Who knew Irony could be so Green?

Mea Maxima Culpa, I should have told you of my views on The Melbourne Cup, and didn’t. Sadly, and despite the fact I was actually still awake as they went down for the start of the sixth at Flemington, I was in no fit state to impart knowledge, having just poisoned myself and Madame with a Cauliflower Cheese that was so rank, even the sudden movement of the brain could herald disaster. Not sure what I did, but I managed somehow to infect the guilty veg dish with C Difficile, Ebola and possibly even radiation poisoning. You are lucky that you weren’t invited for supper and doubly fortunate, because my actual MC selections are still out there on the track!

Life is like that sometimes. Beyond explanation - albeit that some small research would probably expose the reason behind the near-epic foul-up. And I am also wary of trying to deceive you by blaming Brexit, the fridge, the cauliflower, and the appalling UK supermarket system (Motto: No food too old that cannot be gassed into life). I have no idea why the Choufleur Gratin aux lardons de pancetta was wrong, but the vast weight of borborygmic evidence was that I had cocked it up somewhere.

Which brings us neatly to Ed Miliband, Sadiq Khan, and the rest of the “Rush To Extinction” gang. They’ve all headed off to COP30 for a rather extraordinary Amazonian adventure. Cop30 is, of course, the climate summit that promises to save the world, provided you can afford the plane ticket and the price-gouging for a room that makes the charge for a wounded, endangered Rhino look understated.

It’s a comedy of environmental errors, set in a city that needs but doesn’t have 50,000 beds, turning it into what could be the most exclusive climate meeting in history—perfect for discussing global poverty! The first sight for many delegates will be the entirely pointless Road to Nowhere, aka Avenida Liberdade (Freedom Avenue). To save the Amazon, the organisers naturally cut down a slice of the protected Belém Environmental Protection Area (APAB) to build a shiny, 13 km four-lane highway, to whisk delegates smoothly past the very ecosystems they’re there to “protect.” Critics call it habitat fragmentation; I like to think of it as VIP climate efficiency. After all, who has time to sit in traffic when the planet is boiling?

And let’s not forget the host nation’s climate credibility! Brazil is setting the stage in the Amazon, saying “Look at all these beautiful trees we’re not cutting down!” while simultaneously ramping up licensing for new exploratory drilling near the mouth of the Amazon River.

Even more bizarrely, the usual polishing continues, and massive, rather silly vanity projects are being rushed into place, whilst some 30% of the city of Belém itself has little or no sanitation. The developers are all fine, you’ll be pleased to hear, and once the locals realise they can go for a walk through an entire plantation of artificial trees in what has been left of the world’s largest rainforest, I’m guessing they’ll all feel a lot happier about CopOut30.

It is the perfect point to remind ourselves of the air of entrenched deception that covers so much of this trillion-dollar industry. The Milibands of this world, who constantly portray themselves as sincere evangelists intent on saving us from ourselves, all believe that if you keep repeating a lie, it will eventually be considered a fact.

Lazy-journalistic cross-referencing leads to constant repetition. A “fact” that a Minister exclaimed on X, becomes a Facebook post that appears in The Times, is picked up by The BBC, and, despite all evidence to the contrary, is now True. Anything that suggests an alternative is somehow adapted and becomes consistent with their truth. Counterclaimants are smeared and, in some cases, financially, educationally, or vocationally cancelled.

This is how you establish a persistent, incontrovertible, unalterable creed, and as we are beginning to see through our wallets, and will hear relentlessly at Cop30, the creed of Net Zero is untouchable. This creed is, in places, profoundly untrue and in other areas, merely wishful thinking. Even some of the half-truths are based on unattainable outcomes in the near to mid-term, and should not be sold as fact.

You can see it and hear it every week. Milliband and his DESNZ continue to state that renewables are more affordable, more secure due to local production, and that consumer bills will decrease. This mantra is repeated endlessly by the politicians, as they claim “renewables are nine times cheaper,” that £300 will be removed from bills, and they frame disagreement as “climate vandalism.” There was even talk this week of framing anti-net-zero speech as a Hate Crime. Miliband has made each of those assertions above. Media outputs frequently repeat figures from press releases about the potential of wind or solar farms, without any scientific or factual reference. The message is omnipresent in official communications, supported by stakeholders who benefit from its acceptance.

The only thing that might make people wake up to the fact that they are being deliberately lied to is the fact that Britain has the highest electricity prices for industrial customers in the developed world, which is hard to spin as cheap energy.

Traditionally, the blame was firmly placed on the Gas, Putin, Brexit, and volatility, but gas prices have been dropping and are much less volatile than they were. In fact, gas prices are becoming increasingly irrelevant for Britain’s energy costs.

Part of the problem, of course, is that whenever there is an argument about pricing, the Minister will dissemble by referring to world affairs, geopolitical situations, and previous governmental decisions. The reality is that they know exactly how much our energy costs will be over the next 15, 20, or even 35 years, because the decisions the Minister and his Civil Servants have been taking over the last year can only deliver high costs up to 2040 and beyond, as the government contracts to subsidise the producers have already set energy prices.

For instance, current electricity contracts are locking in prices ranging from £90 to £120 per MWh, according to recent estimates by the International Energy Agency (IEA). This level of commitment translates into projected consumer cost increases of 15-20% over the next two decades. Additionally, the regulatory body is required to significantly expand the grid, at an estimated additional cost of £20 billion, to maintain the same level of reliability. (Being a government contract, that figure itself will double without penalty, over the coming years). Consequently, the government is committing to higher energy costs over the next 15–20 years, limiting consumers’ ability to benefit from decreases in gas prices.

At Rio this coming week, you will hear claims that Britain’s “world leadership” on climate change produces cheap energy. The reality is that Britain has shown the world how to pursue a deeply flawed carbon-emissions target, resulting in some of the highest prices globally. No other country will follow this example.

But if you think Miliband is a glorious messiah of cheaper power, ask yourself why the costs and prices are so high.

Thanks to our penalties, controls, and abandonment of existing infrastructure, Britain now needs twice the generation capacity and twice the grid capacity to produce the same output, in addition to a host of batteries, pumped storage, and lots and lots of imports. Even by 2030, on the government’s trajectory, 35 GW of gas will be needed to run for 5% of the time. How could anyone call this cheap?

The Miliband solution is to behave like a close-up magician. Misdirection - shift the focus. Rather than