Welcome to The UK Energy Forum — start here

The Lobby
1

This forum exists because there was nowhere serious to discuss UK energy policy. Reddit has scale and noise; the specialist lists are closed; the comment sections are tribal. This is the alternative: a venue for people who work in, study, or seriously follow the UK energy system.

Three house rules:

  1. Numbers first, tribe never. Argue the mechanism. Party loyalty of any stripe is off-topic.
  2. A claim needs a source. Link the primary source where one exists. Unsourced numbers will be challenged, whoever posts them.
  3. Attack the argument, not the person. Strong disagreement is the point of the venue; contempt is not.

A disclosure, since you will notice anyway: the forum is hosted by Richard Lyon, author of The Energy Trap, and his view — that the current transition fails on physics — is on the record. That view holds no privilege here. The moderation rule is symmetrical, corrections are acknowledged whoever they favour, and the strongest opposing case is actively wanted. If you think the host is wrong, this is the best room in which to prove it.

Introduce yourself below: who you are, what you work on, and the one question about UK energy you most want answered properly.

2

Just joined. Home is Colorado Springs, CO USA, BSME w 35 years of experience in power generation. A pariah among pariahs. Informal sky dragon.

I’ll open with this.

Earth is cooler with the atmosphere, water vapor and 30% albedo not warmer.

Ubiquitous greenhouse effect energy balance graphics do not balance and violate both GAAP and the Laws of Thermodynamics.

Kinetic heat transfer processes of the contiguous atmospheric molecules render a black body surface and “extra” greenhouse effect energy impossible.

GHE = bogus & CAGW = scam.

3

Retired, living in Basingstoke, Hampshire. After a working life spent in the computer industry, latterly in software and evangelism (marketing), I feel supremely unqualified even to hold opinions on the topics treated here; but one must show willing! Nowadays I spend most of my time reading, writing, and walking.

I don’t place too much store in experts; every single science or discipline was founded by someone completely untrained. Yet those people were mostly right in their thinking. Until the 20th century most scientists were enthusiasts who studied nature because they wanted to. Then science and technology became jobs, and people became constrained by the money and the boss, with very pernicious results.

So I think anyone reasonably intelligent should be able to make some sense of the climate debate. First, in line with the forum rules, lay aside all vested interests, including loyalty to one’s treasured ideas and published statements. Just follow the facts and logic. Let Feynman be your guide!

Since the first life on Earth, the climate has varied a lot - from “Snowball Earth” to steamy jungle. Ice ages have been documented, and we have either just ended one or (more likely) we are in an interglacial. The temperature has been gradually increasing for about 20,000 years, but if this is an interglacial it may start to fall again at any time. Meanwhile, temperature and CO2 are near the bottom of their life-friendly ranges; it could get a bit warmer, with a fair amount more CO2, and we would benefit on balance.

However it is much more practical for us humans to adjust our behaviour to the climate than vice versa. So I think we are seriously overpopulated, and about 1 billion would be a reasonable maximum. We could get there fairly soon and safely without drastic measures.

My one question about UK energy: why can’t we follow the Chinese model and have the government do what it thinks best for everyone? Drawing on the abilities and work of the best suited people, of course. Richard’s articles keep highlighting dreadful lack of planning and even simple anticipation.

I have plenty more questions, though not many answers, so for the time being I’ll pipe down. If anyone sees anything I write that’s wrong, please say so loud and clear. Not being an expert, I have no pride to injure.

2 Likes
4

Welcome, Nick. Thirty-five years in power generation is exactly the experience this place needs. One house point: the Forum sticks to the UK energy system (generation, the grid, costs, policy) and leaves climate science to venues built for it, whichever side a post takes. Where your plant experience would really count is the grid-stability thread: Can Britain keep the grid stable without big power stations?. What did your plants do when grid frequency dropped suddenly?

5

Welcome, Tom, and thank you. Your question about planning deserves its own thread: who should decide what Britain builds, and when, and has anyone done it better? Would you start it in Policy & Politics? I’d like to see who argues for the market.

6

Hi everyone and thanks to Richard for the invitation to join the forum.

My background is in physics and IT and I became interested in energy as a result of a bet with a friend 20 or so years ago. At the time I was convinced the world was getting too warm, too quickly. I suggested we needed to go skiing before there was no snow left in the Alps. I appreciate how daft that sounds now but as I hadn’t done my own research - it was what apparently all scientists were saying.

He told me firmly but in simple terms that I was wrong and there was plenty of data that contradicted the mainstream narrative. Anyway, a tenner was bet on me being able to pull together a short paper of findings and references that supported the case for unnatural global warming. I felt extremely confident and went away looking forward to that tenner - easy money!

Suffice to say that when I actually looked into the data my claims fell apart. Rather I should say “the claims I had followed” from the mainstream media (and worse many science journals) fell apart. I quickly discovered how circular and self-referential the claims were. I discovered some fantastic websites and sceptics including Antony Watts, Judith Curry, Ian Plimer, Bjorn Lomberg, Jo Nova, Paul Homewood and the GWPF (and now NetZero Watch). And of course more recently, David Turner, Kathryn Porter and Richard Lyon(!). It would be really great to see some of these people in this forum!

I write on substack (very occasionally these days) at BaffledByScience.com, help to lead an anti-wind farm group in the north of Manchester at SayNoToScoutMoor2 (it is a .org.uk website but I have run out of link allowance), help lead a free speech group called PoliticsInPubs.org.uk (hoping Richard can help out with that in Scotland!) and in my spare time I am the Campaign Manager for our local branch of ReformUK.

How we get out of the current NetZero hole is the biggest challenge facing the world today and IMHO is a driver behind a lot of the global instability we see around the world. I believe that we have hit an existential crisis, not just in the insanity of our ideological energy policy but more widely in the way large numbers of people have simply stopped thinking for themselves and instead just regurgitate what they have been told. I should know - I used to be one of them.

I look forward to meeting people here like-minded and otherwise.

1 Like