James Woudhuysen – visiting professor of forecasting and innovation at London South Bank University – returns to Last Orders with Chris Snowdon and Tom Slater. They discuss the Labour government’s disastrous green agenda, the snobbery of the nanny state and the rise of Lucy Letby trutherism.
Send your postbag questions to lastorders@spiked-online.com and we’ll try to answer them in the next episode.
Support spiked:
Sign up to spiked’s newsletters:
Comments
Need to cancel net zero tories have plumage all profits out off that!!! Labour do carbon capture!!? As if particles aren't small enough to come back up and resurface into the atmosphere!? FRESH AIR CHARGE NEXT SCAM
Price Signals are what make the world go round, but not prices enforced by government, only prices set by the to-and-fro of free trade between free traders.
the reason for american politics being opposite of u.k's colors as red for right/conservative/republican and blue for left/liberal/democrats is Tim Russert, the host of Meet the Press [king of sunday morning tv political talk shows since the 50's] chose to apply them in that way for reasons know only to him. the graphics were created and mass media in america are nothing if not 'followers.'
Zero carbon by 2030 is a nonsense. Is he also going to force everyone out of their cars (see road tax per mile etc), and force everyone to get rid of perfectly good gas central heating systems?? To say he would become unpopular rapidly would be understating the case. Add in other potential tax changes to pensions and this Gov could give a run for its money to the record levels of unpopularity achieved by the Tory party, within their first term of office…..
Not sure what someone being found guilty of murdering children has to do with the excesses of the nanny state, which is what I thought that this podcast was meant to focus on. The case of Lucy Letby is becoming something of a hobby horse for Spiked – or more specifically, going to the mat defending her conviction seems to be.
If I had to guess why, I'd say it's because challenging the verdict is effectively questioning the wisdom of the citizenry, i.e. the jury, which goes against Spiked's general ethos that decisions that ordinary people make should be held in the highest of esteem.
I won't get into my general attitude towards the jury system here – the short version is that my faith in it is not overwhelming – but my antenna always goes up when Spiked start referring to anyone with whom they disagree by terms like 'cranks' or 'truthers'. I don't necessarily even think that Spiked are always wrong in that assessment, but it still comes off like one of the same kind of shitty tricks that the mainstream media play whenever they want to discredit anyone with dissenting views, so it's just strange to me that a magazine largely based around the expression of dissenting views is seemingly not beyond playing the same game.
Naive but well-meaning members of the public donate their hard earned cash to charities like Cancer Research thinking they are going to help cure cancer and save lives. In reality all they are doing is paying oversized salaries to the executives and funding lobbying activities and propaganda. It isn't a charity in any sense that the average member of the public would understand.
The commentator is wrong about the land available. He is assuming, incorrectly, that all land is the same. Much of the land that is to be covered with the solar farms is high quality land suitable for high value cropping and should be preserved as such. The largest percentage (70% +) is only suitable for grass production. Cultivating it leads to soil degradation and other unwanted effects.
Saying 90% of grey belt land isn't used is disingenuous as the reason it's not used is that it's unsuitable for many crops and also unsuitable for solar. Every solar farm I've seen in magazines, TV, and the internet are all on quality flat food production land and as for " it's blowing somewhere in the UK is also stupid as you would have to have the UK completely encircled and that doesn't get the power to where it's needed . Labour and Millband will bankrupt the UK, and the only example in the West of what that looks like is Greece, and they had Germany and the EU to limit the very painful process of survival as a country you don't anymore.
Cancer is increasing significantly since 2020. Heart failure is increasing significantly since 2020 (BHF) Record numbers of people are off long term sick (almost twice what it was in 2018). Fertility is crashing (the ONS have stopped publishing miscarriage data – go figure).
Everybody knows why …. Nobody is allowed to say why.
It is imperative to understand the benefit of net zero.
A … UK emissions per year = 400 million tons (gov.uk)
B … CO2 required to increase global temperature by one degree C = 1 million million tons (IPCC)
Divide A by B to get the reduction in global temperature if UK achieved Net Zero.
Answer; 0.0004 degrees Centigrade per year.
That’s four ten-thousandths of one degree C per year.
California is also 0.0004 … Australia 0.0005 degrees C per year.
Why do you believe these figures for backup power for 2030 fullrenewables for elec, which is only 20% of our energy. That means the capacity for renewables will need tobe 40 to 50 Gigawatts when the wind doesn’t blow. That means 50 Gigawatts or 25 twin nuclear powerstations. Or. 50 gas fired power stations. A twin power stns. Like the Hinckley point is 40billio. Each. Winfarms are only 29% efficient anyway so to get us upto50 Gigawatts. Will mean we will need to build an extra 25 Gigawatts times 4 for 25% efficiency.So you have to build 4 to get 1. This is all rediculously expensive and even more so when you factor in containment charges for so much wind power.
Miliband's problem is that his vocal cords are at the base of his spinal column so he is always talking out of his ass.😂
What I find bizarre is that even in the light of a lot of evidence from scientists and quite honestly common sense is that there are functioning adults who believe that CO2 is the control knob for the planet's climate. It is quite clearly ridiculous.
Made me laugh at the end. "Bring back cuffing."
8:10 Chris clearly has nothing tangible or valuable to add … so why is he here? … love-the-sound-of-my-own-voice-prat.
4:53 I wrote this three days ago, it looks like hes of the same perspective.
Prediction: these solar farms turn out to cost more to manage than expected, there are more broken panels, fires, damage, faults etc. they won't produce as much energy as they claim and it will be less reliable than they claim/predict/sell it as. They will find problems when the temperature is over about 38 degrees, they will complain about overheating, and then snow and ice and cloud. As the trains stop because of 'the wrong type of leaves' so will this because of 'the wrong type of weather'.
The eventual lifetime cost per Megawatt Hour will be more than expected and the total carbon lifetime emissions from resources to recycling will be greater per Megawatt Hour than the incoming nuclear power stations.
We will see continuing energy and food cost inflation, growing food insecurity and exposure to geopolitical shocks – densely populated islands can be cut-off from food in the same way as a walled city under siege – that if lucky we will not suffer much from.
Come the winters we will be paying very high cost per Megawatt Hour to import more electricity from France via the super-connectors (big cables) IF they have the spare nuclear power production to sell it that is.
Or we could just build nuclear power stations where we already have power stations and water supply and get on with life. That would be far too simple though…
I beg to differ that we are not importing energy from Russia. We are importing energy from France which itself is importing from Russia. How many other european countries are dependent on energy from Russia? "Can Europe survive without Russian gas?
"By the end of this year, we can replace 100 Bcm of gas imports from Russia — that is two thirds of what we import from them," EC Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans said March 8. "This will end our over-dependency and give us much-needed room for maneuver. It is hard — but it is possible," Timmermans said.23 Feb 2023"
I suggest that three independent reputable statisticians be presented with the the complete data set for analysis regarding correlation.
Man made climate change is utter bollocks. I'm amazed at the way it's been swallowed en masse by the public. Mankind isn't in charge of the Climate, thank God.
Read the Upopular Truth by Dr. Lars Schernikau and Professor William H Smith. Mark Mills also has a good presentation on the raw material needs of renewables. As for CO2 during the Cambrian Explosion Co2 levels are thought to have been above 4000ppm, but I've been told it's the point of no return with anything much beyond 500ppm. If thats true, how are we here?
National Grid are predicting that demand for electricity in the UK will drop significantly, despite the need to electrify all transport and heating (well over half of total UK energy consumption), plus the growth of population AND the increase in big consumers like data centres!
Labour's energy policy is pure 100% fantasy.