Ross Clark

Most discussion of net zero in Britain seems strangely parochial. We only really talk about UK emissions, even though they account for only one percent of the global total. But how is the rest of the world getting on at reducing carbon emissions? This morning the International Energy Agency (IEA) published the latest edition of its ‘Net Zero Roadmap’ showing where the world is on reducing carbon emissions and what more it needs to do to eliminate them entirely.   First the good news. The world is on course to invest a record $1.8 trillion (£1.5 trillion) in clean energy over the course of 2023.

Predictions of the demise of the fossil fuel industry are based almost wholly on energy. In future, goes the argument, we are going to use clean energy and so we will be able to leave fossil fuels in the ground as ‘stranded assets’, as Mark Carney would call them.  It is proving hard enough to decarbonise the energy sector, but it tends to be forgotten that at present we rely on coal, gas and oil for many other things, too, such as fertilisers, a reducing agent in the steelmaking process and the manufacture of plastics. While there may be substitutes in theory for some of these uses, the experience of Lego demonstrates how difficult it is to replace oil.

I doubt whether many people will feel a pang of sympathy for Bernard Looney, former chief executive of BP who has just resigned over his failure to fully disclosure historic relationships with fellow employees. Perhaps he should have resigned last year when he declared proudly that high oil prices had turned BP into a ‘cash machine’ – a remark which hastened the imposition of a windfall tax which the industry may come bitterly to regret the next time oil prices crash. Yet the remark didn’t do Looney much personal harm – his pay was doubled last year to over £4 million. He will have a pretty decent pension, too, to go off and spend more time on his love life.

It is hard to remember that this time last year soon-to-be prime minister Liz Truss was on the verge of compromising her free market principles by dreaming up a scheme for the state to make an open-ended commitment to subsidise the energy bills of every household in Britain. At the time, there were dire predictions that households would be swamped by energy costs, forecasts for which were rising by the day. This morning, Ofgem has announced that the Energy Price Cap is to fall again, to a level at which the average household will see energy bills of £1,923 a year, down from £2,074 a year at present. The move won’t take prices below the level they were before the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, but it will take them just below the level they were later that spring.

At what point are we going to drop the fiction that acquisitive crime is on the wane and admit that we are in an epidemic of fraud? Today, Barclays Bank has appealed to social media firms – rather than banks like itself – to refund victims of online scams. I am sure that social media companies could do more to close down scams, but isn’t the real problem that the law is tolerating online crime in a way that it doesn’t tolerate other crime?  If your house is burgled, you know to contact the police. That doesn’t necessarily mean that they will investigate, or even pay you a visit to take fingerprints, but at least it will be recognised as a crime and you will be treated as a victim – even if you left your doors unlocked.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) is meant to implore us to ignore hearsay and folklore, and to follow the scientific evidence. So why is it now suddenly promoting the likes of herbal medicine, homeopathy and acupuncture? In a series of tweets this week, the WHO has launched a campaign to extol the virtues of what it calls ‘traditional medicine’. ‘Traditional medicine has been at the frontiers of medicine and science, laying the foundation of conventional medical texts’, it asserts. It goes on to claim that ‘around 40 per cent of approved pharmaceutical products in use today derive from natural substances’.