Skip to content

Seems somewhat unlikely to be honest

The increased reliance on electricity for net zero and the impacts of climate change pose a major national security risk, a report by MPs and peers has warned.

Increasingly high temperatures will cause electricity cables to sag, roads to soften and rut, and signalling equipment to fail, while storms could destroy overhead power lines, the joint committee on the national security strategy (JCNSS) said.

The predicted rise in temperatures – a couple of degrees now isn’t it? – is very much lower than the normal daily, let alone annual, variance. Deeply unconvinced this is going to make much difference to engineering.

20 thoughts on “Seems somewhat unlikely to be honest”

  1. Increasingly high temperatures will cause electricity cables to sag, roads to soften and rut, and signalling equipment to fail, while storms could destroy overhead power lines,

    ummm…

    Electricity cables have sag calulated in over a range of some 200 degrees Celcius/Fahrenheit, because Real Life™ and Ohm’s law puts them through that range. In fact, when in use they’re rather warm to the touch as-is..

    Roads will soften and rut under high temperatures, especially in summer. If you use the wrong compound for the road bed and top layer.
    Amazingly, technology already has provided the answer to that, as well as for those nasty potholes. And water spray during rain. And…
    UK being the UK, no doubt the Unions have blocked any application of that Furrin’ Technology That Will Take Our Jobs.

    Signalling equipment should be designed with components with a tolerance for the Outside for both the mechanical and electronic bits.
    Unless, of course, you “save costs” by using consumer grade parts meant for Inside with far less tolerance to temperature/moisture/stuff….

    Storms destroying overhead powerlines… Well yeah.. the good old storms of the Past never did that, did they?
    Maybe that is why other places have been rather adamant in putting all that stuff underground for decades in urban areas…

    But hey… They worked Climate in… another box Checked..
    Shame it makes them look like ignorant and incompetent pillocks, though… Best of Britain, indeed…

  2. They could just use fossil or synthetic hydrocarbon fuels. And plenty of nukes to provide the energy. (Of course Oz has lots of uranium to sell.)

    This could all be paid for by scrapping the windmills and solar panels!!

  3. Does anyone recall reading a single truthful objective article including the words “MP’s warn” in the title?

    (Also applies to “experts believe”, “scientists state”, “economists predict” etc etc).

  4. Tim, aren’t you making a similar statistical error to that which you accuse the Law Society of?

    Though average temperature may rise on a couple of degrees, this is because there is more variation at the extremes, and it is those events which cause the damage.

    However, as Grikath points out, (as does Bjorn Lomborg,) that it is easier and cheaper to adapt to
    the change than to halt it. (Assume the predictions are right anyway..)

  5. NN, the doomists don’t like to put it about but the variation is mostly at the cold end (their theory not mine) so higher Tmin at night and in winter. That is not scary or troubling so they ignore it.

  6. Andrew M,
    Quite. I would have thought energy security would have come somewhere higher up the list than imaginary climate change, but we’re not allowed to talk about that.

  7. “Increasingly high temperatures will cause electricity cables to sag, roads to soften and rut, and signalling equipment to fail, while storms could destroy overhead power lines, the joint committee on the national security strategy (JCNSS) said.”

    Weren’t we being told a few years ago when it hadn’t stopped raining for months that ‘climate change’ was to blame and we could expect more of the same henceforth? And now we’ve just had a hot dry summer we’re told that ‘climate change’ is to blame and we can expect more of the same in the future?

    So which is it to be – a hot dry climate or a cool wet one? Can’t be both…………..

  8. Jim: ‘So which is it to be – a hot dry climate or a cool wet one? Can’t be both…………..’

    Of course it can, and many other outcomes too, and it’s your fault.

  9. Jim, Rhoda, this is why there is no such thing as climate ‘Science’ – it cannot be falsified as per Mr Popper (Karl, the sciencey bloke, not Tom and his penguins).

  10. There is no point engaging with the details when the whole thesis is a fantasy. Are effective scams often based on fantasy? I suppose some must be.

  11. ” Are effective scams often based on fantasy? I suppose some must be.”

    Communism got a long way on a load of old bollocks, so I’d say yes. In fact isn’t the definition of a scam when you convince someone of the truth of something that’s actually fantasy? If you really had a bridge to sell it wouldn’t be a scam…..

  12. Obviously the MPs on this committee are too ignorant and unimaginative to come up with this nonsense by themselves.
    So we should be told who did.

  13. The danger is from not having the generating capacity nor being able to maintain a stable grid no matter how many windmills are built to meet demand, nor the grid infrastructure to carry the required load and distribute it as needed. Sagging cables will be the least of anyone’s worries since they won’t be any electricity.

    It’s physics.

    Where do they get this extra 2C increase in temperature? Earth temperatures are not evenly distributed across the surface, not even equal over this island. The actual increase in average global temperature would have to be much higher to raise Britain’s temperatures all over the island by 2C.

    It’s all make it up as you go. Aka lies.

  14. surely storms are the result of different weather systems coming together creating a transfer of energy. Whereas climate change is interested in the average surface temperature, and AGW in the impact of humanity on that average temperature. I suppose that it is a bit much to expect politicians to understand that which they legislate on!

  15. Not far from where I live,the interior of Otago has an extreme temperature range over the year.It varies from minus 10-15C in winter ,up to 35+C in high summer.All the power is supplied overhead as an underground supply would be vulnerable to earth movement plus would be prohibitively expensive.The cables have no problem coping with the extreme temperatures, but they are sometimes vulnerable to high winds in exposed places.
    I spy Bullshit.

  16. Some bloke on't t'internet

    I do wonder if there’s some “poor reporting” involved – i.e. someone’s summarised “add 2 and 2” to get “5”.
    At present, we have gas for cooking and a gas boiler – so if the power goes off we can still cook some food, and I can power the boiler from a genny or inverter (I changed it to be plugged in ages ago to make this easier).
    If we fast forward to the utopia pushed by various groups, we’ll be all-electric for everything. That means that a failure in electrical supply will mean no cooking (other than, e.g., a portable gas stove run off canisters) or heating facilities – it just won’t be practical to provide enough power from batteries, and my small genny would soon get through a tank of petrol if asked to power the heating.
    Loss of supplies, even potentially widespread outages, is not just theoretical – we’ve had them in the past. We had some up here not all that long ago – with power restored only after some fairly heroic work by the high voltage line gangs in pretty horrible weather. If (and I’m not saying it is or isn’t more likely, only that if it happens) climate change makes storms more frequent and/or worse, and we’ve become more dependent on electricity for basics like cooking and heating – then that’s a combination for some uncomfortable times ahead.
    While it’s not climate change related, we could look east and see what’s been going on in Ukraine. Until recently, they’ve been coping with repairing stuff after it’s been hit by shells or missiles – the recent widespread attacks seem to have temporarily overwhelmed their abilities. I would hazard a suggestion that based on history with their neighbours, they are in a far better position in terms of preparedness for such issues than we could even dream of. If the UK grid suffered even a small fraction of the damage that Ukraine has suffered, I very much doubt we’d have access to either the materials (spares) or manpower to repair the system in a timely manner. Without wanting to give anyone any ideas, it really wouldn’t take much effort to cause widespread (even nation wide) blackouts over here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *