by Bill and Ann Woodhouse
Department of Energy and Climate Change
Dear Kate Robertshaw,
A very belated thank you for your very explicit letter of the 26th June 2013.
This long delay is a result of pondering as to whether a reply is worth the paper it is written upon as it is obvious that those on behalf you write have been totally convinced that human activity is leading to a “catastrophic” rise in global temperature.
Perhaps this is a moment to pause and ask who are promoting this scenario?
Well a start would be Al Gore who has made a considerable fortune through trading carbon credits (but now has quickly exited before the scam collapses). Or should we be looking to Dr Rajendra K Pachauri, the Chairman of the IPPC who also earns a few extra million heading up TERI (TATA Environmental Research Institute) or should it be Lord Stern? Just taking these three, whom I am sure you will agree have great influence over our governments, should we not consider their scientific credentials?
Al Gore has none. Pachauri is an ex-railway signals engineer. Lord Stern is an accountant.
So what are my credentials? When I worked for ICI Plastics Division I attended courses at our Research Laboratories in Welwyn Garden City to intensively study Carbon as it was the base element of nearly all our products. Carbon is a most elegant hexagonal atomic structure. We know Carbon as “Graphite”, “Coal” and “Diamonds”. To refer to Carbon Dioxide as “Carbon” is as fatuous as referring to Water (H2O) as “Hydrogen”
Do those who run your department know the percentage of CO2 in our atmosphere?
On the unlikely chance that they do can anyone with a grain of common sense, let alone scientific training, really believes that a minute trace gas that is only 0.037% of our atmosphere can have the slightest influence on Climate Change? If they do please ask them to explain!
Not only is CO2 essential for all plant life but we need 7% in our lungs and it is at an historical low.
Of course there is Climate Change. There is and always has been Climate Change. Our climate is dictated by the Sun. Without going back beyond well recorded history take this aboard; In Roman times we had a warm period world wide. Wine bearing grapes were grown under Hadrian’s Wall. This was followed by the cold Dark Ages of plague and pestilence, then followed by the Medieval Warm Period of the Renaissance Wine bearing grapes were then grown again in Newcastle. This warm period was followed by the Mini Ice Age with the Thames freezing 12 to 15 feet thick with ice and oxen roasted on the ice in the winter fairs and even an elephant taken over the ice for an exhibition.
We have had the good fortune to have lived in the current warming period that has now peaked. From now on we can expect to rapidly descend into the next Maunder or Dalton Minimum for which we should be preparing. Sensible people will ask what causes these nine hundred year warming and cooling cycles? The most probable answer is the sun’s magnetic field rotates over this cycle, which determines the Solar radiation projected to our planet.
If the utterly false science swallowed by our elected representatives could be laughed off it would not matter but their legislation is resulting in destroying our country’s economy and ill preparing us for the Mini Ice Age around the corner.
Bill & Ann Woodhouse
On 26 Jun 2013, at 13:50, correspondence wrote:
Dear Bill & Ann Woodhouse,
Thank you for your email dated 15 June, about carbon budgets. Your email was passed to the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) and I have been asked to reply.
Climate change is arguably the greatest challenge facing the world today. It is a global issue that demands a global response – and all countries need to be part of the solution. The UK is playing a leading role at an international level and is working through the European Union, the G8, and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change to find ways to reach global agreement on addressing the issue.
The science is not in doubt: climate change is happening, it is largely the result of human activity, and if we do not do something about it then the impacts on human society and global ecosystems are likely to be catastrophic. It is also clear that the benefits of strong, early, global action hugely outweigh the costs, and that the sooner we act, the lower these will be.
Our aim, and the internationally agreed global goal, is to limit the expected rise in average global surface temperatures to no more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels, and so avoid the most dangerous effects of climate change. The window for achieving this is closing rapidly – it means global emissions need to peak as soon as possible (almost certainly before 2020) and decline steeply thereafter.
The only credible way to promote ambitious mitigation action is through a legally binding international agreement, applicable to all, under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), because it will provide a common framework which is rules-based, transparent and robust, helping to give confidence that countries are all taking action.
We have made progress – all countries have agreed to negotiate a new global deal by 2015 that will come into force by 2020. Before then, they have also made progress on certain elements of the climate regime, for example on emissions reduction pledges, on the Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) system, on finance, technology and adaptation. But we are at best only halfway there. Existing emissions reduction pledges – even if fully implemented – are not consistent with keeping warming below the 2°C threshold. We therefore need countries to go further – both on the post-2020 regime and with more ambitious mitigation action before then.
We are working hard to make that happen, by supporting progress internationally, by pressing for the EU to move to a 30% emissions reduction target for 2020 and by taking action domestically to reduce our emissions in line with our carbon budgets. At the UN climate change conference in Doha, agreement was reached on a high level work plan towards agreeing a new global agreement by 2015, on streamlining future negotiations, and on the EU and a number of other countries entering into a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol.
The UK is also providing £2.9 billion through the International Climate Fund to support developing countries, both to demonstrate low carbon development, protect forests and to help the poorest countries adapt to the impacts of climate change that are already happening.
We are not alone in taking action. Many other countries are doing the same – including China. In 2011, for the first time ever, global investment in renewable energy plants surpassed that in traditional ones.
I hope that this is helpful.
DECC Correspondence Unit