Updated: Feb 5, 2021
The familiar narrative of a climate "emergency" is not supported by a vast body of observational data, according to a new paper published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation. Contrary to popular belief there is little evidence of harmful trends from the impact of global warming. According to the paper's author, Dr Indur Goklany, "Almost everywhere you look, climate change is having only small, and often benign, impacts. The impact of extreme weather events ― hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and droughts ― are, if anything, declining. Economic damages have declined as a fraction of global GDP. Death rates from such events have declined by 99% since the 1920s. Climate-related disease has collapsed. And more people die from cold than warm temperatures" And even sea-level rise - predicted to be the most damaging impact of global warming - seems to be much less of a problem than thought. According to Dr Goklany, reviews of historic maps and satellite imagery have shown that the places predicted to disappear are in fact still with us. "A recent study showed that the Earth has actually gained more land in coastal areas in the last 30 years than it has lost through sea-level rise. We now know for sure that coral atolls aren't disappearing and even Bangladesh is gaining more land through siltation than it is losing through rising seas." Empirical data also shows that food production per capita has increased by 30% since 1961 despite a more-than-doubling of the global population. Hunger and malnutrition have declined, area burnt by wild fires has declined, and since 1950 poverty has declined, people are wealthier and global life expectancy has increased from 46 years to 73 years. Dr Goklany's paper Impacts of Climate Change: Perception and Reality is published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation and can
be downloaded here (pdf). About the author Indur M. Goklany is an independent scholar and author. He was a member of the US delegation that established the IPCC and helped develop its First Assessment Report. He subsequently served as a US delegate to the IPCC, and as an IPCC reviewer. Contact Global Warming Policy Foundation e: firstname.lastname@example.org m: 07553 361717
and here is another GWPF Press Release dated 5th February 2021:
Ofgem condemned for misleading the public about energy price rises
The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF) has condemned Jonathan Brearley, the chief executive of energy regulator Ofgem, for misleading the public about additional rises in energy prices.
Ofgem has claimed the 9% rise in energy bills for millions of British households is primarily a reflection of the rise in wholesale costs, and suggested that consumers should “shop around” for a cheaper supplier. In reality, wholesale costs account for only about 33% of electricity bills, with two-thirds of the very high costs of UK electricity due to subsidies for renewables investors and other socialised costs. Cost increases are mostly due to these parts of the bill;
1. The cost of renewable energy levies are expected by the OBR to rise from £9.6 billion in 20/21 to to £10.2 billion in 2022/23, not including the FiT costs. Together they account for about 40% of the bill. 2. Transmission and Distribution charges (and losses) are also heavily affected by climate policy and account for about 20% of the bill.
3. 'System balancing' costs alone were £2 billion last year, up from £1.5 billion in the previous year, with much of that increase due to the presence of inflexible and uncontrollable renewables. The bulk of that additional £500 million has been deferred to this coming year, and accounting for a substantial part of the increase that Mr Brearley is blaming on “wholesale” costs.
Mr Brearley’s suggestion that customers “switch” to get a cheaper tariff is therefore nonsensical. Climate policy and system costs account for the majority of the bill, and these apply equally to all suppliers, meaning that there can be little to choose between them, and switching can have no significant effect.
"To blame “the market” for what is effectively a manifest failure of ever more expensive Net Zero policies is an attempt to deflect attention from the true culprits behind rising energy poverty. If Mr Brearley and Ofgem really wanted to do something for hard-pressed consumers they would tackle the ballooning effect of climate policies." GWPF director Benny Peiser said.
"Boris Johnson and his government are risking their political survival if they continue to push up the cost of energy, driving millions of British households into energy poverty," Peiser warned.