During the Tory leadership campaign, Liz Truss realised Net Zero was not popular among party members so she agreed to have a Net Zero Policy Review. Unfortunately, she has appointed Chris Skidmore MP to conduct this review. He is a former Minister for Climate Change and one of the architects of our present Net Zero policy, so the opposite of a fresh pair of eyes. Indeed, on accepting the appointment he tweeted: “I’m committed to ensuring we continue to lead the world in our Net Zero plans.”
I’m delighted to have been invited by the PM to conduct a review into meeting our Net Zero commitments in the most economically-efficient way.
I’m committed to ensuring we continue to lead the world in our Net Zero plans in a way that is pro-business and pro-growth 1/2
— Chris Skidmore (@CSkidmoreUK) September 8, 2022
Not a great start for a review to say you are going to continue the present policy! And this ridiculous talk of “lead the world” needs to be dumped. The U.K. is responsible for an insignificant 1% of global CO2 emissions. Three countries, China and America and India, are responsible for 50% of the global CO2 emissions. What is the point of the U.K. paying the early-adopter cost of rushing to achieve Net Zero when these three countries are all moving so slowly?
This week an event named the Net Zero Festival is taking place in London. According to its website, “The climate crisis presents a real and present danger to global development and stability”. Chris Skidmore is the keynote speaker at the event, so presumably he believes this alarmism and exaggeration. Since the Industrial Revolution, the Earth’s temperature is reported to have risen by just one degree. This is a significant rise and possibly a concern, but it is nowhere near a ‘climate crisis’ and a ‘danger to global stability’.
These claims are based on the wilder predictions of climate models, but there is an increasing public and scientific realisation that these models cannot be trusted. During the pandemic, one of the main reasons the country repeatedly went into lockdowns was because of the frightening predictions of epidemiological models. With hindsight, we now know these predictions were wrong. If scientists cannot predict the spread of a virus several weeks ahead then how can they be trusted to predict the temperature of the Earth several decades ahead? The answer is they can’t and over 1,100 scientists recently signed the World Climate Declaration, which concluded that “climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools”.