The Times covers up for the Green blob
Since the Sunday Telegraph revealed the Royal Society criticisms of modelling of the 2050 energy system by the Climate Change Committee (CCC), the Green blob has been rallying round its under-fire CEO Chris Stark.
In the Times today, environment editor Adam Vaughan engages in a full-scale cover up of the CCC’s incompetence.
The facts are not in dispute.
The CCC’s 2019 report, which put us on the road to Net Zero, examined a single year of wind data
A 2023 CCC report examined five isolated years.
Examining isolated years underestimates costs because of the extra storage needed to guard against back-to-back wind drought years, and that was the basis of the Royal Society’s criticism.
Vaughan knows all this, because I explained it to him in an email.
The Sunday Telegraph article mentioned the CCC’s 2023 report in passing, but had clarified that the “single-year” claim covered the 2019 Net Zero Report:
…[the CCC] admitted that its original recommendations in 2019 about the feasibility of meeting the 2050 net zero target were based on just one year’s worth of weather data.
Extraordinarily, in his article, Vaughan doesn’t mention the 2019 report at all. Nor does he mention the CCC’s admission that it was based on a single year.
Let that sink in: the CCC has admitted that the report that put us on the road to Net Zero was grossly inadequate, but the Times doesn’t even think it worth a mention!
Instead, Vaughan spins a story along the lines of “the CCC looked at five years in their 2023 report, so the Telegraph report is rubbish”.
But continuing in the vein of drawing veils over awkward facts, he also fails to mention the fact that examining five isolated years is not good enough either. Astonishing!
This is not honest journalism, this is covering up for the colleagues in the Green Blob.
The Times is not on the side of truth, is it? I guess that’s what happens when you recruit Guardian activists.