Britain’s ‘Bonfire’ of Climate & Green Regulations post-Brexit
As the political fall out from Brexit continues Britain’s mainstream media are reporting that environmentalists and climate alarmists are in full panic mode. The growing fear is that the UK government is set on a course of wholesale reversals of pro-green legislation.
Today’s Independent newspaper (October 13, 2016) reports that the latest “bonfire” fears stem from newly-installed Prime Minister Theresa May’s first act – to unceremoniously scrap the Department for Energy and Climate Change, merging it into the renamed Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). In no uncertain terms this is seen by all sides as a huge blow to the green lobby. The issue of a successful Brexit seems pinned to appeasing populist demands in abandoning failed and needless environmental policy.
A worried Simon Bullock, a climate campaigner at Friends of the Earth, told The Independent that “some politicians would see Brexit as an opportunity to do away with climate change policies they regard as “wasteful, bureaucratic red tape”.”
So, the pro-green Independent has rallied to the climate cause in the most stupid fashion imaginable by arguing the nation’s strategic energy interests are better served by schemes such as capturing carbon dioxide from the air and pumping it into the ground. But as any competent chemical scientists (as opposed to climate scientists) will tell you, this is beyond stupid being that carbon dioxide is a gas constituted of two parts oxygen to every single carbon molecule. In effect, burying oxygen is not only insane, it is anti-science.
But doubling down into full climate crazy mode the newspaper seeks to discredit May’s fresh Brexit electoral mandate by disingenuously waving its green finger of blame at Tory blue skeptics:
“The right-wing of the Conservative party is the last bastion of significant climate scepticism in parliament. The current Environment Secretary, Andrea Leadsom, revealed she had asked officials only last year whether climate change was real, although she added they had convinced her.”
A “convinced” Leadsom nonetheless is sticking to her task of downgraded green priorities. Meanwhile the deluded UK press maintains its greenie credentials and advances one of the most hair-brained schemes put out by the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) – sucking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere employing even “direct air capture and storage”.
The Independent continues its unquestioning promotion of nonsense science:
“A failure to switch to an energy efficient, clean and green economy could cause economic problems as British companies would struggle to sell their products in Europe, the CCC warned. In this scenario, firms on the continent might also engage in “dumping” of out-dated, polluting and expensive-to-run cars and consumer products on the UK market.”
Clearly, these journalists don’t understand that battery-powered cars run on 100 percent ‘fossil fuel’ plus the batteries themselves are constructed from toxic rare earth metals that are almost impossible to recycle. As ‘Scientific American‘ recently reported (May 11, 2016 ) “Your battery–powered vehicle is only as green as your electricity supplier.”
But the UK newspaper bemoans that the “Government has sent mixed messages on climate change.” It then cites a related report whereby the CCC said Britain had set “stretching targets” but what was now needed was “a robust plan” to actually achieve them. Clearly Prime Minister May is being painted as devoid of an alternative climate action plan post-Brexit.
The CCC insists there would need to be “economy-wide improvements” to energy efficiency and the phasing out of fossil fuel emissions from vehicles, heating and power stations, its report said.
“Acting with urgency” to address this problem would reduce the costs of making the switch in the long-term, it added. But nothing about Theresa May may be said to be “urgent” especially when pro-green lobbyists are unashamedly demanding the UK adheres to EU climate targets, which are killing Europe’s economic competitiveness due to high energy bills.
The story continues:
“The fifth carbon budget requires a reduction in emissions of around a third from 2015 to 2030 … current policies, including those agreed to by the UK at the EU level, would at best deliver about half the required emissions reduction.”
So, even by their own economically suicidal measures the destruction of Britain’s industrial output would only “half” do have the job of “saving the planet.”
Read more at www.independent.co.uk
Trackback from your site.