The climate scaremongers: The great ‘clean energy’ con
PAUL HOMEWOOD
WHENEVER you hear talk about ‘clean energy’ beware, because you are probably being sold a pup. The slogans play on human emotions of course – would we all not prefer nice, clean energy to that nasty, dirty energy from fossil fuels?
Last week you may have seen reports that ‘clean energy’ supposedly supplied 40 per cent of the world’s electricity last year. We are told that the milestone was powered by a boom in solar power. The message is clear – the world is rapidly moving to renewables, and we must keep up with it.
However when you look into the numbers, you find that 10 per cent came from tree-burning power stations and nuclear power, neither of which anybody sane would regard as ‘clean’. Indeed burning forests as biomass in power stations like Drax emits more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than coal used to, not to mention the real air pollutants that damage your health, unlike CO2.
Another 15 per cent comes from hydro power, which has been around for decades at similar levels. Ten years ago, the figure was 16 per cent.
That leaves just 8 per cent from wind and 7 per cent from solar – hardly world-shattering!
It gets worse. Electricity is only a minor part of the world’s energy mix: about a third. Wind and solar contributed only 6 per cent of the world’s total energy consumption in 2023, and the figure is unlikely to be much higher for last year.
The International Energy Agency’s recent report stated that fossil fuels supplied nearly two-thirds of the increase in global energy consumption last year, a far cry from media claims that the world is moving to renewables.
More to the point, they also say that global emissions of carbon dioxide climbed again last year, by 0.8 per cent.
https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2025
Meanwhile a recent BBC investigation found that even hydro power is not exactly squeaky clean. It turns out that the water turbulence created by hydro power projects releases huge amounts of methane into the atmosphere.
Methane is said to be 80 times as potent a greenhouse gas as carbon dioxide. We have been told we must give up eating meat and dairy because of the methane emissions involved, but maybe we should start by shutting down the world’s hydro plants instead.
After all, you can’t beat a nice fillet steak cooked over a BBQ and served with a creamy pepper sauce!
How clean are biofuels?
TALKING of clean energy, it appears that biodiesel is not as clean as claimed either. The BBC report:
‘The UK government is investigating a fast-growing “green fuel” called HVO diesel amid claims of significant fraud, the BBC has learned.
‘HVO is increasingly popular as a transport fuel and for powering music festivals and its backers say it can curb carbon emissions by up to 90% as it can be made from waste materials like used cooking oil.
‘But industry whistleblowers told the BBC they believe large amounts of these materials are not waste but instead are virgin palm oil, which is being fraudulently relabelled.
‘And data analysed by the BBC and shared with the UK’s Department for Transport casts further doubt on one of the key ingredients in HVO, a material called palm sludge waste.
‘Europe used more of this waste in HVO and other biofuels in 2023 than it is thought possible for the world to produce.’
Years ago some bright sparks decided that using palm oil to produce biofuels would be good for the planet as it would eliminate carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels.
We have since found out about the environmental catastrophe that resulted from the widespread deforestation in Indonesia and elsewhere.
Now the plot thickens. Supposedly HVO diesel could be made using waste oil, but surprise, surprise, crooked operators are seemingly using virgin palm oil instead.
Why anybody should be surprised by this is amazing. If you create a subsidised, artificial market for something, people will cheat.
It has happened with wood pellets for biomass, and it has also happened with the carbon offset market.
This article (The climate scaremongers: The great ‘clean energy’ con) was created and published by Conservative Woman and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Paul Homewood
See Related Article Below
Project To Suck Money Out Of Taxpayers Begins In UK
PAUL HOMEWOOD
h/t Philip Bratby
Why are UK taxpayers forced to pay for this pointless nonsense, when the rest of the world does not give a toss?
A ground-breaking project to suck carbon out of the sea has started operating on England’s south coast.
The small pilot scheme, known as SeaCURE, is funded by the UK government as part of its search for technologies that fight climate change.
There’s broad consensus amongst climate scientists that the overwhelming priority is to cut greenhouse gas emissions, the chief cause of global warming.
But many scientists also believe that part of the solution will have to involve capturing some of the gases that have already been released.
The project is trying to find whether removing carbon from the water might be a cost effective way of reducing the amount of the climate warming gas CO2 in the atmosphere.
SeaCURE processes the seawater to remove the carbon before pumping it back out to sea where it absorbs more CO2.
Read the full story here.
The report says the project will cost £3 million and will capture a miniscule 100 tonnes of CO2 a year. It also needs a lot of energy to pump the water and gases around. The process also involves adding first acids to help release the CO2, and then alkali to counteract the acid!
The £3 million is of course just to prove whether the process works or not- an ongoing annual operation would cost many times more.
As the UK emits about 800 million tonnes of CO2, including imported ones, 100 tonnes is neither here or there. Nor is there any prospect that such a project could be scaled up to cope with the billions of tonnes emitted worldwide.
This is one of fifteen similar projects, all of which will be paid for out of our taxes.
No doubt the scientists playing around with our taxes will enjoy themselves immensely, but surely there is a better use of this money?
SOURCE: Not a Lot of People Know That
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply