I cannot match the author's expertise and knowledge ,but I'm increasingly suspicious of and affronted by ,the hyperbole and cultism now prevailing.
It seems that we are now facing demand management writ large should the zealots and vested interests succeed: denial of banking facilities to the many with the 'wrong opinions', not to mention the already struggling small businesses which rely on cash transactions, blackouts, smart metering- no thank you- soaring prices and ever more restrictions on farming, travel and diet.
Dr Halpern's breezy claims at the Covid Inquiry infuriated me: the public had been correctly 'drilled' during lockdown but, regrettably, some of us were 'wrongly calibrated'.
Expect more drilling and calibration from the Zero Zealots.
The Seven Pillars of Global Warming (aka 'Boiling'):
1. It is warming
2. We are the principal cause of the warming
3. The warming is 'dangerous, unnatural and unprecedented'
4.. Warming is dangerously accelerating all types of extreme weather - a 'climate crisis'
5. We can significantly mitigate the warming by severely reducing global greenhouse gas emissions
6. The social and economic costs of unmitigated warming greatly exceed the modest costs of mitigation (expansion of renewable energy + energy rationing)
7. The estimated environmental harm of unmitigated warming greatly exceeds the modest environmental harms of mitigation (expansion of renewables)
ALL of those Seven Pillars are being demolished by the emerging evidence - except 1.
I remember when Al Gore held a global warming conference in Washington DC during a major snow blizzard. The result was a name change to Climate Change. Yeah, I agree that most countries have four seasons spring, summer, fall, and winter. That's the climate change.
I agree that Net Zero is looking increasingly bonkers as time goes by. Unfortunately, I see no sign of our WEF puppet politicians and their globalist overlords relenting. Woke banksters even use climate scepticism as a reason to de-bank their customers. Mark Carney says that companies that don’t observe his mad ESG rules, which are not sustainable in the slightest, will be forced into bankruptcy.
It’s all gone way beyond academic arguments over arcane issues like “climate sensitivity”. Net Zero fanatics need to be called out on their cult of either badness or madness. Badness applies to the behind-the-scenes psychopaths who are driving and bankrolling the agenda, and the complicit top politicians. Madness (or simple-mindedness) applies to the useful idiots who have swallowed the “climate change” propaganda hook, line and sinker, like this hysterical scientist writing in the Guardian (except that he is probably paid to make it all up): https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2023/07/29/joe-biden-must-declare-a-climate-emergency/.
On badness, epitomised by the Club of Rome declaration that “The real enemy, then, is humanity itself”, I see a slow awakening among climate sceptics to the realisation that the looming Net Zero energy infrastructure disaster is deliberate policy to deindustrialise and depopulate the Western world. For example, see https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2023/07/10/fes-2023-the-emperor-still-has-no-clothes/#comment-254876 and the two comments above it.
On madness, Andrew Montford of the GWPF has just sponsored the book “Climate Catastrophism and the Cult of Culture” by a US psychologist which claims to prove that climate catastrophism has become a secular religion. The author says this is very dangerous because such cultures work through subconscious behaviours and so are entirely irrational. They can lead to the building of great civilisations, but also to their complete and utter collapse.
In another post of three years, ago also hosted by Ed, I showed that there is no correlation between man-made CO2 emissions and global temperatures: https://edmhdotme.wpcomstaging.com/uk-temperature-analysis-from-1659-to-2019/. This is supported by a recent William Happer paper which also shows that nitrous oxide has negligible greenhouse gas influence, yet the globalists are now waging a war against farming and nitrogen-based fertilisers to deliberately create global food shortages: 40-minute lecture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqWv26PXqz0.
Just look at the lies they are resorting to, putting out coordinated heatwave fearmongering based on surface rather than air temperatures and claiming that all of Rhodes is aflame when arial photography shows no such thing, with the fires most probably due to a combination of poor woodland management and arson, conveniently clearing an area designated for a massive new windfarm: https://twitter.com/ANTlWEF/status/1684172659192475648?t=7yGJtW5EvV7Y2cMUIWfZgA&s=19.
They don’t even try hide the obvious lies of their “safe and effective” Covid vaccine scam, their climate emergency scam, their war on farming, their war on cheap energy, their war on cars, their war on children, their war on humanity …
These people showed their true evil colours through their Covid plandemic. We should not entertain even the slightest suggestion that the Net Zero agenda is anything other than a giant hoax with evil ulterior motives of global population reduction and digital enslavement.
Several years ago I would have read this and thought that while there is fundamental truth within it, there is also a conspiracy note that I can't get behind. But I now largely agree with your position. Outside of the most strident conspiracy creations that I cannot see as real, it's become clear that to zealots and malformed people, conspiracy is a perfectly fine mechanism for getting what you want. The larger the organization, the easier it is to conspire towards a goal, especially if there is power at its core.
I’m in Australia and not as well credentialed as most others, but the climate cult is using similar strategies to religions. ie Greta an uneducated ( school refuser) with mental health problems and on the spectrum admitted in a U S senate enquiry that she had read no scientific papers on the climate and has since been awarded a doctorate in theology by a woke European university. But good news we have a climate sceptic geologist called Ian Palmer who has written 3 books for parents and grandparents to help counter the brainwashing in schools. They are called the little green book- all three have the same title - no1 is aimed at primary aged kids, the second for secondary school , and I’m not sure who the third is aimed at. These books are being released on Monday I’m not aware of who is publishing them
Remember the three illiterate kids in Lourdes they saw Mary in a burning bush that wasn’t there- the Catholic Church has made a motza out of the industry built around that. Spot the difference between them and Greta, and the massive Rory’s attached to green energy.
Proof positive that Greta is just another WEF stooge. She had a full press meeting with Zelinski in Ukraine, pumping up the Ukraine proxy war. This is after the Establishment are claiming it was Ukraine that blew up the Nordstream pipeline, the biggest enviro-disaster methane release in history. So why is Greta cuddling the supposed perpetrator of that.
Rationality’s problem is coming face to face with money and lots of it. Investment in alternate (poor) forms of energy production is led by government spending to secure the vote of the misled and the political contributions of those taking advantage of free money. Catastrophe and the end of times is their effective pitch. Data showing no such catastrophe falls on deaf ears who still cite proof of disaster as 97% of scientists agree. But, we labor on and appreciate the well argued presentation of David Turver and similar rationalists.
I am glad to read an unbiased report on our climate which incorporates real science. Climate warming, climate change, or any other name that they call it is a hoax perpetrated by the One World Economic Forum to control people and reach their goal of the elites total rule of all mankind.
When it comes to Climate Change Mitigation, one way or the other, it is irrelevant. The REAL problem is we need to increase global energy production by 5X in order to fulfill the aspirations of those in Developing Nations to have a good standard of living. There just ain't enough economical fossil reserves to achieve that.
The only source of energy capable of supplying that level of energy production is Nuclear energy. Just the land resources of uranium & thorium can easily power that level of energy production for 20 million years. And much more economically than fossil fuels. Wind & solar being a scam & a joke. And fusion can do the rest, at least until the sun bakes the Earth.
Happy coincidence, Nuclear has the lowest emissions of any energy source by a vast margin, including negligible CO2 emissions if that is anyone's concern. We might have to deliberately burn some fossil (at an economic loss) in order to keep the atmospheric CO2 level at an optimal level, probably ~400-500ppm. The biggest environmental disaster would be another Ice Age. We don't want that.
Note the new info coming out on the REAL embodied carbon emissions in Solar PV. They've been deliberately lying to us about that. When you include that Solar PV is no better than modern CCGT for emissions. Actually worse including Grid Effects. And of course the new data means the already abysmal EROI of Solar PV is actually much lower.
Solar Panels Are Three Times More Carbon-Intensive Than IPCC Claims
It is clear that the CO2 demon may not be quite harmful as we are led to believe. In fact, all plant life is dependent upon CO2 and if plants cannot survive neither can any animal life including humans. So, the second pillar supporting the Net Zero edifice is crumbling too.
Finally someone who states this, as I have been for 20 years.
I keep saying that we need to plant more trees, not burn them.
Shame on you Canada.
Here's something that very few people think about.
The heat increase in Cities is because of all the glass, steel, and asphalt streets.
You made one huge error. You called them the PROPHETS of climate change. Should be the PROFITS of climate change. This is the real fight we are up against.
Thank you for your posts they are very informative, particularly as they are evidence based unlike the propaganda produced by the climate catastrophisers. In this post you make what appear to be contradictory claims. You agree with most that additional concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere have caused some extra warming in addition to natural variation. However, in figure 4 you show that the temperature has trended down as CO2 concentrations have trended upwards. In addition, in figure5 you show that there have been ice ages when the level of CO2 was an order of magnitude higher than todays levels and warmer temperatures than today with similar CO2 levels. To me figures 4 and 5 demonstrate a disconnect between CO2 levels and temperature. I should be grateful if you or anyone else can shed some light on this. Also, the concentration of CO2 has shown considerable variation long before humans started burning fossil fuels. Has anyone an explanation for this?
I guess my implicit assumption is that on those occasions other natural variations overwhelmed the CO2 contribution. I know CO2 works logarithmically and it is possible that the CO2 absorption frequencies are already saturated, but I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt and think that the ΔT = 1.66 * ln (C/C0) equation still applies, which implies a sensitivity of about 1.2 deg C. It maybe that there's negative feedback from clouds that negate that.
Back in the very distant past, 600m years ago there was high CO2 from natural causes (volcanoes etc). As plants evolved they sucked up a lot of CO2 and atmospheric concentrations fell, plus sea creatures with shells sequestered CO2 as carbonates and fell to the bottom of the ocean when they died.
After that, temperatures driven by Milankovitch cycles predominated. High temp, gave rise to higher concentrations as CO2 outgassed from the oceans. Lower temps led to lower CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere as the oceans absorbed more.
Thank you very much for your reply. Could it be inferred from your last paragraph that increased levels of CO2 follow warming rather than preceding it?
I found it interesting that in the first major interviews after being appointed Chairman of IPCC, Jim Skea changed tack rather dramatically.
<i>Jim Skea, the new head of the UN's IPCC, said it's not helpful to imply that a temperature rise of 1.5 degrees Celsius is an existential threat to humanity. He calls for a balanced approach to the climate change debate.</i>
First post, David this is a great site with so much information for the uninitiated folks who are unaware and aware I might add of the economic destruction about to be wrought on the UK by the Net Zero agenda ( religion ). It's a Degrowth agenda that started out as a fringe cult circa over 40 years ago that has now been embedded in every major institution and Govt department in the country. History has shown that almost every cult that man has embraced results in catastrophe, Net Zero Aka Decarbonisation of the UK and indeed most Western economies that have signed up to it will be no exception and it will ultimately destroy all the advancements that secure affordable energy in the form of fossil fuels have brought mankind over the last 130 odd years. It is indeed a disaster in the making. Conspiracy theorists may be forgiven for thinking that the whole Green movement has a sinister commie element behind it...after all Putin and Xi won't be shedding tears when the UK economy collapses. Just me thinking out loud like....Saxonboy.
We are very much non the same page
My layman’s summary of the irrelevant future temperature effects of Greenhouse Gasses
https://edmhdotme.wpcomstaging.com/the-temperature-contribution-of-atmospheric-greenhouse-gasses-co2-ch4-n2o/
My take on the recent publication of BP CO2 data
https://edmhdotme.wpcomstaging.com/global-man-made-co2-emissions-1965-2022-bp-energy-institute-data/
“Renewables” just don’t cut it for productivity and cannot be cost competitive because of their low productivity
https://edmhdotme.wpcomstaging.com/a-few-graphs-say-it-all-for-renewables/
Simple quantified comparisons of power generation technologies in a unified graphical format
https://edmhdotme.wpcomstaging.com/comparing-power-generation-technologies-2/
Please reuse or reference at will
Best Regards
Ed Hoskins
1 Place Hubac
La Garde Freinet
83680 FRANCE
00 33 494 43 6875
00 33 622245189
edhoskins@mac.com
https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/
I cannot match the author's expertise and knowledge ,but I'm increasingly suspicious of and affronted by ,the hyperbole and cultism now prevailing.
It seems that we are now facing demand management writ large should the zealots and vested interests succeed: denial of banking facilities to the many with the 'wrong opinions', not to mention the already struggling small businesses which rely on cash transactions, blackouts, smart metering- no thank you- soaring prices and ever more restrictions on farming, travel and diet.
Dr Halpern's breezy claims at the Covid Inquiry infuriated me: the public had been correctly 'drilled' during lockdown but, regrettably, some of us were 'wrongly calibrated'.
Expect more drilling and calibration from the Zero Zealots.
The Seven Pillars of Global Warming (aka 'Boiling'):
1. It is warming
2. We are the principal cause of the warming
3. The warming is 'dangerous, unnatural and unprecedented'
4.. Warming is dangerously accelerating all types of extreme weather - a 'climate crisis'
5. We can significantly mitigate the warming by severely reducing global greenhouse gas emissions
6. The social and economic costs of unmitigated warming greatly exceed the modest costs of mitigation (expansion of renewable energy + energy rationing)
7. The estimated environmental harm of unmitigated warming greatly exceeds the modest environmental harms of mitigation (expansion of renewables)
ALL of those Seven Pillars are being demolished by the emerging evidence - except 1.
I remember when Al Gore held a global warming conference in Washington DC during a major snow blizzard. The result was a name change to Climate Change. Yeah, I agree that most countries have four seasons spring, summer, fall, and winter. That's the climate change.
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/politics/itll-keep-snowing-in-dc-until-al-gore-cries-uncle-sen-demint/1857353/
I agree that Net Zero is looking increasingly bonkers as time goes by. Unfortunately, I see no sign of our WEF puppet politicians and their globalist overlords relenting. Woke banksters even use climate scepticism as a reason to de-bank their customers. Mark Carney says that companies that don’t observe his mad ESG rules, which are not sustainable in the slightest, will be forced into bankruptcy.
It’s all gone way beyond academic arguments over arcane issues like “climate sensitivity”. Net Zero fanatics need to be called out on their cult of either badness or madness. Badness applies to the behind-the-scenes psychopaths who are driving and bankrolling the agenda, and the complicit top politicians. Madness (or simple-mindedness) applies to the useful idiots who have swallowed the “climate change” propaganda hook, line and sinker, like this hysterical scientist writing in the Guardian (except that he is probably paid to make it all up): https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2023/07/29/joe-biden-must-declare-a-climate-emergency/.
On badness, epitomised by the Club of Rome declaration that “The real enemy, then, is humanity itself”, I see a slow awakening among climate sceptics to the realisation that the looming Net Zero energy infrastructure disaster is deliberate policy to deindustrialise and depopulate the Western world. For example, see https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2023/07/10/fes-2023-the-emperor-still-has-no-clothes/#comment-254876 and the two comments above it.
The doltish Kamila Harris recently let slip the ulterior depopulation agenda: https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1679970911829491712?t=HgNH4WNw3l0mAyfhsCwjMg&s=19, with surreal applause from her prospective victims.
On madness, Andrew Montford of the GWPF has just sponsored the book “Climate Catastrophism and the Cult of Culture” by a US psychologist which claims to prove that climate catastrophism has become a secular religion. The author says this is very dangerous because such cultures work through subconscious behaviours and so are entirely irrational. They can lead to the building of great civilisations, but also to their complete and utter collapse.
A sign of madness is the inability to see that Net Zero striving is, and always has been, doomed to get nowhere, especially when undertaken unilaterally. I posted on this three years ago in a paper kindly hosted by my pal Ed Hoskins who has commented above: https://edmhdotme.wpcomstaging.com/fossil-fuel-dependency-shows-net-zero-is-impossible/.
Fast forward through the Covid “plandemic” global slowdown and after about 20 years of futile decarbonisation striving, the UK is still almost 80% dependent on fossil fuels for its primary energy supply, see Page 5 of the latest Dukes report: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1135950/DUKES_2022.pdf.
In another post of three years, ago also hosted by Ed, I showed that there is no correlation between man-made CO2 emissions and global temperatures: https://edmhdotme.wpcomstaging.com/uk-temperature-analysis-from-1659-to-2019/. This is supported by a recent William Happer paper which also shows that nitrous oxide has negligible greenhouse gas influence, yet the globalists are now waging a war against farming and nitrogen-based fertilisers to deliberately create global food shortages: 40-minute lecture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqWv26PXqz0.
Just look at the lies they are resorting to, putting out coordinated heatwave fearmongering based on surface rather than air temperatures and claiming that all of Rhodes is aflame when arial photography shows no such thing, with the fires most probably due to a combination of poor woodland management and arson, conveniently clearing an area designated for a massive new windfarm: https://twitter.com/ANTlWEF/status/1684172659192475648?t=7yGJtW5EvV7Y2cMUIWfZgA&s=19.
They don’t even try hide the obvious lies of their “safe and effective” Covid vaccine scam, their climate emergency scam, their war on farming, their war on cheap energy, their war on cars, their war on children, their war on humanity …
These people showed their true evil colours through their Covid plandemic. We should not entertain even the slightest suggestion that the Net Zero agenda is anything other than a giant hoax with evil ulterior motives of global population reduction and digital enslavement.
Several years ago I would have read this and thought that while there is fundamental truth within it, there is also a conspiracy note that I can't get behind. But I now largely agree with your position. Outside of the most strident conspiracy creations that I cannot see as real, it's become clear that to zealots and malformed people, conspiracy is a perfectly fine mechanism for getting what you want. The larger the organization, the easier it is to conspire towards a goal, especially if there is power at its core.
I’m in Australia and not as well credentialed as most others, but the climate cult is using similar strategies to religions. ie Greta an uneducated ( school refuser) with mental health problems and on the spectrum admitted in a U S senate enquiry that she had read no scientific papers on the climate and has since been awarded a doctorate in theology by a woke European university. But good news we have a climate sceptic geologist called Ian Palmer who has written 3 books for parents and grandparents to help counter the brainwashing in schools. They are called the little green book- all three have the same title - no1 is aimed at primary aged kids, the second for secondary school , and I’m not sure who the third is aimed at. These books are being released on Monday I’m not aware of who is publishing them
"Doctorate in Theology" - how appropriate.
Remember the three illiterate kids in Lourdes they saw Mary in a burning bush that wasn’t there- the Catholic Church has made a motza out of the industry built around that. Spot the difference between them and Greta, and the massive Rory’s attached to green energy.
Might as well be astrology
Proof positive that Greta is just another WEF stooge. She had a full press meeting with Zelinski in Ukraine, pumping up the Ukraine proxy war. This is after the Establishment are claiming it was Ukraine that blew up the Nordstream pipeline, the biggest enviro-disaster methane release in history. So why is Greta cuddling the supposed perpetrator of that.
She’s a bunch of contradictions, she was filmed trying to stop a wind farm to protect a culturally sensitive area.
I suspect you are referring to Ian Plimer, not Palmer, for the benefit of anyone who might be looking for the books.
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/07/30/boiling-ocean-update-florida-sea-temperature-record-drops-15f-in-just-48-hours/
A litany of changing the data to match a narrative, predictions which never came true, and decontextualization from historical records!
Rationality’s problem is coming face to face with money and lots of it. Investment in alternate (poor) forms of energy production is led by government spending to secure the vote of the misled and the political contributions of those taking advantage of free money. Catastrophe and the end of times is their effective pitch. Data showing no such catastrophe falls on deaf ears who still cite proof of disaster as 97% of scientists agree. But, we labor on and appreciate the well argued presentation of David Turver and similar rationalists.
I am glad to read an unbiased report on our climate which incorporates real science. Climate warming, climate change, or any other name that they call it is a hoax perpetrated by the One World Economic Forum to control people and reach their goal of the elites total rule of all mankind.
When it comes to Climate Change Mitigation, one way or the other, it is irrelevant. The REAL problem is we need to increase global energy production by 5X in order to fulfill the aspirations of those in Developing Nations to have a good standard of living. There just ain't enough economical fossil reserves to achieve that.
The only source of energy capable of supplying that level of energy production is Nuclear energy. Just the land resources of uranium & thorium can easily power that level of energy production for 20 million years. And much more economically than fossil fuels. Wind & solar being a scam & a joke. And fusion can do the rest, at least until the sun bakes the Earth.
Happy coincidence, Nuclear has the lowest emissions of any energy source by a vast margin, including negligible CO2 emissions if that is anyone's concern. We might have to deliberately burn some fossil (at an economic loss) in order to keep the atmospheric CO2 level at an optimal level, probably ~400-500ppm. The biggest environmental disaster would be another Ice Age. We don't want that.
Yup.
https://davidturver.substack.com/p/nuclear-power-everywhere-all-at-once
Note the new info coming out on the REAL embodied carbon emissions in Solar PV. They've been deliberately lying to us about that. When you include that Solar PV is no better than modern CCGT for emissions. Actually worse including Grid Effects. And of course the new data means the already abysmal EROI of Solar PV is actually much lower.
Solar Panels Are Three Times More Carbon-Intensive Than IPCC Claims
Shellenberger, Environmental Progress, Enrico Mariutti analysis, 170-250 gms/kwh not IPCC's 48:
https://public.substack.com/p/solar-panels-more-carbon-intensive
If plants thrive on carbon dioxide and produce oxygen, then carbon should be an asset.
It is clear that the CO2 demon may not be quite harmful as we are led to believe. In fact, all plant life is dependent upon CO2 and if plants cannot survive neither can any animal life including humans. So, the second pillar supporting the Net Zero edifice is crumbling too.
Finally someone who states this, as I have been for 20 years.
I keep saying that we need to plant more trees, not burn them.
Shame on you Canada.
Here's something that very few people think about.
The heat increase in Cities is because of all the glass, steel, and asphalt streets.
You made one huge error. You called them the PROPHETS of climate change. Should be the PROFITS of climate change. This is the real fight we are up against.
Thank you for your posts they are very informative, particularly as they are evidence based unlike the propaganda produced by the climate catastrophisers. In this post you make what appear to be contradictory claims. You agree with most that additional concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere have caused some extra warming in addition to natural variation. However, in figure 4 you show that the temperature has trended down as CO2 concentrations have trended upwards. In addition, in figure5 you show that there have been ice ages when the level of CO2 was an order of magnitude higher than todays levels and warmer temperatures than today with similar CO2 levels. To me figures 4 and 5 demonstrate a disconnect between CO2 levels and temperature. I should be grateful if you or anyone else can shed some light on this. Also, the concentration of CO2 has shown considerable variation long before humans started burning fossil fuels. Has anyone an explanation for this?
I guess my implicit assumption is that on those occasions other natural variations overwhelmed the CO2 contribution. I know CO2 works logarithmically and it is possible that the CO2 absorption frequencies are already saturated, but I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt and think that the ΔT = 1.66 * ln (C/C0) equation still applies, which implies a sensitivity of about 1.2 deg C. It maybe that there's negative feedback from clouds that negate that.
Back in the very distant past, 600m years ago there was high CO2 from natural causes (volcanoes etc). As plants evolved they sucked up a lot of CO2 and atmospheric concentrations fell, plus sea creatures with shells sequestered CO2 as carbonates and fell to the bottom of the ocean when they died.
After that, temperatures driven by Milankovitch cycles predominated. High temp, gave rise to higher concentrations as CO2 outgassed from the oceans. Lower temps led to lower CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere as the oceans absorbed more.
Thank you very much for your reply. Could it be inferred from your last paragraph that increased levels of CO2 follow warming rather than preceding it?
Yes Professor Ian Pilsmer - sorry I should check auto correct
I found it interesting that in the first major interviews after being appointed Chairman of IPCC, Jim Skea changed tack rather dramatically.
<i>Jim Skea, the new head of the UN's IPCC, said it's not helpful to imply that a temperature rise of 1.5 degrees Celsius is an existential threat to humanity. He calls for a balanced approach to the climate change debate.</i>
https://www.dw.com/en/climate-change-do-not-overstate-15-degrees-threat/a-66386523
First post, David this is a great site with so much information for the uninitiated folks who are unaware and aware I might add of the economic destruction about to be wrought on the UK by the Net Zero agenda ( religion ). It's a Degrowth agenda that started out as a fringe cult circa over 40 years ago that has now been embedded in every major institution and Govt department in the country. History has shown that almost every cult that man has embraced results in catastrophe, Net Zero Aka Decarbonisation of the UK and indeed most Western economies that have signed up to it will be no exception and it will ultimately destroy all the advancements that secure affordable energy in the form of fossil fuels have brought mankind over the last 130 odd years. It is indeed a disaster in the making. Conspiracy theorists may be forgiven for thinking that the whole Green movement has a sinister commie element behind it...after all Putin and Xi won't be shedding tears when the UK economy collapses. Just me thinking out loud like....Saxonboy.