Stubborn, thick, petulant Theresa May has decided what her legacy is going to be: she’s going to poison the wells, salt the earth, and make damn sure that her name lives on through all eternity as the stroppy cow who cost the UK economy £1 trillion [$1.1 trillion].
That’s her Chancellor Phil Hammond’s estimate of how much it will cost to implement her legally binding ‘Net Zero’ commitment — to be passed by parliament on the nod, apparently with no scrutiny whatsoever — to 100 percent decarbonize the UK economy by 2050.
Previously — under the terms of the disastrous and pointless 2008 Climate Change Act — the target was an 80 percent reduction.
Since this was largely a virtue-signaling exercise in the dog days of the last Labour government, dreamed up by an activist called Bryony (now Lady) Worthington from the hard left Friends of the Earth and Environment Secretary Ed Miliband, many thought that this would be one of the first things a Conservative government would repeal when it got into power.
Not a bit of it. Theresa May has responded to the challenge as only the Worst-Ever Prime Minister knows how: “You think the Climate Change Act was the most idiotic bit of legislation in British history? Hold my Chardonnay!”
So now, instead of a ludicrously impossible CO2 reduction target of 80 percent by 2050, Britain will now be committed to comically, risibly, absurdly impossible CO2 reduction target of 100 percent.
Since Britain is responsible for around one percent of the world’s CO2 emissions, this act of unilateral economic disarmament — higher taxes, the death of what remains of British industry — would have only a negligible effect on climate change.
According to Bjorn Lomborg, writing in The Telegraph, the notional reduction in ‘global warming’ by the end of the century would be 0.014 degrees C. That’s 14/1,000th of a degree.
He writes:
The UN’s climate scenario modelling shows that reaching net zero carbon around 2050 (a scenario in which we keep temperature rises to 1.5°C) would cost 5.3 per cent of GDP by 2050.
For the UK, that would mean an annual cost of £187 billion by 2050. And that is based on the heroic assumption that for 30 years politicians manage to consistently implement the most efficient policies imaginable, using a single carbon tax, while avoiding any gilets jaunes-style backlash even as the measures force up the cost of living.
Studies show that in the real world where policies are not implemented efficiently, it is more likely the cost would double – meaning £374 billion annually. That’s more than the UK currently spends on health, education, police, courts, defence, environment, housing, recreation and culture.
The piece is titled: “This Climate Madness has to end.”
Which indeed it will, eventually, as the reality of this frivolous gesture politics kicks in and people start to wonder why they are experiencing blackouts and brownouts in a supposedly first world economy, why business is becoming less competitive, and why unemployment and the cost of living are shooting up.
In the meantime, most of the main candidates in the Tory leadership contest — including runaway favorite Boris Johnson — are supporting Theresa May’s plan wholeheartedly…
Read more at Breitbart
Phil you make a reasonable point however the earth has a fever fraud
undermines real action to make the most efficient use of energy . People are tired of being lied to . Ice free arctic , kids won’t know what snow is etc all by rent seekers trying to cash an over blown fraud .
Its tough but you can’t say it is too expensive because it is much cheaper than not doing it and the upside is we would be world leaders in the manufacture and supply of renewable energy technology. We can’t keep burning fossil fuels at a growing rate as the world population keeps growing.
The Australian Labor Party tried to win an election with a promise of a massive increase in renewable energy. The skeptics among us were looking forward to watching the Australians throw the baby out with the bath water and provide a practical example to the rest of the West of just how destructive their flirtation and infatuation with renewable energy will be. The election was a disaster for the green sympathizers.
Meanwhile, the English parliament says, “Hold my beer! Watch this!”
greetings from New Zealand……she should be in ‘klink’!! throw the key away!! regards, Trevor..
Clearly global warming effected her judgement …again .
10’s of thousands of fuel poverty deaths in the UK as a result of
foolish government policy .
They had to know there were going to be casualties.
Almost 3 Dunkirk’s per year and nobody is held accountable for this completely avoidable tragedy .
The UK government should be sued .
Even the fact that she has beautiful breasts
will not absolve this act of idiocy.
It was a cool, rainy winter and spring where I live. I wish some of that global warming would come here.