Why Do Green Environmentalists Oppose Everything

The only fairytale is that CO2 is the main driver of climate, not the sun

Dash for Gas angers campaigners” trumpets the Guardian with the usual righteous indignation because the Green environmental movement is upset.

The Greens naturally oppose anything that is not heavily subsidised politically correct Green renewable energy, never a movement to be confused with real facts, they are programmed to automatically oppose any form of affordable reliable energy.

The extravagant and erroneous statements they make about solar power for example: “There are enough roof tops in Britain for the country to provide its energy needs“; doubtless there is sufficient roof space for this Green wet dream, the problem is that the most significant part of this equation, the big orange ball in the sky does not always shine and is conspicuous by its absence at night.

The same goes for wind farms, which despite getting billions in Green subsidies fail to generate more than 3.3% of Britain’s electricity needs and suffer from the problems of no wind, too much wind and not very often being able to generate sufficient power at times of peak demand.

Both wind and solar both require fossil fuel power stations being instantly able to meet demand when the renewables consistently fail to do so.

Shale gas terrifies the very small a vocal minority that want to green Britain, in the US shale has both drastically lowered the cost of energy and largely killed off wind and solar power,  the ending of 20 years of Green subsidy for wind will be the final nail in that coffin.

The chancellor, George Osborne, and the energy secretary, Ed Davey, announced plans to clear the way for a new generation of gas-fired power stations across the UK. They said this would not hamper the fight against climate change.

Green groups, however, fear that supporting an expansion of fossil fuel would put carbon-cutting targets at risk and lead to higher energy prices. They argue that this, in turn, would push thousands more people into fuel poverty. Most of the recent rises in electricity prices have been down to the soaring wholesale cost of gas, according to the government’s own analysis.

The governments own analysis was Chris Huhne lying about the cost of renewables that were hidden in the appendices of a DECC report, post Huhne the truth is out, DECC now admits that Green susbidy adds 15% to British energy bills.

Paul Steedman, energy campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said: “The big six and other energy companies are planning to keep us hooked on dirty and expensive gas we don’t need. Gas dependency is a costly, polluting dead-end – to guarantee affordable energy in the long run we must switch to clean British power and slash energy waste.

“People in the UK are fed up of the energy rip-off – an overwhelming majority want the government to force the big energy firms to invest in power from our wind, waves and sun.”

Shale gas is 50% cleaner in CO2 emissions than existing gas fired stations, if that matters to you, it  is cheap, affordable and does not require huge Green subsidies to make it economically viable.

Fracking has been declared safe in country after country, even the CO2 obsessed EU has declared that fracking does not require more regulation.

There is no majority in favour of wind, solar and the new  scam,  tidal power, people want cheap affordable energy that creates jobs and wealth, just like fracking has done in the US.

The Greens want more unreliable heavily subsidised renewable energy that will push up energy bills, because as more wind and tidal turbines deploy so the Green subsidy bill will continue ever upward, paid for by ever increasing energy bills. They will naturally keep quiet about all the fossil fuel power stations kept running as back up for their sacred renewables.

If the Green ecomentalists are upset then this is a good thing for the people of Britain, for that means affordable energy, jobs and prosperity are on the way, and the Green dream of the drudge and misery of the Agrarian society is receding into the far distance.

About Tory Aardvark

Climate Realist, Conservative and proud NRA member. I don't buy into the Man Made Global Warming Scam, science is never settled. http://toryaardvark.com @ToryAardvark on Twitter ToryAardvark on Facebook

Posted on March 17, 2012, in Anthropogenic Global Warming, Church Of Climatology, Climate Change, Global Warming, Green Environmental Holocaust, Green Jobs Lie, Green Lies, Green Taxation, Junk Science, Renewables and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. 9 Comments.

  1. “Shale gas is 50% cleaner in CO2 emissions than existing gas fired stations”

    Not entirely true – it’s exactly the same (methane) as existing gas. I think you’ll find the 50% figure comes from comparing modern combined cycle gas generating plants with coal fired equivalents. Coal produces much more CO2 for the same amount of energy, and replacing it with gas would enable us to meet the utterly pointless 2020 commitment without spending another penny on bird choppers or PV panels.

    Otherwise I completely agree with the article.

  2. Wind energy is subsidized 50 million dollars a year in the US — that compares to 10 billion dollars of fossil fuel subsidies or roughly 36 hours of fossil fuel subsidy. Imagine how much further clean energy would be advanced if we had just 10% of what the fossil fuel cartel gets?

  3. It doesn’t matter how much more efficient wind or solar become, the sun still won’t shine at night, and the wind still won’t blow at a steady 40mph all year round. A “Supergrid” has been proposed by the Desertec project to try and get round this. However attempting to transfer Terrawatts of electrical power over thousands of miles would incur losses far exceeding that of transporting fossil fuels to where they are needed. This crazy scheme is now even less realistic considering the latest political upheavals in North Africa, and the huge shale gas reserves recently discovered closer to home).

    Contrary to popular belief, there are many periods when the entire country (and much of neighbouring Europe) is under the influence of a high pressure zone, which can last for days or weeks. This can happen at any time of year, not just during winter when demand is greatest. There is absolutely no realistic prospect of storing the amount of energy required to cover these periods.

    Every modern, developed, economy is based around reliable supplies of power provided by controllable grid connected sources. Any engineer with practical experience of operating such systems will tell you the more solar & wind you connect to a grid (particularly at its extremities) the more unstable it becomes. This has already been proven in countries with longer experience than the UK.

    Wind and/or solar can be very useful to people living in isolated places, but they will invariably have a large battery packs & conventional diesel/petrol/gas powered generation to cover periods when nature doesn’t play ball. I’m sorry, but unless you’re happy to go back to living as people did 200 years ago, don’t keep bleating that subsidies are unfair.

  4. There is no doubt that a complicated mix of renewable power sources — wind, solar thermal, solar pv, geo-thermal, tidal and heat exchangers — will need to be properly co-ordinated to power future societies. The holy grail, of course, is the improved battery which allows for storage and transmission of power created by these fluctuating power sources at the times needed. A smart grid that incorporates the millions of electric vehicles that will be in our garages in 15 to 20 years will also be helpful. Couple all this with improved energy efficiency (it is estimated that 35% of all electricity is simply wasted) and you can reduce fossil fuel reduction by 60% or more within 30 years (developed counties). Perhaps, in 50 years, fossil fuel electricity will be a minor part of society’s energy use.

    • Coolwhip still being coolwhip I see! Coolwhip must have a vested intress in the green thinggy that coolwhip wants everyone to pay into.

  5. Something to give the Green anti-frakking mob nightmares.
    Using liquified butane, propane or even natural gas, mixed with an inert sand or silica particles as a proppant, that is used for fracturing of shale or coal, for natural gas.
    No “poisonous chemicals”, no use of thousands of litres of water, no leaching out of salts into the water table or to the surface. Reduced requirement for flaring. No dams for water storage to leak away.
    Gas is recoverable, for re-use or sale.
    Process was developed and patented by Gasfrac in Canada. Has been proven by over a thousand wells. Google Gasfrac.
    The next alarmist whinge – ” but that will cause earthquakes” –

  6. “Will need to be properly co-ordinated to power future societies”

    Oh, you mean “One World Government”? That’s what is really behind the AGW scare story…

    “The holy grail, of course, is the improved battery”

    Good luck with that one, the best currently available batteries have about 1% the energy density of a gallon of petrol.
    And don’t try and promote hydrogen and fuel cells – that has been “almost ready for production” for at least 20 years. It also uses huge amounts of energy in the production, storage and use of hydrogen to start with. See below.

    “A smart grid that incorporates the millions of electric vehicles that will be in our garages in 15 to 20 years will also be helpful”

    Not in my garage, there won’t… There will be lots of people walking to work in winter, when “renewable” sources don’t work for days or weeks on end. The “Smart” grid is another example of centralised control. No wind or sun? – sorry you’ll either have to freeze, or be able to drive your battery car – possibly neither. See what I mean about turning the clock back 200 years?

    “It is estimated that 35% of all electricity is simply wasted”

    And the further from population centres you have generating capacity (e.g. offshore wind) the worse this gets. Don’t forget every time you convert energy from one form to another there are consequent losses. The cumulative effects mean your favoured electric cars are actually less efficient than conventional ones, particularly given the dramatic advances made with petrol/diesel engines over the last few years.

    “And you can reduce fossil fuel reduction (do you mean use?) by 60% or more within 30 years (developed counties)”

    By effectively shutting down our economies, maybe… Meanwhile China is busily constructing new coal and gas fired power stations on a weekly basis. Did you know they recently signed a 25 year contract to buy coal from Australia? The country that has just introduced a carbon trading system, and will slowly commit economic suicide as a result.

    The brave new world awaits…

  7. The next alarmist whinge – ” but that will cause earthquakes”

    And I suppose they think CO2 capture & storage won’t? Not that anybody has successfully made it work on a practical scale!

    And don’t forget that conventional coal mining has been causing small tremors for some 200 years. Have they been moaning about that?

    Wholesale gas prices in the US are now a fraction of what we are paying, thanks to fracking for shale deposits. How much longer are we going to be ripped off?

    • Studies indicate that fracking causes earthquakes of between 1.1 – 2.3 on the Richter scale, which without a seismograph you wont detect.

      For hundreds of years mining has caused low end earthquakes, and yes the CCS white elephant will cause the same level of earthquakes as fracking, but as fracking is not politically correct……..

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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

%d bloggers like this: