• 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

UK’s Energy Strategy And Wind Obsession Are A Load Of Hot Air

by Dr. John Constable
April 08, 2022, 10:20 AM
in News and Opinion
Reading Time: 4 mins read
A A
8
Share on FacebookShare on XwitterShare on Linkedin

boris energy strategy montageOur energy policy has been an incoherent mess since the early 2000s when Tony Blair forced the UK off the carefully engineered and economical gas-to-nuclear strategy that was then underway.

Instead, Blair put all our bets on so-called renewables: wind and solar power. Nuclear was damned with faint praise, while coal was progressively driven off the system. [bold, links added]

This has left the UK increasingly dependent on the weather for our electricity — not ideal in a country with an unreliable climate.

So there has to be back-up from natural gas-fired power stations, the only generators flexible enough to work with uncontrollable wind and solar.

Gas is a very good fuel, but because of the Blair renewables policy, we have certainly become overexposed to it. So it’s no exaggeration to say that today our energy security hangs by a single thread.

In fact, low wind power in 2021, with UK onshore wind output down nearly 20 percent compared to 2020, was one of the main causes of the current energy crisis.

Europe is also overcommitted to wind and their output was also down, so they wanted the natural gas too.

The international economic recovery post-Covid compounded these effects. Very high gas prices — with huge amounts paid to Vladimir Putin’s Russia — were the result.

Critics of Mr. Blair’s policies said at the time that renewables would make the UK ­vulnerable to high gas prices, and they have been proved right.

So the only question that matters, after yesterday’s publication of the Government’s energy security strategy, is: Has Boris cleared up Tony’s mess?

With the best will in the world, the answer is a resounding NO. In fact, he’s actually making it worse.

First, there’s precious little in the strategy to help ­consumers with rocketing bills in the short term. For example, ­scrapping the £10 billion-a-year in green levies.

And second, there are simply gigantic costs in the medium term, and in spite of those costs, our security of supply looks as uncertain as ever.

Yes, there are positive aspects, but every silver lining in the strategy seems to have a particularly dark cloud wrapped around it.

The plans to get more oil and gas out of the North Sea are completely rational and could help to protect consumers as well as enhance the ­security of supply.

But why has the Government done so little to lift the over-cautious moratorium on fracking shale gas? Shale has huge potential for the UK and it is simply irresponsible to leave it unexplored.

And then there’s Boris’s plan for a nuclear program delivering 25 percent of electricity consumption by 2050.

Broadly speaking, this could be a good idea.

COST AND TIMESCALE

Nuclear energy is a physically superior source of energy. It’s high quality and reliable.

But alongside the nuclear proposals, there are wildly ambitious plans for still more wind and solar, which are all but completely incompatible with the nuclear proposals.

These technologies do not work well together, physically or economically.

The Government plans are just incoherent at worst. And then there is the cost and timescale of wind.

Even with modern high-capacity wind turbines, the plans mean the installation of several thousand super-sized machines, all in a little under a decade.

This will require an express service that will send costs off the scale.

The Government is still parroting industry propaganda about falling wind prices, but no one who understands the wind farm companies, or who has looked at their financial accounts, believes costs are coming down significantly.

In fact, it seems that costs are actually rising as they move into deeper water and more difficult conditions, which is not surprising.

Regrettably, Mr. Johnson’s strategy, like Tony Blair’s before it, is a confused muddle of overly ambitious targets that only suit industry lobbyists looking for subsidies. And those lobbyists are already excited.

The Government press release is followed by pages of fulsome quotes from energy businesses ­supporting the plans.

That should set alarm bells ringing. When the energy ­sector starts salivating, the ­consumer is on the menu.

Mr. Johnson’s plan may be good for the energy companies but it will be bad for British households and businesses.

DAMAGING TO ECONOMY

It will also be damaging to the economy as a whole.

Delivering these extreme and muddled policies will cost, even at a conservative estimate, ­capital expenditure of several hundred billion pounds in a matter of a few decades.

Some analysts say between £500 billion and £800 billion, more than half of the UK’s net investment budget for the next 15 years or so, putting a squeeze on many other areas of expenditure and wiping out real income growth in the UK for more than a decade.

Looking on the bright side, very little of this energy plan will ever be realized.

In spite of a few positive aspects, it is uninvestable, unaffordable, and impractical.

Far from clearing up Tony’s mess, Boris and his Government appear to have learned nothing from the failure of the New Labour energy policies.

This late in the day and in the midst of the worst energy crisis in a generation, I fear it’s going to prove a disaster for the UK.

Image via The Sun


Dr. John Constable is the director of energy at the campaign group Net Zero Watch.

Read more at The Sun

  • Truth
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Gettr
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…
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
  • Skype
  • Facebook Messenger
  • Kakao
  • LiveJournal
  • Yammer
  • Edgar
  • Fintel
  • Mix
  • Instapaper
  • Copy Link
  • Truth
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Gettr
  • Baidu
  • Mastodon
  • Threads
  • Bluesky

Join our list

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.

Thank you for subscribing.

Something went wrong.

We respect your privacy and take protecting it seriously

Related Posts

Energy

New Lawsuit Targets Empire Wind Offshore Project Over Marine Mammal Harm

May 19, 2025
Extreme Weather

Meteorologist: No, We’re Not Going Extinct — Slate’s Climate Panic Ignores Reality

May 19, 2025
Agriculture

Miliband’s Net Zero Plan Sparks Backlash Over Jobs, Security, And China Ties

May 19, 2025

Comments 8

  1. James says:
    3 years ago

    If we declare that climate is variable, how can we rely on wind as an energy source? Or rely on Sun, which only drunks can think shines at night? Using either on an experimental basis, what are the criteria to decide the success or failure of the experiment? Or do we just carry on til we hit a wall? Is that the political criterion, used and applied to friends only? Something stinks. Why do the CPS and Serious Fraud office not act?

  2. David O'Neill says:
    3 years ago

    What about the really big ones that fall into the sea that you never get to hear about?
    For example the one that fell off at the Anholt industrial wind plant array off the Danish coast just a couple of days ago. What is the environmental impact going to accumulate to?
    Will the reason for it ever be in the public domain?

  3. Brian James says:
    3 years ago

    February 27, 2022 Graveyard of the green giants

    Right across the road from the town cemetery in Sweetwater, Texas, sits another graveyard where the dead are never buried. Some 4,000 worn-out giant wind turbine blades are piled as far as the eye can see, taking up most of a 25-acre field.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10558375/TOM-LEONARD-Graveyard-green-giants.html

    • David Lewis says:
      3 years ago

      Responsible industrial practice is to plan for the entire life cycle cost of a product. For instance, the aerospace company that I’m retired from provided life cycle cost planning for the purchase, maintenance, and retirement of the aircraft. Responsible practices are totally missing from the environmental movement. For wind turbines and solar powers, plans for disposal of worn out units are simply missing. These are huge costs and there is good reason that the industry ignores them. These costs are certainly not included in any claim that renewable energy is becoming competitive with fossil fuels.

  4. Spurwing Plover says:
    3 years ago

    The UK returning to a Dark Ages way to live all over totaly fake crisis of Global Warming/Climate Change

  5. Stephen Heins says:
    3 years ago

    What strategy?

    • Ed Reid says:
      3 years ago

      More like a stragedy.
      “A goal without a plan is just a wish.”, Antoine de St. Exupery

      • David Lewis says:
        3 years ago

        I would like to modify your statement. “A goal without a plan is a disaster.”

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

  • offshore wind farm stormy seasNew Lawsuit Targets Empire Wind Offshore Project Over Marine Mammal Harm
    May 19, 2025
    Numerous groups are suing Empire Wind's offshore wind project over marine mammal harms and legal violations in New Jersey and New York coastal waters. […]
  • graveyard tombstonesMeteorologist: No, We’re Not Going Extinct — Slate’s Climate Panic Ignores Reality
    May 19, 2025
    Slate’s extinction fantasy ignores real data on human resilience, tech progress, and why warming isn’t the catastrophe alarmists claim it is. […]
  • Miliband swooning over windMiliband’s Net Zero Plan Sparks Backlash Over Jobs, Security, And China Ties
    May 19, 2025
    Ed Miliband’s radical net zero push risks jobs, energy security, and sovereignty as critics warn of grid failures and overreliance on China and Russia. […]
  • Cofrentes nuclear power plant spainSpain Quietly Boosts Nuclear And Gas After Blackout It Still Won’t Explain
    May 19, 2025
    Spain’s grid failure started in Andalusia, but officials still won’t say why—despite leaning more on nuclear and gas after the blackout. […]
  • city summer sunClimatologist Rebuts ‘Hottest Year Ever’ Claims: ‘Not Even Close’
    May 16, 2025
    Media headlines say it's the hottest year ever—but the real climate story gets buried under data tricks, historical erasure, and narrative control. […]
  • Antarctica sea lionsAntarctic and Arctic Ice Trends Defy Climate Models And Dire Predictions
    May 16, 2025
    New data shows Antarctic ice is growing and Arctic sea ice has stabilized—raising serious questions about climate models and mainstream climate claims. […]
  • power lines electricityPennsylvania Supreme Court Presses Officials On RGGI Carbon Tax
    May 16, 2025
    Pennsylvania's high court grilled state officials about whether the money it wants to collect from the RGGI pact constitutes a fee or a tax. […]
  • german wind farmGerman Wind Slump Triggers Energy Losses, Industry Turmoil
    May 15, 2025
    Germany's wind power output plunged in 2025 as wind speeds hit a 50-year low, slashing profits and sparking doubts about energy reliability. […]
  • Geothermal PlantGeothermal Gold Rush: U.S. Digs Deep To Power the Future
    May 15, 2025
    America is racing to unlock geothermal energy using shale-era tech — and it could power AI, homes, and industry while cutting reliance on China. […]
  • mississippi floodingDebunking The Weather Attribution Theater Playbook
    May 15, 2025
    The media exaggerates climate change flooding in the Mississippi Valley, ignoring peer-reviewed science for so-called attribution science. […]

Get Instant Email Notifications

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts by email either instantly or daily. Check your Junk folder for any verification emails upon subscribing.

Submit a tip

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

Books We Like

very convenient warming

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

Share via
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…
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