Sacked Environment Minister Owen Paterson Provokes Widespread Disbelief

authordefault
on

Sacked environment minister Owen Paterson has provoked derision and disbelief at his โ€œperverseโ€ call to scrap the Climate Change Act, according to a report by the Guardian newspaper.

Paterson will present the Global Warming Policy Foundationโ€™s annual lecture tomorrow (Wednesday) at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers on Birdcage Walk, Westminster at 7pm, where he will attack his own governmentโ€™s climateย policies.

The former Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will argue that the Climate Change Act should be suspended and if other countries donโ€™t take Britainโ€™s lead it will eventually be scrapped altogether, in a speech trailed on the front page of the Sunday Telegraph.

The extraordinary charge flies in the face of David Cameronโ€™s promise that he would deliver the โ€œgreenest government everโ€ and presents a serious threat to the Toryโ€™s ambition to win the trust of the electorate at the next generalย election.ย 

Patersonโ€™s claims have provoked widespread condemnation from experts in energy and climate change, with many of his claims remainingย highly controversial.

Lord Stern, who co-authored the New Climate Economy suggesting climate chaos is avoidable and also the seminal 2007 study on the economics of climate change, said repealing the Climate Change Act โ€œwould be a perverse backward step by the UKโ€.

He told the Guardian: โ€œIt would create additional uncertainty about the direction of government policy, undermining the confidence of investors, and increasing the cost of capital for new energyย infrastructure.โ€

Utterlyย Bonkers

โ€œIts perversity would be even greater because the costs of renewables have fallen by extraordinary amounts in recent years and there is growing medical understanding of the damage to human health from the pollution caused by fossilย fuels.ย 

โ€œThis is a further example of the former environment ministerโ€™s complete failure to understand the immense risks from unmanaged climate change, as documented by national academies of sciences around theย world.โ€

Baroness Worthington, shadow minister in the lords for the Department of Energy and Climate Change, was one of the architects of the Climate Changeย Act.

She said Patersonโ€™s speech was โ€œutterly bonkersโ€ and said MPs would never support the act being scrapped. โ€œIt would take a huge parliamentary debate,โ€ sheย argued.

โ€œAt the current time, when all the evidence is that climate change is getting worse and we need urgent action, I canโ€™t see any desire to repeal this act. Itโ€™s the desire of a small group of fanatics who donโ€™t even know what the actย does.โ€

Populistย Proposal

Kevin Anderson, deputy director of the Tyndall Centre, said the act must be trained and strengthened for Cameron to have any hope of meeting his promises to world leaders to support global efforts to prevent runaway climateย chaos.

He said: โ€œWe certainly need to revisit the Climate Change Act โ€“ but to significantly strengthen it in line with the science underpinning our prime ministerโ€™s international commitments on the 2Cย goal.

โ€œOwen Patersonโ€™s populist proposal to threaten to scrap the act if others donโ€™t join in is far removed from that of a measured and scientifically informed government confronting difficult and dynamicย issues.โ€

The claim made by Paterson that Britain is going it alone on climate change appears unfounded. A total of 66 countries around the world now have climate legislation, while the EU have demanded emission cuts of up to 95 percent byย 2050.ย 

The total cost of decarbonising Britain quoted by Paterson, at ยฃ1,100 billion appears to come from a 2012 study by Mercados, but the energy consultants make clear that ยฃ780 billion needs to be spent to replace ageing infrastructure and the further costs are associated with using existing renewable technology in this programme. Some studies even suggest using renewable energy will be cheaper.ย 

Paterson has called for the use of small nuclear reactors despite the fact the Department of Energy and Climate Change and the Office for Nuclear Regulation have both warned that even pilot schemes would take six years to get started. Moreover, the technology is extremely expensive with just two demonstration plants costing the US $450m.

Picture: Jamie Gray, via Flickr.ย 

ย 

Related Posts

on

UCP pledges to abandon the provinceโ€™s net zero targets, and remove the designation of CO2 as a pollutant.

UCP pledges to abandon the provinceโ€™s net zero targets, and remove the designation of CO2 as a pollutant.
on

Speaking at the UCP annual general meeting, the Premier took shots at the federal government and vowed not to โ€œbudge an inch.โ€

Speaking at the UCP annual general meeting, the Premier took shots at the federal government and vowed not to โ€œbudge an inch.โ€
on

One candidate has sworn off taking money from regulated companies

One candidate has sworn off taking money from regulated companies
on

The worldโ€™s largest advertising and public relations firms continue to get the majority of their work from major polluters, a new report has found. Known as the โ€œBig Six,โ€ WPP, Omnicom, Interpu...