Green Energy Costs to Double, Committee on Climate Change Reveals

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

image

http://www.thegwpf.com/green-energy-costs-to-double-committee-on-climate-change-reveals/

From GWPF:

They announced, just as five of the big six energy providers raised prices by between 7-10%, that ‘Britain’s low carbon energy revolution is actually saving money for households’. Nothing could be further from the truth. Tucked away at the bottom of a technical annex was a shocking revelation; households would be paying almost twice as much for climate policies than the CCC had estimated in their previous report on energy bills.

The Annex of the report includes an estimate of £235 for the cost of low-carbon policies on household energy bills in 2030, a cost that the CCC claimed in 2015 would only be £125 (p. 21).

View original post 474 more words

Advertisements

How Green Hypocrites Use Energy Illiteracy to Pray on the Gullible and Naive

STOP THESE THINGS

dunce

In Australia, at least, education has been reduced to helping our little darlings understand why they feel the way they do.

The hard graft of maths and science has given way to gender theory. Little wonder that the current generation have no idea how energy is produced, how much is consumed and who or what consumes it: let’s call it ‘energy illiteracy’.

But it’s not just the young that suffer from a lack of even a basic understanding of how power is produced.

With a few exceptions, politicians of every hue in this country exhibit their ignorance of the operation of electricity grids and power markets every time they open their mouths.

The result is one class of fools leading another; the blind leading the naked.

The intellectual vacuum thus created has allowed the wind cult to fill the void with lies and myths. Start with the language. Electricity generated…

View original post 1,129 more words

John Cleese on offense and “political correctness”

Why Evolution Is True

John Cleese has made a career out of offending people, for that’s the thrust of much of his comedy, especially with Monty Python. In this short Big Think video, he sounds off on the hyper-offensiveness plaguing today’s society (he singles out college students), showing that it’s a warped extension of a laudable concern for the dispossessed. (By the way, I don’t agree that all humor is critical, and I’ve put a joke at the bottom* that is completely inoffensive.)

The money quote: “If people can’t control their own emotions then they have to start trying to control other people’s behavior.” We’ve seen this going around the internet quite a bit in the last year, when it’s been deemed okay to mock some viewpoints while others are totally off limits, branding those transgressing those boundaries as ideologically polluted.

h/t: Cindy
_________

*Here’s a joke that doesn’t offend anyone (except perhaps invertebrates):

One day a…

View original post 114 more words

Jobs are not Scarce

azmytheconomics

The buzzword in politics these days is “jobs”. It seems all anyone can seem to talk about is how to increase the number of jobs available. The underlying theory seems to be if we don’t pass enough laws, all the jobs will disappear and everyone will sit around unemployed. While this is a common paradigm, it is a rather strange way to look at an economy.

The purpose of an economy is to satisfy as many wants and needs of human beings as possible. All the natural resources of the world have been sitting around since the dawn of time, but the process of arranging them takes work. The whole point of technological progress is making more of the stuff people want with fewer resources. Popular rhetoric would have you believe that the best system is one where the most labor is used to produce the fewest goods. Ideally…

View original post 514 more words

Going for Growth 2017: Policies for growth to benefit all

OECD ECOSCOPE

by Alain De Serres and Nicolas Ruiz, Structural Surveillance Division, OECD Economics Department

The support for governments’ pro-growth structural reform agenda is being undermined by the prolonged period of stagnating living standards that has affected a large share of the population in many countries.  Growing political headwinds are clearly one factor contributing to the steady slowdown in the pace of reforms observed since the immediate post-crisis years, (see first chart). Yet, the reforms are needed, both to escape the low-growth trap and to prepare for rapid technological changes.

GfG the pace of reforms

The annual Going for Growth report just released by the OECD helps government to pursue an ambitious reform agenda, one that seeks to make the most of the potential synergies between product, labour and financial market reforms. It proposes country-specific policy packages to boost productivity and employment, and to ensure that the gains reach a vast majority of workers and households. The…

View original post 510 more words

is ethnography the most policy-relevant sociology?

orgtheory.net

The New York Times – the Upshot, no less – is feeling the love for sociology today. Which is great. Neil Irwin suggests that sociologists have a lot to say about the current state of affairs in the U.S., and perhaps might merit a little more attention relative to you-know-who.

Irwin emphasizes sociologists’ understanding “how tied up work is with a sense of purpose and identity,” quotes Michèle Lamont and Herb Gans, and mentions the work of Ofer Sharone, Jennifer Silva, and Matt Desmond.

Which all reinforces something I’ve been thinking about for a while—that ethnography, that often-maligned, inadequately scientific method—is the sociology most likely to break through to policymakers and the larger public. Besides Evicted, what other sociologists have made it into the consciousness of policy types in the last couple of years? Of the four who immediately pop to mind—Kathy Edin, Alice Goffman…

View original post 396 more words

Alan Carlin: A particularly troublesome aspect of climate alarmism

Tallbloke's Talkshop

Had enough of climate propaganda?
Last week EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt stated that: “I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do, and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see.”

I can only applaud Pruitt’s thoughtful comments, writes Alan Carlin.

But in fact there is not just uncertainty as Pruitt said, but actual evidence that there are no significant effects of rising human-caused emissions or atmospheric CO2 levels on global temperatures.

View original post 278 more words