First, declare state of emergency of existing energy supply. Pull out of Paris Accord, abolish the Climate Change Act and shut down the CCC and DARPA. Stop all funding and subsidies of renewable energy sources, Wind, Solar, Hydrogen. Stop forced transition to EVs, heat pumps. Abolish Carbon taxes. Frack, drill for oil and gas and coal.
Build some 50 or so RR SMRs on existing Nuclear sites and near grid connections of larger towns and cities. Abolish tax on energy and fuel supply. Nationalise energy production and grid infrastructure. Establish significant exports of power to European partners.
Thanks Robert - all perfectly valid policy choices. I chose the word "priority" rather than "emergency" in my essay to avoid the criticism of alarmism, but your version is closer to what is warranted under the circumstances.
How sane all this is. We need a campaign to educate people about this. Evidence not politics. Real life pragmatism instead of fantasy models. Save our country. Labour are not the sole culprit so much greater scrutiny of politicians involvement. Who do they work for? The Globalist cabal or UKplc? Get royal family interest declared.
Robert - I very much appreciate your good wishes. Thank you. All profits from my forthcoming book "Fixing UK Energy Policy: A Seven Point Plan" will go to a UK charity that supports the elderly who are cruelly threatened in winter by Net Zero. I'll also make copies available to all of my lovely subscribers.
In the UKIP days, Farage had Roger Helmer who was not bad on energy although not an expert. I very much hope that Reform will enlist the help of rational energy experts like yourself, David Turver and Kathryn Porter to plot the future.
Point 1. Even if Reform displaces the Uniparty, it will still have to overcome the Green Blob and the bought-and-paid-for MSM. It will be essential to be prepared to counter the pseudo-science narratives of the establishment's climate change hoax. This should not be too difficult. I predict a Net Zero-sceptical general public will lap up a robust debunking of the climate change nonsense they have been fed for decades. Reform will also be able to draw on the debunking already underway in the USA under President Trump, e.g. the "CO2 endangerment" legislation which will hopefully soon be scrapped.
Point 4. The recent Spain blackout and discussion of the importance of grid inertia prompted me to investigate what the late Chief Scientist Sir David Mackay had to say about it in his 2008 opus "Renewable Energy - without the hot air". The answer is nothing! The word "inertia" is never mentioned in his 383-page ebook. If he (a scientist, not an engineer) was blissfully unaware of the fundamental incompatibility of non-synchronous wind and solar with how the grid was designed to operate, you can be sure that the climate activists and politicians were equally ignorant, and mostly still are. What a mess, to have rank amateurs thinking they can redesign our energy infrastructure, with the incumbant experts cowed into keeping schtum. All the easier to debunk their rank incompetence.
Thanks, Douglas. These are very thoughtful points. On [1]: I strongly suspect we will see the phenomenon of "preference cascade". The net zero Emperor very visibly has no clothes, and yet everyone supposes that everyone else supports this nonsense. Once the dam bursts, public sentiment will instantly realign around this realisation. At that point, the Green Blob and MSM will be powerless. Perhaps I am naive, and I certainly don't underestimate the sheer power of the billionaires (Hohn, Soros, etc.) but we'll see.
The collapse of this Net Zero scam cannot come soon enough and definitely to be looked forward to. As mentioned above, the US is leading the way and Reform UK eager to stop our ruination from these disastrous policies.
Our intensive efforts to debunk the climate change hoax may turn out to be superfluous. The globalist establishment tried but failed to shackle the populace through their Covid "plandemic". Their climate change scam now seems to be falling apart as well.
It strikes me what the Terminator films get wrong is that trusting computers to control nuclear weapons sends humanity back to a pre-industrial hellscape. In reality, trusting computers running climate models is prompting us to, of our own volition, to return ourselves to a pre-industrial hellscape.
I agree with the recommendations of Robert Davies to stabilise and turn around our energy security position but I am pessimistic that this can be achieved under the current Labour government which has 3 more years to run and appears to be in thrall to the loony ideas of Ed Miliband.
Excellent. Words that must be used by Farage and the GB News team. Sadly, other MSM will ignore them, as well as the woke in Whitehall, etc. how to get the message into younger people
Unfortunately, and as nice as this seems, it is full of fantasy and consultation of the rear view mirror. The facts are that we have increased CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere by a phenominal amount, by virtue of our addiction to burning things, and done so in an extremely short time period. The consequences are clear and contemporaneous. Wishing this away simply won't do. Nuclear must be part of the zero CO2 solution, but it is fraught with risk. (e.g.) We have been making SMR for quite some time, but have still yet to work out how to decomission one. Technology will save us, just not that of yesterday.
Thanks Norman. I’m intrigued by your comment that the consequences of CO2 are clear. The only real climate change property that the IPCC claims has a detectable human signature is a mild warming trend. Many studies have estimated the deaths globally due to temperature as we emerge from the recent mini ice age. About 50 times more humans die from cold than from heat. Here in the UK, the ONS estimated the change in temperature related deaths in the last 20 years due to nights getting a bit less cold. Around 555,000 fewer have died than would be expected if they hadn’t. Clear in what way, and what is it you believe we are wishing away?
On technology. We agree on nuclear. The gotcha is that solving problems with technology requires surplus energy. So the one category of problem that technology can’t solve is energy deficit. That’s why I note that success is by no means guaranteed, given that energy contraction is already setting in.
First, declare state of emergency of existing energy supply. Pull out of Paris Accord, abolish the Climate Change Act and shut down the CCC and DARPA. Stop all funding and subsidies of renewable energy sources, Wind, Solar, Hydrogen. Stop forced transition to EVs, heat pumps. Abolish Carbon taxes. Frack, drill for oil and gas and coal.
Build some 50 or so RR SMRs on existing Nuclear sites and near grid connections of larger towns and cities. Abolish tax on energy and fuel supply. Nationalise energy production and grid infrastructure. Establish significant exports of power to European partners.
Thanks Robert - all perfectly valid policy choices. I chose the word "priority" rather than "emergency" in my essay to avoid the criticism of alarmism, but your version is closer to what is warranted under the circumstances.
How sane all this is. We need a campaign to educate people about this. Evidence not politics. Real life pragmatism instead of fantasy models. Save our country. Labour are not the sole culprit so much greater scrutiny of politicians involvement. Who do they work for? The Globalist cabal or UKplc? Get royal family interest declared.
Thank you for your comment. I’m actually writing a book to do exactly this. We don’t teach energy in schools. We should.
We don’t teach real science either. Just ‘the science’ and no critical thinking.
Wishing you every success with your much-needed book, especially in educating the unconverted.
Robert - I very much appreciate your good wishes. Thank you. All profits from my forthcoming book "Fixing UK Energy Policy: A Seven Point Plan" will go to a UK charity that supports the elderly who are cruelly threatened in winter by Net Zero. I'll also make copies available to all of my lovely subscribers.
In the UKIP days, Farage had Roger Helmer who was not bad on energy although not an expert. I very much hope that Reform will enlist the help of rational energy experts like yourself, David Turver and Kathryn Porter to plot the future.
Point 1. Even if Reform displaces the Uniparty, it will still have to overcome the Green Blob and the bought-and-paid-for MSM. It will be essential to be prepared to counter the pseudo-science narratives of the establishment's climate change hoax. This should not be too difficult. I predict a Net Zero-sceptical general public will lap up a robust debunking of the climate change nonsense they have been fed for decades. Reform will also be able to draw on the debunking already underway in the USA under President Trump, e.g. the "CO2 endangerment" legislation which will hopefully soon be scrapped.
Point 4. The recent Spain blackout and discussion of the importance of grid inertia prompted me to investigate what the late Chief Scientist Sir David Mackay had to say about it in his 2008 opus "Renewable Energy - without the hot air". The answer is nothing! The word "inertia" is never mentioned in his 383-page ebook. If he (a scientist, not an engineer) was blissfully unaware of the fundamental incompatibility of non-synchronous wind and solar with how the grid was designed to operate, you can be sure that the climate activists and politicians were equally ignorant, and mostly still are. What a mess, to have rank amateurs thinking they can redesign our energy infrastructure, with the incumbant experts cowed into keeping schtum. All the easier to debunk their rank incompetence.
Thanks, Douglas. These are very thoughtful points. On [1]: I strongly suspect we will see the phenomenon of "preference cascade". The net zero Emperor very visibly has no clothes, and yet everyone supposes that everyone else supports this nonsense. Once the dam bursts, public sentiment will instantly realign around this realisation. At that point, the Green Blob and MSM will be powerless. Perhaps I am naive, and I certainly don't underestimate the sheer power of the billionaires (Hohn, Soros, etc.) but we'll see.
The collapse of this Net Zero scam cannot come soon enough and definitely to be looked forward to. As mentioned above, the US is leading the way and Reform UK eager to stop our ruination from these disastrous policies.
Our intensive efforts to debunk the climate change hoax may turn out to be superfluous. The globalist establishment tried but failed to shackle the populace through their Covid "plandemic". Their climate change scam now seems to be falling apart as well.
It now looks as if the globalists favour trying to shackle the populace by more blatant methods, e.g. by provoking civil or all-out war. Andrew Bridgen has the measure of them: https://x.com/ABridgen/status/1929916593342910870?t=TO8neS6_bjv3KnkySXqM1Q&s=19
Andrew Bridgen warned 18 months ago that the globalists planned to escalate war with Russia under Starmer as Sunak didn’t want to be a "war-time" leader: https://x.com/ABridgen/status/1929980236378320953?t=pJRH9OQAOWl2ZGONNlrOLQ&s=19.
It strikes me what the Terminator films get wrong is that trusting computers to control nuclear weapons sends humanity back to a pre-industrial hellscape. In reality, trusting computers running climate models is prompting us to, of our own volition, to return ourselves to a pre-industrial hellscape.
Andrew Montford description of manic, treasonous Ed Miliband the Terminator: "It can't be bargained with, it can't be reasoned with, it doesn't feel pity. Or remorse or fear and it absolutely will not stop, ever ..." https://x.com/aDissentient/status/1929552942211736041?t=khbw97ECrp-Ir1v6bf6yew&s=19.
I agree with the recommendations of Robert Davies to stabilise and turn around our energy security position but I am pessimistic that this can be achieved under the current Labour government which has 3 more years to run and appears to be in thrall to the loony ideas of Ed Miliband.
Agree Catherine, only ReformUK can do this, because they know it is what has to be done.
A very hopeful energy policy, which could only be brought about when control is wrenched from the hands of ideologues and billionaires.
Real good.... But you forgot step 1.... turf the idiots already in power.
Excellent. Words that must be used by Farage and the GB News team. Sadly, other MSM will ignore them, as well as the woke in Whitehall, etc. how to get the message into younger people
Unfortunately, and as nice as this seems, it is full of fantasy and consultation of the rear view mirror. The facts are that we have increased CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere by a phenominal amount, by virtue of our addiction to burning things, and done so in an extremely short time period. The consequences are clear and contemporaneous. Wishing this away simply won't do. Nuclear must be part of the zero CO2 solution, but it is fraught with risk. (e.g.) We have been making SMR for quite some time, but have still yet to work out how to decomission one. Technology will save us, just not that of yesterday.
Thanks Norman. I’m intrigued by your comment that the consequences of CO2 are clear. The only real climate change property that the IPCC claims has a detectable human signature is a mild warming trend. Many studies have estimated the deaths globally due to temperature as we emerge from the recent mini ice age. About 50 times more humans die from cold than from heat. Here in the UK, the ONS estimated the change in temperature related deaths in the last 20 years due to nights getting a bit less cold. Around 555,000 fewer have died than would be expected if they hadn’t. Clear in what way, and what is it you believe we are wishing away?
On technology. We agree on nuclear. The gotcha is that solving problems with technology requires surplus energy. So the one category of problem that technology can’t solve is energy deficit. That’s why I note that success is by no means guaranteed, given that energy contraction is already setting in.
Thank you for reading my essay and your comments.