Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Monday open thread | Main | Worst BBC programme of all time? »

Light blogging

It's half term here, so blogging will be light this week. I have quite a few threads lined up to appear so there will be something to talk about.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (24)

Ah, yes. Half-term. I remember them. In our case it was usually a boat on the Midlands canals for a week. Always good and cheap because we missed the English half-term week (usually!)
'Ave a nice time, guv.

(Are you leaving somebody behind to keep Zed in her box? If she knows you're away she'll be all over the blog like a dose of ... better not say it, I suppose.)

Oct 19, 2013 at 9:12 AM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

I too remember half term - spud-bashing week where I came from. Yes, keep an eye open for zebedee, she'll be like a rat up a drain pipe with her cut'n'paste insults.

Oct 19, 2013 at 9:23 AM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby

If anyone is looking for something to read, I've got a thought provoking article full of interesting graphs called: Enerconics: The Relationship between Energy and GDP which might be just the thing for some light half term reading.

Although based on a presentation I did for a Scottish audience, the conclusions that green economics is economic suicide and that we must increase energy availability to stimulate the economy are applicable worldwide.

Oct 19, 2013 at 9:38 AM | Registered CommenterMikeHaseler

@MikeHaseler : SNP spokesman on Radio 5Live yesterday, 4.55pm
told us about his fantasy universe "the renewables program is going so fantastically well, they have achieved such enormous CO2 reduction that an Independent Scotland, would simply go to the EU and they will hand them the £200m necessary to refund the green/assistance taxes to the Scottish public."
- OK so it's ridiculous that at the moment green/assistance taxes are hidden in the bills so raising the bills of the poor, so necessitating raising prices further to pay the poor a rebate. Therefore it's good that green tax/subsidies are moved in general taxation, but SNP don't say how they are going to cope with a future where either subsidies are multiple more or world energy prices have pushed customers bills to double of todays.
- (on past record I don't think we can believe the CO2 reduction figs, they will have done things like ignore all the CO2 used for windfarm concrete etc.)

Oct 19, 2013 at 10:21 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

the renewables program is going so fantastically well, they have achieved such enormous CO2 reduction that an Independent Scotland, would simply go to the EU and they will hand them the £200m necessary to refund the green/assistance taxes to the Scottish public.
Aye! In yer dreams, Eck!

Oct 19, 2013 at 11:27 AM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson
Oct 19, 2013 at 3:09 PM | Unregistered CommenterRobinson

Stew, the SNP administration have turned Scotland into a renewable banana republic and when (now that they have) the public realise this they will turn against them and kick them out.

Oct 19, 2013 at 3:49 PM | Unregistered CommenterMikeHaseler


Oct 19, 2013 at 6:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterDolphinlegs

Seems an eminently reasonable assessment of the situation, dolphinlegs, wouldn't you say? ;-)

Oct 19, 2013 at 6:14 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

Dolphinlegs: Well it was 11 years ago. Things have changed at the Grauniad since then and slow warming is now not good for the Grauiniadistas.

Oct 19, 2013 at 6:44 PM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby

sorry guys when I posted it did not realise it was weather not climate

Oct 19, 2013 at 9:21 PM | Unregistered CommenterDolphinlegs

this should go viral but probably won't

Matthew Sinclair of Taxpayers Alliance on green taxes

Oct 20, 2013 at 1:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterDolphinlegs

Mike Haseler, your little piece on the link between energy and GDP implies that we could increase our GDP very simply by reversing all of the energy efficiency measures taken over the last 20 years. And equally, if we set about using energy more efficiently, we can expect it to make us less prosperous (according to GDP)! This wacky idea might appeal to readers of this blog and yours but you might have trouble selling it to the world.

Oct 20, 2013 at 3:22 PM | Unregistered CommenterChandra

Mike Haseler
Your presentation on the link between energy and wealth seems eminently sensible to me and contains nothing either controversial or to which a trained economist would take exception.
The idea that reversing energy efficiency measures (why would you?) would lead to an increase in GDP appears nowhere in what you wrote and neither does the idea that energy efficiency leads to relative poverty.
The modern world is bedevilled with economic illiterates, not to mention trolls.
Which Robin Guenier (tolerant fellow that he is) has at last decided to stop feeding. I suggest we follow Robin's good practice here.

Oct 20, 2013 at 3:51 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

I gave up FingTTs a long time ago. They just disrupt things without having any added value (rather like wind turbines).

Oct 20, 2013 at 4:07 PM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby

Red Alert!.....Doomsday Asteroid, Head-Ed for London....

Oct 20, 2013 at 4:45 PM | Unregistered Commenterfenbeagleblog

Interesting read on energy prices and media stupidity at autonomous mind today‎

Oct 20, 2013 at 5:19 PM | Unregistered Commentercloud10

Mike Jackson, are you sure there is nothing to which a "trained economist" would take exception? Try this:

GDP is the goods the average person can purchase on an average income.

And compare to this from Wiki:
Gross domestic product (GDP) is the market value of all officially recognized final goods and services produced within a country in a given period of time. GDP per capita is often considered an indicator of a country's standard of living;[2][3]
GDP per capita is not a measure of personal income (See Standard of living and GDP). Under economic theory, GDP per capita exactly equals the gross domestic income (GDI) per capita (See Gross domestic income).

In my experience, people on this sort of blog who accuse others of being economic illiterates are often exactly that themselves.

BTW, physicist might object to:

Energy is the work done by a unit of energy

Oct 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM | Unregistered CommenterChandra

Another "fact" at which a trained economist might raise an eyebrow is Haseler's figure 7 which shows EU per capita GDP to be lower in 2010 than in 1980! He uses that to show that EU CO2 reductions have reduced its GDP. Any person of an even vaguely skeptical nature would find this slightly ludicrous and look for an explanation. Mr Jackson, meanwhile sees it as entirely uncontroversial.

(Hint, the EU gained ten extra countries in 2004 and 2007, plus 17 million poor East Germans.)

Oct 20, 2013 at 8:59 PM | Unregistered CommenterChandra

It was, of course, the very expansion of the EU which was a contributory factor in the per capita reduction in GDP.
You do understand the concept of 'per capita', I take it.
As for the rest, I have heard some of it better phrased but only someone who could quibble about 'sceptic' vs 'sceptical' would make an issue of it.

Oct 20, 2013 at 10:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterMike Jackson

Bingo, you got it! It was the expansion that caused the per capita drop in GDP. But according to Haseler,

But what happens when we try to reduce energy usage? In recent years, countries across the globe have been trying to reduce CO2 emissions by cutting their energy consumption and by switching their energy production. Looking at energy use of the the USA, China, India and the EU from 1980, only the EU has seen a drop in in CO2 from energy usage

And what has been the effect on GDP?

EU energy and GDP have gone down.

Is this another example of the link between energy usage and GDP? It seems so from the way fig 6 (above) shows a drop in EU energy usage and fig 7 (below) shows a similar drop in EU GDP . The polices that try to reduce energy appear to either go hand in hand with reducing GDP, or reducing energy is CAUSING reducing GDP.

So you are now contradicting Haseler, despite saying earlier that his text is "uncontroversial". I guess you meant uncontroversial but wrong but were too polite to say so.

Oct 20, 2013 at 11:02 PM | Unregistered CommenterChandra

Darth Vader an Author at the CRU?

Oct 21, 2013 at 4:59 AM | Unregistered CommenterPoptech

It really is hard to know where to begin with you, which is probably why most people have given up and I will join them after this posting. "Shape-shifting" doesn't even start to describe it.
There is nothing contradictory in my comment. The reason for the fall in GDP in the EU was the admission of a large number of people who were a lot poorer than the people of Western Europe.
And why were they poorer? Something to do with lower energy use, perhaps?
Now be a good boy and stop spouting half-digested rubbish across this blog.

Oct 21, 2013 at 9:13 AM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

Don't be dense. Haseler says, " The polices that try to reduce energy appear to either go hand in hand with reducing GDP, or reducing energy is CAUSING reducing GDP." It would be absurd to say that the policy aim of EU expansion is energy reduction, but I'm sure that won't stop you.

Oct 21, 2013 at 10:27 AM | Unregistered CommenterChandra

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>