« Brian Coleman: Britain's Olympic winners "left their consciences at passport control" | Main | Conservative members are not as libertarian as blog threads suggest »


London could be self-sufficient in electricity if the power of the tide in the Thames were harnessed through a series of tidal turbines built below a new bridge across the estuary beyond Dartford, together with several smaller ones along the river further in towards the centre. That's the great thing about tides, the water is pulled along by the gravitational pull of the moon, so even after it has passed through turbine A, it speeds up again to pass through turbine B, etc etc.

That bridge that would also serve the new London airport in the Thames estuary, which would in turn reduce fuel use by all those cars that currently crawl in to Heathrow. (The airport would of course also be served by spurs off the Channel Tunnel link).

The plan seems quite sensible with efficiency measures and plans to deal with a possibly changing climate(without mentionning the cause) - what worries me is that they said he'd changed his mind and then he agreed.

I don't think he's contradicted his view that kyoto and the greens are quasi-religious, but hasn't shied away from dealing with issues that they have 'claimed', like a hetroxesual man who will proudly listen to kylie.

I have friends that refuse to use recycling bins due to recycling being what the hippie-greens do, but that's letting them set how you act and I'm glad Boris hasn't succumbed to that sort of thinking.

Had a quick look at this and some good ideas. However, on drought:

"Reduce leaks from water mains"-yes.

"Compulsory water metering where feasible"-don`t know what "where feasible" means. If we all had to install water meters we would not doubt reduce use and would expect lower bills and then what? The price per gallon would go up.

Sorry Mr. Johnson has changed his mind on Kyoto and now is a climate change/global warming supporter.

Just look at page 5 in the Telegraph today Mr. Johnson with pictures of a Kent reservoir last year and this. No doubt last year the "experts" were saying the drought was all our fault. Who is to blame this year?

Six out of ten so far, could do better.

"Despite previously attacking the Kyoto Protocol - which regulates international carbon emissions - as "pointless" and saying that anxiety over climate change was "partly a religious phenomenon" Johnson now admits that the 2006 Stern review on the issue had convinced him of the need to act. "When the facts change, you change your mind," he said."

Johnson joins the Stern gang (the original gang was never a threat to our economy and was never going to cost us billions - unlike the present doom monger). A pity.
So what are the "facts" that have changed?

Johnson, the budding prime minister? Has he Got News For You. The BBC will love it.

This is sensible stuff! I'd be perfectly happy to have a compulsory water meter fitted (actually being a single person household I'd probably benefit!) and the idea of planting more trees to soak up rainwater is an excellent one. Virtually all the experts agree that the incidence of flooding has increased in the UK because of the large number of front gardens which have been concreted over.

These overwhelmingly sensible measures, without needing to be linked to any AGW theories. Perhaps it's just easier to promote them by 'accepting' the doom-mongering.

Errrmm whilst all of the hard proposals are probably good environmental practice and to be largely welcomed none of this has very much at all to do with climate change.

Boris was right about the climate change lobby being essentially a religious thing, it is all about adopting a blind belief in unproven claims about both the cause and effects of what might be happening to our climate. That faith is what the Left have substituted for their previous article of faith; economic socialism.

There is no real scientific consensus since those who argue against the left's new religion are excluded from the debate and have their views and findings marginalised. Any appearance of consensus is therefore a manufactured fake one.

Interesting Mr Angry that you mention the "religious" dimension to anxiety over climate change! I think this is something that doesn't "belong" to one particular faith (though at our Friday night Shabbat service we have one prayer which makes reference to the fact that God gave us the earth to look after and if we don't then we will have to bear the consequences...)

I think it is simply about realising that the earth is ultimately all we have and we need to ensure that it is still there for generations to come!

"I think it is simply about realising that the earth is ultimately all we have and we need to ensure that it is still there for generations to come!"

There's always Mars.

"There's always Mars."

Or possibly "a Galaxy Far Far Away"!

Much as I like Boris he has fallen for the Climate Change line. If it is happening then I don't believe we can do much about it - just a big excuse for more taxes. The Earth goes through changes - get used to it.

"The Earth goes through changes - get used to it."
isn't that what the plan is about?

Well, it's referred to as an adaptation strategy so yes, Norm I think you've just about hit the nail on the head!

Nothing wrong with adapting our city to changes in climate which might or might not be man made. The problem comes when politicians of the left seek to adapt our behaviour on the basis that it might or might not change the climate.

In a drought conservatives would dig a well, greens would organise a rain dance.

Whilst we are on Johnson's conversion to the Gloal Warming religion (now changed to Climate Change - because there isn't any global warming) take a look at the EUReferendum blog of today. Here is a taste:

"Saturday, August 30, 2008
Suckered by what very much appears to be a "plant" by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), two British newspapers have visited the "drowning polar bears" story today. In so doing they exhibit a gullibility that, in more serious times, would render them laughing stocks.

First out of the traps is The Daily Telegraph, with an online story headed, "Nine polar bears at risk of drowning in global warming meltdown" accompanied by the picture shown (above left)." Read it all

The blog then goes on to inform us that the spin is also covered by the Daily Mail, which I believe is asking for donations to support the WWF efforts. Many of the Mail's comment column shows shock and horror at the bears allegedly drowning.

When Richard North sent a comment to the Mail stating that the story was two weeks old and a load of tosh, his comment was not printed.
The climate change intolerant religious zealots at the Mail at work, apparently.
Welcome aboard, Johnson and kneel at the feet of Stern. Amen

I am sorry Boris has let the issue of climate change colour his proposals. They are sensible responses to environmental circumstances which have emaeged recently in London.

"In a drought conservatives would dig a well, greens would organise a rain dance."

I own a well and borehole or three, with, according to the deeds, an enduring abstraction-permit going back to 1866 (thanks to the Marquis of Ailesbury). If any Greenie type comes round begging for water, I'll happily tell him to get stuffed.

Putting aside emotional views for and against man-made CC and just looking at measures that are good ideas in their own right, many of Boris's points are good. However I would add that we need much stricter planning law on insulation/efficency of buildings. If we believe in energy security, which we should, then saving energy is vital to the nation. Secondly we have real rainwater run-off problems with water in our towns and cities. many people are putting in hard driveways and getting rid of gardens etc and of course we are building over brown sites in urban areas. We need strict laws on materials that are used eg there are now materials that provide a form of hard standing but allow water to soak through rather than run-off and cause localised flooding.

"It calls for compulsory water metering"

That will go down like a lead balloon. I would probably benefit from the idea but I strongly object to it. If there's one thing guaranteed to p*** people off it's compulsory water meters.

Drought? It's been raining most of August!

A few roof top gardens isn't going to save the planet and it is hard to see how they could make a serious difference to the amount of rainwater in the drains because the potential for rooftop gardens is limited. A more effective approach would be to encourage / require water butts for the storage and use of rain water to reduce the amount of water going directly into the drains.

There should be planning restrictions on the concreting of gardens. People will object, but it's a serious problem with the drain system.

We should plant more trees - it helps match the increases in Co2. The amount of trees which get removed because of hysteria about them being unsafe or "dead" is absurd.

I am unconvinced that the global warming from 1975 is more than marginally man made, but the UN scientists eventually came to the view that it is, and
some of Boris's proposals look like sensible, low cost measures, just in case.

"If there's one thing guaranteed to p*** people off it's compulsory water meters."

Why? Electricity and gas are metered. What's so different about water?

At worst it should be neutral - it will p*** off those who use more than an average amount of water and please those who use less than an average amount.

Why no thread on the turmoil within the Labour Party, the open warfare between Darling and Brown, and the increasingly dire state of the UK economy?

I find this rather puzzling, even having read the full article, and feel the emphasis must be Guardian mischief making. I seriously wondered for a few moments whether it might be some sort of Guardian spoof.

He is not just committed to "adaption", even the Guardian article (in the small print) says that he has committed himself to the existing London targets on amelioration (i.e. trying to reduce carbon emissions). Either he has changed his mind or he hasn't. It seems rather perverse to quote him as saying he's changed his mind on Koyoto etc and then headline roof top gardens as a key plank in his strategy! Not sure how they fit with preserving Victorian buildings which are hardly suitable for that! Nigel Lawson wants adaption and the Stern report, which Boris is quoted as finding convincing, is certainly not about adaptation but amelioration.

I am a Boris fan (as some on this site may have noticed), but I think London needs a rather more thoroughgoing strategy than is reported here. I also expect that we will get it, so tough luck to the naysayers!

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker