“Get-out clause” built into Huhne’s emissions targets

The smallest glimmer of common sense has finally emerged in what is otherwise a ridiculous piece of ‘green’ posturing by the coalition government.  To quote:

“The Government has inserted a get-out clause in its climate change plan which will allow it to scrap a new emissions target within three years if other European countries fail to take similar action.  Chris Huhne, the Energy Secretary, said he was adopting the recommendation by the Committee on Climate Change for emissions to be halved by 2025 compared with 1990 levels.  However, he said that the Government would hold a review in early 2014 and would adjust the target in line with “the actual EU trajectory”.”

However, I have a suspicion that if we (the public) take our eye of this particular ball, the review will be no more than a publicity stunt and we will continue to pursue these damaging targets, whilst the rest of Europe and the world laughs at us behind their collective hands.

I fully support policies that seek to reverse the damage being done to the environment by the way man and womankind mis-use and often abuses planet Earth, even to the point where I am about to take on the portfolio for carbon reduction.  However, our goverment’s massively expensive pursuit of unrealistic carbon reduction figures, whilst just about every other major industrial country continues to pay lip service to the issue, is not just globally insignificant, it is potentially highly damaging to this country’s economy.

What we needas a start point, is a ministerial letter, like the one Liam Fox wrote to the Prime Minister regarding the Overseas Aid budget commitment, demanding that he GETS REAL!

Speaking of which, I see in today’s press that an un-named government minister has criticised Liam Fox for going public on the issue of the Overseas Aid budget.  I share Liam Foxe’s frustration on this subject and I wouldn’t mind betting that he has already tried to make his point behind closed doors, but that until now, just like the rest of us, has been completely ignored.  Is it really the case that our politicians only care about public opinion when the ballot boxes are being dusted off and the rest of the time they treat us like children who need to be told by the adults inWestminsterwhat is best for us?   

I wonder if David Cameron will now do the British public the honour of explaining his policy of pouring money in to the coffers of foreign governments, whilst his own people face many years of austerity, rising prices and zero wage increases.

Safe nuclear energy does exist (?)

Here’s a very interesting article about the Chinese nuclear energy industry.  Obvious triggered by the latest scares surrounding the situation in Japan, it seems to suggest that, if you are going nuclear, there is a better way of doing it.  I hope our politicians and especially, Chris Huhne, have read it.   

http://www.todayonline.com/Commentary/EDC110322-0000335

I was interested to read somebody’s comments on the site this came from.  These focused on the issue of a very corrosive salt solution being used in the process and how this made it worse than the Uranium based system we have.  I’m no expert, but if that’s the only drawback, to what otherwise sounds like a much better and more importantly safer way of nuclear energy, all I can say is – hasn’t he heard of ceramic lined pipes?