassle’ families with net zero targets
Press Association, 24 July 2023
3) Less of the ‘green crap’: UK politicians want to take edge off net-zero pain
Politico, 23 July 2023
Politico, 23 July 2023
4) Voters will not tolerate being hammered by the mad scramble to Net Zero
Editorial, The Sun, 24 July 2023
Editorial, The Sun, 24 July 2023
5) Daniel Johnson: Cut Net Zero rhetoric and start listening to the voters
Daily Mail, 24 July 2023
6) Ralph Schoellhammer: There is a Europe wide push back against Net Zero
Brussels Signal, 23 July 2023
7) Soaring costs are derailing offshore wind projects across the world
Daily Mail, 24 July 2023
6) Ralph Schoellhammer: There is a Europe wide push back against Net Zero
Brussels Signal, 23 July 2023
7) Soaring costs are derailing offshore wind projects across the world
8) Ross Clark: Is global warming behind Greece’s wildfires?
The Spectator, 24 July 2023
The Spectator, 24 July 2023
9) Nobel Price Laureate John Clauser cancelled after speaking out on “corruption” of climate science
The Daily Sceptic, 23 July 2023
10) What climate crisis? G20 countries fail to reach agreement on cutting fossil fuels
The Guardian, 22 July 2023
The Daily Sceptic, 23 July 2023
10) What climate crisis? G20 countries fail to reach agreement on cutting fossil fuels
The Guardian, 22 July 2023
Full details:
1) Tories could U-turn on petrol and diesel ban as green policies face axe
The Times, 24 July 2023
The Times, 24 July 2023
Minister cannot guarantee that policy will survive as government retreats on ‘costly and unpopular’ measures
A minister has raised questions over the future of the government’s pledge to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 by saying that he cannot “prophesy” whether it will remain.
Andrew Mitchell, an international development minister, said that the policy “absolutely” remains in place despite a push from Tory MPs for the government to delay it.
However, pressed on whether it will continue to be government policy, he said: “I’m afraid I can’t prophesy for the future.” Pressed further he appeared to commit to it. “It is in place and it remains in place and will remain in place.”
He said that the government has shown that it is “adept at defending people from rising prices”.
Ministers are backing away from “costly and unpopular” green policies. Low-traffic neighbourhoods face a ban and landlords will get longer to meet energy efficiency targets.
Rishi Sunak is planning to hold firm on net-zero goals while delaying or ditching a host of measures that would impose direct costs on consumers, as he comes under pressure from the right of his party to rethink Britain’s climate commitments.
After the Conservatives’ unexpected victory in last week’s Uxbridge & South Ruislip by-election, there are tensions in both main parties about the cost of environmental policies after expansion of London’s Ulez emissions scheme was blamed for Labour’s defeat.
Sadiq Khan, the London mayor, is planning to press ahead with next month’s expansion of the £12.50 daily charge for older petrol and diesel vehicles, while Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, insists that the party’s policies should not put up people’s bills.
Conservative MPs are demanding a radical rethink of net-zero policies, with the former business secretary Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg calling yesterday for a delay to the 2030 ban on sales of new petrol and diesel cars and the end of green levies on energy bills.
“What works is getting rid of unpopular, expensive green policies and that’s a real opportunity for us,” he told GB News. “I would get rid of things that apply direct costs. Having a long-term ambition for net zero is different.”
Full story
2) Rishi Sunak says he does not want to ‘hassle’ families with net zero targets
Press Association, 24 July 2023
A minister has raised questions over the future of the government’s pledge to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 by saying that he cannot “prophesy” whether it will remain.
Andrew Mitchell, an international development minister, said that the policy “absolutely” remains in place despite a push from Tory MPs for the government to delay it.
However, pressed on whether it will continue to be government policy, he said: “I’m afraid I can’t prophesy for the future.” Pressed further he appeared to commit to it. “It is in place and it remains in place and will remain in place.”
He said that the government has shown that it is “adept at defending people from rising prices”.
Ministers are backing away from “costly and unpopular” green policies. Low-traffic neighbourhoods face a ban and landlords will get longer to meet energy efficiency targets.
Rishi Sunak is planning to hold firm on net-zero goals while delaying or ditching a host of measures that would impose direct costs on consumers, as he comes under pressure from the right of his party to rethink Britain’s climate commitments.
After the Conservatives’ unexpected victory in last week’s Uxbridge & South Ruislip by-election, there are tensions in both main parties about the cost of environmental policies after expansion of London’s Ulez emissions scheme was blamed for Labour’s defeat.
Sadiq Khan, the London mayor, is planning to press ahead with next month’s expansion of the £12.50 daily charge for older petrol and diesel vehicles, while Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, insists that the party’s policies should not put up people’s bills.
Conservative MPs are demanding a radical rethink of net-zero policies, with the former business secretary Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg calling yesterday for a delay to the 2030 ban on sales of new petrol and diesel cars and the end of green levies on energy bills.
“What works is getting rid of unpopular, expensive green policies and that’s a real opportunity for us,” he told GB News. “I would get rid of things that apply direct costs. Having a long-term ambition for net zero is different.”
Full story
2) Rishi Sunak says he does not want to ‘hassle’ families with net zero targets
Press Association, 24 July 2023
The PM signalled he could water down some policies amid pressure from the right of his party.
Rishi Sunak has said he does not want policies tackling the climate crisis to heap “hassle” or extra costs on to families as he seems set to water down efforts to win over voters.
The Prime Minister said he wants to act in a “proportionate and pragmatic” way that does not “unnecessarily” affect lives as he comes under pressure from the right of the Tory party.
He insisted on Monday that reaching net zero is “of course” important to him, following accusations he is “uninterested” in the environment.
But he did not specifically recommit to the ban on selling new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 amid tensions over policies to tackle the emergency.
The Conservatives narrowly held on to Uxbridge and South Ruislip in last week’s by-election after Labour’s failure to win was attributed to the expansion of the Ulez emissions scheme.
Asked whether he is continuing with the target for banning new fossil fuel car sales, Mr Sunak insisted “we’re going to keep making progress towards our net zero ambitions”.
But he was not clear whether the 2030 deadline will stay in place after a report in The Times that an “Aston Martin exemption” could be added for smaller car manufacturers.
Full story
Rishi Sunak has said he does not want policies tackling the climate crisis to heap “hassle” or extra costs on to families as he seems set to water down efforts to win over voters.
The Prime Minister said he wants to act in a “proportionate and pragmatic” way that does not “unnecessarily” affect lives as he comes under pressure from the right of the Tory party.
He insisted on Monday that reaching net zero is “of course” important to him, following accusations he is “uninterested” in the environment.
But he did not specifically recommit to the ban on selling new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 amid tensions over policies to tackle the emergency.
The Conservatives narrowly held on to Uxbridge and South Ruislip in last week’s by-election after Labour’s failure to win was attributed to the expansion of the Ulez emissions scheme.
Asked whether he is continuing with the target for banning new fossil fuel car sales, Mr Sunak insisted “we’re going to keep making progress towards our net zero ambitions”.
But he was not clear whether the 2030 deadline will stay in place after a report in The Times that an “Aston Martin exemption” could be added for smaller car manufacturers.
Full story
3) Less of the ‘green crap’: UK politicians want to take edge off net-zero pain
Politico, 23 July 2023
Politico, 23 July 2023
LONDON — British politicians think they know what the people want this weekend — less of the "green crap."
Senior Conservative and Labour politicians have been assuring voters they want to take the edge off a suite of bold policies designed to tackle climate change and pollution after the ailing Conservatives clinched a surprise victory in an outer-London by-election opposing an ultra-low emissions zone (ULEZ), a green tax levied on higher-polluting cars.
Allies of Labour's London Mayor Sadiq Khan, the architect of that expanded ULEZ scheme, made it clear he is in listening mode after last week's election result. City Hall is expected to look at new ways to mitigate the financial impact of the policy. It comes after Labour Party leader Keir Starmer on Friday urged Khan to “reflect” on the impact of the extension of ULEZ into Uxbridge, the former seat of Boris Johnson where the election was held.
Meanwhile, veteran Conservative Cabinet minister Michael Gove, a former environment secretary who was once seen as one of the Conservatives' most vocal green crusaders, told the Sunday Telegraph he wants to relax current plans to bring in stricter minimum energy efficiency standards for landlords by 2028.
“My own strong view is that we’re asking too much too quickly. We do want to move towards greater energy efficiency, but just at this point, when landlords face so much, I think that we should relax the pace that’s been set for people in the private rented sector, particularly because many of them are currently facing a big capital outlay in order to improve that efficiency,” Gove told the paper.
Gove was former Prime Minister Theresa May's environment secretary when the government enshrined into law a target of eradicating the U.K.'s net contribution to climate change by 2050.
In an interview with the Financial Times, meanwhile, Energy Secretary Grant Shapps said North Sea oil and natural-gas licenses should be granted for all viable oilfields and gasfields, as long as it was consistent with the net-zero ambitions.
It is not the first time Conservative ministers have cooled on green promises in the run-up to an election.
In 2013, Prime Minister David Cameron reportedly ordered aides to get rid of the "green crap" from energy bills in a drive to bring down energy costs. Cameron had made the environment a core election issue in 2010 when he invited people to "vote blue, go green."
The U.K. government has also recently been under pressure from senior Conservatives over former Prime Minister Johnson's pledge to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel cars in the U.K. by 2030.
Asked if the government should drop its commitment, Lee Rowley, a junior minister in Gove's housing department, told GB News: “It's about doing this in a way that works. We've got a target. Let's all go and try and do as much as we can to get there."
Full story
Senior Conservative and Labour politicians have been assuring voters they want to take the edge off a suite of bold policies designed to tackle climate change and pollution after the ailing Conservatives clinched a surprise victory in an outer-London by-election opposing an ultra-low emissions zone (ULEZ), a green tax levied on higher-polluting cars.
Allies of Labour's London Mayor Sadiq Khan, the architect of that expanded ULEZ scheme, made it clear he is in listening mode after last week's election result. City Hall is expected to look at new ways to mitigate the financial impact of the policy. It comes after Labour Party leader Keir Starmer on Friday urged Khan to “reflect” on the impact of the extension of ULEZ into Uxbridge, the former seat of Boris Johnson where the election was held.
Meanwhile, veteran Conservative Cabinet minister Michael Gove, a former environment secretary who was once seen as one of the Conservatives' most vocal green crusaders, told the Sunday Telegraph he wants to relax current plans to bring in stricter minimum energy efficiency standards for landlords by 2028.
“My own strong view is that we’re asking too much too quickly. We do want to move towards greater energy efficiency, but just at this point, when landlords face so much, I think that we should relax the pace that’s been set for people in the private rented sector, particularly because many of them are currently facing a big capital outlay in order to improve that efficiency,” Gove told the paper.
Gove was former Prime Minister Theresa May's environment secretary when the government enshrined into law a target of eradicating the U.K.'s net contribution to climate change by 2050.
In an interview with the Financial Times, meanwhile, Energy Secretary Grant Shapps said North Sea oil and natural-gas licenses should be granted for all viable oilfields and gasfields, as long as it was consistent with the net-zero ambitions.
It is not the first time Conservative ministers have cooled on green promises in the run-up to an election.
In 2013, Prime Minister David Cameron reportedly ordered aides to get rid of the "green crap" from energy bills in a drive to bring down energy costs. Cameron had made the environment a core election issue in 2010 when he invited people to "vote blue, go green."
The U.K. government has also recently been under pressure from senior Conservatives over former Prime Minister Johnson's pledge to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel cars in the U.K. by 2030.
Asked if the government should drop its commitment, Lee Rowley, a junior minister in Gove's housing department, told GB News: “It's about doing this in a way that works. We've got a target. Let's all go and try and do as much as we can to get there."
Full story
4) Voters will not tolerate being hammered by the mad scramble to Net Zero
Editorial, The Sun, 24 July 2023
Editorial, The Sun, 24 July 2023
FOR years The Sun has warned politicians that voters will not tolerate being hammered by punitive costs in the mad scramble to Net Zero.
The Tories have finally realised we were right.
The ultimate ambition of an emissions-free country is a fine one.
But we are trying to achieve it at ruinous pace.
The Government, in the shape of Levelling Up Secretary Michael Gove, now admits our main parties have vastly over-estimated the public’s willingness or ability to foot the bill.
Families can’t and won’t replace vehicles they like with £40,000 battery ones which, among other problems, cannot take them on holiday on a single charge.
They will not replace cheap, efficient gas boilers with heat pumps costing five times as much, especially when it may leave them shivering in the winter.
They despise paying more tax to bankroll politicians’ desires to “show an example to the world” on the climate.
They will vote against all that enforced pain at any time, let alone now.
Last week the Tories won the Uxbridge by-election in London when working people revolted against Labour Mayor Sadiq Khan’s levy on older vehicles.
But the Government must not now lurch from one extreme to another.
Very few voters want Net Zero ditched entirely.
They are just sick of the apocalyptic hysteria exemplified by Just Stop Oil, its Labour stooges and the BBC.
They are sick of the unscientific, oddly egocentric notion that the UK’s emissions are pivotal to the planet’s survival despite them being globally negligible and their reduction since 2010 already outpacing almost every major nation.
They are sick too of rich politicians who will never struggle to pay a bill preaching about the “immorality” of slowing our rush to Net Zero.
Rishi Sunak MUST delay the random 2030 ban on new fossil fuel cars to at least 2035, like the EU.
Heat pumps could be mandatory in new homes only.
The 2050 Net Zero deadline must be revised, based on economic reality and not wishful thinking. Voters demand it.
They will not be cash cows for MPs panicked by wild-eyed zealots into what Mr Gove rightly calls a “religious crusade”.
The Tories have finally realised we were right.
The ultimate ambition of an emissions-free country is a fine one.
But we are trying to achieve it at ruinous pace.
The Government, in the shape of Levelling Up Secretary Michael Gove, now admits our main parties have vastly over-estimated the public’s willingness or ability to foot the bill.
Families can’t and won’t replace vehicles they like with £40,000 battery ones which, among other problems, cannot take them on holiday on a single charge.
They will not replace cheap, efficient gas boilers with heat pumps costing five times as much, especially when it may leave them shivering in the winter.
They despise paying more tax to bankroll politicians’ desires to “show an example to the world” on the climate.
They will vote against all that enforced pain at any time, let alone now.
Last week the Tories won the Uxbridge by-election in London when working people revolted against Labour Mayor Sadiq Khan’s levy on older vehicles.
But the Government must not now lurch from one extreme to another.
Very few voters want Net Zero ditched entirely.
They are just sick of the apocalyptic hysteria exemplified by Just Stop Oil, its Labour stooges and the BBC.
They are sick of the unscientific, oddly egocentric notion that the UK’s emissions are pivotal to the planet’s survival despite them being globally negligible and their reduction since 2010 already outpacing almost every major nation.
They are sick too of rich politicians who will never struggle to pay a bill preaching about the “immorality” of slowing our rush to Net Zero.
Rishi Sunak MUST delay the random 2030 ban on new fossil fuel cars to at least 2035, like the EU.
Heat pumps could be mandatory in new homes only.
The 2050 Net Zero deadline must be revised, based on economic reality and not wishful thinking. Voters demand it.
They will not be cash cows for MPs panicked by wild-eyed zealots into what Mr Gove rightly calls a “religious crusade”.
5) Daniel Johnson: Cut Net Zero rhetoric and start listening to the voters
Daily Mail, 24 July 2023
Daily Mail, 24 July 2023
All over Europe, the backlash against green fanaticism is destroying establishment politicians – most recently in The Netherlands, where centre-Right Prime Minister Mark Rutte has just been ousted after ten years in office. Mr Sunak could easily follow him into oblivion – unless he ditches the boilerplate net zero rhetoric and starts listening to voters.
If there is one lesson that Rishi Sunak must take away from last week’s by-elections, it is that voters cannot be bullied into embracing unpopular green policies such as Ulez or net zero.
Holding on in Uxbridge and South Ruislip has given the Conservatives a glimmer of hope that they could yet turn the tables on a reinvigorated Labour.
But the Prime Minister will only justify that hope if he is prepared to act boldly to put clear blue water between himself and Keir Starmer – by abandoning punitive policies or arbitrary environmental targets, taxes and regulations.
The bad news is that the Government is still wedded to a whole range of these measures, from banning new petrol cars by 2030 to replacing fossil fuels with renewables on a timetable that cannot be met without hardship.
To penalise innocent people for driving to work or heating their homes would be intolerable even in normal times. To do so during a cost of living crisis, when many are dreading fuel poverty next winter, is electoral suicide.
The good news, as the Mail reveals today, is that Mr Sunak appears to be beginning to listen. Sir Keir Starmer, however, is surrounded by green zealots such as Ed Miliband. Mr Miliband, the Shadow Climate Change Secretary, had pledged to spend £28billion on accelerating the already over-ambitious drive to net zero, though even spendthrift Labour now admit such vast sums may not be practical.
Sir Keir is engaged in a carefully staged spat with the London Mayor over the extension of the Ulez scheme – the capital’s ultra-low emissions zone – after it was blamed for the loss in Uxbridge. But he has also accepted £1.5million from Dale Vince, a wealthy supporter of Just Stop Oil, the hardline environmental protest group.
Indeed, Sir Keir has just shown how far he is in hock to this and other extremist organisations by promising to ban new drilling for oil and gas in the North Sea – thereby forcing us to buy more of these fuels elsewhere.
By contrast, Michael Gove ‘gets it’. The Levelling Up Secretary said at the weekend that ‘if people think that you are treating the cause of the environment as a religious crusade, in which you’re dividing the world into goodies and baddies, then you alienate the support you need for thoughtful environmentalism’. We have been here before. Back in 2013, David Cameron told officials: ‘We have got to get rid of all the green c**p.’ Two years later, he won the election.
This time, the Conservatives are in an even tighter spot. Last week they lost two normally ‘safe’ seats, with an average swing of over 20 per cent.
But it is the ‘Ulez by-election’ in Uxbridge that has excited Westminster. This victory – a surprise to the Tory high command – was due to an excellent local campaign focused on the Ulez extension, which for many will mean a £12.50 a day tax on driving in the outer London boroughs.
Former Uxbridge MP Boris Johnson rightly praised the Conservative candidate, Steve Tuckwell, rather than Mr Sunak. The result had little to do with the PM, but everything to do with loathing of the London Mayor.
Sadiq Khan’s blithe indifference to the misery he is causing evidently galvanised Uxbridge to vote against his party. Could this single issue template work for the Conservative Party nationally? The answer is: only if the PM can convince people he understands their economic hardship.
All over Europe, the backlash against green fanaticism is destroying establishment politicians – most recently in The Netherlands, where centre-Right Prime Minister Mark Rutte has just been ousted after ten years in office. Mr Sunak could easily follow him into oblivion – unless he ditches the boilerplate net zero rhetoric and starts listening to voters.
Full post
6) Ralph Schoellhammer: There is a Europe wide push back against Net Zero
Brussels Signal, 23 July 2023
If there is one lesson that Rishi Sunak must take away from last week’s by-elections, it is that voters cannot be bullied into embracing unpopular green policies such as Ulez or net zero.
Holding on in Uxbridge and South Ruislip has given the Conservatives a glimmer of hope that they could yet turn the tables on a reinvigorated Labour.
But the Prime Minister will only justify that hope if he is prepared to act boldly to put clear blue water between himself and Keir Starmer – by abandoning punitive policies or arbitrary environmental targets, taxes and regulations.
The bad news is that the Government is still wedded to a whole range of these measures, from banning new petrol cars by 2030 to replacing fossil fuels with renewables on a timetable that cannot be met without hardship.
To penalise innocent people for driving to work or heating their homes would be intolerable even in normal times. To do so during a cost of living crisis, when many are dreading fuel poverty next winter, is electoral suicide.
The good news, as the Mail reveals today, is that Mr Sunak appears to be beginning to listen. Sir Keir Starmer, however, is surrounded by green zealots such as Ed Miliband. Mr Miliband, the Shadow Climate Change Secretary, had pledged to spend £28billion on accelerating the already over-ambitious drive to net zero, though even spendthrift Labour now admit such vast sums may not be practical.
Sir Keir is engaged in a carefully staged spat with the London Mayor over the extension of the Ulez scheme – the capital’s ultra-low emissions zone – after it was blamed for the loss in Uxbridge. But he has also accepted £1.5million from Dale Vince, a wealthy supporter of Just Stop Oil, the hardline environmental protest group.
Indeed, Sir Keir has just shown how far he is in hock to this and other extremist organisations by promising to ban new drilling for oil and gas in the North Sea – thereby forcing us to buy more of these fuels elsewhere.
By contrast, Michael Gove ‘gets it’. The Levelling Up Secretary said at the weekend that ‘if people think that you are treating the cause of the environment as a religious crusade, in which you’re dividing the world into goodies and baddies, then you alienate the support you need for thoughtful environmentalism’. We have been here before. Back in 2013, David Cameron told officials: ‘We have got to get rid of all the green c**p.’ Two years later, he won the election.
This time, the Conservatives are in an even tighter spot. Last week they lost two normally ‘safe’ seats, with an average swing of over 20 per cent.
But it is the ‘Ulez by-election’ in Uxbridge that has excited Westminster. This victory – a surprise to the Tory high command – was due to an excellent local campaign focused on the Ulez extension, which for many will mean a £12.50 a day tax on driving in the outer London boroughs.
Former Uxbridge MP Boris Johnson rightly praised the Conservative candidate, Steve Tuckwell, rather than Mr Sunak. The result had little to do with the PM, but everything to do with loathing of the London Mayor.
Sadiq Khan’s blithe indifference to the misery he is causing evidently galvanised Uxbridge to vote against his party. Could this single issue template work for the Conservative Party nationally? The answer is: only if the PM can convince people he understands their economic hardship.
All over Europe, the backlash against green fanaticism is destroying establishment politicians – most recently in The Netherlands, where centre-Right Prime Minister Mark Rutte has just been ousted after ten years in office. Mr Sunak could easily follow him into oblivion – unless he ditches the boilerplate net zero rhetoric and starts listening to voters.
Full post
6) Ralph Schoellhammer: There is a Europe wide push back against Net Zero
Brussels Signal, 23 July 2023
Traditional parties that do not want to lose an ever larger share of the vote to parties on the political fringe will sooner or later have to take this new scepticism towards environmental and climate goals seriously.
It is the very nature of reality to always reassert itself. Or as the Roman poet Horace put it in the first century BC: “You can drive out nature with a pitchfork, but still she will always come back.”This idea will also apply to Europe’s economic and energy policies at some point. No matter how often politicians from Berlin or Brussels are promoting green new deals or a Europe powered almost exclusively by wind and solar, reality starts to fight back. Germany, for example, has been promoting Tesla’s plans to expand their Gigafactory in the state of Brandenburg, supposedly demonstrating how job creation and the energy transition can go hand in hand. In truth, the much flaunted promise by Tesla to power its factory exclusively with renewable energy is about to be broken. In order to start operations, the US company plans to build its own gas-fired power plant to ensure an uninterrupted and reliable supply of energy.
It is not only Musk’s Tesla that is breaking promises: After shutting down their entire nuclear fleet, Germany’s economic minister has just realised that the country will need 50 new gas-fired power plants to avoid future blackouts. Luckily for him, regasification ports for LNG are being built quicker than renewables and the necessary infrastructure to run them, particularly transmission lines. They are nowhere near being built as quickly as they would have to for a successful energy transition towards renewables.
It is not only the law of physics that will demand a return to realism: The upcoming election in the Netherlands will pit the pro-agriculture Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB) against the climate zealots of Frans Timmermans, who decided to leave his post as the EU’s Commissioner for Climate Action and return to Dutch politics. Only founded in 2019, the BBB has become a major force in Dutch politics, primarily due to their criticism of what it views as environmental overreach. The agriculture lobby is becoming more critical of the EU’s climate goals. Many of the proposed policies would directly affect how much land farmers could use and what kinds of fertiliser they could apply. Similarly, resistance is growing in Ireland, where farmers are protesting plans to kill up to 200,000 cows in order to reduce methane emissions.
But this new resistance is not limited to the farming sector: In London, the Conservative Party managed to cling on to a parliamentary seat on the edge of the capital in last week’s by-elections largely thanks to Labour mayor Sadiq Khan’s plan to extend his so-called “Ultra Low Emissions Zones”, making commuting via car more expensive. Although it has not yet reached Dutch levels of prominence, voices critical of Britain’s commitment to net zero are getting louder within both the Labour and Tory leadership.
The simple fact is that energy policies have no delivered what they promised: Cheaper energy, a lowering of inflation, and good paying “green” jobs. Offshore wind projects are being cancelled, and even the pro-energy transition German weekly magazine Der Spiegel admitted that “wind and sun alone are not enough.”
It seems that only the national conservative AfD (Alternative for Germany) is feeling any wind in its sails. It is currently the second party in German polls and could well become the largest if current trends continue. The AfD is feeding off its decade old opposition to the energy transition that until 2022 seemed to be an outlier in the German party landscape, but has since then become mainstream. This is highlighted by the party’s support for nuclear energy, one area where the majority position of Germans has switched from being against to being in favour – vindicating at least one position of the populist movement.
As could be expected, other countries are taking note: Italy under the leadership of Georgia Meloni has pledged to pursue a more pragmatic and less ideological approach towards climate change, while Sweden’s new government has abandoned its 100 per cent renewable target by 2045. It will continue to support the further development of nuclear power.
Traditional parties that do not want to lose an ever larger share of the vote to parties on the political fringe will sooner or later have to take this new scepticism towards environmental and climate goals seriously. Most people will not vote for parties that deliver lower living standards in exchange for climate policies, and assuming that most politicians are opportunists, it will ultimately be the climate agenda that is going to take the backseat. It is no longer a question of when, but only how fast.
7) Soaring costs are derailing offshore wind projects across the world
It is the very nature of reality to always reassert itself. Or as the Roman poet Horace put it in the first century BC: “You can drive out nature with a pitchfork, but still she will always come back.”This idea will also apply to Europe’s economic and energy policies at some point. No matter how often politicians from Berlin or Brussels are promoting green new deals or a Europe powered almost exclusively by wind and solar, reality starts to fight back. Germany, for example, has been promoting Tesla’s plans to expand their Gigafactory in the state of Brandenburg, supposedly demonstrating how job creation and the energy transition can go hand in hand. In truth, the much flaunted promise by Tesla to power its factory exclusively with renewable energy is about to be broken. In order to start operations, the US company plans to build its own gas-fired power plant to ensure an uninterrupted and reliable supply of energy.
It is not only Musk’s Tesla that is breaking promises: After shutting down their entire nuclear fleet, Germany’s economic minister has just realised that the country will need 50 new gas-fired power plants to avoid future blackouts. Luckily for him, regasification ports for LNG are being built quicker than renewables and the necessary infrastructure to run them, particularly transmission lines. They are nowhere near being built as quickly as they would have to for a successful energy transition towards renewables.
It is not only the law of physics that will demand a return to realism: The upcoming election in the Netherlands will pit the pro-agriculture Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB) against the climate zealots of Frans Timmermans, who decided to leave his post as the EU’s Commissioner for Climate Action and return to Dutch politics. Only founded in 2019, the BBB has become a major force in Dutch politics, primarily due to their criticism of what it views as environmental overreach. The agriculture lobby is becoming more critical of the EU’s climate goals. Many of the proposed policies would directly affect how much land farmers could use and what kinds of fertiliser they could apply. Similarly, resistance is growing in Ireland, where farmers are protesting plans to kill up to 200,000 cows in order to reduce methane emissions.
But this new resistance is not limited to the farming sector: In London, the Conservative Party managed to cling on to a parliamentary seat on the edge of the capital in last week’s by-elections largely thanks to Labour mayor Sadiq Khan’s plan to extend his so-called “Ultra Low Emissions Zones”, making commuting via car more expensive. Although it has not yet reached Dutch levels of prominence, voices critical of Britain’s commitment to net zero are getting louder within both the Labour and Tory leadership.
The simple fact is that energy policies have no delivered what they promised: Cheaper energy, a lowering of inflation, and good paying “green” jobs. Offshore wind projects are being cancelled, and even the pro-energy transition German weekly magazine Der Spiegel admitted that “wind and sun alone are not enough.”
It seems that only the national conservative AfD (Alternative for Germany) is feeling any wind in its sails. It is currently the second party in German polls and could well become the largest if current trends continue. The AfD is feeding off its decade old opposition to the energy transition that until 2022 seemed to be an outlier in the German party landscape, but has since then become mainstream. This is highlighted by the party’s support for nuclear energy, one area where the majority position of Germans has switched from being against to being in favour – vindicating at least one position of the populist movement.
As could be expected, other countries are taking note: Italy under the leadership of Georgia Meloni has pledged to pursue a more pragmatic and less ideological approach towards climate change, while Sweden’s new government has abandoned its 100 per cent renewable target by 2045. It will continue to support the further development of nuclear power.
Traditional parties that do not want to lose an ever larger share of the vote to parties on the political fringe will sooner or later have to take this new scepticism towards environmental and climate goals seriously. Most people will not vote for parties that deliver lower living standards in exchange for climate policies, and assuming that most politicians are opportunists, it will ultimately be the climate agenda that is going to take the backseat. It is no longer a question of when, but only how fast.
7) Soaring costs are derailing offshore wind projects across the world
Offshore wind projects are facing an economic crisis that erased billions of US dollars in planned spending this week — just as the world needs clean energy more than ever.
A unit of Spain’s Iberdrola SA agreed to cancel a contract to sell power from a planned wind farm off the coast of Massachusetts. Danish developer Orsted A/S lost a bid to provide offshore wind power to Rhode Island, whose main utility said rising costs made the proposal too expensive. Swedish state-owned utility Vattenfall AB scuttled plans for a wind farm off the coast of Britain, citing inflation.
Soaring costs are derailing offshore wind projects even as demand for renewable energy soars. Extreme heat driven by climate change is straining electric grids all over the world, underscoring the need for more power generation — and adding urgency to calls for a faster transition away from fossil fuels. In Europe, the move to reduce reliance on Russian oil and gas has also given clean-energy projects momentum.
“Energy coming from these projects is desperately needed,” Helene Bistrom, the head of Vattenfall’s wind business, said on an earnings call this week. “With new market conditions, it doesn’t make sense to continue.”
Together, the three affected projects would have provided 3.5 gigawatts of power — more than 11% of the total offshore wind fleet currently deployed in the waters of the US and Europe. And the numbers could soon expand. At least 9.7 gigawatts of US projects are at risk because their developers want to renegotiate or exit contracts to sell power at prices that they say are now too low to make the investments worth it, according to BloombergNEF.
Full story
A unit of Spain’s Iberdrola SA agreed to cancel a contract to sell power from a planned wind farm off the coast of Massachusetts. Danish developer Orsted A/S lost a bid to provide offshore wind power to Rhode Island, whose main utility said rising costs made the proposal too expensive. Swedish state-owned utility Vattenfall AB scuttled plans for a wind farm off the coast of Britain, citing inflation.
Soaring costs are derailing offshore wind projects even as demand for renewable energy soars. Extreme heat driven by climate change is straining electric grids all over the world, underscoring the need for more power generation — and adding urgency to calls for a faster transition away from fossil fuels. In Europe, the move to reduce reliance on Russian oil and gas has also given clean-energy projects momentum.
“Energy coming from these projects is desperately needed,” Helene Bistrom, the head of Vattenfall’s wind business, said on an earnings call this week. “With new market conditions, it doesn’t make sense to continue.”
Together, the three affected projects would have provided 3.5 gigawatts of power — more than 11% of the total offshore wind fleet currently deployed in the waters of the US and Europe. And the numbers could soon expand. At least 9.7 gigawatts of US projects are at risk because their developers want to renegotiate or exit contracts to sell power at prices that they say are now too low to make the investments worth it, according to BloombergNEF.
Full story
8) Ross Clark: Is global warming behind Greece’s wildfires?
The Spectator, 24 July 2023
The Spectator, 24 July 2023
Summer wouldn’t be complete without hordes of disgruntled British tourists being evacuated from their hotels, flown home early or spending their holidays sprawled on the floor of an international airport. But are the scenes of Rhodes really a symptom of a the world ‘being on fire’, as Greta Thunberg would put it?
Actually, in spite of scenes of burning forests on Rhodes and elsewhere being presented daily on our television screens, 2023 has not been a devastating year for forest fires in Europe. Data from the European Forest Fire Information System (EFFIS), which covers the EU, shows that it has been an average year to date – with an early burst of fires in the spring followed by less activity since then.
It is a similar story with wildfires globally. A 2016 study published in a Royal Society journal using Nasa satellite data surprised many people by revealing that the amount of land burned annually in wildfires globally had decreased by about a quarter between 2001 and 2015. The authors have since updated their study and confirmed that in spite of increasing agonising over fires in the US, Europe and Australia, the amount of land being burned is still falling. This data includes all wildfires, not just forests – and globally 70 per cent of fires are on grassland rather than forests.
None of this is to say that climate change is not increasing the risk of fires in certain locations at certain times of year, but it does rather undermine lazy claims about the world being on fire. If anything, the world is being damped down.
We have been conditioned to think that climate change is the overwhelming problem facing human civilisation and all other life on Earth. But why is the extent of fires not actually increasing in the way that climate campaigners frequently claim? Partly because in some places shifting patterns of rainfall have reduced the risk of fire. But also because rising global temperatures are not the only influence on fires.
Why is the extent of fires not actually increasing in the way that climate campaigners frequently claim?
The incidence of wildfires also has a lot to do with land use. Where wildfires have increased in recent years, such as in some parts of Eastern Europe, it is down to farmland being abandoned and allowed to return to scrubland, which contains far more flammable material. Urban development close to forested areas also plays a big role, increasing the sources of ignition through barbecues, overhead electricity wires and so on.
Forest management also has a lot to do with it. Wildfires are, in many cases, natural events sparked off by lightning strikes – indeed, they play an essential role in many eco systems, with some plants taking advantage of fire in order to germinate. But in some parts of the Earth, especially the US, fire fighting authorities have become a little too good over the past century in fighting wildfires.
Full post
Actually, in spite of scenes of burning forests on Rhodes and elsewhere being presented daily on our television screens, 2023 has not been a devastating year for forest fires in Europe. Data from the European Forest Fire Information System (EFFIS), which covers the EU, shows that it has been an average year to date – with an early burst of fires in the spring followed by less activity since then.
It is a similar story with wildfires globally. A 2016 study published in a Royal Society journal using Nasa satellite data surprised many people by revealing that the amount of land burned annually in wildfires globally had decreased by about a quarter between 2001 and 2015. The authors have since updated their study and confirmed that in spite of increasing agonising over fires in the US, Europe and Australia, the amount of land being burned is still falling. This data includes all wildfires, not just forests – and globally 70 per cent of fires are on grassland rather than forests.
None of this is to say that climate change is not increasing the risk of fires in certain locations at certain times of year, but it does rather undermine lazy claims about the world being on fire. If anything, the world is being damped down.
We have been conditioned to think that climate change is the overwhelming problem facing human civilisation and all other life on Earth. But why is the extent of fires not actually increasing in the way that climate campaigners frequently claim? Partly because in some places shifting patterns of rainfall have reduced the risk of fire. But also because rising global temperatures are not the only influence on fires.
Why is the extent of fires not actually increasing in the way that climate campaigners frequently claim?
The incidence of wildfires also has a lot to do with land use. Where wildfires have increased in recent years, such as in some parts of Eastern Europe, it is down to farmland being abandoned and allowed to return to scrubland, which contains far more flammable material. Urban development close to forested areas also plays a big role, increasing the sources of ignition through barbecues, overhead electricity wires and so on.
Forest management also has a lot to do with it. Wildfires are, in many cases, natural events sparked off by lightning strikes – indeed, they play an essential role in many eco systems, with some plants taking advantage of fire in order to germinate. But in some parts of the Earth, especially the US, fire fighting authorities have become a little too good over the past century in fighting wildfires.
Full post
9) Nobel Price Laureate John Clauser cancelled after speaking out on “corruption” of climate science
The Daily Sceptic, 23 July 2023
The Daily Sceptic, 23 July 2023
Earlier this month, the 2022 Nobel Physics Laureate Dr. John Clauser slammed the ‘climate emergency’ narrative as a “dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world’s economy and the well-being of billions of people”. Inevitably, the punishments have begun.
A talk that Dr. Clauser was due to give to the International Monetary Fund on climate models has been abruptly cancelled, and the page announcing the event removed from the IMF site.
Dr. Clauser was due to speak to the IMF’s Independent Evaluation Office this Thursday under the title: “Let’s talk – How much can we trust IPCC climate predictions?” It would appear that “not a lot” isn’t the politically correct answer.
Clauser is a longstanding critic of climate models and criticised the award of the Physics Nobel in 2021 for work on them. He is not alone, since many feel that climate models are primarily based on mathematics, and a history of failed opinionated climate predictions leave them undeserving of recognition at the highest level of pure science. Not that this opinion is shared by the green activist National Geographic magazine, which ran an article: “How climate models got so accurate they won a Nobel.”
Last week, Clauser observed that misguided climate science has “metastasised into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience”. This pseudoscience, he continued, has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other related ills. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies and environmentalists. “In my opinion, there is no real climate crisis,” he added.
Clauser is the latest Nobel physics laureate to dismiss the notion of a climate crisis. Professor Ivar Giaever, a fellow laureate, is the lead signatory of the World Climate Declaration that states there is no climate emergency. It further argues that climate models are “not remotely plausible as global policy tools”. The 1998 winner Professor Robert Laughlin has expressed the view that the climate is “beyond our power to control” and humanity cannot and should not do anything to respond to climate change.
The Australian climate journalist Jo Nova was in fine form reporting on Clauser’s recent comments. “The thing about sceptical Nobel Prize winners is that they make the name-calling ‘climate denier’ programme look as stupid as it can get,” she observed. She noted the lack of any mainstream media interest in Clauser’s recent comments, asking: “How much damage would it do to the cause if the audience finds out that one of the highest ranking scientists in the world disagrees with the mantra?” A question of course with an obvious answer. Quite a lot.
Full post
10) What climate crisis? G20 countries fail to reach agreement on cutting fossil fuels
The Guardian, 22 July 2023
A talk that Dr. Clauser was due to give to the International Monetary Fund on climate models has been abruptly cancelled, and the page announcing the event removed from the IMF site.
Dr. Clauser was due to speak to the IMF’s Independent Evaluation Office this Thursday under the title: “Let’s talk – How much can we trust IPCC climate predictions?” It would appear that “not a lot” isn’t the politically correct answer.
Clauser is a longstanding critic of climate models and criticised the award of the Physics Nobel in 2021 for work on them. He is not alone, since many feel that climate models are primarily based on mathematics, and a history of failed opinionated climate predictions leave them undeserving of recognition at the highest level of pure science. Not that this opinion is shared by the green activist National Geographic magazine, which ran an article: “How climate models got so accurate they won a Nobel.”
Last week, Clauser observed that misguided climate science has “metastasised into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience”. This pseudoscience, he continued, has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other related ills. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies and environmentalists. “In my opinion, there is no real climate crisis,” he added.
Clauser is the latest Nobel physics laureate to dismiss the notion of a climate crisis. Professor Ivar Giaever, a fellow laureate, is the lead signatory of the World Climate Declaration that states there is no climate emergency. It further argues that climate models are “not remotely plausible as global policy tools”. The 1998 winner Professor Robert Laughlin has expressed the view that the climate is “beyond our power to control” and humanity cannot and should not do anything to respond to climate change.
The Australian climate journalist Jo Nova was in fine form reporting on Clauser’s recent comments. “The thing about sceptical Nobel Prize winners is that they make the name-calling ‘climate denier’ programme look as stupid as it can get,” she observed. She noted the lack of any mainstream media interest in Clauser’s recent comments, asking: “How much damage would it do to the cause if the audience finds out that one of the highest ranking scientists in the world disagrees with the mantra?” A question of course with an obvious answer. Quite a lot.
Full post
10) What climate crisis? G20 countries fail to reach agreement on cutting fossil fuels
The Guardian, 22 July 2023
The G20 bloc of wealthy economies meeting in India failed to reach a consensus on phasing down fossil fuels on Saturday after objections by some producer nations.
Scientists and campaigners are exasperated by international bodies’ foot-dragging on action to curb global heating even as extreme weather across the northern hemisphere underlined the climate crisis facing the world.
The G20 member countries together account for more than three-quarters of global emissions and gross domestic product, so a cumulative effort by the group to decarbonise is crucial in the global fight against climate breakdown.
However, disagreements including the intended tripling of renewable energy capacities by 2030 resulted in officials issuing an outcome statement and a chair summary instead of a joint communique at the end of their four-day meeting in Panaji, the capital of the Indian coastal state of Goa.
Full story
Scientists and campaigners are exasperated by international bodies’ foot-dragging on action to curb global heating even as extreme weather across the northern hemisphere underlined the climate crisis facing the world.
The G20 member countries together account for more than three-quarters of global emissions and gross domestic product, so a cumulative effort by the group to decarbonise is crucial in the global fight against climate breakdown.
However, disagreements including the intended tripling of renewable energy capacities by 2030 resulted in officials issuing an outcome statement and a chair summary instead of a joint communique at the end of their four-day meeting in Panaji, the capital of the Indian coastal state of Goa.
Full story
The London-based Net Zero Watch is a campaign group set up to highlight and discuss the serious implications of expensive and poorly considered climate change policies. The Net Zero Watch newsletter is prepared by Director Dr Benny Peiser - for more information, please visit the website at www.netzerowatch.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment