The RAF’s Virtue-signalling Climate Fantasies
Two days ago, the forces.net website carried an article entitled ‘Climate Warriors: The RAF’s quest to go green‘
It starts by saying ‘The Chief of the Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Mike Wigston, wants to see the service achieve net-zero carbon emissions by the year 2040.’
It is not a long article, so I reproduce it in full, but beware, it is full of virtue-signalling dross.
The Royal Air Force accounts for two-thirds of the Ministry of Defence’s fuel consumption – just under 400,000 litres a year.
In less than 20 years, the current Chief of the Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Mike Wigston, wants to see the RAF achieve net-zero carbon emissions.
He also wants an emissions-free aircraft flying in RAF colours by the end of this decade.
“It sounds a long way away, but we have got to start making the plans now, or we’ll run out of time,” he told Forces News.
RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire is something of a beacon when it comes to going green.
At the station, Corporal Hayley Woodhall and a colleague have invented a ground-breaking system to recycle old aircraft oil.
The system, called ‘Picasso’, uses bacteria to devour the waste, and turn it into water and carbon dioxide, which is then converted into oxygen by plants.
The station has also been trialling an autonomous delivery vehicle called ‘Kar-Go’, which is designed to learn routes as it travels around the base and would provide an alternative to the current fleet of diesel vans.
RAF Brize Norton has also won awards for a scheme to cut back on single-use plastic.
By 2040, they are planning to be using sustainable fuels at the station, have their own solar farm, and be sequestering carbon from the atmosphere using moss, which is 80% more efficient than planting trees.
“Goodness knows how things will have moved on by then, but by then sustainability will be part of our DNA,” said Group Captain Emily Flynn, RAF Brize Norton’s station commander.
Last year, an RAF test pilot flew the world’s first aircraft powered with 100% sustainable fuel.
The Royal Air Force’s Rapid Capabilities Office worked on the project with Zero Petroleum, a private company founded by veteran Formula One designer Paddy Lowe.
So can the RAF go green and still maintain its capability?
“I don’t see them as being mutually exclusive,” says Air Marshal Andrew Turner, former deputy commander for capability in the RAF.
“We are aiming at net zero, that’s to say no offsets, no purchases, no carbon credits. I think we can win, and generate a net-zero service.”
You may well think that Sir Mike Wigston, or perhaps more likely you have been instructed to follow the alarmist propaganda. I would hate to think an Air Chief Marshall would really believe such blatant lies, as he is old enough at 59 to recognise a scam when he sees it.
To have a senior military figure who has been awarded a CBE, who is a Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath, and who is an Aide-de-Camp to the Royal Family, going along with such nonsense is extremely concerning.
If the RAF is forced to go down this road of ‘net zero’, it will result in the service being about as much use as a chocolate teapot.
See more here: forces.net
Header image: forces.net
About the author: Andy Rowlands is a university graduate in space science and British Principia Scientific International researcher, writer and editor who co-edited the new climate science book, ‘The Sky Dragon Slayers: Victory Lap‘
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
D. Boss
| #
Someone has their facts completely wrong. The article states the Royal Air Force uses 400,000 liters of fuel per year. That is utterly and completely ridiculous folks!!!
A C-130 (similar to the transport in the photograph) holds 25,000 liters of fuel and burns 2,800 liters per hour of cruise flight. So according to the total fuel budget – you can only refuel 16 of these transports per year!
Likewise a Panavia Tornado fighter jet holds around 6,000 liters of fuel, and this gives it a range of 900 miles with low and high level cruising at subsonic speeds, and only 230 miles going supersonic. So going subsonic it burns about 4,000 to 5,000 liters per hour, and supersonic it burns close to 50,000 liters per hour.
It might be plausible that the RAF uses 400,000 tonnes of fuel per year, but most certainly not 400k liters! (400k tonnes of jet fuel is roughly 505 million liters – a more plausible amount for the RAF to burn)
Reply
Alan
| #
I can’t wait to see the inflight battery recharging system.
Reply
VOWG
| #
I want to see those battery operated fighters doing at least mach 1 or 2.
Reply
Brian James
| #
6th April 2022 Brits support an end to fracking ban
“The cost of living has already become the number one concern to voters, and with the effect of soaring energy bills yet to really hit, these figures show that the government urgently needs to reconsider its stances on Net Zero and the shale gas moratorium.”
https://www.netzerowatch.com/brits-support-an-end-to-fracking-ban/
Reply
Howdy
| #
The RAF:
“I don’t see them as being mutually exclusive,”
“I think we can win, and generate a net-zero service.”
How very scientific.
This wonder fuel:
“this 21st-century version is produced in a completely clean manner”
“It is emitting, but the emissions are considerably less than fossil fuels.”
“its only by-product is oxygen.”
Make of that contradictory nonsense what you will.
“It is produced at a site on the Orkney Islands, using electricity generated from wind, tidal and wave energy.
Currently, only small quantities are being made.”
OK. But:
“Wayne Strachan, Commercial Director IGCL Technology, explained: “We didn’t produce a huge amount because that wasn’t the purpose of the demonstration, it was to prove that we could do it technically, and if we move into a more commercial footing, clearly we’ll be able to produce much higher volumes.”
Requiring much higher energy input, which surely will need to come from the grid.
“It will be expensive,”
But it still emits. Is there any point?
“The team behind the fuel claim they can produce enough to stop using fossil fuels on all RAF aircraft by 2040.”
Claims are worth nothing, and from what I’ve seen, the article author is correct in that this is fantasy.
Reply
Geraint Hughes
| #
Just like the plan to have all electric cars by 2030, it is going to fail. The electrical tranmission network simply does not exist to enable such a thing even if the extra generation required to support such a plan was built, which it is not.
Reply
Old Crow
| #
Douglas Badder would be turning in his grave.
Reply