My head hurts reading this. We seemingly have the option of the 'Conservatives not conservatives' in total disarray, rallying against the faintest hint of anything remotely resembling conservative policy coming from within their own party, anything which offers the faint hope of putting Britain back on the road to prosperity and sanity, or we have the prospect of Keith's Labour-lite eco-fascist Green loonies running the country into the ground. Can we presume that this is the one task they will perform competently? Meanwhile we have a disparate array of tiny opposition parties who refuse to unite under one banner to form a genuine and credible opposition to the LibLabConGreens. Depressing is not the word.
Professor Michael Kelly does a terrific analysis of the costs of transition (gwpf.org.uk) and has recently appeared on the Tom Nelson podcast explaining his thinking further. Like you he puts the transition cost into the trillions and also talks about the practicalities of developing the grid (x3) and where on earth all the 1000s of engineers are going to come from to do the work.
If we were to pursue this it would have to be funded by asking our kids and grandchildren to pay for it. And it's worth remembering it took the UK 300yrs to accumulate debt of c£1Trillion. 30yrs to double it and the last 2.5 yrs to add a further 25%. We seem to have lost all concept of understanding debt. The nations children and grandchildren are going to be mightly pissed off when the bill comes in, the climate is the same and India, Russia and China are ignoring CO2 reduction. As a minimum we need to be saying 'shall we get our children and grandchildren to pay for X/Y/Z even though it wont make a blind bit of difference?'
Thank you Ben for your excellent piece. It's no surprise that Starmer's "Green Prosperity Plan" is Boris's (and countless other 'leaders') "Build Back Better" by another name. There is likely one degree of separation between their handlers. The puppetry has become glaringly more obvious with each passing day, each scripted speech.
"The why not… is straightforward enough to anyone with a brain".
Indeed. It is incredible that the entire incumbent political class is so brainless on energy engineering.
My head hurts reading this. We seemingly have the option of the 'Conservatives not conservatives' in total disarray, rallying against the faintest hint of anything remotely resembling conservative policy coming from within their own party, anything which offers the faint hope of putting Britain back on the road to prosperity and sanity, or we have the prospect of Keith's Labour-lite eco-fascist Green loonies running the country into the ground. Can we presume that this is the one task they will perform competently? Meanwhile we have a disparate array of tiny opposition parties who refuse to unite under one banner to form a genuine and credible opposition to the LibLabConGreens. Depressing is not the word.
Professor Michael Kelly does a terrific analysis of the costs of transition (gwpf.org.uk) and has recently appeared on the Tom Nelson podcast explaining his thinking further. Like you he puts the transition cost into the trillions and also talks about the practicalities of developing the grid (x3) and where on earth all the 1000s of engineers are going to come from to do the work.
Quick scaling exercise... 1 million seconds = c11days, 1 trillion seconds = c31,700yrs
If we were to pursue this it would have to be funded by asking our kids and grandchildren to pay for it. And it's worth remembering it took the UK 300yrs to accumulate debt of c£1Trillion. 30yrs to double it and the last 2.5 yrs to add a further 25%. We seem to have lost all concept of understanding debt. The nations children and grandchildren are going to be mightly pissed off when the bill comes in, the climate is the same and India, Russia and China are ignoring CO2 reduction. As a minimum we need to be saying 'shall we get our children and grandchildren to pay for X/Y/Z even though it wont make a blind bit of difference?'
Another great article Ben.
Thank you Ben for your excellent piece. It's no surprise that Starmer's "Green Prosperity Plan" is Boris's (and countless other 'leaders') "Build Back Better" by another name. There is likely one degree of separation between their handlers. The puppetry has become glaringly more obvious with each passing day, each scripted speech.