A train built with shadowy carriages all leaving from the same location, all carrying different cargo, all designed to ensure the same result. Stop one, search it, destroy it and the others all get away with it. By the time the last train is stopped they've reinstated the first one under a different name, or are fighting to prevent the search, or the station has gone on strike, lost the keys, hidden the goods.
Folk think organised crime is complex. It has nothing on an abusive, totalitarian, thoroughly evil government department.
This is a brilliant piece of work and we are really lucky to have it: thanks for posting it!
Looking at the pieces of the jigsaw is like the project that I proposed years ago to account for the corruption of science that underpins the net zero project.
Here is a preliminary list of the dots that have to be joined to get the picture.
Jacques Barzun’s extended commentary on education;
the radicalization of the student “generation of ‘68”;
John Grover’s account of the international campaign against nuclear power which grew out of the Ban the Bomb protests in the 1950s;
the development of a crisis mindset regarding environmental issues.
the postwar emergence of Big Science;
the rise of “normal science” flagged by T S Kuhn.
Moving on to climate science there is
the role of “environmental entrepreneurs” in the United Nations;
the partnership between Western governments and the IPCC and
I could envisage spending ten years on the project and I put it aside to write an introductory book on climate science, followed by concentrating on energy issues.
Escape Key Substack has in depth essays on how these bodies were set up, all compartmentalised, with no-one working in a specific area knowing the full picture, not only for the carbon/environmental areas.
It's a convoluted mess - deliberately designed to ensure it can never be unravelled. As soon as one nonsense is taken apart, the next head of the hydra rears up.
Such can only be designed by the civil service which has a deliberate agenda to force this sort of policy and ensure it cannot be taken apart. it would be the work of two governments to undo before meaningful change were made. Ten years with nothing getting done. What a waste - but then, that's the point.
This is the sort of thing that, like the appalling 'human rights act' the Left so love to knot their serpentine selves around. It is why voting does not matter. The blob wants this and has ensured it can't be undone. When I look at Farage and his nonsense over this £5m I just see a stunt man. Not someone willing and able to unravel leviathan.
Hell, the Foreign office has already gone on strike (not that anyone has or would notice) over miniscule job cuts. The intent is to ensure the legislation can never be changed regardless of who is in office.
The bigger issue is it's not just this one law ruining our country. It is that every convoluted, entangled administrative mess the blob use to ensure our decline continues is designed this way.
Umm me thinks you give the civil service too much credit here and what we actually have here is unintended outcome of their gross ineptitude to actually deliver anything useful for the British State.
I think you only create a set up like that, with 'independent' but chained bodies, all with separate legislative arrangements, all mangled with separate unions, different accountability, across multiple government departments by intent.
The CS, like all public sector is 20/80. 20% of the people do all the work, 80% try to stop them.
It takes a lot of work, effort and sheer malice to set up such a twisted knot and it has to be intentional to prevent the hoax being unravelled.
Now imagine what they will be able to do by harnessing AI to create an even more impenetrable fortress. Perhaps it can be undone with the aid of more AI, so long as it is friendly to the task.
A great analysis describing how the Net Zero madness has been woven into almost every aspect of society. Is there a Gordian knot which can be severed to bring it to a stop?
The establishment’s multi-tentacled Net Zero project has been severely criticised in an article published recently by former MI6 chief Richard Dearlove saying that Britain’s Net Zero policy has become a national security liability. Mr Dearlove retired in 2004, well before the UK Climate Change Act had even passed into law, but even so, it is very unusual for an MI6 officer not to be totally supportive of official government policy.
A somewhat unrelated good example of conforming to official policy at any price is what happened in 2016-18 when a former MI6 agent with Russia desk expertise (Christopher Steele) was used to manufacture fake evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election for deep state-accomplice Barack Obama to use to try to impeach President Trump - the failed Russiagate hoax as exposed by the White House Press Secretary: https://x.com/Real_RobN/status/2022508286558507463.
Douglas, I think you have identified the central question: where is the Gordian knot, and how can it be cut?
Alexander the Great did not waste time trying to untangle every strand. He used the sword. In our case, that sword must be constitutional and legislative.
The Climate Change Act would have to be repealed, the system of binding carbon budgets dismantled, and the international agreements constraining sovereign energy and industrial policy paused while the United Kingdom determines which commitments remain compatible with the national interest.
That would not solve every problem overnight, because the machinery has spread through planning law, regulation, Treasury appraisal, agriculture, environmental policy and infrastructure investment. But it would remove the legal command at the centre of the system and allow Parliament to reassess the entire structure openly.
This is no longer simply an argument about emissions targets. It is about whether the United Kingdom retains the sovereign power to decide how it produces energy, uses its land, protects its industries and secures its future.
The knot will not untie itself. It has to be cut.lawfully, democratically and decisively.
I’ve often thought that a project so deeply embedded and intractable as Net Zero might only be brought to a halt by a spate of severe national blackouts caused by relying too heavily on inertia-less weather dependent renewables, as happened last year in Spain. I’m personally very concerned about the vulnerability of the Scottish electricity grid which has only two remaining and aged large synchronous generators which the clueless SNP seems to think can be replaced by yet more unreliable intermittent wind and solar.
By coincidence, the latest post from Energy Bad Boys highlights a report on grid battery storage. It modelled how much battery capacity it would take to maintain reliability on PJM, the USA’s largest regional transmission operator, using primarily wind and solar to power the grid. The short answer is that it would take an incredible amount of battery storage capacity to firm a mostly wind and solar PJM—even with the existing nuclear fleet staying online—and the cost to construct these facilities would be prohibitively expensive to achieve: https://energybadboys.substack.com/p/the-battery-bubble.
They do indeed. But the US guys do in depth grid system modelling which can be used directly to influence and legally challenge decisions. The way the US grids are controlled helps in that process of course but similar modelling etc in the UK is generally 'captured' by the system itself.
The article quotes Kathryn Porter saying “Batteries are very expensive. A better option is to not build intermittent generation and then we wouldn’t need batteries or the extra grid infrastructure or the backup delivered by the capacity market”.
Government has been outsourcing responsibility for it's actions happily for years without realising that the instruments for outsourcing their responsibility (many listed above) were also constraining their power to effect change when they wanted to. Bat tunnels, and fish discos and £100s of millions in planning paperwork for tunnels all highlighted rightly for their ridiculousness but the people in power finding that they have no levers available to them that were still actually attached to any mechanism that would allow them to do anything. All the while every attempt to progress a project for the benefit of the country appears to be subject to challenge, cancellation and delay with the mechanisms to allow that enshrined in the instruments that politicians have put in place to reduce their personal responsibility.
As I'm convinced that climate change is real and needs to be addressed, I'm reassured that this structure, that stems from the Climate Change Act, has been so thoroughly worked out. I'm frankly surprised that what I thought had been a fairly ineffective series of Conservative administrations, in power from 2010 to 2024, had the gumption to achieve almost all of this.
The first thing is surely to secure the ability to adapt to changes in climate. It is the height of folly to believe that we can control it favourably. We only have to look at the studies that now blame reduced pollution as a major cause of our hot weather to see the law of unintended consequences applies.
Thank you, David, for such a generous introduction and for bringing this paper to the Eigen Values audience. I am genuinely grateful that you considered it worthy of publication. My hope is that it now reaches the wider audience it deserves and helps more people understand how the separate laws, plans, regulators and institutions fit together as one powerful system. The more clearly the machinery behind Net Zero is understood, the harder it becomes for these far-reaching changes to proceed without proper democratic scrutiny.
Excellent article - thank you. No shortage of plans then.
"I know now why confusion in government is not only tolerated but encouraged. I have learned. A confused people can make no clear demands." - John Steinbeck
“But the plans were on display…”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.” - Douglas Adams: 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy'
I wonder what happens if one changes the overall destination. So say we go back to an 80% 2050 target as was the case prior to 2019. Or we move to a position where the UK’s legislated targets are reviewed every 5 years in the context of what other large emitters are doing with the legislated targets rolled back if the US, EU, China, India are not making similar reductions. Does this machinery mean the whole system can be relatively sensibly redirected?
Another development which could bring Net Zero to a halt is the onset of global cooling. Most people have been brainwashed into thinking that this is inconceivable but the UAH satellite global temperature series shows that if transient natural warming spikes are discounted there has been negligible global warming since about 1998, contrary to the unhelpful linear trendline now imposed on the graph by Roy Spencer: https://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-c/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_JUNE_2026_v6.1_20x9_GLOBAL-scaled.jpg.
The graph from 1998 shows about 14 years of flatlining (the so-called “pause”) follower by two transient El Nino spikes which had fairly well dissipated when the massive Hunga Tonga undersea volcanic eruption warming spike came along, which has still only half dissipated. Strange that the climate alarmists don’t mention the ~0.5°C of global cooling that has happened over the past couple of years!
These sudden natural warming spikes have nothing to do with man-made CO2. The UN IPCC’s own pseudoscience postulates that CO2 global warming happens at a slow and steady rate of about 0.2°C per decade, not 1°C in less than a year as happened with Hunga Tonga.
The current global temperature trend plausibly fits the waning warm phase of the 60-70 year cycle of the regular Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), whose last cold phase in the 1960s and 70s provoked the scientific panic that the planet might be entering a new ice age.
Another influence which could bring Net Zero to a halt is President Trump and his MAGA movement, the major existential threat to the British deep state.
I keep going on about the malign influence of the British deep state which pursues political policies deeply inimical to the British people via electorate-disenfranchising UK Uniparty politicians. Here’s an update which you will never read about in the captured MSM.
The Promethean Action group keeps a close watch on the nefarious activities of the British deep state which has caused and continues to cause so much harm to the people of Britain, the USA and beyond via: Net Zero and deliberate deindustrialisation, dystopian Agenda 2030, open borders policy fostering mass immigration of cultural aliens, stoking forever wars, facilitating fake pandemics and more.
President Trump is already dismantling these oppressions in the USA and his efforts will hopefully rub off over here once more people shake off the negativity towards Trump they have been brainwashed into believing via establishment deep state propaganda.
It explains how the deep state is regrouping to try to counter the “American System” policy of President Trump’s MAGA movement which it knows poses an existential threat to its own undeserving future. It also gives hope that overcoming this malign deep state body might not be as insurmountable task as feared given that it is being controlled by some very lightweight players who are pursuing policies which are very unpopular with the British people: https://dailysceptic.org/2026/07/22/yes-reform-uk-is-anti-establishment/.
It seems that Canada’s prime minister and ex-UN climate czar Matt Carney has assumed a lead role within the British deep state and has surrounded himself with a coterie of deep state globalists who few will have ever heard of. It also seems that Carney had the brass neck to covertly court Andy Burnham well before he became UK prime minister and has managed to insert his Bank of England protégé Andy Haldane as Burnham’s economic advisor (cf. Klaus Schwab’s WEF boast, “We penetrate the cabinets”).
Burnham was already in hock to lead globalist ex-mayor of New York and failed presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg while he was mayor of Manchester, via Bloomberg’s C40 Cities movement set up with the infuriatingly undemocratic goal “to drive global climate action”. Mayor of London Sadiq Khan has been the chairman of C40 Cities for some time.
We never hear our matey new PM Andy being open about these shady inner workings.
As a postscript, the latest episode from Promethean Action is shockingly scathing of the British deep state and its policies. It describes Iran’s IRGC as a British “death cult” terrorism asset linked to financial sponsors in the City of London and then links the 1970s Malthusian outlook of the Club of Rome to modern environmentalism and Net Zero, which together have created a “New Dark Age”. It contrasts this with the optimism of Trump’s nuclear renaissance and how his administration is succeeding in dismantling global “Dope and Terror Inc.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBngEoBtzlM.
This structure is repeated for just about everything of significance you can think of.
For instance I was personally incentivised to investigate fire safety when faced with high expense to install the 'required' fire alarms in a converted flat in a listed building. I tracked the underlying requirement as spelled out in the actual Act as providing one (just one) smoke detector in the whole flat. By the time this requirement had made its way through the 'system', it was magnified to an unnecessary over complicated system.
I wonder where the actual Law actually starts and stops. Rather than spend inordinate effort and expense fighting the end results, shouldn't it better be spent either questioning the original legislation under the Act or possibly using what is always inadequate drafting in these legislative vehicles to make all the subsequent 'system' irrelevant.
Your paper of December last year is very apposite to David’s post of today. It makes some very good points but I’m afraid it riles me that NZW fails to take the gloves off properly in this fight. Why can’t it fall in line with the Americans who say the climate change movement is “a hoax”?
Publicly available official publications such as (i) the Energy Institute’s latest Statistical Review of World Energy showing that total energy supply dependency on fossil fuels (oil, coal, gas) is a stonking 86% globally and 79% for the UK and (ii) the UK government’s recent admission that the UK achieved a net reduction of just 15% on greenhouse gas emissions over the period 1996 to 2023 show clearly that Net Zero is pointless and unachievable, both globally and nationally here in the UK.
Winning always requires persuading marginal voters, so language matters. Because the climate is changing and anthropomorphic CO2 is a contributor, “hoax” is not the right word.
You may find this helpful:
Climate Realism
Understanding Agreement & Disagreement in Climate Science
“Anthropogenic CO2 is a contributor”. Tell that to all the households suffering with the “heat or eat” dilemma of fuel poverty due to sky-high Net Zero energy prices. Ditto the hundreds of thousands losing their jobs because their businesses can no longer compete. Ditto the North Sea oil and gas workers losing their jobs due to brainless political ideology (started by the Conservatives). Ditto the UK car industry about to disappear because of the push for pointless EVs (also Conservative policy).
President Trump has said climate change is a hoax. His energy secretary Chris White is more nuanced, saying "there is no climate crisis", while acknowledging that greenhouse gases and fossil fuels contribute to warming. He argues that the risks are overstated and that the benefits of fossil fuels outweigh the harms: https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6a65e3f49be4819188c965b9c9a3bdcb.
As to the alleged contribution of CO2, see my earlier comment on global temperature trends.
It’s almost as if NZW are themselves “following the money” in a perverse way, holding back on delivering a Net Zero knockout punch for fear of putting themselves out of a job.
I’m sorry, I took it for granted you knew I was one of parliament’s leading opponents of Net Zero, obtaining plenty of press coverage and taking many political hits.
Benny directed the GWPF. You asked why not say “hoax”. I gave you a serious answer.
I’m aware of your record, I’m directing my ire more broadly at the brainless (to put it charitably) Conservatives.
One of the just five MPs who voted against the 2008 Climate Change Act was murdered a couple of weeks ago in very strange circumstances, Ann Widdicombe. Theresa May pushed through Net Zero in 2019 without even holding a parliamentary vote.
It is a fundamental phenomenon in behavioural science that when people disagree they tend to blame the other person’s motives rather than explore whether they might not have considered all the factors at work.
Again, I offer you a serious explanation for your disagreement with them
If you think you can school me on the climate change hoax, try to rebut my debunking written two years ago after decades of being taken for a fool by Uniparty politicians, a synthesis of the work of many independent experts: https://metatron.substack.com/p/debunking-the-climate-change-hoax.
Net Zero Watch are impeccably accurate and I commend them to you. It is very common to question motives in disagreement. That is the point, not to challenge your considered beliefs.
There you go again, they are not my considered “beliefs”, they are factual reality. Again, can you rebut anything I wrote in my climate change hoax debunking post?
The question they never answer is this: what percentage of climate change is due to human activity. The system just assumes that it's a big percentage which therefore justifies crucifying our society.
Only idiots make assumptions. Sadly they're in control.
Analyses like this are essential feeding matter for politicians who hope to disentangle the mess and restore some kind of sanity. The whole structure is like a game of pick-up-sticks or Jenga, and it has to be dismantled with extreme care to avoid the remaining structures crashing down and entombing further progress.
The first job is to decode the regulatory genome. The next is to design the medicines to cure it. That is not a simple task.
Reads like a runaway train with no-one having access to the brakes!
A train built with shadowy carriages all leaving from the same location, all carrying different cargo, all designed to ensure the same result. Stop one, search it, destroy it and the others all get away with it. By the time the last train is stopped they've reinstated the first one under a different name, or are fighting to prevent the search, or the station has gone on strike, lost the keys, hidden the goods.
Folk think organised crime is complex. It has nothing on an abusive, totalitarian, thoroughly evil government department.
This is a brilliant piece of work and we are really lucky to have it: thanks for posting it!
Looking at the pieces of the jigsaw is like the project that I proposed years ago to account for the corruption of science that underpins the net zero project.
Here is a preliminary list of the dots that have to be joined to get the picture.
Jacques Barzun’s extended commentary on education;
the radicalization of the student “generation of ‘68”;
John Grover’s account of the international campaign against nuclear power which grew out of the Ban the Bomb protests in the 1950s;
the development of a crisis mindset regarding environmental issues.
the postwar emergence of Big Science;
the rise of “normal science” flagged by T S Kuhn.
Moving on to climate science there is
the role of “environmental entrepreneurs” in the United Nations;
the partnership between Western governments and the IPCC and
the governance of the IPCC itself.
https://gordianknot.homestead.com/Theses/GordonTullockontheDeclineofScientificEmpires.html?_=1583007394505
I could envisage spending ten years on the project and I put it aside to write an introductory book on climate science, followed by concentrating on energy issues.
https://www.amazon.com.au/s?k=Rafe+Champion&i=stripbooks&crid=GZ66NWUYZ193&sprefix=rafe+champion%2Cstripbooks%2C262&ref=nb_sb_noss
Escape Key Substack has in depth essays on how these bodies were set up, all compartmentalised, with no-one working in a specific area knowing the full picture, not only for the carbon/environmental areas.
It's a convoluted mess - deliberately designed to ensure it can never be unravelled. As soon as one nonsense is taken apart, the next head of the hydra rears up.
Such can only be designed by the civil service which has a deliberate agenda to force this sort of policy and ensure it cannot be taken apart. it would be the work of two governments to undo before meaningful change were made. Ten years with nothing getting done. What a waste - but then, that's the point.
This is the sort of thing that, like the appalling 'human rights act' the Left so love to knot their serpentine selves around. It is why voting does not matter. The blob wants this and has ensured it can't be undone. When I look at Farage and his nonsense over this £5m I just see a stunt man. Not someone willing and able to unravel leviathan.
Hell, the Foreign office has already gone on strike (not that anyone has or would notice) over miniscule job cuts. The intent is to ensure the legislation can never be changed regardless of who is in office.
The bigger issue is it's not just this one law ruining our country. It is that every convoluted, entangled administrative mess the blob use to ensure our decline continues is designed this way.
Umm me thinks you give the civil service too much credit here and what we actually have here is unintended outcome of their gross ineptitude to actually deliver anything useful for the British State.
I think you only create a set up like that, with 'independent' but chained bodies, all with separate legislative arrangements, all mangled with separate unions, different accountability, across multiple government departments by intent.
The CS, like all public sector is 20/80. 20% of the people do all the work, 80% try to stop them.
It takes a lot of work, effort and sheer malice to set up such a twisted knot and it has to be intentional to prevent the hoax being unravelled.
Now imagine what they will be able to do by harnessing AI to create an even more impenetrable fortress. Perhaps it can be undone with the aid of more AI, so long as it is friendly to the task.
A great analysis describing how the Net Zero madness has been woven into almost every aspect of society. Is there a Gordian knot which can be severed to bring it to a stop?
The establishment’s multi-tentacled Net Zero project has been severely criticised in an article published recently by former MI6 chief Richard Dearlove saying that Britain’s Net Zero policy has become a national security liability. Mr Dearlove retired in 2004, well before the UK Climate Change Act had even passed into law, but even so, it is very unusual for an MI6 officer not to be totally supportive of official government policy.
A somewhat unrelated good example of conforming to official policy at any price is what happened in 2016-18 when a former MI6 agent with Russia desk expertise (Christopher Steele) was used to manufacture fake evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election for deep state-accomplice Barack Obama to use to try to impeach President Trump - the failed Russiagate hoax as exposed by the White House Press Secretary: https://x.com/Real_RobN/status/2022508286558507463.
The Dearlove article is here: https://www.climateskeptic.org/p/britains-national-security-must-not.
Douglas, I think you have identified the central question: where is the Gordian knot, and how can it be cut?
Alexander the Great did not waste time trying to untangle every strand. He used the sword. In our case, that sword must be constitutional and legislative.
The Climate Change Act would have to be repealed, the system of binding carbon budgets dismantled, and the international agreements constraining sovereign energy and industrial policy paused while the United Kingdom determines which commitments remain compatible with the national interest.
That would not solve every problem overnight, because the machinery has spread through planning law, regulation, Treasury appraisal, agriculture, environmental policy and infrastructure investment. But it would remove the legal command at the centre of the system and allow Parliament to reassess the entire structure openly.
This is no longer simply an argument about emissions targets. It is about whether the United Kingdom retains the sovereign power to decide how it produces energy, uses its land, protects its industries and secures its future.
The knot will not untie itself. It has to be cut.lawfully, democratically and decisively.
I’ve often thought that a project so deeply embedded and intractable as Net Zero might only be brought to a halt by a spate of severe national blackouts caused by relying too heavily on inertia-less weather dependent renewables, as happened last year in Spain. I’m personally very concerned about the vulnerability of the Scottish electricity grid which has only two remaining and aged large synchronous generators which the clueless SNP seems to think can be replaced by yet more unreliable intermittent wind and solar.
By coincidence, the latest post from Energy Bad Boys highlights a report on grid battery storage. It modelled how much battery capacity it would take to maintain reliability on PJM, the USA’s largest regional transmission operator, using primarily wind and solar to power the grid. The short answer is that it would take an incredible amount of battery storage capacity to firm a mostly wind and solar PJM—even with the existing nuclear fleet staying online—and the cost to construct these facilities would be prohibitively expensive to achieve: https://energybadboys.substack.com/p/the-battery-bubble.
I commented on the UK aspects of the "battery bubble", statistics provided by ChatGPT: https://energybadboys.substack.com/p/the-battery-bubble?r=8t7a0&utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=301445229
Yes I read EBB and Doomberg. Its a shame there isn't the equivalent people operating in the UK.
I think our host, Kathryn Porter and Richard Lyon do a pretty good job.
They do indeed. But the US guys do in depth grid system modelling which can be used directly to influence and legally challenge decisions. The way the US grids are controlled helps in that process of course but similar modelling etc in the UK is generally 'captured' by the system itself.
Here’s an article in today’s Telegraph on the risk of the grid crashing if operators all try to charge up their batteries at the same time. I suspect it’s “seat of the pants flying” by NESO as to how all these battery storage systems will actually work: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/07/26/britains-battery-boom-risks-overwhelming-the-grid/.
The article quotes Kathryn Porter saying “Batteries are very expensive. A better option is to not build intermittent generation and then we wouldn’t need batteries or the extra grid infrastructure or the backup delivered by the capacity market”.
Government has been outsourcing responsibility for it's actions happily for years without realising that the instruments for outsourcing their responsibility (many listed above) were also constraining their power to effect change when they wanted to. Bat tunnels, and fish discos and £100s of millions in planning paperwork for tunnels all highlighted rightly for their ridiculousness but the people in power finding that they have no levers available to them that were still actually attached to any mechanism that would allow them to do anything. All the while every attempt to progress a project for the benefit of the country appears to be subject to challenge, cancellation and delay with the mechanisms to allow that enshrined in the instruments that politicians have put in place to reduce their personal responsibility.
As I'm convinced that climate change is real and needs to be addressed, I'm reassured that this structure, that stems from the Climate Change Act, has been so thoroughly worked out. I'm frankly surprised that what I thought had been a fairly ineffective series of Conservative administrations, in power from 2010 to 2024, had the gumption to achieve almost all of this.
The first thing is surely to secure the ability to adapt to changes in climate. It is the height of folly to believe that we can control it favourably. We only have to look at the studies that now blame reduced pollution as a major cause of our hot weather to see the law of unintended consequences applies.
I suspect that the smoke from all those wild fires will soon compensate for that "reduced pollution".
That probably depends on who sets them.
Thank you, David, for such a generous introduction and for bringing this paper to the Eigen Values audience. I am genuinely grateful that you considered it worthy of publication. My hope is that it now reaches the wider audience it deserves and helps more people understand how the separate laws, plans, regulators and institutions fit together as one powerful system. The more clearly the machinery behind Net Zero is understood, the harder it becomes for these far-reaching changes to proceed without proper democratic scrutiny.
Excellent article - thank you. No shortage of plans then.
"I know now why confusion in government is not only tolerated but encouraged. I have learned. A confused people can make no clear demands." - John Steinbeck
“But the plans were on display…”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.” - Douglas Adams: 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy'
I wonder what happens if one changes the overall destination. So say we go back to an 80% 2050 target as was the case prior to 2019. Or we move to a position where the UK’s legislated targets are reviewed every 5 years in the context of what other large emitters are doing with the legislated targets rolled back if the US, EU, China, India are not making similar reductions. Does this machinery mean the whole system can be relatively sensibly redirected?
Another development which could bring Net Zero to a halt is the onset of global cooling. Most people have been brainwashed into thinking that this is inconceivable but the UAH satellite global temperature series shows that if transient natural warming spikes are discounted there has been negligible global warming since about 1998, contrary to the unhelpful linear trendline now imposed on the graph by Roy Spencer: https://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-c/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_JUNE_2026_v6.1_20x9_GLOBAL-scaled.jpg.
The graph from 1998 shows about 14 years of flatlining (the so-called “pause”) follower by two transient El Nino spikes which had fairly well dissipated when the massive Hunga Tonga undersea volcanic eruption warming spike came along, which has still only half dissipated. Strange that the climate alarmists don’t mention the ~0.5°C of global cooling that has happened over the past couple of years!
These sudden natural warming spikes have nothing to do with man-made CO2. The UN IPCC’s own pseudoscience postulates that CO2 global warming happens at a slow and steady rate of about 0.2°C per decade, not 1°C in less than a year as happened with Hunga Tonga.
The current global temperature trend plausibly fits the waning warm phase of the 60-70 year cycle of the regular Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), whose last cold phase in the 1960s and 70s provoked the scientific panic that the planet might be entering a new ice age.
On top of the AMO, there is a possibility of a repeat of the 400 years ago Grand Solar Minimum (GSM) of frigid Maunder Minimum conditions forecast by Professor Valentina Zharkova and others: https://iainhunter.substack.com/p/the-grand-solar-minimum-is-here.
Another influence which could bring Net Zero to a halt is President Trump and his MAGA movement, the major existential threat to the British deep state.
I keep going on about the malign influence of the British deep state which pursues political policies deeply inimical to the British people via electorate-disenfranchising UK Uniparty politicians. Here’s an update which you will never read about in the captured MSM.
The Promethean Action group keeps a close watch on the nefarious activities of the British deep state which has caused and continues to cause so much harm to the people of Britain, the USA and beyond via: Net Zero and deliberate deindustrialisation, dystopian Agenda 2030, open borders policy fostering mass immigration of cultural aliens, stoking forever wars, facilitating fake pandemics and more.
President Trump is already dismantling these oppressions in the USA and his efforts will hopefully rub off over here once more people shake off the negativity towards Trump they have been brainwashed into believing via establishment deep state propaganda.
This 14-minute episode is very revealing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U16bL65SKQA.
It explains how the deep state is regrouping to try to counter the “American System” policy of President Trump’s MAGA movement which it knows poses an existential threat to its own undeserving future. It also gives hope that overcoming this malign deep state body might not be as insurmountable task as feared given that it is being controlled by some very lightweight players who are pursuing policies which are very unpopular with the British people: https://dailysceptic.org/2026/07/22/yes-reform-uk-is-anti-establishment/.
It seems that Canada’s prime minister and ex-UN climate czar Matt Carney has assumed a lead role within the British deep state and has surrounded himself with a coterie of deep state globalists who few will have ever heard of. It also seems that Carney had the brass neck to covertly court Andy Burnham well before he became UK prime minister and has managed to insert his Bank of England protégé Andy Haldane as Burnham’s economic advisor (cf. Klaus Schwab’s WEF boast, “We penetrate the cabinets”).
Burnham was already in hock to lead globalist ex-mayor of New York and failed presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg while he was mayor of Manchester, via Bloomberg’s C40 Cities movement set up with the infuriatingly undemocratic goal “to drive global climate action”. Mayor of London Sadiq Khan has been the chairman of C40 Cities for some time.
We never hear our matey new PM Andy being open about these shady inner workings.
As a postscript, the latest episode from Promethean Action is shockingly scathing of the British deep state and its policies. It describes Iran’s IRGC as a British “death cult” terrorism asset linked to financial sponsors in the City of London and then links the 1970s Malthusian outlook of the Club of Rome to modern environmentalism and Net Zero, which together have created a “New Dark Age”. It contrasts this with the optimism of Trump’s nuclear renaissance and how his administration is succeeding in dismantling global “Dope and Terror Inc.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBngEoBtzlM.
This structure is repeated for just about everything of significance you can think of.
For instance I was personally incentivised to investigate fire safety when faced with high expense to install the 'required' fire alarms in a converted flat in a listed building. I tracked the underlying requirement as spelled out in the actual Act as providing one (just one) smoke detector in the whole flat. By the time this requirement had made its way through the 'system', it was magnified to an unnecessary over complicated system.
I wonder where the actual Law actually starts and stops. Rather than spend inordinate effort and expense fighting the end results, shouldn't it better be spent either questioning the original legislation under the Act or possibly using what is always inadequate drafting in these legislative vehicles to make all the subsequent 'system' irrelevant.
Very good. It’s amazing how effective the state can be when it’s doing the wrong thing.
Readers may enjoy my related paper:
https://www.netzerowatch.com/all-papers/rts7slnru43hjmt6sm1io3u6ckhd2e
Your paper of December last year is very apposite to David’s post of today. It makes some very good points but I’m afraid it riles me that NZW fails to take the gloves off properly in this fight. Why can’t it fall in line with the Americans who say the climate change movement is “a hoax”?
Publicly available official publications such as (i) the Energy Institute’s latest Statistical Review of World Energy showing that total energy supply dependency on fossil fuels (oil, coal, gas) is a stonking 86% globally and 79% for the UK and (ii) the UK government’s recent admission that the UK achieved a net reduction of just 15% on greenhouse gas emissions over the period 1996 to 2023 show clearly that Net Zero is pointless and unachievable, both globally and nationally here in the UK.
Winning always requires persuading marginal voters, so language matters. Because the climate is changing and anthropomorphic CO2 is a contributor, “hoax” is not the right word.
You may find this helpful:
Climate Realism
Understanding Agreement & Disagreement in Climate Science
University of Warwick, 19 February 2018
Dr Benny Peiser
Director, Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)
https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2018/03/Peiser-Warwick-2018-3.pdf
“Anthropogenic CO2 is a contributor”. Tell that to all the households suffering with the “heat or eat” dilemma of fuel poverty due to sky-high Net Zero energy prices. Ditto the hundreds of thousands losing their jobs because their businesses can no longer compete. Ditto the North Sea oil and gas workers losing their jobs due to brainless political ideology (started by the Conservatives). Ditto the UK car industry about to disappear because of the push for pointless EVs (also Conservative policy).
President Trump has said climate change is a hoax. His energy secretary Chris White is more nuanced, saying "there is no climate crisis", while acknowledging that greenhouse gases and fossil fuels contribute to warming. He argues that the risks are overstated and that the benefits of fossil fuels outweigh the harms: https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6a65e3f49be4819188c965b9c9a3bdcb.
As to the alleged contribution of CO2, see my earlier comment on global temperature trends.
It’s almost as if NZW are themselves “following the money” in a perverse way, holding back on delivering a Net Zero knockout punch for fear of putting themselves out of a job.
I’m sorry, I took it for granted you knew I was one of parliament’s leading opponents of Net Zero, obtaining plenty of press coverage and taking many political hits.
Benny directed the GWPF. You asked why not say “hoax”. I gave you a serious answer.
I’m aware of your record, I’m directing my ire more broadly at the brainless (to put it charitably) Conservatives.
One of the just five MPs who voted against the 2008 Climate Change Act was murdered a couple of weeks ago in very strange circumstances, Ann Widdicombe. Theresa May pushed through Net Zero in 2019 without even holding a parliamentary vote.
And on Net Zero Watch and their motives, please see this
https://www.theprovocationpeople.com/2025/01/fundamental-attribution-error/
It is a fundamental phenomenon in behavioural science that when people disagree they tend to blame the other person’s motives rather than explore whether they might not have considered all the factors at work.
Again, I offer you a serious explanation for your disagreement with them
If you think you can school me on the climate change hoax, try to rebut my debunking written two years ago after decades of being taken for a fool by Uniparty politicians, a synthesis of the work of many independent experts: https://metatron.substack.com/p/debunking-the-climate-change-hoax.
Net Zero Watch are impeccably accurate and I commend them to you. It is very common to question motives in disagreement. That is the point, not to challenge your considered beliefs.
There you go again, they are not my considered “beliefs”, they are factual reality. Again, can you rebut anything I wrote in my climate change hoax debunking post?
The question they never answer is this: what percentage of climate change is due to human activity. The system just assumes that it's a big percentage which therefore justifies crucifying our society.
Only idiots make assumptions. Sadly they're in control.
Analyses like this are essential feeding matter for politicians who hope to disentangle the mess and restore some kind of sanity. The whole structure is like a game of pick-up-sticks or Jenga, and it has to be dismantled with extreme care to avoid the remaining structures crashing down and entombing further progress.
The first job is to decode the regulatory genome. The next is to design the medicines to cure it. That is not a simple task.