Are You Cooking With Gas?

Well, not for much longer, if the ecomentalists have their way…

Householders across the country will be horrified to learn that, over the next decade or two, the Government plans to phase out all our gas-fired cookers and heating systems —forcing us to replace them at a cost of untold billions.

Nor is that all…

Official documents reveal the Government is seriously contemplating that, within 25 years or so, gas will be all but banned — along with petrol and diesel.

The intention is that not only our cooking and heating but much else, including our cars and most of the vehicles on Britain’s roads, will have to be powered by electricity.

The Government admits this astonishingly ambitious plan will be the most far-reaching energy revolution since electricity itself was discovered.

Who could dream up such a crazy plan?

Astonishingly, the plan to change the way we cook our food and heat our homes is being instigated by the Government as the only way by which we can meet a statutory requirement under the Climate Change Act.

This particular piece of legislative folly was pushed through Parliament six years ago by Ed Miliband, as our first ever Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, and decreed that Britain must cut its emissions of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels by a staggering 80 per cent within 35 years.

Not even in power, and ruining the country!

13 comments for “Are You Cooking With Gas?

  1. Mudplugger
    December 26, 2014 at 10:18 am

    One basket, all eggs dutifully installed therein.

    Contingency planning anyone ?

    • John
      December 26, 2014 at 7:19 pm

      You’re kidding right? This is Ed Miliband we’re talking about here, possibly one of the greatest pillocks ever to be produced by the British political system.

      • January 1, 2015 at 7:57 am

        He should be replaced by that cardboard cut out someone’s holding to ransom!

  2. Stonyground
    December 26, 2014 at 8:17 pm

    There is no need to worry. Every socialist Titanic is destined to meet the iceberg of reality. I can’t really see this one being any different. Any wholesale move toward electricity powering everything would require a massive expansion of nuclear power. These idiots think that windmills and solar panels can save the world, their delusions will be shattered within seconds of them actually trying it.

    • January 1, 2015 at 7:58 am

      They should all be forced to install one for a year, and rely solely on it… 😈

  3. Cascadian
    December 26, 2014 at 9:37 pm

    Ministry of Energy and Climate Change…..says it all.

    Sane energy policy requires recognition that climate change is negligible and cannot be altered by man.

    Ed Davey/Ed Milliband does not matter, both fools who will never be held responsible.

    UK does not have much domestic natural gas left so unless you rely on LNG or Russian then you may just see a huge price increase and reduced use. Stonyground is correct your future probably lies with nuclear or coal.

  4. December 27, 2014 at 12:25 am

    Tasmania is almost totally ‘electric’. We have just one ‘non-hydro’ plant as a standby and often export electricity to the mainland via a cable..

    • Mudplugger
      December 27, 2014 at 3:42 pm

      It always surprises me that, with a network of lakes and reliably-flowing rivers, Britain has never exploited hydro-energy in any volume.
      Possibly the greenest energy source, it’s unusual amongst ‘greens’ in that it can provide base-load, and not just an occasional top-up when it’s sunny or windy at peak-times.
      It can even be ‘saved’ by using any excess hydro-power production to pump the water back up-hill, re-using it later when demand is higher.
      And if it needs a few more dam-lakes, just flood some excess farmland, thus saving many millions on futile subsidies.
      What’s not to like ?
      (Of course, most of those subsidied go into the pockets of some large landowning folk, who seem to wield influence in these matters, so they just collect their generous windmill-bonus for doing nothing.)

    • Daedalus
      December 28, 2014 at 6:46 am

      Yes, but Tasmania has a land mass about 1/3rd as large as the UK, has higher hills and mountains 5,500 ft to our 4,500 ft roughly and a population of 500,000, against our 65,000,000. Hydro is going to be easy, it’s like comparing the requirements of elephants and mice.

  5. ivan
    December 27, 2014 at 10:05 am

    Ah yes, the Climate Change Act written by one of the Nazca vandals who was given a seat in the House of Lords as a reward.

    Any politician with a backbone would tear up such an act because it is so totally against the people and progress.

    • Brightside Bob
      December 27, 2014 at 2:09 pm

      “Any politician with a backbone…” Looks like we’re fooked then.

      • January 1, 2015 at 7:58 am


  6. Andrew Duffin
    December 28, 2014 at 10:20 am

    @Mudplugger: “It always surprises me that, with a network of lakes and reliably-flowing rivers, Britain has never exploited hydro-energy in any volume” – we have.

    All suitable hydro (and pumped storage for that matter) locations are already being used. The geographical fact is, there are not many of them – you need high mountains with lots (I mean LOTS) of water pouring down them for these systems to be economical.

    Even the green loonies have not – yet – suggested that we literally move mountains to accommodate their fantasies, and in any case the amount of energy involved in so doing would be completely counterproductive.

Comments are closed.