***
Britain set itself on the path to wind powered penury a decade ago and sealed its fate with its Climate Change Act in 2008.
As anyone with a modicum of common sense could have predicted, the result has been a social and economic disaster, the costs of which can only escalate from here.
In this report from the Global Warming Policy Foundation, the financial cost alone is tipped to hit £300 Billion, outstripping the cost of every other major piece of infrastructure policy currently on foot in Britain.
Report reveals £300 Billion cost of Britain’s Climate Change Act
Global Warming Policy Foundation
11 December 2016
A new report published today (PDF 518KB) by the Global Warming Policy Foundation reveals the extraordinary £319 billion cost of Britain’s Climate Change Act.
The report, which is based entirely on official figures, exposes the mischievous attempts by ministers to try and disguise the true cost to households.
“Britain has been gulled by false assurances that decarbonising our economy would be costless into signing up to a stupendous bill of over £300 billion up to 2030,” said Peter Lilley MP, the study’s author and one of the few Members of Parliament who voted against the Act back in 2008.
“Hardly anyone in Westminster is aware of this even though it is more than double the cost of HS2, Heathrow and Hinckley put together. Yet so far it has not reduced our ‘carbon footprint’ as we have outsourced our carbon emissions to developing countries such as China. Described by the PM’s special adviser as ‘an act of self harm’, our climate change policies are harming our standard of living, our jobs and our industry.”
The report details the huge burden on every household, explaining how numerous devices have been used to hide the real price of decarbonisation, which is rising at a rapid rate.
Peter Lilley warns that the Government can no longer be complacent about the rising cost of Britain’s unilateral climate policies, particularly in light of Theresa May’s expressed priority of supporting ‘just about managing’ families. After all, these costs “are borne disproportionately by the less well off, the elderly and the vulnerable.”
Global Warming Policy Foundation
One of the real battles is, of course, a media pack so lazy and so gullible that the wind cult has been able to avoid any serious scrutiny at all among the mainstream press. That type of analysis is left to outfits like the Global Warming Policy Foundation.
Speaking at the News Xchange conference on November 30, 2016 in Copenhagen, Nigel Farage hit the issue of wind industry bias in the media right between the eyes.
Are we out of touch – Keynote #1
News Xchange Conference
Nigel Farage
November 2016
Alternative link – Friends against wind
Transcript:
And lastly, where I think you’re really getting completely out of touch is your coverage of the issue of climate change. And I say this with particular reference to the wind industry. I’ve seen dozens of reports, on British media, about a new wind farm that is being built on an upland moor, or being built at sea.
We’re told how wonderful this is, how it’s going to reduce CO2 emissions, and this new wind farm will power a city the size of Birmingham.
And what we don’t get told is that when the wind does not blow, it won’t even power a single kettle.
What we don’t get told is that none of this can be done without vast tax-payer subsidy.
What we don’t get told is that actually, wind energy and renewables has led to one of the greatest transfers of wealth from the poor to the rich that we’ve seen in modern times.
I haven’t heard any of that in the United Kingdom, and I doubt that there’s much of it in your countries too. And increasingly, people are wondering why their electricity bills are as high as they are. So I do think this industry needs to press the reset button.
Xchange Conference
STOP THESE THINGS 
Hi,
I started a PETITION “SA PREMIER JAY WEATHERILL : Demand the RESIGNATION of the Energy Minister for HIGH POWER PRICES CAUSING SA’s JOBS CRISIS and 15,000 household POWER DISCONNECTIONS, frequent POWER BLACKOUTS and the JULY 2016 POWER CRISIS” and wanted to see if you could help by adding your name.
Our goal is to reach 200 signatures and we need more support.
You can read more and sign the petition here:
https://www.change.org/p/sa-premier-jay-weatherill-demand-the-resignation-of-the-energy-minister-for-high-power-prices-causing-sa-s-jobs-crisis-and-also-15-000-household-power-disconnections-frequent-power-blackouts-and-the-july-2016-power-crisis?recruiter=135406845&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=share_email_responsive
Please share this petition with anyone you think may be interested in signing it.
Thankyou for your time.
The intro on our fb page:
DO NO HARM
Our second Do No Harm post begins with STT’s piece today on the obscene cost to the UK of the Climate Change Act, as stated in the Peter Lilley’s report for the Global Warming Policy Foundation. Mr Lilley was one of only three MPs – yes THREE – to vote against the Act. The others were Christopher Chope (the Tory with whom we were very impressed at the Wishart Whingefest aka the Scottish Affairs Committee inquiry) and Andrew Tyrie who, at the time. said that the Stern conclusions were ‘completely absurd’.
We must just put this in here with the link from whence it came – Business Green, after the vote – it’s from Christopher Chope and he said it after the second reading (subsequently two MPs capitulated):
“When the history books are written in 2050, people will ask why only five people voted against Second Reading of the ludicrous measure.”
‘He argues that the bill will have an adverse affect on the economy, particularly with the inclusion of aviation and shipping, and that households bills will rise as business growth is inhibited.’
Well done, Mr Chope, because that’s exactly what the GWPF Report states, and how!
The Report is long and the subject is complex, but it’s written in easy-to-understand style and content. Its language is strong and is a wrecking ball taken to all those who employed methods ranging from half-truths, deliberate obfuscation, a total lack of comprehension and foresight – and to those who still do – resulting in huge impact on individuals and business – to the tune of an anticipated £300 billion – yes, three hundred billion – by 2050.
That figure includes all those things which should have been included to arrive at a realistic figure and ignores those which shouldn’t have been. Amazingly, costs were not discussed during the Climate Change Act debates.
Engineers, and Grid engineers, particularly, were all singing from the same hymn sheet in 2007/8 and, taught by them, so were many of we lay people. We all knew the falsehoods which were being fed to the public.
We would urge you to read, or even just skim, the Report to get the flavour of the message it’s getting across.
We’ll whet your appetite. The word ‘ludicrous’ is one of the most used. This is in the introduction:
‘Naturally enough, those responsible for the Climate Change Act (including all the main political parties and most of the chattering classes) have been reluctant to acknowledge those costs, shrink from discussing them and, when obliged to do so, seek to minimize them. The first Coalition Energy Secretary – Chris Huhne – brazenly claimed that the overall impact of climate change policies was actually to reduce household bills. This is a graver distortion of the truth than the dishonesty that landed him in prison The report goes on to discuss ‘Slap’ Ed Davey’s assertions along similar lines.
The answer to a wholly ill-considered regressive Act which, due to deliberately false calculations continues to have huge financial impact on individuals, businesses and economy?
Lord Turnbull, in his foreword to the Report, says: ‘In the short term there is a way out. The CCA states that the Secretary of State can, by order, amend the figures for a carbon budget if it appears to him that ‘there have been significant changes affecting the basis on which the previous decision was made’. Since the time when the CCA was being developed, a great deal has changed.’ He bullet points the changes.
Returning to our pinned post, where Abbott warns the Turnbull government to start forward-thinking, pronto, so should the UK Government and it probably is. The one who is not, however, because it has its fingers lodged in its ears and, in our view, isn’t capable of considering the long-term, is the Scottish Government. In its single focus on independence, it is still content to point developers in the direction of fleecing even more consumers, taxpayers and business – aided and abetted by its chattering sock puppets.
There are many parallels to this energy agenda and it’s results in Canada; especially in Ontario. Lord Monckton recently made a statement about our Prime Minister:
People are finally waking up and speaking out!
Surely, things will change for the better soon!
Reblogged this on UPPER SONACHAN WIND FARM.
agree with climatism. since the destruction of the industrial economy is the goal of the climate movement perhaps it’s not a “disaster” after all.
There is one piece of evidence that could possibly undermine the whole Climate Warmists agenda. And that is your winter heating bills. They are effectively a paper trail that could contradict everything the Climate Changers are threatening us with.
For example, it is being stated that 2016 was the warmist year on record in Australia. And yet for the first time our household used three gas bottles for winter heating instead of the more usual one or two. And we needed more fuel for the wood stove. The fuel receipts back this up. In fact it has been the coldest winter that we have experienced in Australia.
In addition to this, we have other family connections in the UK. So there is another energy bill that could be looked at more closely.
Make sure you keep those utility bills. You never know when you might need them!
Engie with the upcoming closure of the Hazelwood coal mine and power generator are looking to a token replacement with a renewable source within the local Gippsland community.
Wind energy is on the nose for a multitude of reasons so they are looking at a solar farm.
The insanity of it all is that the Gippsland area is not Queensland being in the south Eastern part of Victoria it is more of an English climate several have criticised the suitability of the location .
The response from a spokes person from the Clean Energy Council was that “sunnyness” wasn’t the only consideration in determining the location of a solar farm.
Shoot me now.
Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
“…outsourced our carbon emissions to developing countries such as China. Described by the PM’s special adviser as ‘an act of self harm’, our climate change policies are harming our standard of living, our jobs and our industry.”
They talk about the “social cost of carbon”. Well, the above paragraph explains absolutely the “social cost” rendered when the climate obsessed West imposes draconian climate policy on itself in a suicidal attempt to appease the fanatical environmental lobby, in a useless effort to fix a mythical non-problem – “Global Warming” now called “Climate Change”, as the planet hasn’t warmed, at all, for the past 18+ years, despite record CO2 emissions over the same period.
The West is being brought to its knees and slowly destroyed by a pseudo-scientific Leftist Trojan horse going by the eco-friendly name of “Saving The Planet”.
You have been warned…multiple times.