Cameron's price for saving his Coalition: the destruction of Britain

Telegraph,James Delingpole
"Here’s the gist:

Cabinet ministers have agreed a far-reaching, legally binding “green deal” that will commit the UK to two decades of drastic cuts in carbon emissions. The package will require sweeping changes to domestic life, transport and business and will place Britain at the forefront of the global battle against climate change.

The deal was hammered out after tense arguments between ministers who had disagreed over whether the ambitious plans to switch to more green energy were affordable. The row had pitted the energy secretary, Chris Huhne, who strongly backed the plans, against the chancellor, George Osborne, and the business secretary, Vince Cable, who were concerned about the cost and potential impact on the economy. ...

....Let’s be clear about this, there is no logical argument whatsoever for the “decarbonisation” of the British economy. The case for CO2 as a catastrophic driver of Man-Made-Global-Warming remains, at best, unproven. The idea that Britain – producer of barely 2 per cent of Anthropogenic CO2 emissions – could significantly ameloriate the “problem”, even if that “problem” were actually to exist, is self-evidently fatuous.

Therefore, the only excuses one might have left for steering the British economy from relatively cheap, reliable power sources (coal, gas, oil, mainly) towards expensive, unreliable ones (renewables like wind and solar) are 1) that it might boost “energy security” and 2) that it might give the economy a fillip.

However, we know that thanks the Shale Gas Revolution, energy security is no longer a live issue. We have more than enough energy for at least the next two generations sitting on our doorstep, giving us plenty of time to investigate future technologies such as thorium nuclear reactors."