There are a few Conservatives that the BBC quite likes and Tim Yeo is one. (Bercow is another). Yeo’s Eco- zealotry is the reason for BBC admiration and he was given a very easy ride on Today this morning (7.13am) as he attacked his own colleagues in the Treasury for not putting further subsidy into green energy.

Tim Yeo, chairman of the energy and climate change select committee, said: “The Treasury has clearly intervened in the draft bill in a way that will put up bills to consumers and put off investors by increasing their risks. “This is exactly the opposite of what the Treasury says it wants,” he told BBC News.

So, Yeo and the gang are trying to get a pre-emptive strike in and place the blame on the Treasury for the consequences of the sheer lunacy of their own eco-cultism. Yeo knows that as consumers see energy prices rising they will look to attribute blame and since the Green movement knows it is bang to rights on this it hopes to shift that blame elsewhere. Roger Harradin joins in the act here. 

Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to BIG GREEN

  1. geyza says:

    There is a new peer reviewed paper out almost every week these days which disputes the cAGW nonsense, so these eco zealots should get up to date with the science.

    There is also a brilliant deconstruction of the “97% of scientists agree” lie here:

    And there has been another dendrochronology based reconstruction paper which refutes Mann’s ‘hockey stick’ described here:

    They should give up. There is nothing unprecedented about the current earth temperature.


  2. DJ says:

    Oh yeah… this Tim Yeo:

    No doubt they were just about to raise it with him when they had to cut to the surfing duck.


  3. johnnythefish says:

    ‘Climate Change’, the religion formerly known as Man Made Global Warming, is a socialist/environmentalist device for creating a new world order – you know, total chaos – and nothing whatsoever to do with science.


  4. JonathanWilson says:

    You know, if I had the money or resources I’d love to do a proper full study into just how green modern windmills really are.

    I’m sure once you take into account the huge amount of CO2 that is released due to large amounts of concrete needed for the base, the damage done to parts of china to get at the rare earth metals needed for the generators both in terms of fuel needed for the extraction and the large areas polluted with highly toxic waste and while it may be argued that its down to bad/low tech mining practices some parts cannot be “clean” by the very nature of the method of extraction and purification.

    Then add in the production and shipments of the windmills from other countries to the uk as we don’t make them here because its to expensive due to carbon taxes on manufacturing which, while it makes us seem “green,” is just pushing the point of pollution and CO2 creation around the world (a bit like how the trams in nottingham are seen as green and clean, yet forgets that the pollution point is just pushed outside the city to the power station and the added congestion of cars having to negotiate stupid one way systems has caused more idle traffic that before, just not in the city center)

    Then add in the damage done to areas while they are moved and put in place once in the uk, and the as yet unknown damage to the local areas plant and wild life (bird and bats specifically, and also the newest problem that it seem as if they cause localized warming, which may, or not, cause problems) and large tracts of land dug up to put the cables in to connect disparate wind farms together so they can be connected to the grid, then add the number of normal power stations that are needed in reserve, burning fuel in standby mode, for times when the windmills don’t produce enough energy such as in the coldest parts of winter, or every time the wind really comes out the play and the windmills have to be braked and locked to prevent damage, or the fact that they have to draw power from the grid to prevent damage when they are idle.

    And the fact that the potential sited and actual realized power is wildly different. “During each of the four highest peak demands of 2010, wind output reached just 4.72%, 5.51%, 2.59% and 2.51% of capacity” and on average over a year windmills only produce 10-20% of the sited power capacity and at best are only 35% efficient in converting the energy in wind into electrical energy.

    And finally factor in the on going maintenance and replacement and life span of a windmill and how much secondary power and pollution is caused by replacement and scrapping of broken windmills, which would require either a permanent road access to be built, or the land would need to be damaged once again to get heavy machinery to the windmills to pull down and install new ones and the fact that the broken windmills and parts will do doubt be transfered abroad to be stripped and with rare earth materials hard to recycle, seems honda is the about the only company that has done research and then it seems its only about 80% efficient in the lab (quick look on google for “recycle rare earth materials”), there is more waste and power used.
    Seems that the more you look into it, the less “green” wind is.


    • geyza says:

      I read a report several years ago which did analyse the full carbon footprint of a windmill. From design, to manufacture to testing to installation to lifetime maintenance to disposal.

      It was bigger than the whole of the carbon it would offset during it’s lifetime. It is greener to not have windmills at all.


  5. Reed says:

    As Guido points out, Mr. Yeo is guilty of the same type of omission that the BBC are all too often guilty of in relation to many of their ‘contributors’ – failing to declare their interest.

    Rather more extraordinary is the vast amount of money Tim rakes in from his personal investments in green companies. In the past twelve months Yeo has made over £60k as chairman of TMO Renewables, a company which develops and supplies technology for second generation biofuels. He is also chair of AFC Energy, an alkaline fuel cell technology that pays him over £50k per year. Guido has visited this before:

    Given that Yeo makes over £100,000 each year from private green investments, using his role to lobby on behalf of the industry for subsidies represents a serious conflict of interest. This is the Chairman of the Energy Select Committee.


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      But they hold the approved thoughts and so are granted the indulgence.


  6. Derek Buxton says:

    I saw the other day that the Climate Change Act was the result of an idea by a young Greenpeace activist. Milliband co-opted her as an advisor for it,, she then got a Peerage. Not a bad return for writing the suicide note for a Country.


    • johnnythefish says:

      Not unlike the IPCC – crammed with environmentalists. Read this, it’s a must:


  7. SteveB says:

    Would that be the same Tim Yeo that is president of the Renewal Energy Association ?


  8. George R says:

    For Beeboid anti-shale gas activist, Harrabin:


    (inc 3 min video)