Data doodling – the malicious impoverishment of the UK via “net zero” policies of the Marxist UK Labour lunatics – epitomised by the Cult High Priest of “Energy Security” – Miliband
PETER HALLIGAN
Edward Samuel Miliband (born 24 December 1969) is a British politician who has served as Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero since July 2024. Energy policies in the UK are his “baby” and he was responsible for spending £630 million in taxes to create National Energy System Operator (NESO) – in September 2024. So gar NSO has one employee.
Today’s UK inflation data was not good and this is before the upcoming inflationary impact of the hikes in National Insurance and the minimum wage impact the economy in a month or so.
“In the 12 months to January 2025, the consumer prices index (CPI) measure of inflation rose from 2.5 per cent to three per cent, the Office for National Statistics show.”
The TLDR version of this article is that UK households pay four times the price that is enjoyed by Chinese households and that the UK’s “net zero” policies are only possible by even more CO2 pollution in China than is “achieved” in the UK. Even if reducing CO2 is a valid goal (and it isn’t) – planting trees would achieve the same CO2 reductions that are targeted to achieve “net zero” and would make money – in an eco-friendly manner – rather than costing Brits a fortune.
The UK Government and the bureaucrats In the Bank of England (who just voted to reduce base rates by a quarter point with 2 morons voting for a half per cent cut) are all “thick as a brick”, with as much foresight and earthworms.
. Jethro Tull: Thick as a Brick (07/31/1976)
As with the US, EU and elsewhere, prices in the UK haven’t returned to levels resembling those prior to the C19 scamdemic. The C19 scamdemic was supposedly an emergency, The emergency is over, but prices remain at elevated levels, chiefly because of the cost of energy,
Energy prices are dominated by the cost of building out “renewables” that are ugly, expensive and intermittent whilst restricting reliable, cheap and available hydrocarbon fuels that are mistakenly considered to be producers of inacceptable levels of “greenhouse gases” such as carbon dioxide, methane (0.016% of the atmosphere) and laughing gas (nitrous oxide – 0.03% of the atmosphere by volume). These 3 “greenhouse gases” make up less than one tenth of on per cent of the atmosphere, but are the reason for global spending of trillions upon trillions of dollars on “renewable energy” projects of obsolete and useless forests of wind turbines and plantations of solar panels – to produce electricity for homes, businesses and to recharge batteries for EV’s.
Carbon dioxide makes up just 0.04% of the atmosphere and is plant (and tree) food – plants convert CO2 to oxygen via photosynthesis.
If a country wants to absorb more CO2, it could plant more trees.
The wood from trees has may uses – not so much for fuel these days – but for many other things within the building and furniture industry, for example.
Water vapour (including clouds) is by far the most significant “greenhouse gas” – per Brave AI “The percentage of water vapor in the atmosphere varies but typically ranges from 0.2% to 4%.”
And when events like the Hunga Tonga volcano occur, the weather can be influenced for years.
You would think that if a country wanted an “eco-friendly” approach to reducing its misnamed “carbon footprint” (more accurately its “CO2” footprint) – it would plant more res and carefully manage the resulting forests.
All assuming of course that levels of CO2 need to be “controlled” in the first place – which is a dubious proposition!
Now for some data doodling.
Let’s start with a comparison of electricity prices between China and the UK.
Per Brave AI – Chinse electricity prices:
“Residential electricity prices have fluctuated between 7.5 and 8.5 cents per kWh since September 2020.”
UK household electricity prices from British Gas are now:
They will be increasing again in a few months – maybe by 5%.
26,057 pence per kWh = 32.21 US cents which is QUADRUPLE the price in China. To which must be added the annual “standing charge” of £151.71 a year (an extra 5-15% on the annual bill) for the privilege of being gouged by the insanely expensive prices.
The UK has an energy regulator, OFGEM, who sets a “price cap” for the maximum price gouging level – OFGEM does not determine a cheapest price, just the maximum price that can be charged for the current energy supply mix -with all the imported energy costs and renewables factored in
The UK has shut down its coal and steel industry. China is ramping its up.
Fun facts, from Brave AI:
“The main demands for steel are driven by several key sectors including construction, automotive, and infrastructure development. Construction is the largest consumer of steel worldwide, accounting for over 50% of the world’s steel consumption.”
“The production of wind turbines and solar panels requires significant amounts of steel. Each new megawatt (MW) of wind power needs between 120 to 180 tons of steel, while each new MW of solar power requires between 35 to 45 tons of steel.”
“To produce one ton of steel, approximately 630 kilograms of coke are required, which is derived from metallurgical coal This means it takes around 770 kilograms of met coal to make one ton of steel The process involves using metallurgical coal to produce coke, which is then used in blast furnaces to smelt iron ore into steel.”
“The UK had over 11,000 wind turbines with a total installed capacity of 30 gigawatts (GW) by 2023, of which 16 GW was onshore, and 15 GW was offshore.”
“The main producers of iron ore are Australia, Brazil, China, India, Russia, Ukraine, South Africa, Iran, Kazakhstan, and Canada.”
“As of April 2024, the UK wind farm infrastructure comprises 9,825 operational wind turbines across 802 wind farms, including onshore and offshore installations in England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.”
“The total electricity generation from wind sources during the first three months of 2024 was 25.3 terawatt hours (TWh), compared to 23.6 TWh from all fossil fuel sources.”
The first quarter of any year in the UK will be part of the windy, winter season – whenever the wind drops for an hour or a day or a week, hydrocarbon fuels must be cranked up to cover the shortfall – but let’s go with that as an indication of the installed capacity..
23.6 terawatt hours – (23,600,000 megawatt hours) from around 10,000 wind turbines, requiring 150 tons of steel per megawatt hour.
That implies that over 3.5 billion tons of steel have been used so far in the construction of the UK’s wind turbines.
It also implies that – given that 770 kg of metallurgical coal is required to produce one ton of steel – 2.7 billion tonnes of metallurgical coal has been used to produce that 4.5 billion tons of steel.
“Burning a tonne of metallurgical coal produces approximately 2.6 to 3.67 tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2), depending on the carbon content of the coal.”
So, the odd emissions of 5 billion tonnes of CO2 just for the UK’s wind turbines up to a year ago- hardly “carbon neutral” – and there are plans to sequester 10% of (CO2 absorbing) prime and beautiful agricultural land and pave it with wind turbines and solar panels – not trees!
All this excludes the “carbon footprint” from all the other materials used to construct a wind turbine – the concrete platforms, the foundations, the access roads, the plastics and fibres used in the blades etc.
Also excluded is the “carbon footprint” from transporting the wretched things from China to the EU companies that end up installing them in the UK (Chinese workers not allowed!).
What we aw left with, is the monstrous carbon footprint compared to planting trees that are nicer to look at, support natural ecosystems and remove CO2 from the air.
Ad that is even if there is a CO2 problem requiring any reduction measures at all!
Coal is not exactly “pure” to extract either:
“Coal seams are not pure coal but consist of coal mixed with other materials. They are formed from dead and decaying organic matter, typically from ancient peat bogs that died and fell into shallow, stagnant waters. Over time, this material decomposes and transforms into peat, which then, under increased heat and pressure, becomes coal. The thickness and composition of coal seams can vary widely, and they often contain impurities and other minerals.”
Mind you:
“The UK has identified hard coal resources of 3 560 million tonnes, although total resources could be as large as 187 billion tonnes. About 80 million tonnes of the economically recoverable reserves are available in shallow deposits capable of being extracted by surface mining. There are also about 1 000 million tonnes of lignite resources, mainly in Northern Ireland, although no lignite is mined at present.”
“Lignite, often referred to as brown coal, is a soft, brown, combustible sedimentary rock formed from naturally compressed peat. It has a carbon content around 25–35% and is considered the lowest rank of coal due to its relatively low heat content. When removed from the ground, it contains a very high amount of moisture, which partially explains its low carbon content.67 Lignite is used almost exclusively as a fuel for steam-electric power generation.”
As for other hydrocarbons:
“The UK has significant oil reserves, with estimates ranging from 10 to 20 billion barrels of both discovered and undiscovered potential.”
“A review published in March 2020 by Warwick Business School estimated that UK fracking might produce between 90 and 330 billion cubic meters (bcm) of natural gas between 2020 and 2050, which could represent between 17 and 22 percent of projected cumulative UK consumption over that period.”
I am not sure how those percentages work with these cubic metres, but three you go.
I won’t belabour the point and go through the same numbers of solar panels – suffice to say, from Brave AI, the UK has:
“As of 2025, solar power is one of the UK’s largest renewable energy sources. On 20 April 2023, solar power generation reached a peak of 10.971GW, enough to power over 4,000 households in Great Britain at that point.”
The UK has around 28 million households.
Please take a paid subscription to reward me for the thousands of hours of research that go into the thousands of articles I publish – or make a donation of $3 bucks or more for a ko-fi here:
Onwards!!!
This article (Data doodling – the malicious impoverishment of the UK via “net zero” policies of the Marxist UK Labour lunatics – epitomised by the Cult High Priest of “Energy Security” – Miliband) was created and published by Peter Halligan and is republished here under “Fair Use”
See Related Article Below
Net zero will mean higher bills, admit Miliband’s officials
Households’ energy costs will reach £1,823 a year after price cap rises by £85 in April
MATT OLIVER
Britain’s push towards net zero will temporarily push energy bills higher, Ed Miliband’s officials have admitted in an apparent contradiction of the Energy Secretary’s own claims.
The cost of rolling out wind farms, solar farms and other renewable power schemes will inflate prices in the “short to medium term”, making British businesses less competitive internationally, an obscure page on the Government’s website states.
It has emerged as Mr Miliband faces scrutiny over how he will meet Labour’s pledge to bring down bills for millions of consumers, amid predictions that households face a surge in bills this spring.
Cornwall Insight, an energy consultancy, on Tuesday forecast that the energy price cap was on course to rise by £85 in April, taking a typical household’s bill to the equivalent of £1,823 per year.
A separate forecast by government officials has put the coming increase at closer to £100, The Guardian reported.
On Tuesday, Mr Miliband blamed the rise on surging gas prices, which have doubled in Europe over the past year.
However, industry sources pointed out that an information page about business energy costs, prepared by his own officials at the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, blames spending on renewable energy projects as well.
The web page, which has been online for a number of years, says bills have been pushed higher by costs related to subsidies for wind and solar farms, including the renewables obligation, feed-in tariffs and Contracts for Difference. These are funded through levies on bills paid by households and businesses.
The webpage, which remains live, says: “A number of policies have been developed to increase the share of electricity generated from renewable sources.
“The costs of funding these schemes are recovered through levies on suppliers and ultimately passed on to domestic and industrial consumers’ bills.
“The Government recognises that, in the short to medium term, the resulting increase in retail electricity prices risks reducing the competitiveness of the UK’s most electricity-intensive businesses where they are operating in internationally competitive markets.”
It goes on to say that the Government has launched a separate subsidy scheme to help shield certain energy-intensive businesses, such as steelmakers, by exempting them from the levies. However, that policy is in turn funded by adding costs to the bills of other consumers.
On Tuesday, Mr Miliband’s department refused to say whether it stood by the statements.
The electricity price paid by British industrial companies is the highest in the developed world, according to official data, with domestic power prices also among the highest.
Mr Miliband has repeatedly claimed that the Government’s goal of reaching a clean power system by 2030 will ultimately bring bills down by making the electricity grid less reliant on gas-fired power stations.
Instead, the system will be dominated by wind farms, solar farms and energy storage systems such as batteries, with many guaranteed fixed prices through contracts for difference.
Gas plants will still be kept as a backup, but only to supply power up to 5pc of the time when wind and solar output is low.
Last month, Mr Miliband told MPs on the energy select committee that it was “the roller coaster of fossil fuel markets” that had triggered the cost of living crisis for millions of households in 2022.
He added: “There is an answer to this, in our view, which is clean home-grown power that we control. That is the right thing for energy security, for bringing down bills for good, for creating good jobs and for tackling the climate crisis.”
But Sir Dieter Helm, professor of economic policy at Oxford University and a former energy adviser to the Government, warned this month that “the sprint to net zero is increasing the relative cost of UK electricity”.
‘Consumers will have to bear costs’
He warned that bringing down industrial electricity costs for businesses would require charging “higher prices to consumers who will have to bear more of the fixed and sunk costs”.
Mr Miliband has written to Ofgem, urging the energy regulator to do everything it can to mitigate the impact of bill rises for consumers, such as cracking down on inaccurate bills, speeding up reforms to standing charges and enforcing compensation for customers who were wrongly forced to have a prepayment meters by suppliers.
The watchdog will confirm the next price cap level on Feb 25.
While Cornwall Insights has predicted a rise in bills this spring, Craig Lowrey, of the consultancy, argued that investing in renewable energy would be better for households in the long run.
He said: “It might be tempting to look at rising bills and conclude that the push towards renewables is not working, and we should scale back on the transition. But the reality is higher energy costs only reinforce the need to accelerate our expansion of clean, reliable energy across the UK.
“While building out renewables requires market reform, as well as investment and time, the alternative is to be left forever at the whim of the volatile international wholesale market, which as recent years have shown, can be a pretty expensive place to be.”
A spokesman for the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero said: “Every family in the country has paid the price of Britain’s dependence on global fossil fuel markets.
“That is why we are sprinting to clean, home-grown energy, so the UK can take back control of its energy with cleaner, affordable power.
The Telegraph: continue reading
Featured image: fairbydesign.com
••••
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