• Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
Climate Change Dispatch
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
Climate Change Dispatch
No Result
View All Result

‘Going Green’ Risks Destroying The British Car Industry

by Ewen Stewart
November 25, 2020, 9:01 AM
in News and Opinion
Reading Time: 4 mins read
A A
5

nissan leaf chargingTo my mind, Boris Johnson’s announcement of the ban on the sale of all new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 – just ten years off ­– is one of the most significant political decisions in modern times.

It says much of the way this Government thinks, how it acts, and how it treats business and people. This clearly is not a Government that trusts the people to decide what is best but one where the people must be told what is right for them.

The implications of this ban are immense in terms of manufacture, supply chains, investment, sunk capital, employment, infrastructure, consumer choice, the value of existing stock and so much more.

So please forgive the statistics that follow, for I think them important. But let us also look at the impact of this decision from an economic, political, and social perspective.

First, well over 99 percent of all cars on the road in the UK use the traditional combustion engine.

The UK’s manufacturing profile in automotive is almost entirely geared towards combustion technology with the sole exception of Nissan’s manufacturing of the Leaf at its Sunderland plant.

Other manufacturers based in Britain are announcing investment programs for electric assemblies, such as Jaguar Land-Rover’s plans for new models coming out of its various Midlands plants, but there is a very long way to go before new electric car sales approach even a fraction of what British people drive.

China dominates the global top ten of electric car manufacturers, with the US, Germany, Japan, South Korea, and France bringing up the rear – and that is not a position that is likely to be relinquished.

Thus to claim, as the Government does, that this policy will result in leadership in new technology demonstrates how little they understand about business.

Simply banning one successful business and telling consumers to buy something else does not mean the UK will be successful in the new industry. That is an obvious fallacy.

The government risks destroying a successful British industry for a marginal place in a new one.

Certainly, if this Government believes that banning the manufacture of combustion engines within a decade, rather than letting consumer choice make the market, will lead to the UK’s achieving leadership in electric cars, they are deluded.

Worse, if they think they can direct investment, government ministers are about as likely to succeed as the British Leyland management in the 1970s. Have they learned nothing?

As if to demonstrate this, BMW has announced it is moving the manufacture of its eight and twelve-cylinder internal combustion engines to Britain so it can focus on manufacturing its electric power trains in Germany.

While it’s good news in the short to medium term for job opportunities in Birmingham, the lead in electric for BMW will be taken in Bavaria, as might be expected.

The British automotive sector is big. Last year it had a turnover of £78.9 billion, one-fifth of the entire manufacturing base of the UK.

Of the 1.3 million cars manufactured, more than 80 percent were exported. This generated some £42.4billion of exports, 13 percent of the entire export output of the UK. This is a great British success story of the renaissance given the problems the industry faced only 25 years ago.

UK automotive employs 180,300 directly in manufacturing and hundreds of thousands indirectly. Over £3.1 billion of new capital was employed in facilities last year alone. The list goes on.

Technologies change and most rational people would wholeheartedly welcome competition of ideas. May the best technology win!

Just as the combustion engine has evolved and improved, let us celebrate the growth of hybrid and electric. But never before has a Government dared to close down an entire and critical industry almost overnight by diktat.

Cars replaced the horse because consumers preferred the car. The same thing happened with the transition from the aircraft propeller to the jet engine (although the British Government sold the technology to the Americans and Soviets for sweeties): the market chose.

The same thing may very well happen with the electric car, but that should be the call of us, the consumers, not the Government. It is for you and me to choose what sort of car we wish to drive, be it big or small, blue or red, electric or combustion.

To legislate from an arbitrary date (and one not far off) that the sale of all new combustion cars must cease is frankly one of the most illiberal and economically destructive policies ever to come from Whitehall.

It risks hundreds of thousands of livelihoods and much-needed exports for the most marginal benefit.

Moreover, this virtue signaling whim will make hardly a jot of difference for the environment. Automotive is a long-term, capital-intensive industry.

New models take years to design, tooling up costs tens of millions and more, and families invest a large proportion of their hard-earned cash in the car of their choice.

Now, just as the Government at the stroke of a pen wiped thousands of pounds off the value of diesel cars, they will do exactly the same thing again, deliberately driving down the value of traditional cars. Worse, the new technology is still in its infancy.

The technological outcome is suboptimal in terms of infrastructure, range, battery technology, relative cost, and the like.

The private sector would find a way – it always does. Take the mobile phone network. While the cellular phone came out of military developments by private British company RACAL, if it had been left to Government we would probably still be waiting on a monopoly supplier providing a service for public use.

Instead, enterprise organically built a highly effective and relatively inexpensive network. The same will happen with electric cars if left to personal choice. But if the Government directs you can be sure of the result: incompetence, inefficiency, and expense.

What gives the Government the right to interfere in such a manner?

It will claim ‘the environment, stupid’. Really? Ninety-four percent of carbon dioxide occurs naturally and Britain accounts for under 2 percent of the man-made output of the remaining 6 percent – and automotive perhaps 30 percent of that.

This is a tiny percentage of already small percentages (0.06 x 0.02 x 0.3 = 0.000036 per cent). Does this really justify such illiberal action and enormous upheaval, forced job loss, and cost?

We may well choose to drive electric cars if we judge they are better, cleaner, and more efficient, but I’m sorry, that’s my business, not the Government’s.

Read rest at Conservative Woman

  • Truth
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Gettr
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…

Popular Posts

Electric Vehicles (EVs)

The ‘Green’ Scam Of The Century: How ‘Renewables’ Increase Fossil Fuel Demands

Oct 23, 2024
News and Opinion

Antarctica Is Colder, Icier Today Than At Any Time In 5,000 Years

Apr 15, 2024
Energy

30-Plus Signs That The Climate Scam Is Collapsing

Apr 09, 2025

Comments 5

  1. captain taffyapple says:
    5 years ago

    JUST ONE THING IF WE GET RID OF ALL CARBON IT WILL MEAN NOTHING WILL GROW PLANTS NEED CARBON TREES TAKE IN CARBON AND REPLACE WITH OXYGEN

    Reply
  2. Roger Payne says:
    5 years ago

    Apart from the comments made in this article, Government offers no explanation whatever of how it would deal with the stull vast numbers of petro diriven cars on the road, much less with scrapping them and how consumers would afford to do so and buy an electric car. Nor any mention of the shadow side of E car batteries, rare metals and so on, nor the supply network all across the whole UK. Nor has it mentioned the huge loss of income from tax to the Exchequer as petrol is driven out. This would have to be recovered to some degree by heavy road tax or tax on electric charging points.

    Reply
  3. Chaamjamal says:
    5 years ago

    What explains the Montral Protocol obsession in climate change reporting these days? Here’s one from National Geographic.
    https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/11/25/climate-alarm-of-11-25-2020/

    Reply

Comments are welcome! Those that add no discussion value may be removed.Cancel reply

Stay Connected On Social Media

gab-logo

Donate Today

Beating back the alarmist narrative takes time and money. Please donate today to help!

Recent Posts

  • 1930S Dust BowlBloomberg’s Climate Alarm Misfires: U.S. Heat Records Show 1930s Still Hottest
    Oct 10, 2025
    New data challenges Bloomberg’s heat claims, showing U.S. temp records peaked in the 1930s, not the modern era, despite climate alarmist narratives. […]
  • Rinderknecht facebook postSuspected Pacific Palisades Firebug Ranted Online About Trump, Climate Change
    Oct 10, 2025
    The alleged firebug behind the Pacific Palisades fire ranted online about climate change, Trump, Antarctic ice, and plant-based diets. […]
  • Solar panel farmBLM Cancels Mammoth Nevada Solar Project Under Trump’s Energy Agenda
    Oct 10, 2025
    BLM pulled the plug on a massive Nevada solar power project amid the Trump administration’s crackdown on renewable energy projects. […]
  • North Sea Wind FarmScientists Warn EU’s Net Zero Push Fueling Green Colonialism In Poor Countries
    Oct 10, 2025
    Scientists warn the green energy push risks exploiting developing nations, draining resources, and worsening global inequality under climate action. […]
  • Leonardo DiCaprio and his megayacht‘Green Antoinettes’ Preach Sacrifice While Jetting Off In Luxury
    Oct 10, 2025
    From Leo DiCaprio to AOC, celebs and politicians moralize about climate austerity while jetting off in luxury, fueling public backlash. […]
  • city underwaterYahoo News Pushes False Claim Cape Coral Will Vanish Under Rising Seas
    Oct 9, 2025
    Yahoo News amplified a false claim that Cape Coral will vanish under rising seas, ignoring NOAA tide data showing only a modest, steady sea level trend. […]
  • Santa Ynez Reservoir and hydrantLAFD After-Action Report Omits Empty Reservoir’s Role In Palisades Fire
    Oct 9, 2025
    LAFD’s Palisades Fire report cites firefighting issues but leaves out how the empty Santa Ynez Reservoir worsened the disaster. […]
  • Palisades FireDemocrats, Media Falsely Blamed Deadly California Fire On Climate Change—It Was Arson
    Oct 9, 2025
    The Feds say a man intentionally set the Palisades Fire, undermining claims from Democrats and media that climate change and oil companies were to blame. […]
  • Pope ice blessingPope Leo’s Arctic Ice Blessing Eroding Church’s Spiritual Mandate
    Oct 8, 2025
    Pope Leo’s Arctic ice blessing exposed how diving into climate politics erodes the Church’s spiritual authority and aligns it with radical agendas. […]
  • Offshore oil rigFederal Judge Rules Biden’s Massive Offshore Oil And Gas Ban Was Illegal
    Oct 8, 2025
    A federal judge ruled Biden overstepped his authority when he blocked offshore oil and gas drilling across 625 million acres, overturning his permanent ban. […]

Get Instant Email Notifications

Subscribe to receive a digest of daily stories, or get emailed once they're published. Check your Junk/Spam folder for a verification email.

Submit a tip

Please enter your email, so we know you're human.

Books You May Like

exposing great lie

Have a suggestion? Let us know! We swap out books based on your input. We participate in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. See here.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Us

© Portions copyright Climate Change Dispatch

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us

© 2025 Climate Change Dispatch

Share via
  • Facebook
  • Like
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • Tumblr
  • VKontakte
  • Print
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Buffer
  • Love This
  • Weibo
  • Pocket
  • Xing
  • Odnoklassniki
  • WhatsApp
  • Meneame
  • Blogger
  • Amazon
  • Yahoo Mail
  • Gmail
  • AOL
  • Newsvine
  • HackerNews
  • Evernote
  • MySpace
  • Mail.ru
  • Viadeo
  • Line
  • Flipboard
  • Comments
  • SMS
  • Viber
  • Telegram
  • Subscribe
  • Facebook Messenger
  • Kakao
  • LiveJournal
  • Yammer
  • Edgar
  • Fintel
  • Mix
  • Instapaper
  • Copy Link
  • Truth
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Gettr
  • Baidu
  • Mastodon
  • Threads
  • Bluesky
Share via
  • Digg
  • Tumblr
  • VKontakte
  • Print
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Buffer
  • Love This
  • Weibo
  • Pocket
  • Xing
  • Odnoklassniki
  • WhatsApp
  • Meneame
  • Blogger
  • Amazon
  • Yahoo Mail
  • Gmail
  • AOL
  • Newsvine
  • HackerNews
  • Evernote
  • MySpace
  • Mail.ru
  • Viadeo
  • Line
  • Flipboard
  • Comments
  • SMS
  • Viber
  • Telegram
  • Subscribe
  • Facebook Messenger
  • Kakao
  • LiveJournal
  • Yammer
  • Edgar
  • Fintel
  • Mix
  • Instapaper
  • Copy Link
  • Truth
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Gettr
  • Baidu
  • Mastodon
  • Threads
  • Bluesky