Before I got banned on Twitter for maliciously spreading facts, I was warning people that Zero Covid was entry level Net Zero. I warned also that the Covid restrictions on international travel and the destruction of the overseas tourism industry was the government preparing people for a total ban on holiday flights. The nation contented itself with domestic holidays for a while. Now it seems we won't even have that privilege if the Net Zero cultists get their way. Cars will be effectively banned and if you've got a motorhome or caravan and want to go travelling, forget it. The widening of pavements and restrictions on roads, initially supposed to protect us from a virus, but hailed by the transport secretary as a step towards more climate friendly 'sustainable' living spaces, was also an ominous sign. This wasn't mere naked opportunism; it was planned.
Well I'm reading about all this helplessness that we will not accept this which non of us welcome well we can just band together and sa, “NO, we've had enough of your fearmongering and we are taking back control if our lives and we've a LEGAL right to do this.”
So are you all going to sit on yourarses or are you go to start organise your friends and family and neighbourhood and get it there, and keep going out until they're given in???
Oh living hell no. No beef? No flying? We’re being ruled by fools. Such disgust. So we’ll all give up good lives for crappy ones... to save Mother Earth. These the same people who have messed up everything else the last three years? Yeah... no thanks.
I regularly check www.energydashboard.co.uk/live. It concentrates my mind on how our electricity demand and generation sources fluctuate on a daily basis. On 27th March at 19.34, of the 36.75 GW generation, 52.2% was from gas. 6.4% was from wind. Tonight 12th April at 9.00pm of the 34.4 GW generation, 25% is from gas and 40% wind. On both occasions around 11% of electricity was being imported and our nuclear contributed a totally constant 4.8 GW of base load. The idea that we can satisfy an increasing electricity demand by building more wind turbines and solar farms is delusional. Where are the numbers? Staring us in the face and anyone can view them on their phone to escape the net-zero matrix.
Wind and solar generation can save us using gas, rather than provide “despatchable” capacity - yet at the peak of highest gas prices for years it doesn’t even save us money as they pay wind generators gas prices. Why.??
The fact it was to be the climate scam sledgehammer used to destroy liberty has been obvious for well over a decade.
Covid was not just a trial run for entrenching lockdowns and restrictions into the human psyche, it was also to introduce digital IDs - initially the vaccine passports.
This was to be utilised, in conjunction with CBDC, to 'track' our individual carbon footprint. The Government having the power to 'switch our ability to live' off at any time. Complete tyranny.
Depopulation would be very simple from then onwards. Every human necessity can be tightly restricted digitally - employment, food, shelter, travel, energy, health treatment...
And, what pitiful claim can any of us make, that 'we need something to save ourselves'. What do we matter, when the collective objective is 'to save the entire planet'.
Will every company be it food processing, financial, pharma, clothing manufacturer, car maker, etc etc simply fold? Without a fight? Sorry none of this makes sense. The only way the rich stay rich are by the rest of us working, growing food, producing all the things necessary to live.
"The only way the rich stay rich are by the rest of us working, growing food, producing all the things necessary to live."
Wealth is but a tool to achieve power, control and ownership. The super wealthy are making their last moves to gain all the wealth, to own everything, and we, will 'own nothing and be happy'.
Necessity to this global elites is not what we need to live, it is what they need to live. They are certain they don't need 8 billion of us for them to live best.
And, the 'fight' you are anticipating from the corporate sector. What sort of a fight have you seen from the fossil fuel giants? What fight did you observe from the airlines, or, the hotel chains duringbthe global Covid lockdowns? Somber acquiescence.
Elites now own so much, and have the ability to have what ever they desire. They don't care whether you or I can get a 5 series BMW, or fly to Switzerland. They can, and they will continue to do so, without so many of us 'polluting' the planet.
Imagine they really go through with all of that, and a hundred years from now the people will realize that none of it had the slightest impact on Climate Change™ (whatever that is), but the establishment will still be engaged in the same gaslighting because Climate Change™ would had been so much worse without this glorious Net Zero agenda.
It seems that a global authority needs to demand similar efforts from all nations otherwise the nations that pay the price to save the climate will be severely handicapped in the competition between nations. There is no global authority currently, so I don't think this can work.
It would be different if the motivation was selfish such as energy independence. I don't see how Western nations can save the climate when non-Western nations may not see the same urgency.
Yes, my point is that even assuming the climate needs to be saved and these policies will save the climate, it still must be a global effort. If the UK achieves its goal independently then it will only enable other nations to applaud the UK and do nothing themselves. The policies are so draconian and economically harmful that I don't see why nations would voluntarily follow them.
Is there some global authority with the teeth to force these policies on all nations?
Do these policies have some secret selfish national goal while pretending to be altruistic?
Bob L. You seemed to have missed the elephant in the room - there is no climate crisis, it was concocted to control humanity.
The 'global authority with the teeth to force these policies on all nations', was, and remains the objective. CAGW is the fraud deployed to justify and facilitate achievement of this predetermined objective.
Let’s not assume anything without some pretty good evidence. Presumably the proponents of the policies can prove they are gonna achieve... er what exactly?
I will let the experts who work on FIRES speak for themselves. I've no doubt Prof. Fenton's an expert in his field. I'm also sure he knows as well as I do that Fox is hardly a credible platform on climate change. You're right about the lack of high profile public dialogue between experts from different relevant fields. The FIRES project is surely a serious attempt to address that.
The UK is a major source of global finance and insurance for the activities that cause rising emissions. The UK is firmly wedded to GDP growth in a world of falling energy returns on energy invested, an unsustainable proposition whose consequences are not experienced equally in the short to medium term at least. Given the top 10% of global income earners, that's everyone earning more than around US$50,000 a year, contribute about 50% of global emissions/year, and only 20% of humans have ever flown, fanning a hysterical reaction to the FIRES reductions strikes me as dishonest and pernicious. It privileges the perspective of the minority who would suffer a lifestyle contraction and who refuse to see, or take any responsibility for, the horrors happening elsewhere that will also affect the UK, though obviously not all Brits equally. Last year in the space of 3 months, Pakistan went from experiencing heat waves so intense that birds fell from the sky and children asked where the monsters were, to floods that displaced 33 million people, in part due to climate-fuelled intense rains and glaciers melting. The scale of damage, of impoverishment, is already huge but let's not pretend that greed and selfishness aren't embedded in refusing to contemplate change to the status quo.
I’m not sure the FIRES project is a serious attempt at dialogue. A serious dialogue would include the views of Professor David McKay (deceased), Professor Simon Michaux, Professor Kelly and others. I don’t see that in the professional sphere which is an indictment of the way modern politics operates.
Neither do I see that impoverishing the developed west will have any material, or beneficial impact on the developing world. The developing world will only secure a future through the use of energy dense hydrocarbons. Any attempts the west makes towards net-zero will be swamped by the increased emissions of the developing world. As for falling EROI and EROEI, then the rush to ‘renewable energy’ sources will be like falling off a cliff.
I would be very wary of attribution studies that suggest severe and critical weather events in Pakistan in 2022 were the result of climate change. It is statistically inevitable, even under a static climate that records will be set somewhere most every year. Much better that we build resilience as has been having throughout the entirety of the 20th century. Loss of life due to natural disasters, including climate, have decreased by a factor of 10 over the past century. This resilience has only come about through the widespread availability of dispatchable, energy dense fossil fuels.
Neil Lock has done the donkey work on the alleged 'climate emergency' in the UK and summarized the outrageous events over the last 4 years particularly. It is a very revealing summary and it puts into context the Absolute Zero report published in November 2019, which coincidentally happens to be the month when Covid cases first emerged in Wuhan. 2019 in the UK was, as he points out, a 'year of madness' in the UK re. the Net Zero Green agenda. He sums up as follows:
"In the last four years alone, the UK government has been, again and again, tyrannical and dishonest on the “climate change” issue towards the people it is supposed to serve.
It has fraternized with extremists like Extinction Rebellion. It has declared a “climate emergency,” without any hard evidence of such an emergency, and without the parliament even taking a vote. It has mandated emissions reductions that, if informed in advance of their likely consequences, we would have rebelled against. It has moved the emissions goalposts, always in the direction of greater reductions. It has erected a supposedly democratic “assembly,” and made it nothing more than a rubber stamp for a pre-determined agenda. It is seeking to make it all but impossible for those, who cannot afford to buy electric cars, to retain their personal mobility.
It has laid down, and is implementing, policies which go very seriously against the interests of the people it is supposed to be serving. The effects will be disruptive, and will severely and negatively impact our freedoms and our prosperity. And it is doing these things to us without proper feasibility study, or proper analysis of the costs and benefits or of the risks.
On the occasions where it has allowed us an apparent say in the matter, it has ignored our views. It has conspired – yes, I do mean that word – with international parties to develop and promote an agenda hostile to us, the human beings it is supposed to serve; something that no democracy should ever do. It has encouraged extremists to force that agenda on to us at the local level as well as the national. It is indoctrinating young children with lies and scares. And in all these things, it has behaved with arrogance, dishonesty and hypocrisy.
We, the people, want all this climate crap stopped. Now. And we want our money back!"
Hi Jaime, Well done for diving so deep into all of this. As you know, I have also concluded that the Net Zero and Covid agendas are both ulterior pretexts, nothing to do with climate or public health respectively. They are simply tools of oppression to cow us, to demoralise us and to digitally shackle us as detailed in my recent post https://thewhiterose.uk/the-undemocratic-tyranny-of-modern-government/ and its linked prior post specifically on Net Zero.
In Chicago. Not one person I know here ever heard of net zero. The millions working everyday are earning salaries and raising families. Ohare airport is spending 2billion dollars on a modernisation project of their international terminal. Does not look like Chicago got the memo about curtailing air travel. Somehow either the British politicians are all truly bent, or somebody has this all terribly wrong in the U.K.
40,000 human or 400,000 humans left alive on the planet, depending on whose point of view you read and most of those won't be useless eaters or human garbage, but the wealthy and elite, like Rothschild for example - do you think they have it right, or will they have exterminated humanity from this planet - I don't see any of the wealthy or elite doing the manual jobs the human garbage did, computers and automation aside, when they break down or stop working, do you?
open air prison.
this is also what Aaron Russo talked about on Alex Jones's first documentary.
it seems so obvious that this is the trajectory to me, that I struggle with why people resist its reality.
we've started collecting books, looking for early editions, so that our children have some point of reference someday.
Me too... been buying a lot of eBay used books to store away.
Before I got banned on Twitter for maliciously spreading facts, I was warning people that Zero Covid was entry level Net Zero. I warned also that the Covid restrictions on international travel and the destruction of the overseas tourism industry was the government preparing people for a total ban on holiday flights. The nation contented itself with domestic holidays for a while. Now it seems we won't even have that privilege if the Net Zero cultists get their way. Cars will be effectively banned and if you've got a motorhome or caravan and want to go travelling, forget it. The widening of pavements and restrictions on roads, initially supposed to protect us from a virus, but hailed by the transport secretary as a step towards more climate friendly 'sustainable' living spaces, was also an ominous sign. This wasn't mere naked opportunism; it was planned.
Well I'm reading about all this helplessness that we will not accept this which non of us welcome well we can just band together and sa, “NO, we've had enough of your fearmongering and we are taking back control if our lives and we've a LEGAL right to do this.”
So are you all going to sit on yourarses or are you go to start organise your friends and family and neighbourhood and get it there, and keep going out until they're given in???
Thank you for speaking out. 🙏
Oh living hell no. No beef? No flying? We’re being ruled by fools. Such disgust. So we’ll all give up good lives for crappy ones... to save Mother Earth. These the same people who have messed up everything else the last three years? Yeah... no thanks.
I regularly check www.energydashboard.co.uk/live. It concentrates my mind on how our electricity demand and generation sources fluctuate on a daily basis. On 27th March at 19.34, of the 36.75 GW generation, 52.2% was from gas. 6.4% was from wind. Tonight 12th April at 9.00pm of the 34.4 GW generation, 25% is from gas and 40% wind. On both occasions around 11% of electricity was being imported and our nuclear contributed a totally constant 4.8 GW of base load. The idea that we can satisfy an increasing electricity demand by building more wind turbines and solar farms is delusional. Where are the numbers? Staring us in the face and anyone can view them on their phone to escape the net-zero matrix.
Wind and solar generation can save us using gas, rather than provide “despatchable” capacity - yet at the peak of highest gas prices for years it doesn’t even save us money as they pay wind generators gas prices. Why.??
The fact it was to be the climate scam sledgehammer used to destroy liberty has been obvious for well over a decade.
Covid was not just a trial run for entrenching lockdowns and restrictions into the human psyche, it was also to introduce digital IDs - initially the vaccine passports.
This was to be utilised, in conjunction with CBDC, to 'track' our individual carbon footprint. The Government having the power to 'switch our ability to live' off at any time. Complete tyranny.
Depopulation would be very simple from then onwards. Every human necessity can be tightly restricted digitally - employment, food, shelter, travel, energy, health treatment...
And, what pitiful claim can any of us make, that 'we need something to save ourselves'. What do we matter, when the collective objective is 'to save the entire planet'.
Will every company be it food processing, financial, pharma, clothing manufacturer, car maker, etc etc simply fold? Without a fight? Sorry none of this makes sense. The only way the rich stay rich are by the rest of us working, growing food, producing all the things necessary to live.
"The only way the rich stay rich are by the rest of us working, growing food, producing all the things necessary to live."
Wealth is but a tool to achieve power, control and ownership. The super wealthy are making their last moves to gain all the wealth, to own everything, and we, will 'own nothing and be happy'.
Necessity to this global elites is not what we need to live, it is what they need to live. They are certain they don't need 8 billion of us for them to live best.
And, the 'fight' you are anticipating from the corporate sector. What sort of a fight have you seen from the fossil fuel giants? What fight did you observe from the airlines, or, the hotel chains duringbthe global Covid lockdowns? Somber acquiescence.
Elites now own so much, and have the ability to have what ever they desire. They don't care whether you or I can get a 5 series BMW, or fly to Switzerland. They can, and they will continue to do so, without so many of us 'polluting' the planet.
Imagine they really go through with all of that, and a hundred years from now the people will realize that none of it had the slightest impact on Climate Change™ (whatever that is), but the establishment will still be engaged in the same gaslighting because Climate Change™ would had been so much worse without this glorious Net Zero agenda.
It seems that a global authority needs to demand similar efforts from all nations otherwise the nations that pay the price to save the climate will be severely handicapped in the competition between nations. There is no global authority currently, so I don't think this can work.
It would be different if the motivation was selfish such as energy independence. I don't see how Western nations can save the climate when non-Western nations may not see the same urgency.
Where is any evidence that these policies will “save the climate” ? If that even means anything at all.
Yes, my point is that even assuming the climate needs to be saved and these policies will save the climate, it still must be a global effort. If the UK achieves its goal independently then it will only enable other nations to applaud the UK and do nothing themselves. The policies are so draconian and economically harmful that I don't see why nations would voluntarily follow them.
Is there some global authority with the teeth to force these policies on all nations?
Do these policies have some secret selfish national goal while pretending to be altruistic?
Bob L. You seemed to have missed the elephant in the room - there is no climate crisis, it was concocted to control humanity.
The 'global authority with the teeth to force these policies on all nations', was, and remains the objective. CAGW is the fraud deployed to justify and facilitate achievement of this predetermined objective.
Let’s not assume anything without some pretty good evidence. Presumably the proponents of the policies can prove they are gonna achieve... er what exactly?
If it's any consolation to the media's late discovery of your work, I discovered you early on in the pandemic :)
Hi, Prof Fenton. I covered this and other material from National Grid ESO on energy use and the CCC and what they have in store for us:
46-60% less energy per person
35-50% less meat
20-25% less agricultural land
Reduced car miles
Expensive foreign travel
Colder, more expensive homes.
Overall, it’s a misanthropic, Malthusian manifesto with no electoral legitimacy. Check out the article here:
https://open.substack.com/pub/davidturver/p/what-will-net-zero-ever-do-for-us?r=nhgn1&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
I will let the experts who work on FIRES speak for themselves. I've no doubt Prof. Fenton's an expert in his field. I'm also sure he knows as well as I do that Fox is hardly a credible platform on climate change. You're right about the lack of high profile public dialogue between experts from different relevant fields. The FIRES project is surely a serious attempt to address that.
The UK is a major source of global finance and insurance for the activities that cause rising emissions. The UK is firmly wedded to GDP growth in a world of falling energy returns on energy invested, an unsustainable proposition whose consequences are not experienced equally in the short to medium term at least. Given the top 10% of global income earners, that's everyone earning more than around US$50,000 a year, contribute about 50% of global emissions/year, and only 20% of humans have ever flown, fanning a hysterical reaction to the FIRES reductions strikes me as dishonest and pernicious. It privileges the perspective of the minority who would suffer a lifestyle contraction and who refuse to see, or take any responsibility for, the horrors happening elsewhere that will also affect the UK, though obviously not all Brits equally. Last year in the space of 3 months, Pakistan went from experiencing heat waves so intense that birds fell from the sky and children asked where the monsters were, to floods that displaced 33 million people, in part due to climate-fuelled intense rains and glaciers melting. The scale of damage, of impoverishment, is already huge but let's not pretend that greed and selfishness aren't embedded in refusing to contemplate change to the status quo.
I’m not sure the FIRES project is a serious attempt at dialogue. A serious dialogue would include the views of Professor David McKay (deceased), Professor Simon Michaux, Professor Kelly and others. I don’t see that in the professional sphere which is an indictment of the way modern politics operates.
Neither do I see that impoverishing the developed west will have any material, or beneficial impact on the developing world. The developing world will only secure a future through the use of energy dense hydrocarbons. Any attempts the west makes towards net-zero will be swamped by the increased emissions of the developing world. As for falling EROI and EROEI, then the rush to ‘renewable energy’ sources will be like falling off a cliff.
I would be very wary of attribution studies that suggest severe and critical weather events in Pakistan in 2022 were the result of climate change. It is statistically inevitable, even under a static climate that records will be set somewhere most every year. Much better that we build resilience as has been having throughout the entirety of the 20th century. Loss of life due to natural disasters, including climate, have decreased by a factor of 10 over the past century. This resilience has only come about through the widespread availability of dispatchable, energy dense fossil fuels.
Neil Lock has done the donkey work on the alleged 'climate emergency' in the UK and summarized the outrageous events over the last 4 years particularly. It is a very revealing summary and it puts into context the Absolute Zero report published in November 2019, which coincidentally happens to be the month when Covid cases first emerged in Wuhan. 2019 in the UK was, as he points out, a 'year of madness' in the UK re. the Net Zero Green agenda. He sums up as follows:
"In the last four years alone, the UK government has been, again and again, tyrannical and dishonest on the “climate change” issue towards the people it is supposed to serve.
It has fraternized with extremists like Extinction Rebellion. It has declared a “climate emergency,” without any hard evidence of such an emergency, and without the parliament even taking a vote. It has mandated emissions reductions that, if informed in advance of their likely consequences, we would have rebelled against. It has moved the emissions goalposts, always in the direction of greater reductions. It has erected a supposedly democratic “assembly,” and made it nothing more than a rubber stamp for a pre-determined agenda. It is seeking to make it all but impossible for those, who cannot afford to buy electric cars, to retain their personal mobility.
It has laid down, and is implementing, policies which go very seriously against the interests of the people it is supposed to be serving. The effects will be disruptive, and will severely and negatively impact our freedoms and our prosperity. And it is doing these things to us without proper feasibility study, or proper analysis of the costs and benefits or of the risks.
On the occasions where it has allowed us an apparent say in the matter, it has ignored our views. It has conspired – yes, I do mean that word – with international parties to develop and promote an agenda hostile to us, the human beings it is supposed to serve; something that no democracy should ever do. It has encouraged extremists to force that agenda on to us at the local level as well as the national. It is indoctrinating young children with lies and scares. And in all these things, it has behaved with arrogance, dishonesty and hypocrisy.
We, the people, want all this climate crap stopped. Now. And we want our money back!"
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/04/12/climate-crisis-what-climate-crisis-part-two-where-we-are-in-the-uk-today/
The Covid and climate 'crises', in the UK especially, are inextricably entwined. We've been had, done up like kippers, as they say.
Hi Jaime, Well done for diving so deep into all of this. As you know, I have also concluded that the Net Zero and Covid agendas are both ulterior pretexts, nothing to do with climate or public health respectively. They are simply tools of oppression to cow us, to demoralise us and to digitally shackle us as detailed in my recent post https://thewhiterose.uk/the-undemocratic-tyranny-of-modern-government/ and its linked prior post specifically on Net Zero.
The ONLY 'net zero' we need is is these controlling totalitarian liars to be GONE!!
No more! ..out of here!!!
nada nada!! hung and strung!! burned at the stake!!..
In Chicago. Not one person I know here ever heard of net zero. The millions working everyday are earning salaries and raising families. Ohare airport is spending 2billion dollars on a modernisation project of their international terminal. Does not look like Chicago got the memo about curtailing air travel. Somehow either the British politicians are all truly bent, or somebody has this all terribly wrong in the U.K.
People will finally see the reality when the boot is on their head. Too late.
40,000 human or 400,000 humans left alive on the planet, depending on whose point of view you read and most of those won't be useless eaters or human garbage, but the wealthy and elite, like Rothschild for example - do you think they have it right, or will they have exterminated humanity from this planet - I don't see any of the wealthy or elite doing the manual jobs the human garbage did, computers and automation aside, when they break down or stop working, do you?