The last “Green Nail in Britain’s coffin”!

Posted: February 26, 2013 in Uncategorized

Suicide by Government?…………………….Disaster with no end in sight?……………………. Euro’s dreams of Britain’s nightmares?

O.K………..that’s enough!

All of the above applies to Britain and it’s ultimate DEMISE! Once a great Industrial Nation, Britain is being now reduced to a cave dwelling, cold damp mere shadow of it’s former self by a Green Government hell bent on bringing Britain’s citizens to their virtual knees!

Not bad enough that Britain tolerates on average a whopping 24,000 deaths a year of low and fixed income people because they can’t heat their homes properly but now they have enacted a Carbon Agenda which will basically force electricity consumers to face “either food or warmth” because electricity will be too costly with the exception of the bankers, politicians and elites who wear the green flag of “eco-whackos” we have all come to know and despise!

Following suit is of course our own Government here in Ontario along with many other despotic locations around the world?

Why would these people do this to their own citizens?

That question is not too hard to answer: Read Agenda 21

This foul declaration from the world’s elitists basically spells out the end of the Industrial World with no hope for return. Imagine that World War 11 was fought and ended by the defeat of a large group of mad men who should have all been eliminated from society………… unfortunately some got away and then refined their domination dreams of the world. Sounds like a good horror movie doesn’t it? Except movies are usually fiction………..this is REAL!

Eco-tastrophe! How MPs in the pay of subsidised eco-firms set insane new carbon targets that send your bills sky-rocketing… and drag us to a new Dark Age

By DAVID ROSE   Daily Mail        24 February 2013

Pay packet: Like all MPs Tim Yeo is paid £65,000 but three ‘green’ companies also paid the Conservative MP for South Suffolk £135,970 in last year alone

Like all MPs, Tim Yeo is paid £65,000 a year. But he never has to make do with just that. Last year alone, three ‘green’ companies paid the Conservative MP for South Suffolk £135,970.

For this, he usually did just a few hours’ work a month. Yet he may be the firms’ most valuable asset, as Mr Yeo is chairman of the Commons Select Committee on Energy and Climate Change, and so plays a key role in shaping the green economy in which his sometime employers – AFC Energy, Eco City Vehicles and TMO Renewables – operate.

And he may be about to perform his most valuable service ye

Mr Yeo has moved an extraordinary amendment to the Energy Bill that would set a crippling and binding target for the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by generating power in 2030. It would transform the electricity industry and bring huge benefits to the business sector, which has so generously rewarded Mr Yeo.

For the rest of us, however, the effects will be very different. It will cause already high energy bills to soar further and could lead to more power cuts. The effect on business is likely to be even more dramatic.

Yet despite the considerable drawbacks, the amendment is likely to be passed into law. Following intense campaigning by an alliance of dozens of green pressure groups and renewable-energy firms, the move has won the support of Labour, many backbench Liberal Democrats and some Tories, which may be enough to push it through Parliament.

‘Even without the amendment, the long-term consequences of the Bill will be horrible,’ said Professor Gordon Hughes of Edinburgh University, one of Britain’s leading experts on energy economics. He issued a strong warning the ‘surreal’ amendment could spell the end of British  industry. ‘It’s a recipe for deindustrialisation,’ he said.

Prof Hughes thinks the choice is stark: ‘Either we get rid of this obsession, or we give away our future to the rest of the world. The question is whether we’re serious about our economic future or not.’

But for supporters of the amendment, cutting Britain’s carbon  dioxide production is more vital.


A: ‘Aggressive’ aims

The Lib Dems love low-carbon energy. This helps explain to why the Bill will double the number of onshore wind farms by 2020, while subsidies for offshore farms will rise 16-fold.

On paper, the amendment looks innocuous: it merely requires the Government to set a target to reduce the carbon dioxide emitted by the power sector by 2030 and to take advice from the Committee on  Climate Change, the official body chaired by Lord Deben, the former Tory Minister John Selwyn Gummer.

But the level repeatedly recommended by that committee is that just 50g of carbon dioxide (CO2) should be emitted per kilowatt hour of electricity generated. The number may be meaningless to the lay person, until you realise that currently that figure is between 450 and 500g, meaning a cut of 90 per cen

Even a member of Lord Deben’s committee, Professor Sam Fankhauser, believes this is an ‘unbelievably aggressive target’. Yet supporters of the amendment, including Labour MP Barry Gardiner, who tabled it with Mr Yeo, claim this will promote growth.

Transform industry: Mr Yeo has moved an extraordinary amendment to the Energy Bill that would set a crippling and binding target for the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by generating power in 2030


A: In the pocket, of course

The Government admits that the Energy Bill, even without the amendment, will add about £100 a year to household bills – on top of the approximately £100 already being paid in subsidies for renewables.

But the real economic cost is likely to be much higher.

First, the Government could be hostage to its own policy. Already the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) is wrangling with French energy giant EDF over two planned nuclear power plants, which emit no carbon. EDF wants the Government to agree to pay £100 per megawatt hour for their output for at least 40 years – well over double the market price – before it will start to build them. If EDF gets its way, this will heap yet further charges on to consumer

Then there are the indirect costs. Steel giant TATA has already said it may pull out of Britain because of high energy prices and other firms seem certain to follow.

There is also a question of the reliability of low-carbon electricity.

Prof Hughes said the amendment would give multinational companies more reason not to invest in British factories as its effects become felt.

‘If you were thinking of building a new car plant, you could get to 2018 or so and find yourself either having your power cut off because of the shortfall in generating capacity, or paying through the nose for your power,’ he said. ‘Firms are not going to run those risks.’

The absence of economic growth caused a downgrading of Britain’s AAA credit rating on Friday and critics of the Bill say that continuing to increase energy prices to levels far higher than our competitors’, while failing to guarantee supplies, is a sure way to prolong the slump indefinitely.


A: Dark Ages, more like

The targets assume that carbon emissions can be slashed through new technology, but this is far from certain. For example, a 2011 report from the committee now chaired by Lord Deben assumes ‘carbon-capture and storage’ – ways to prevent CO2 being emitted from coal-fired power stations – will be a reality by 2030, something many experts doubt.

The report also assumes that fresh nuclear power stations will be coming on stream, although EDF’s new designs, now being tested at sites  in France and Finland, have hit problems which have massively increased their cost.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s