'By massive margins, Tory members have long believed that energy prices, not climate change, will be voters' top priority. They have been vindicated. There is going to be no progress on combating climate change for the foreseeable future. The climate change lobby was badly wounded at Copenhagen, late last year. Last week, because of the US mid-terms and the election of a sceptical Republican Congress, the lobby is close to death. Yes, we should continue to do green things that have other benefits (eg energy conservation). Yes, we should invest in clean technologies (but Dalibor Rohac sounds a warning on this). But no, we should not be doing anything that pointlessly hurts energy consumers, handicaps UK manufacturing and which does nothing to stop China, India and other energy-poor countries from increasing the world's carbon footprint.

We need to do what Lord Lawson has long recommended. Get richer so we can afford to adapt. A richer world can then afford to invest in resilence against extreme weather events. In the meantime Chris Huhne should we worried about warming Aunt Mabel's house. He can't do anything about global warming.'

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2010/11/chris-huhne-should-worry-about-warming-grans-house-he-cant-do-anything-about-global-warming.html

We are sorry for the period of induced climate naivety due to a technical problem beyond our control. Rest assured that normal politics will be resumed without delay!

climate mystery...

Where's Richard Black (BBC)

No blog for over 2 weeks, and the comments are closed?

Must have flown off somewhere important? look at the date.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/2010/10/from_the_un_convention_on_7.html

Barry
Oxfam court, what can I say..... am I still on the same planet as some of these people. Jaw on the foor moment when I read that.

From Investors.com, an article looking at the results of that Scientific American poll (ref Judith Curry – ‘Heretic’ ) What happens next, if some investors look to make a quiet exit from all green investments?

The ‘Carbon Crunch’ ?

quote:

“A new consensus is emerging as the unraveling of the global warming tale picks up speed.”

Investor.com: A New Consensus
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/553695/201011121850/A-New-Consensus.htm
Posted 06:50 PM ET

Global Warming: Wouldn’t the followers of Scientific American have a pretty good understanding of what’s really going on with the climate? If a reader poll is any indication, they’re skeptical man is heating the planet.

For years we’ve heard that scientists have reached a “consensus” that the earth is warming due to a greenhouse effect caused by carbon dioxide emissions resulting from man’s use of fossil fuels. No use in discussing it further, Al Gore and others have said. It’s happening.

Not every reader of Scientific American magazine is a scientist. But the responses of the 7,000 readers (6,767 as of Friday morning) who’ve taken the magazine’s online poll strongly suggest that claims of a consensus are, at best, an exaggeration.

More than three-fourths (77.7%) say natural processes are causing climate change and almost a third (31.9%) blame solar variation. Only 26.6% believe man is the cause. (The percentages exceed 100 because respondents were allowed to choose more than one cause on this question.)

Whether climate change is man-caused or natural, most respondents don’t believe there’s anything that can be done about it anyway. Nearly seven in 10 (69.2%) agree “we are powerless to stop it.” A mere one in four (25.7%) recommend switching “to carbon-free energy sources as much as possible and adapt to changes already under way.”

and more, see above link.

Oxfam's fantasy 'climate court' is both prescient and practical
Over a thousand legal experts, politicians and economists gathered in Dhaka this week to explore routes to justice for the victims of climate criminals – and found that precedents exist

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2010/nov/12/dhaka-climate-court-criminals

Scotland 'risking a blackout' in a bid to go green
By Nathalie Thomas, Chief business correspondent

"THE "lights could go out" over Scotland unless new power stations are built in the next two years to ward off a looming electricity crisis, the head of one of Scotland's most successful companies has warned Alex Salmond"

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/news/Scotland-39risking-a-blackout39-in.6624497.jp

We don't want the Bishop to get cut off! when he explains why.

Just sent email to webmaster@bishop-hill.net with screen shot because the site isn't loading properly.

RayG
11/11/10, 1903 PST

And undoubtedly, Beaverbrook, the full statement will say that since it is such an urgent issue the Government will, with all due haste, appoint an independent committee to examine the urgent issue and urgently issue an urgent report sometime just after the next election (probably, at that stage, by candlelight).

Hansard 11 Nov 2010 : Column 284

Lord Broers: My Lords, I ask the Government, through the Minister, to reassure us that they realise the urgency of the situation. There is a limited capacity for making nuclear plants and the suppliers of nuclear plants already have their order books filled. China is currently building four or five new plants. We must get on with this, as it is extremely urgent. We must take safety into account, but please reassure us that the Government realise the urgency of the matter.

Lord Freud: My Lords, we realise the urgency. That is why we are going to produce a full statement on the issue very shortly.

Clive James stuns question time by stating that the new leader of the Labour party is a fantasist because he believes that emissions can be decreased by 80% by 2050.
David Dimbleby changes tack after a pregnant pause.