I've said it before, I'll say it again, I don't think Miliband is in full possession of his faculties. He really looks unwell, too. His appointment shows a spectacular lack of judgement by Starmer, unless of course.....well. They (govt) forget that they will be affected if this particular project fails, if the lights go out in Britain, they go out for all of us.
Miliband doesn’t think beyond the legally-binding Net Zero Act and the globalist pressures from the Paris Agreement, COP28 et al which tell him that he has got to get rid of fossil fuels. So yes, the fact that his minibrain has not taken in that this endeavour is both infeasible and pointless indicates that he is mad, i.e. not in full possession of his faculties, but I contend he is also bad, i.e. evil and treasonous for pushing ahead with ruinous Net Zero in the face of the many warnings he must have seen that it is certain to lead to disaster. It’s analogous to Nuremberg: saying that “I was only following orders” doesn’t cut it.
“it called for a halving of per capita energy use by 2050”
For heating, it excludes the energy extracted from air or the ground by heat pumps, so not a direct comparison
For transport, if reducing per capita energy use was any type of problem them improving the mpg of ICEs would always be a problem, and I don’t recall it ever has been
I really don’t see what the issue is. When FES2024 was produced (but not published) the goal was a decarbonised grid by 2035, so of course it wasn’t decarbonised by 2030. That didn’t mean the ESO were saying it couldn’t be
Now they have to recut the same set of data to take out five years - just like back in the good old days of BPR you can re-engineer most things to reduce lead time, you just increase the risk of not delivering, so you put the effort into managing risk
Cutting five years out of an 11 year plan is easy when all you have to do is move around post-it notes on a big piece of brown paper. But somewhat harder when you have to invent affordable storage and implement new technologies such as large scale CCS.
Enough to get rid of 25-30m tonnes CO2e, cf about 38m tonnes emitted last year. And who is going to put their hand up to spend money on their aging gas plants to add a CCS unit.
Spot on David - a Govt of incompetence, led by the inept
In a saner, more traditional time, neither of these nit wits would be anywhere near our nations energy control levers - our Marxist dumb down is well underway, starting at the top
One way of changing this nonsense would be a sustained campaign to change the wording of the Climate Change Act 2008 to not just refer to the science but to “science verified to be applicable to the real world using accepted engineering and audit processes”.
Because right now any academic can vomit out numbers and apparently they are hard facts. They wrote the act to be vague but the trouble is that in 2016 they had the Water Act which is anything but vague.
So if you can demand exacting standards for water science why do you accept vaguery and hand waving for climate science? They both impact public safety.
It's quite easy to implement decarbonised electricity by 2030, or even earlier if Ed Miliband wants, as he hasn't said that elecricity would still be affordable or reliable. He could just turn off the gas generated electricity., which I think he could be prepared to do.
Why not get to net zero this year? Why wait? If net zero is CO2 emissions minus an equivalent in carbon credits, all the government has to do is buy up all the carbon credits they need to achieve their goal.
They demonized CO2, making it out to be a threat to our planet when it is just a harmless fertilizer that has so little to do with any (beneficial) warming going on that it is laughable science. But then IPCC and all the climate models, which are half-baked and wrong and predict nothing, are trotted out and then all the world's governments go along with the long con and actual policies are put in place to "decarbonize", trotting out windmills and solar panels and EVs, limiting use of coal, oil and natural gas ... these are not stupid people. They only pretend to be. They are on a mission, unstated, to rid us of our sources of wealth and comfort, fossil fuels. In the end they want to make us miserable before we die off. These are misanthropes, they hate people. That's a redundant sentence, I realize.
You can look this up: Sri Lanka had a go at "organic" farming, eliminating nitrogen-based fertilizer. It only took a year before they had food riots and insurrection, with the president of the country slinking out in the dark of night. The homes of 28 politicians were burned to the ground. Natural gas is used as a heat source to produce fertilizer. We do not ingest it. I shudder when I grasp that these monsters are aiming their evil eyes at the food supply.
NASA's Goddard Space Center tells us that our planet has warmed 1.1 degree Celsius over the last 144 years. That's barely detectible. We do not have a warming problem. We have leaders all about the world who hate us and want us gone. The want a planet unspoiled by humans other than themselves and their servants.
A lot of that warming is the result of the UHI effect. Some of it is also the result of "progressive" adjustments to the data, which render them estimates instead.
Well, this only goes to show that it is quite possible to be highly educated, highly intelligent and a complete idiot. The trouble is the vast majority of politicians fall into this bracket....
So do a lot of Professors and PhD's - try reading this for a report then tell me what side of the thin line reputedly separating genius from insanity this lot stand.
Reminds me of a Chemistry Prof - he was a VERY clever when it came to Chemistry, but put him in charge of a school crossing with a lollipop stick and the local A&E would have been overwhelmed with squashed children within the hour.
He even forgot one final year student who discovered he had no finals project when we turned up to collect our assignments. Ah the joys of Academe. Give me reality any day. Which is why Govt shouldn't listen to the likes of Prof "I've a mistress to die for" Ferguson OR anyone telling them their computer model predicts the end of the Universe if cows don't stop farting.
Sadly it is probably too late to avoid the catastrophe Net Zero is about to impose upon the UK. Still, invest in Gold or Silver, the Blackmarket that arrives with every disaster will accept both over polymer notes no doubt.
I don't think most politicians are highly intelligent. They might have had a good education, (or, what purports to be one these days), but it has been wasted on them for they all soon turn in to stupid 'parrots'. They allow themselves to be financially subsumed in to the State's machine, becoming weak and witless ( servants of the people), or, greedy globalists to serve their demanding paymasters. Oh, there will be some absolute dolts among them and, also liberally spread through msm.
It takes a certain amount of intelligence to be able to carry out the mental gymnastics to reconcile the irreconcilable of many of the ideologies that they believe. For instance you can't imagine Queer Theory being thought up in a working men's club. Their feet are so firmly on the floor that they'd see it as the utter tosh that it is. That's not to say working men are unintelligent but that their intelligence is grounded and therefore utter bunk is seen for what it is.
(N)ESO have responded to the SOS here ( https://www.nationalgrideso.com/news/eso-commissioned-provide-key-advice-and-expertise-how-great-britain-can-achieve-clean-power-2030 ). As you would expect they are going along with the request but I'd say they are not yet fully on board with the closing sentence "Whilst we will advise on how to deliver the clean power 2030 ambition, we’ll continue to plan for the longer term, looking out beyond 2030 to strategically plan energy infrastructure requirements out to 2050"
SOS = Secretary of State
I've said it before, I'll say it again, I don't think Miliband is in full possession of his faculties. He really looks unwell, too. His appointment shows a spectacular lack of judgement by Starmer, unless of course.....well. They (govt) forget that they will be affected if this particular project fails, if the lights go out in Britain, they go out for all of us.
Miliband doesn’t think beyond the legally-binding Net Zero Act and the globalist pressures from the Paris Agreement, COP28 et al which tell him that he has got to get rid of fossil fuels. So yes, the fact that his minibrain has not taken in that this endeavour is both infeasible and pointless indicates that he is mad, i.e. not in full possession of his faculties, but I contend he is also bad, i.e. evil and treasonous for pushing ahead with ruinous Net Zero in the face of the many warnings he must have seen that it is certain to lead to disaster. It’s analogous to Nuremberg: saying that “I was only following orders” doesn’t cut it.
“it called for a halving of per capita energy use by 2050”
For heating, it excludes the energy extracted from air or the ground by heat pumps, so not a direct comparison
For transport, if reducing per capita energy use was any type of problem them improving the mpg of ICEs would always be a problem, and I don’t recall it ever has been
I really don’t see what the issue is. When FES2024 was produced (but not published) the goal was a decarbonised grid by 2035, so of course it wasn’t decarbonised by 2030. That didn’t mean the ESO were saying it couldn’t be
Now they have to recut the same set of data to take out five years - just like back in the good old days of BPR you can re-engineer most things to reduce lead time, you just increase the risk of not delivering, so you put the effort into managing risk
Seems like Ed has asked for the right thing
Cutting five years out of an 11 year plan is easy when all you have to do is move around post-it notes on a big piece of brown paper. But somewhat harder when you have to invent affordable storage and implement new technologies such as large scale CCS.
How much storage and CCS is needed by 2030?
Enough to get rid of 25-30m tonnes CO2e, cf about 38m tonnes emitted last year. And who is going to put their hand up to spend money on their aging gas plants to add a CCS unit.
Pembroke power station say they doing it, but I’ll believe it when is see it, and there are the new batch of gas plants being planned
Spot on David - a Govt of incompetence, led by the inept
In a saner, more traditional time, neither of these nit wits would be anywhere near our nations energy control levers - our Marxist dumb down is well underway, starting at the top
David, I appears that Dr. Jonathan F. Dean's confidence in FES2024 might have been misplaced.
Natural gas will be counted as a clean investment just like the EU did to save German blushes in 2022. Hey presto…
https://theconversation.com/natural-gas-is-a-fossil-fuel-but-the-eu-will-count-it-as-a-green-investment-heres-why-175867
AR :
A good idea. Or even simpler, just say that 97% of scientists agree that all our electricity is green.
This looks like preparatory work for later blaming (N)ESO for their own failures
GCSE Physics Class Autumn 2024, Faraday College. The way the wind isn’t blowing in modern science education under Greenpeace energy policy.
Physics Teacher: Morning Class.
Class: Morning Sir.
Teacher: Today’s topic is Conservation of Energy. Repeat after me, “Hydrocarbons are conserved solar energy.”
Class in unison: Hydrocarbons are conserved solar energy.
Teacher: High-density 24/7 energy used to power private vehicles, public and commercial transport.
Student: The Tiger in your Tank.
Teacher: Nuclear power is the highest-density 24/7 energy source of all.
Student: The atom unleashed.
Teacher: We’ll need to rely more on nuclear power when hydrocarbons get seriously depleted.
Student: Just like France’s nuclear fleet.
Teacher: Whereas wind and solar are low-density intermittent energy.
Student: Once a windmill always a windmill.
Teacher: Dependent on a vast physical footprint, back up energy and massively subsidised by green levies on bills.
Student: All thanks to the climate heist. No wonder Britain has the world’s most expensive electricity.
Teacher: Now Class, would it make sense to take energy from low-density intermittent wind and solar…
…Use the energy to split water to make hydrogen, losing half the energy in the process.
…Then use the hydrogen energy to make electricity, losing another half of the energy.
…And finally use the surviving quarter of the original intermittent energy to charge batteries to power EVs?
Class in unison: That’s stark staring bonkers, Sir!
Teacher: Trick question, Class! You cannot power a modern civilisation on breezes and sunbeams.
Class: Bang on Sir!
Teacher: Well-done, Class. When you leave school, I wouldn’t advise applying for a job in the Energy Insecurity industry.
One way of changing this nonsense would be a sustained campaign to change the wording of the Climate Change Act 2008 to not just refer to the science but to “science verified to be applicable to the real world using accepted engineering and audit processes”.
Because right now any academic can vomit out numbers and apparently they are hard facts. They wrote the act to be vague but the trouble is that in 2016 they had the Water Act which is anything but vague.
So if you can demand exacting standards for water science why do you accept vaguery and hand waving for climate science? They both impact public safety.
It's quite easy to implement decarbonised electricity by 2030, or even earlier if Ed Miliband wants, as he hasn't said that elecricity would still be affordable or reliable. He could just turn off the gas generated electricity., which I think he could be prepared to do.
Why not get to net zero this year? Why wait? If net zero is CO2 emissions minus an equivalent in carbon credits, all the government has to do is buy up all the carbon credits they need to achieve their goal.
Just kidding.
They demonized CO2, making it out to be a threat to our planet when it is just a harmless fertilizer that has so little to do with any (beneficial) warming going on that it is laughable science. But then IPCC and all the climate models, which are half-baked and wrong and predict nothing, are trotted out and then all the world's governments go along with the long con and actual policies are put in place to "decarbonize", trotting out windmills and solar panels and EVs, limiting use of coal, oil and natural gas ... these are not stupid people. They only pretend to be. They are on a mission, unstated, to rid us of our sources of wealth and comfort, fossil fuels. In the end they want to make us miserable before we die off. These are misanthropes, they hate people. That's a redundant sentence, I realize.
You can look this up: Sri Lanka had a go at "organic" farming, eliminating nitrogen-based fertilizer. It only took a year before they had food riots and insurrection, with the president of the country slinking out in the dark of night. The homes of 28 politicians were burned to the ground. Natural gas is used as a heat source to produce fertilizer. We do not ingest it. I shudder when I grasp that these monsters are aiming their evil eyes at the food supply.
NASA's Goddard Space Center tells us that our planet has warmed 1.1 degree Celsius over the last 144 years. That's barely detectible. We do not have a warming problem. We have leaders all about the world who hate us and want us gone. The want a planet unspoiled by humans other than themselves and their servants.
Natural gas is used to make hydrogen to make ammonia for fertiliser
A lot of that warming is the result of the UHI effect. Some of it is also the result of "progressive" adjustments to the data, which render them estimates instead.
YT's Suspicious 0bservers has plenty on the Sun's influence on Earth's climate, weather, triggering of earthquakes, thunder storms and hurricanes.
Well, this only goes to show that it is quite possible to be highly educated, highly intelligent and a complete idiot. The trouble is the vast majority of politicians fall into this bracket....
So do a lot of Professors and PhD's - try reading this for a report then tell me what side of the thin line reputedly separating genius from insanity this lot stand.
https://www.icax.co.uk/pdf/Absolute_Zero_Report.pdf
Reminds me of a Chemistry Prof - he was a VERY clever when it came to Chemistry, but put him in charge of a school crossing with a lollipop stick and the local A&E would have been overwhelmed with squashed children within the hour.
He even forgot one final year student who discovered he had no finals project when we turned up to collect our assignments. Ah the joys of Academe. Give me reality any day. Which is why Govt shouldn't listen to the likes of Prof "I've a mistress to die for" Ferguson OR anyone telling them their computer model predicts the end of the Universe if cows don't stop farting.
Sadly it is probably too late to avoid the catastrophe Net Zero is about to impose upon the UK. Still, invest in Gold or Silver, the Blackmarket that arrives with every disaster will accept both over polymer notes no doubt.
But, but George Monbiot says it's true about the cows! 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Then we should reduce the price of meat, so we ALL eat the cows and forget about CO2 ;-)
Eat local. Less CO2 than avocados flown in from South America 😎
It takes a PhD to misunderstand that.
I don't think most politicians are highly intelligent. They might have had a good education, (or, what purports to be one these days), but it has been wasted on them for they all soon turn in to stupid 'parrots'. They allow themselves to be financially subsumed in to the State's machine, becoming weak and witless ( servants of the people), or, greedy globalists to serve their demanding paymasters. Oh, there will be some absolute dolts among them and, also liberally spread through msm.
It takes a certain amount of intelligence to be able to carry out the mental gymnastics to reconcile the irreconcilable of many of the ideologies that they believe. For instance you can't imagine Queer Theory being thought up in a working men's club. Their feet are so firmly on the floor that they'd see it as the utter tosh that it is. That's not to say working men are unintelligent but that their intelligence is grounded and therefore utter bunk is seen for what it is.