Europe’s Green Deal: Same Hysteria, Same Destruction

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Yes, this is about oil & gas. 

Or more accurately, the Elite EU leader's persistent plans to dismantle the fossil fuel industry, while increasing their own power and control, and imposing massive new destructive taxes to "combat" CO2 and CH4 - - - natural gases.

The UK exited the EU just in time to avoid getting sucked into this mandated morass of EU Green Economic Death of exacerbated Climate Hysteria.

 

Europe’s Green Deal: Same Hysteria, Same Destruction

Today’s brand of the left-leaning politician is all about substituting what sounds good for what actually works. Modern politics, whether in the U.S. or Europe, is about taking a chainsaw to everything that produced even a modicum of success to appease the deities espousing progressive orthodoxy. There is no better example of this than fossil fuels, energy sources that have lifted us out of destitution and darkness and given us incredible wealth the world had never witnessed. What is the left interested in doing? Confiscation, cronyism, centralization, and coercion to combat climate change. The European Union will achieve these objectives through the boondoggle-in the-making Green Deal.

The European counterpart is a bit more realistic than the American version, aiming for net-zero emissions within 30 years rather than in a decade. But that is probably the best thing you can say about this proposal, which was approved by the European Parliament – some policymakers had requested even greater ambitions to be inserted inside the climate change scheme. Overall, the Green Deal is bad economics that will affect the already dreary conditions of Europe and exacerbate the slowdown.

The Green Deal begins by the European Commission examining every European Union law and regulation and then modifying them to align with the bloc’s new climate objectives. If you thought the E.U.’s regulations were already egregious, just you wait until March 2021 when the bureaucrats will submit a package containing all the statist goodies. At least Great Britain will not have to.  ...

 

... "The Green Deal is the most fundamental shift in European energy policy we have seen in 20 years. Companies in the sector should not underestimate the disruption it will bring,” Nick Butler wrote in The Financial Times.  ...

 

... Every proposal to fight climate change and save the planet is based on the concentration of power and the aggressive expansion of regulatory implementation and enforcement. Policymakers refuse to allow the free market to create innovative solutions to environmental problems, effectively admitting that the planet is too important to leave up to the inhabitants. Only the government, and those it handpicks to receive the benefits of public spending, can be Mother Nature’s best friend. Unfortunately, this reckless abandon of innovation and industry, which is far too common in the region, will be another step toward Europe’s ruin. As H.L. Mencken wrote, “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” The E.U. knows this all too well.

 

[Rob Plant + 2,610]

5 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

The European counterpart is a bit more realistic than the American version, aiming for net-zero emissions within 30 years rather than in a decade.

 

6 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

The UK exited the EU just in time to avoid getting sucked into this mandated morass of EU Green Economic Death of exacerbated Climate Hysteria.

Unfortunately the UK has already committed to being carbon neutral by 2050 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48596775

There is no difference in reality to our own policy as the EU's. There is far too much political pressure from climate activists who are spouting unscientific garbage for the politicians to do anything but agree to this. In the UK it seems the uninformed shout the loudest!

I do think man has contributed to the speed the planet is warming, but not to the cataclysmic scales the climate activists preach. In 2019 Co2 levels were at 415 parts per million, 500 million years ago they were at 4000, and the planet is still very much alive and kicking.

I have no problem in reducing emissions and supplementing power with green energy, but not at the expense of all fossil fuels (especially gas).My issue is with pollution both air and sea which is unacceptable and is causing thousands of deaths each year, and of course deforestation.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

16 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Or more accurately, the Elite EU leader's persistent plans to dismantle the fossil fuel industry, while increasing their own power and control, and imposing massive new destructive taxes to "combat" CO2 and CH4 - - - natural gases.

The UK exited the EU just in time to avoid getting sucked into this mandated morass of EU Green Economic Death of exacerbated Climate Hysteria.

 

Nobody says it quite as well as our old friend Nigel Farage:

Nigel Farage’s final speech to European Parliament cut short after he waves flag

Towards the end of the video, it is pitiful and wonderful all at the same time that that woman, after the lambasting that Nigel had just given her about huge, important flaws in her organization, still thought it important to call out and resort to the "rules", like a teacher in the 5th grade; not in front of world representatives.  Rules to not show your own flag, heaven forbid, to SIT DOWN, RETURN TO YOUR SEATS!  Or you will be cut off. 

Take your senseless, massively expensive job killing rules and power grabbing and shove them up where the Sun doesn't shine!  Ah-hah-hah!  Laugh out loud, indeed.

[NickW + 2,714]

37 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

 

Unfortunately the UK has already committed to being carbon neutral by 2050 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48596775

There is no difference in reality to our own policy as the EU's. There is far too much political pressure from climate activists who are spouting unscientific garbage for the politicians to do anything but agree to this. In the UK it seems the uninformed shout the loudest!

I do think man has contributed to the speed the planet is warming, but not to the cataclysmic scales the climate activists preach. In 2019 Co2 levels were at 415 parts per million, 500 million years ago they were at 4000, and the planet is still very much alive and kicking.

I have no problem in reducing emissions and supplementing power with green energy, but not at the expense of all fossil fuels (especially gas).My issue is with pollution both air and sea which is unacceptable and is causing thousands of deaths each year, and of course deforestation.

500 million years ago the irradiance of the sun was about 15% less (the Suns Irradiance increases by about 30% every billion years). 4000ppm of CO2 in AD 2020 is going to be very different from 4000ppm in 500 million BC.

Secondly in 500 million BC the only known land based lifeforms that had developed were a few algal sludges on tidal flats.

The geological epoch mankind evolved in was one in which CO2 levels were at 260-400ppm so on the balance of probabilities its probably wisest to keep as near as possible to that range in which we have thrived,  assuming you have a human-centric view of the world.

[NickW + 2,714]

1 hour ago, Tom Kirkman said:

 

The UK exited the EU just in time to avoid getting sucked into this mandated morass of EU Green Economic Death of exacerbated Climate Hysteria.

 

Europe’s Green Deal: Same Hysteria, Same DestructionT

At least Great Britain will not have to.  ...

 

 

Meanwhile, back in the real world and not wishing to be entirely reliant in the long term on gas imports the UK....

is steaming ahead with huge offshore wind developments with the cost of electricity rapidly heading towards parity with conventional generation.

Company car tax on EV's being scrapped in April

Government getting behind development of RR SMR project.

Government start smart export guarantee from Jan 2020 for domestic solar projects

Biogas injection into grid growing rapidly

'Wind to Hydrogen ' projects getting govt support.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

People will only wise up when the cost of these regulations starts to hit their ability to put food on the table. Until then it gives them a warm fuzzy feeling that they are saving the planet....

[Rob Plant + 2,610]

37 minutes ago, NickW said:

Meanwhile, back in the real world and not wishing to be entirely reliant in the long term on gas imports the UK....

is steaming ahead with huge offshore wind developments with the cost of electricity rapidly heading towards parity with conventional generation.

Company car tax on EV's being scrapped in April

Government getting behind development of RR SMR project.

Government start smart export guarantee from Jan 2020 for domestic solar projects

Biogas injection into grid growing rapidly

'Wind to Hydrogen ' projects getting govt support.

Wind power in the UK circa 20% of the national grid

This project off the Yorkshire coast an additional 5%

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/01/worlds-largest-wind-turbines-to-be-built-off-yorkshire-coast

Company car tax on EV's is almost nothing now anyway.

Agreed with RR SMR's

the smart guarantee is for electricity back into the grid, not just solar! This wont have much of an effect if any on the grid IMO

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/environmental-programmes/smart-export-guarantee-seg/about-smart-export-guarantee-seg

Biogas is expensive and inefficient and is not the answer IMO

https://energypedia.info/wiki/Electricity_Generation_from_Biogas

Wind to hydrogen is an interesting one and has merit, however the initial start up cost (approx £12bn) is off putting but may come down significantly with economies of scale

Nick you mention "back in the real world" some of these ideas/projects will fly and some wont

[Rob Plant + 2,610]

1 hour ago, NickW said:

500 million years ago the irradiance of the sun was about 15% less (the Suns Irradiance increases by about 30% every billion years). 4000ppm of CO2 in AD 2020 is going to be very different from 4000ppm in 500 million BC.

Secondly in 500 million BC the only known land based lifeforms that had developed were a few algal sludges on tidal flats.

The geological epoch mankind evolved in was one in which CO2 levels were at 260-400ppm so on the balance of probabilities its probably wisest to keep as near as possible to that range in which we have thrived,  assuming you have a human-centric view of the world.

The problem with your 15% is that you havent taken into consideration global dimming which more than offsets this, see below

https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/causes-and-effects-of-global-dimming.php

Edited February 3, 2020 by Rob Plant

[NickW + 2,714]

18 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Wind power in the UK circa 20% of the national grid

This project off the Yorkshire coast an additional 5%

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/01/worlds-largest-wind-turbines-to-be-built-off-yorkshire-coast

Company car tax on EV's is almost nothing now anyway.

Agreed with RR SMR's

the smart guarantee is for electricity back into the grid, not just solar! This wont have much of an effect if any on the grid IMO

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/environmental-programmes/smart-export-guarantee-seg/about-smart-export-guarantee-seg

Biogas is expensive and inefficient and is not the answer IMO

https://energypedia.info/wiki/Electricity_Generation_from_Biogas

Wind to hydrogen is an interesting one and has merit, however the initial start up cost (approx £12bn) is off putting but may come down significantly with economies of scale

Nick you mention "back in the real world" some of these ideas/projects will fly and some wont

While there maybe some debate on the speed, the direction of travel is obvious and at 180 degrees to what is suggested in that article

The projected resource for Biogas is around 150 Twh. Its cost is falling and bear in mind the additional benefit it provides in processing waste by reducing the volume by 15-20% and rendering it into something less noxious and easily applied to land.

The Smart export guarantee will help maintain the take up of domestic rooftop solar (and small scale business renewables) because it assures the producer they will get paid for exports.

Nio silver bullet in any of these but they all cumulatively add up and said to 'avoid becoming entirely reliant on gas imports' not to displace all gas imports which I would contend is unrealistic.

[Rob Plant + 2,610]

3 minutes ago, NickW said:

While there maybe some debate on the speed, the direction of travel is obvious and at 180 degrees to what is suggested in that article

The projected resource for Biogas is around 150 Twh. Its cost is falling and bear in mind the additional benefit it provides in processing waste by reducing the volume by 15-20% and rendering it into something less noxious and easily applied to land.

The Smart export guarantee will help maintain the take up of domestic rooftop solar (and small scale business renewables) because it assures the producer they will get paid for exports.

Nio silver bullet in any of these but they all cumulatively add up and said to 'avoid becoming entirely reliant on gas imports' not to displace all gas imports which I would contend is unrealistic.

Agreed that the political will is there for this, that is undeniable as its a vote winner.

The problem I have is that without significant nuclear and gas contributions to the grid the UK's electricity cost will rise sharply.

And as I alluded to at the start of the thread the ignorance from many climate activists who just jump on the bandwagon without any knowledge whatsoever of what they are talking about is mind blowing.

Maybe ive just been unlucky as the majority of greens ive discussed this with have no idea. Most think hybrids are great and proudly spout off about how little they are polluting the environment, not knowing how much Co2 it took to make the battery in the first place!!

[NickW + 2,714]

17 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

The problem with your 15% is that you havent taken into consideration global dimming which more than offsets this, see below

https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/causes-and-effects-of-global-dimming.php

May well have been a major issue back then as Volcanic activity was much more prevalent than it is today.

 

Back to today - as coal use falls / better particulate control is applied to stations  that effect will diminish.

Anyway filling the air we breath with pollutants to offset global warming is hardly a sustainable approach.

[NickW + 2,714]

3 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Agreed that the political will is there for this, that is undeniable as its a vote winner.

The problem I have is that without significant nuclear and gas contributions to the grid the UK's electricity cost will rise sharply.

And as I alluded to at the start of the thread the ignorance from many climate activists who just jump on the bandwagon without any knowledge whatsoever of what they are talking about is mind blowing.

Maybe ive just been unlucky as the majority of greens ive discussed this with have no idea. Most think hybrids are great and proudly spout off about how little they are polluting the environment, not knowing how much Co2 it took to make the battery in the first place!!

I'd check that one if I were you. The Co2 footprint of a Prius / Corolla battery is about 2-5% of its total lifetime output. However the fuel economy is at least 30% better than a conventional petrol.

Edited February 3, 2020 by NickW

[Rob Plant + 2,610]

18 minutes ago, NickW said:

Anyway filling the air we breath with pollutants to offset global warming is hardly a sustainable approach.

Agreed never said it was, i was just pointing out the 15% you mentioned was flawed.

 

18 minutes ago, NickW said:

May well have been a major issue back then as Volcanic activity was much more prevalent than it is today.

I dont see any evidence of this, in fact there is a study claiming the warmer the planet the greater likelihood of eruptions there is.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/get-ready-for-more-volcanic-eruptions-as-the-planet-warms/

The cleaner the air gets the faster the increase of global warming. Its a double edged sword, we want clean air but a cooler planet and at the moment we cant have both.

Edited February 3, 2020 by Rob Plant

[Rob Plant + 2,610]

7 minutes ago, NickW said:

I'd check that one if I were you. The Co2 footprint of a Prius / Corolla is about 2-5% of its total lifetime output. However the fuel economy is at least 30% better than a conventional petrol.

The problem with a large proportion of hybrids is they are leased as company cars to reduce tax. These often only give 15-20 miles of charge which is nothing and the rest of the time they will be using a 2.0l petrol engine. When you factor in the amount of Co2 the battery has used in its manufacture it will take a hell of a long time to get back to parity to a conventional ICE vehicle. My point is the greens that have these think they are saving the planet when they clearly arent

[NickW + 2,714]

7 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Agreed never said it was, i was just pointing out the 15% you mentioned was flawed.

 

I dont see any evidence of this, in fact there is a study claiming the warmer he planet the greater likelihood of eruptions there is.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/get-ready-for-more-volcanic-eruptions-as-the-planet-warms/

The cleaner the air gets the faster the increase of global warming. Its a double edged sword, we want clean air but a cooler planet and at the moment we cant have both.

That article is about changes in glaciation causing more eruptions - its not about a younger earth with a hotter mantle / core being more volcanic which is the point I was making.

I don't think anyone is campaigning for a cooler planet, its more a case of containing the temperature of an increasingly warmer planet

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Let's just tax CO2 and CH4 into oblivion.

Taxing naturally ocurring gases and giving more control to governments should fix the problem.

While we are at it, better make it illegal to question political leaders and illegal to question scientists that are funded by vested interests.  Because they know what is best.

[Rob Plant + 2,610]

1 minute ago, NickW said:

That article is about changes in glaciation causing more eruptions - its not about a younger earth with a hotter mantle / core being more volcanic which is the point I was making.

I don't think anyone is campaigning for a cooler planet, its more a case of containing the temperature of an increasingly warmer planet

Can you show me any evidence of this increased volcanic activity during the Cambrian period?

I think youre clutching at straws.

[NickW + 2,714]

Just now, Rob Plant said:

The problem with a large proportion of hybrids is they are leased as company cars to reduce tax. These often only give 15-20 miles of charge which is nothing and the rest of the time they will be using a 2.0l petrol engine. When you factor in the amount of Co2 the battery has used in its manufacture it will take a hell of a long time to get back to parity to a conventional ICE vehicle. My point is the greens that have these think they are saving the planet when they clearly arent

You are now talkiing about Plug in Hybrids, These are distinctly different from conventional Hybrids (Prius, Auris, Corolla, Yaris, Insight etc) which have a relatively small Nickel Hydride rather than a large Lithium Battery.

I agree - they aren't saving the planet but a conventional hybrid over a non hybrid is generally a better option from a perspective of lowering CO2 and local air pollutants.

[NickW + 2,714]

1 minute ago, Rob Plant said:

Can you show me any evidence of this increased volcanic activity during the Cambrian period?

I think youre clutching at straws.

Or maybe not

https://geologyglasgow.org.uk/headlines/cambrian-explosion-fuelled-by-volcanic-activity/

[Rob Plant + 2,610]

yes sorry I didnt make the distinction up front but yes plug ins which appear to be the majority these days.

[NickW + 2,714]

7 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

yes sorry I didnt make the distinction up front but yes plug ins which appear to be the majority these days.

In the UK the vast majority are conventional Hybrids - Prius, Auris / Corolla, Yaris, Insight.

I agree with your point in PHEV's - particularly the Mitsubishi PHEV which is a tank

[Rob Plant + 2,610]

3 minutes ago, NickW said:

Or maybe not

https://geologyglasgow.org.uk/headlines/cambrian-explosion-fuelled-by-volcanic-activity/

Maybe so then but there is no evidence to say what levels of ash were in the atmosphere or for how long so its a moot point.

Levels of zircon were increased but it doesnt say by how much.

If we take it that there were massive eruptions over a long period of time and this increased the Co2 from 300ppm to 4000ppm then I'm also presuming you agree that this caused a "death" phase on the planet.

If that is the case then I agree it would, but then climate activists are saying a rise from 300ppm to 415ppm in recent history is critical to the environment and we have to be carbon neutral in 30 years or less or we are all doomed.

I just dont buy that, the earth withstood a huge increase in Co2 compared to this over millenia (most likely) and came through it. An increase of 100-200 ppm is worrying,but literally not the end of the world.

[Rob Plant + 2,610]

3 minutes ago, NickW said:

In the UK the vast majority are conventional Hybrids - Prius, Auris / Corolla, Yaris, Insight.

I agree with your point in PHEV's - particularly the Mitsubishi PHEV which is a tank

Yes a guy at work has one, its dreadful!

BMW's are no better, the other ones you name are not as prevalent, people are going higher end now the prices are coming down.

 

[NickW + 2,714]

54 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Yes a guy at work has one, its dreadful!

BMW's are no better, the other ones you name are not as prevalent, people are going higher end now the prices are coming down.

 

The PHEV is an unhappy compromise between a Hybrid and an EV.

I think the Prius version is ok providing the daily commute range is roughly comparable with the battery range. My wifes daily commute is 34 or 50 miles depending on which site she is at so I would consider the Prius PHEV as a good option.

 

[NickW + 2,714]

1 hour ago, Rob Plant said:

Maybe so then but there is no evidence to say what levels of ash were in the atmosphere or for how long so its a moot point.

Levels of zircon were increased but it doesnt say by how much.

If we take it that there were massive eruptions over a long period of time and this increased the Co2 from 300ppm to 4000ppm then I'm also presuming you agree that this caused a "death" phase on the planet.

If that is the case then I agree it would, but then climate activists are saying a rise from 300ppm to 415ppm in recent history is critical to the environment and we have to be carbon neutral in 30 years or less or we are all doomed.

I just dont buy that, the earth withstood a huge increase in Co2 compared to this over millenia (most likely) and came through it. An increase of 100-200 ppm is worrying,but literally not the end of the world.

So far the oceans have absorbed a lot of that CO2 but its sponge effect won't last for ever. Then you start getting full on accumulation with plenty of positive feedbacks thrown in -  release of CO2 / CH4 from permafrosts, more frequent forest fires, release from soils,  oceanic outgassing.

I suppose thats one skills set we have over the Cambrian tidal sludge - an ability to consider future risks.