This video was posted to YouTube yesterday afternoon, but I was so involved in what I was doing I forgot to share it here. So apologies for the double dose of videos this morning.
Nigel Farage says there's no climate crisis. Reform UK wants to scrap net zero, block green investment, and drive up your energy bills. The truth is simple: renewables mean lower costs, more jobs, and a liveable planet. Reform means climate chaos.
This is the transcript:
Why would anyone vote for Reform? After all, Nigel Farage denies that there's a climate crisis, but all the evidence - and it is now overwhelming, and science proves it - suggests that we are living in and are going to suffer living through a climate crisis, the consequences of which are enormous.
Despite that, Nigel Farage opposes green investment. He's completely rejecting investment, in particular, in the cheapest forms of energy that we have, which are solar and wind, which, like Donald Trump, he says, are a con trick.
He even wants to scrap net-zero because he says we can't afford it. But the truth is that without net zero, there may be no life for us human beings here on earth. As a consequence, he wants to abandon the hopes of all young people.
The reality is that climate change is real and urgent.
Energy bills will fall faster with more green power.
And jobs in this country will not come from oil, but they will most definitely come from renewables and fitting them into every property in the UK.
Reform is blocking the future that we need, the jobs that we need, the lower energy prices that we need, and the sustainability that we need.
It wants you to have higher energy bills than are necessary.
It wants to destroy the green jobs that might offer you or your children the opportunities that they desire.
It wants to prevent investment in green industries in the UK.
And as a result, it wants Britain to be left behind in the global race to tackle climate change.
And all the time, the planet will be pushed closer to crisis.
Nigel Farage is offering a dead end when it comes to climate change. Reform means higher costs and climate chaos.
Why would you vote to destroy your children's future? That is what you would be doing if you vote for Reform, and Nigel Farage.
Why would you want to back climate denial when it is so obviously real?
Please think hard about this. Our future matters. Your children's future matters. Please don't vote for Nigel Farage.
He doesn't care about you, or your children, or the future of this planet. He only cares about himself, and that's not a basis for voting for him
Poll
Loading ...Previous posts in this series
This may also be of interest:
Taking further action
If you want to write a letter to your MP on the issues raised in this blog post, there is a ChatGPT prompt to assist you in doing so, with full instructions, here.
One word of warning, though: please ensure you have the correct MP. ChatGPT can get it wrong.
Comments
When commenting, please take note of this blog's comment policy, which is available here. Contravening this policy will result in comments being deleted before or after initial publication at the editor's sole discretion and without explanation being required or offered.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
One thing my late Uncle, Air Commodore RAF Retd & I could agree on was that renewables and energy efficiency made strategic sense because it was domestically produced not imported with all the risks that brings
So what does Farage say to that?
He says whatever the person handing him his brown envelope tells him to say.
Probably cosy up to the USA and back its efforts to occupy and exploit all oil and gas reserves wherever they exist.
I note in the Guardian this morning and article about how biomethane will not be possible to transition away from gas in households.
What’s interesting is how the article mentions the intense lobbying by the oil and gas industry to accept this as the “solution” instead of heat pumps.
Hydrogen also has problems according to the article. I am aware that hydrogen production can be quite dirty.
Ultimately it comes down to profit. The oil and gas industry don’t want to rip out the existing infrastructure as it will cost them money. Won’t someone think of the billionaires?…
I remember listening to this podcast which provides some useful insight into the limitations of hydrogen: https://www.thegreatsimplification.com/episode/63-paul-martin which means it’s not a straightforward plug and play. Three big factors leaped out at me:
1. Hydrogen is incredibly flammable, moreso than fossil hydrocarbons, so there would need to be different systems to mitigate this.
2. Hydrogen molecules are smaller than many others, hence they leak through normal pipes easily as they can pass through metal, plastic, etc. This increases the risk of 1, and the below.
3. Hydrogen is a long lasting and potent greenhouse has as it damages the ability of the upper atmosphere to dissipate other greenhouses gases, so it’s a worse greenhouse gas than co2.
More generally, there are significant downsides with renewables, as with fossil fuels, and in general they don’t seem to be a plug and play either. Firstly, they are a flow of energy rather than a stable stock of energy, meaning you likely need storage which is (as I understand) not generally factored into the cited costs of renewable energy. The storage presents increasing difficulty depending on the amount of stored energy required (and has its own challenges). Secondly, electricity is allegedly 20% of energy, so the rest is not necessarily covered by renewable energy. Additionally, mining the materials for, and manufacturing, renewable energy generators currently depends upon fossil hydrocarbons, and generate their own environmental impacts.
In short, there’s an easy answer to stop fossil fuels and use renewables, but the practicalities and physical realities are much harder. Not that it doesn’t need to be done – and a conversation on how to make the immense change to reducing energy and particularly fossil is long overdue, but I think the answer will necessarily involve being satisfied with less energy (and this means less GDP).
Reform hold the mayoral position and the county council of Lincolnshire, a county that is vital to British food production and at serious risk from climate change. Be assured, they will do everything they can to hold back efforts to mitigate risk. They are more interested in fracking than food production, and in stopping solar farms than shoring up flood defence. In their hands the future looks, well, I can’t see the future from here because of all the smoke.
The critical factor regarding Fagage’s insane rejection of the overwhelming evidence of climate breakdown is whether the mass media mainly billionaire controlled will go along with this. Also whether the BBC will downplay this nonsense so the general public remains unaware of the climate crisis.
A decent discussion on the transition economics (exponential curve, primary energy fallacy,…) from Michael Lebreicht (ex Bloomberg NEF) podcast CleaningUp
– Audioblog 15: The Pragmatic Climate Reset Part 1 — The Energy Transition Is Not Dead
https://www.cleaningup.live/audioblog-15-the-pragmatic-climate-reset-part-1-the-energy-transition-is-not-dead/
– Audioblog 16: The Pragmatic Climate Reset, Part II — A Provocation
https://www.cleaningup.live/audioblog-16-the-pragmatic-climate-reset-part-ii-a-provocation/
Thanks
We’ve got abundant wind resources. And yet turbines get turned off to balance the load? Why not channel all that energy into green hydrogen production rather than turn the turbines off, then repurpose gas fired power stations to burn hydrogen to produce green energy when the wind isn’t blowing with zero emissions? Or is that too simplistic?
Good points. Most of the turn-off occurs in Scotland due to the Scotland-England elec interface & lack of elec capacity. Where capacity is not lacking is in the area of gas – high pressure pipelines from north of Scotland (Peterhead?) to England. Produce H2 in soctland (no shortage of water) inject into the existing gas system and abstract (possible) further down the track or just – repurpose one of the pipelines (there are +/- 4 of them). All doable right now – gov could fund but there is no money in the bank according to Rache-the-imbecile (but there is for ID cards).
Thanks
I think we should put some separation between the analysis of the data framing the problems and the variety of solutions put forward to try to deal with it. Farage is very adept at using the detail that often broad brush explanations cover over to criticise and minimise efforts to move away from burning FF as a whole. The element of truth is crucial in hooking in his followers.
Net Zero is such an example. It is an almost impossible target without large reductions in production of some goods and the growth of ‘green’ businesses will never replace in financial terms what FF dependent businesses can currently earn. As a result, governments have used the off-shoring of production or simply relying on importing of goods to make their progress to net zero seem a realistic target. Farage can genuinely point to the reduced production and therefore jobs and link this to the still expensive products that green growth produces and are out of reach of many of his supporters.
The government is involved in a cover up and can’t therefore devise an effective strategy that is clear about the problem and addresses the wealth disparity that is fuelling a lot of the climate scepticism. There is more to this of course but this is an important element.
What is the problem witb consuming less and living more?
With fewer rent extractions from us all that would be possible
You are looking in the wrong place for problems.
Excellent. I just wish certain politicians would call Farage and Reform out like this.
It’s a no-brainer, really.
Fight him on the issues he’s weak on, and expose the fact of the danger he represents to future generations. The, “think about your children (and grandchildren)” is a very powerful message to use against climate deniers. This is far more important to their future than stopping the boats.
He’s the MP for Clacton (apparently).
Climate Denier Nigel Farage Standing in Seat at Risk of Sea Level Rises and Flooding
https://www.desmog.com/2024/06/04/climate-denier-nigel-farage-standing-seat-clacton-risk-sea-level-rises-flooding-global-warming/
The same is true of Richard “build a big wall to stop the sea” Tice in Skegness.
Farage and Tice, the King Canute’s of British politics.
🙂