Monday 29 May 2023

Questioning The Wisdom

Even the Daily Mail now admits that the miners were right, as Jonathan Webb writes:

It was ten years ago, while interviewing council tenants about the damp in their flats, and lifts used as lavatories, that it hit me – a green agenda is an obsession by the liberal middle classes. It was summed up rather succinctly by one tenant who said to me, 'While I've got mould growing on my wall and a lift that's full of p**s, the council can shut up about spending money on going green. Us tenants are more important than recycling paper and tin cans.'

So, what caused the Government to be brainwashed into adopting a dogma that's seen the UK's coal power stations close and, in most cases, blown up with indecent haste – while China and India embarked on a massive programme of expanding theirs?

Prior to the rise of Greta Thernberg, the most famous thing to come out of Sweden was the pop group Abba – a source I would trust more, regarding climate change. The seeds of destruction can actually be traced back to 2001, two years before Greta was born, with the issuing of the Large Combustion Plant Directive (LCPD) which aimed to reduce carbon emissions throughout Europe.

What caused the Government to be brainwashed into adopting a dogma that's seen the UK's coal power stations close and, in most cases, blown up with indecent haste while China and India embarked on a massive programme of expanding theirs?

The deadline of January 1, 2008 allowed plants that did not comply with the strict emission limits to opt-out. In January 2008, Britain had 21 coal-fired power stations in operation, which not only employed thousands of staff directly, but also gave work to many thousands of supply staff – such as train drivers, many of which were to lose their jobs as a result of this policy.

Since then it's been a non-stop attack on society from busybodies, who obviously have way too much time on there hands, and lobby groups – with the UK Government seemingly in awe. Where else would an unelected teenager be listened to regarding making policy, while at the same time demonising anyone who questions the logic of such action?

The amount of emissions released by Britain is so minute in comparison to China and India, that if we were to ban fossil fuels in the UK tomorrow, it would make an absolutely minuscule impact on total levels across the globe. Advocates claim that we should lead by example, but I don't see China or India taking any notice, and why should they? What right has the western world, that has benefited for hundreds of years from fossil fuels, to tell rapidly developing countries that they can't have those same benefits?

Last year, construction and planning applications of coal fired plants in China accelerated dramatically – with new permits reaching the highest level since 2015. Capacity will be six time as large as that in the rest of the world combined. Permission for many of these projects are fast tracked, allowing construction to commence within a matter of weeks. Last year permission for the construction of the equivalent of two large power plants a week was granted. Why doesn't Greta go and protest in China, if she feels so strongly about pollution? After all China emits as much CO2 in 12 days as the UK does in a year.

What the ecozealots never say is that what is increasing is the number of deaths due to fuel poverty and the cold – exacerbated by the premature abolition of fossil fuels before a cheap and reliable alternative is in place. Rising temperatures are not the real enemy as the many who have to choose between heating and eating will testify. For them the average annual green levy of £120 is already a huge burden.

President Xi has also pledged that China would reduce coal consumption in the 2026–30 period, but this is increasingly beginning to look like nothing more than lip service, with China accounting for 52 per cent of the 176 gigawatts of coal capacity under construction in 20 countries in 2021. This is only a reduction of four GW from the previous year. This is despite China being told that a halt had to be brought to such projects if climate goals are to be achieved.

Thank goodness that the Government wasn't entirely brainwashed by the woke elite, and was able to warm up coal fired power stations (that were mothballed and not, as is so often the case, demolished) on a number of occasions last winter to keep the 'lights on' in Britain. This, however, came at a great price to British citizens and one that could do much damage to the hopes of any political party that doesn't address it.

Last year, after years of trying to shift away from fossil fuels, the UK was forced to double its coal imports, due to soaring gas prices. In October 2022 more than 560,0000 tonnes of coal arrived in the UK via British ports compared to 291,000 tonnes the previous October. Victor Katona, a senior analyst at Kpler, said 'With gas prices like these, relying on natural gas for power generation is a no-go zone for anyone who can switch between fuels.'

The reduction in living standards, coupled with soaring energy bills – due to the west deciding it doesn't want buy Russian gas or coal – are coinciding with strong signs that war fatigue is setting in. Western governments that were once overwhelmingly supportive of Ukraine are now looking nervously at the polls, none more so than America – the biggest donor of funds – with elections looming next year. Ironically, the west has no reservations about doing business with China, and other autocratic governments, while at the same time demonising Russia.

Even the predicted lowering of energy bills by around £450 in the UK will probably do little to stop people questioning the wisdom of a government that is happy to pour endless millions into a war that has no positive side for western citizens, but many negatives. It was the UK and members of the EU who de-industrialised themselves, making themselves dependent on foreign energy imports such as Russia and and manufacturing and materials – especially those from China.

Retired American police officer and republican voter Jeremy Snyder is typical of many. While initially being 'all for' sending aid, he now says, 'Ukraine keeps asking for more money when we need more money at home.' The results of a poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research show that overall, support for aiding Ukraine has fallen from 60% to 48% over the last 12 months, with a recent NBC News poll revealed only one third of Republicans think sending more money to Ukraine is a good idea.

Similar attitudes are becoming more prevalent in the UK, but there are still some who are so brainwashed, you have to wonder if there was ever a brain to wash to begin with. I asked one left-leaning lady in her seventies what she thought about rumours that Zelensky's wife had been on a spending spree in Paris and she replied, without a moment of hesitation, 'So bloody what? If it's true she bloody well deserves it!'

We were lucky last winter, as it wasn't a particularly cold one in Britain – enabling a lot of households to have to cope with steep, but not budget breaking energy bills. We will not be so fortunate if this winter is a bitter one. 'Freeze for Ukraine' is never going to be a winning election slogan and many more will question what purpose is served by the UK getting involved in a war with Russia – one that puts it within range of Russian missiles.


  1. Labour gives them no reason not to let the still say vote Tory next year.

    1. Yes, they can be as critical as they like of the Government outside Election time, because the other side holds no terrors for them.