Why Ed Miliband’s costly Net Zero evangelism hits the buffers of reality at COP29…as leaders that matter are a no-show
ED MILIBAND has whisked himself off to the UN Climate Change Conference in Azerbaijan, which he excitedly anticipated would be “like playing 200-dimensional chess”.
Yes, for this man of the people who has a bizarre knack of not being able to cut through to ordinary voters, the COP29 climate summit is his Glastonbury.
The eco warrior Energy Secretary said the summit is the “once-a-year chance to put the world’s leaders on the spot to act on climate change”.
Except it wasn’t.
Because the world leaders that really matter to whether the world’s temperatures and carbon emissions come down or not were a no-show.
The Taliban was there, offering their own version of green terror.
But the world’s four biggest polluters China, the US, India and the EU, have not sent their No1s.
The mood was gloomy and quiet and, despite the zealotry of Miliband and his clean power push, reports from on the ground were glum.
‘Radical goal’
Even Greta Thunberg didn’t bother turning up, protesting about the hypocrisy of letting an oil-driven country host the climate change summit.
She may have had a point because, in the days leading up to the event, the host nation’s deputy energy boss and chief exec of COP29, Azerbaijan’s Elnur Soltanov, was caught on camera using his role to discuss “lots of gas fields” they had for investment.
The scandal could have been directly lifted from Industry — the brilliant, but intensely stressful, TV drama which has brilliantly skewered the smoke and mirrors around “green” investments.
It even features an opportunistic and aggressive hedge fund turning up to the COP summit to poach supposedly green investors to its fossil fuel-focused funds with the promise of bigger profits.
“I bet I can prove returns trump ideology,” boasts the fictional Petra Koenig, played by Sarah Goldberg.
And she is not wrong.
The problem with these staged pow-wows is that they can only really be influential if the grown-ups come, otherwise they remain underwhelming.
Fifteen years ago the US was instrumental in pressuring China to at least make climate commitments.
But all it is committed to is a loose aspiration to hit net zero by 2060.
Meanwhile, it continues to build around two large coal power plants a week.
Which rather poses the question about why Miliband is so keen on bankrupting the UK to meet his own radical goal of de-carbonising the power sector by 2030?
The National Energy System Operator last week published a report which Miliband trumpeted and said proved he could achieve his aim.
Except the report should have had “IF” plastered all over it.
IF the UK can raise £40billion a year from big investors who are already going cooler on green funds.
IF it can really rip up all the necessary red tape and actually hire enough people to speed up the current planning approval from 15 years.
IF the UK can build 1,000km of power lines and 4,500km of undersea cables on time.
IF it can triple the number of offshore wind farms, double the number of onshore wind farms and triple the number of onshore solar farms, also on time.
IF it can successfully tell Brits to not cook their dinners at dinner time or bathe their children at bath time to save energy.
IF the wind blows. And the sun shines.
And judging by last week’s “anticyclonic gloom” — or grey, colourless, flat skies — Miliband doesn’t control the weather, yet.
Sir Keir Starmer yesterday tried to reassure reporters that the clean power push would not involve telling Brits how to live
This is a report, by the way, commissioned by the NESO, which the Government now owns.
Secretary of State Ed Miliband is shown on Companies House as the person with significant control.
Hardly an impartial judge and, even then, it wasn’t that enthusiastic.
Sir Keir Starmer yesterday tried to reassure reporters that the clean power push would not involve telling Brits how to live.
That’s just as well, because Donald Trump’s clean sweep in the US election proves that voters care about how they feel in their pockets today — and rarely about hazy hopes and dreams of the future.
The ordinary Brit probably thinks more about climate change than Donald Trump.
But being able to afford groceries and rent and energy bills also ranks higher on their priority lists.
‘Expensive bet’
During the election campaign, Miliband claimed his clean power push would save Brits £300 in bills.
Ministers now say it will save “up to” £300, which is very different.
The true test of how Brits feel about having to fork out for Mr Miliband’s net zero evangelism will come in 2030.
Winning this race won’t mean a thing if it was only achieved because all the other major economies — for sound political and economic reasons — were not competing
After all, in five years, economic growth is forecast to be lower, taxes on companies will be higher to afford the shift of investment into state-owned green enterprises, worker earnings will be lower and inflation will be also be higher.
This COP crusade might mean that Miliband can say the UK is a world leader on clean energy.
But winning this race won’t mean a thing if it was only achieved because all the other major economies — for sound political and economic reasons — were not competing.
It is such a huge, expensive bet by this government and one that has a needlessly strict deadline.
A rush job when it comes to trying to stand alone in a global energy market.
And one which has a high chance of being a ruinously expensive bodge job.