Bishop Hill Green Deal claptrap
Jul 25, 2015 Energy: other Politicians Yesterday the government announced it was to scrap funding for the Green Deal, spelling the end for its flagship energy household efficiency programme. Richard Howard is head of centre-right think tank Energy and Environment, Policy Exchange. Ed Davey is former Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change.
An extraordinary interview on energy policy took place at 7.50 am on BBC Radio 4 Today programme, with John Humphreys soliciting the opinions on the scrapping of the Green Deal from the two below. [Funny that a spokesman on energy policy from this think tank is OK, while Lord Lawson from the GWPF (the clue is in the name) is persona non grata. ]
After the usual introduction, (there is a scientific consensus, we are all doomed by dangerous climate change unless we act) from JH, there followed a barmy mixture of a reasonable helping of financial common sense from Richard Howard, tempered by the obligatory "renewables are a jolly good thing". He did say that the Government are "looking at the removal of subsidies" in the Green Deal rather than definitely "removing them". Amber Rudd's speech should clarify this, if anyone has read it carefully.
Ed Davey (Ed Davey!!) held forth with his usual breakneck-speed delivery of illogical claptrap, including the statement that renewables were a huge success under the coalition government. Apparently as electricity prices were forecast to be much higher but had dropped, this meant that the green subsidies cost less than they would have done otherwise. which made them really, really good value.
There are more comments on this on Unthreaded from BH readers quicker off the mark than me.
TM
Reader Comments (11)
I woke up to this!!! AArrrrrgghhhh! Hearing Davey's voice nearly tipped me over the edge of reason. He had the gall to claim that subsidised wind/solar was now getting so much cheaper because gas and oil prices were dropping - and the alternative, new gas-fired power - would be extremely expensive because it too was subsidised(!!!) Of course, John Humphries (long past his best before date) didn't challenge him at all as to what he meant by 'subsidy'.
I thought Davey had been voted into oblivion. "Who will rid us of this turbulent twat?" to misquote someone.
The BBC still has a gagging order on free speech when it comes to common sense.
Even terrorist representatives have more right to respond than CO2.
The War on Terror costs less than the global war on CO2.
The War on CO2 costs more innocent lives
The BBC does not understand why it has lost credibility.
It is a tragic reflection on the BBC, that their News Editorial Team still believe that Ed Davey has any credibility.
Or was it simply that the BBC could not find anyone else, to lecture listeners on why the BBC is right in its doomed stance, on failed science?
I thought Richard Howard was weak, and somebody like Professor Dieter Helm would have been more appropriate.
The subject was supposed to be the Green Deal though, that's what RH was there to discuss, and Humphrys allowed Davey to ramble off topic.
rfs, Davey 'rambling off topic', demonstrates how a politician plays to his/her strengths,
And Ed D still thinks that if we only had more wind'n'solar, there would be no shortage of electricity! The tragedy is that Humphrys didn't (or couldn't) ask what happens when they are both absent. The BBC does remember the election result, I suppose?
Waking up to the idiot Davey was not a good start to the weekend...
Note to Ed Davey:
Viscount Ridley 22.7.2015
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/ldhansrd/text/150722-0001.htm#15072240000320
Messenger, Davey doesn't do evidence that disagree with him. He has a touch of Huhne about him.
golf charlie, And the quicker someone throws Davey in prison the safer we'll all feel.
Here's the transcript:
https://sites.google.com/site/mytranscriptbox/2015/20150725_r4