Jacob Rees-Mogg’s Laughing Gas Emissions Red Herring

Mr Jacob Rees-Mogg MP is well known for his enthusiasm for the unabated burning of fossil fuels, for the reduction of environmental regulation and for his climate skepticism. So it is nice to see him belatedly expressing concern for an environmental health issue – None of us can afford to ignore dangers of diesel, Somerset Guardian (16/2/2017). However, rather than actually addressing the substantive issue (the health impacts of burning fossil fuels) he uses his article as a stick to beat the EU with and he constructs a red-herring fallacy to trivialise the impact of carbon dioxide emissions on climate change.

Mr Rees-Mogg quotes the shocking statistic that air pollution contributes to 40,000 premature deaths each year in the UK “primarily caused by nitrous oxides that are produced by diesel engines”. Nitrous oxide (N2O) is of course laughing gas (dephlogisticated nitrous air to Mr Rees-Mogg), rather than nitrogen dioxide (NO2) which is produced by diesel engines and gas boilers and which causes harmful air pollution.

The policy of promoting diesel over petrol engines was a well intentioned but bad policy based on bad information and lobbying by the car manufacturers. Mr Rees-Mogg blames an “EU green agenda” rather than the criminal actions of the car industry or the lack of regulatory enforcement by national governments, including the UK. The EU is threatening to fine the UK for being in breach of its NO2 limits since 2010, not the other way around.

The motivation behind the switch from petrol to diesel was to reduce CO2 emissions from petrol engines in order to mitigate global climate change – on the basis that companies such as VW were not knowingly cheating the system, which they were.

Mr Rees-Mogg says “The policy was determined because of fears about carbon dioxide emissions and an agreement made across the European Union to reduce them. Petrol creates more carbon dioxide than diesel engines but carbon dioxide does not lead to serious health complaints, indeed it is perfectly safe as a background atmospheric gas for people to breath”.

In these two sentences Mr Rees-Mogg has constructed a logical fallacy that says – because carbon dioxide is not toxic it is therefore harmless, so we shouldn’t be concerned about it and producing more is not an issue. This meme, which is often used by the fossil fuel lobby to misinform, detracts from the real issue which is that emissions from burning fossil fuels, including both diesel and petrol, is a very serious problem that both kills people through air pollution and which is dangerously disrupting the Earth’s climate.

Mr Rees-Mogg has clearly not read the report from the Royal College of Physicians on air pollution (the source of the 40,000 figure) which highlights the co-benefits of mitigating climate change and reducing air pollution.

Given that fossil fuel combustion is a major source of both greenhouse gases and local air pollutants, if action is taken to address climate change there could be major improvements in outdoor air quality as a result of decarbonisation of power and transport systems, and improved efficiency of energy use. Indeed, the economic benefits of improved health resulting from reduced exposure to fine particles and other local and regional air pollutants as a consequence of climate policies have been estimated to be sufficient, on their own (ie without reference to climate benefits), to justify a range of climate actions being adopted”.

Neither air pollution nor climate change are laughing matters and their solutions lie in both strong environmental regulation and leaving fossil fuels in the ground – two things Mr Rees-Mogg is not the slightest bit interested in.

Rees-Mogg’s red herring…

Advertisements

Election Time – what are the candidates saying?

Have your parliamentary candidates signed the I’m Not Backing Fracking frack-free promise? Read on…

What do the parties and the North East Somerset candidates think about fracking? 

CarbonBrief.org has trawled through the election manifestos to find What the manifestos say on climate and energy, including fracking. Here is the bit about fracking…


Conservatives say: “We will continue to support the safe development of shale gas”

Labour says: “Will establish ‘robust’ regulations ‘before’ fracking can take place.

LibDems say: “It is vital that efforts to access [shale] gas be properly regulated”

Plaid Cymru say: “We support a moratorium on fracking and other forms of unconventional gas”

SNP say: “We will .. continue to support a moratorium on fracking”

UKIPs say: “Its ‘time to get fracking’, ‘provided safeguards are in place to protect.. the environment’. NB UKIP is the only party that embraces climate change denial, as outlined in their energy policy document.


Locally, fracking questions have been prominent in the local newspapers and at hustings. Based was was said at the Ubley Husting, The Chew Valley Gazette and the Somerset Guardian the candidates positions seem to be:


Jacob Rees-Mogg (Conservative) – having been a vocal pro-fracker during the parliament Mr Rees-Mogg has said that he is now a NIMBY and that North East Somerset isn’t a suitable area. However, he maintains that fracking can provide energy security and cheap energy, although he still hasn’t provided any evidence for this last statement.

Todd Foreman (Labour) – Mr Foreman has been rather consistent in opposing fracking in North East Somerset, saying in the Somerset Guardian that he would oppose “any plans that would allow fracking here”, although he hasn’t ruled it out elsewhere.

Wera Hobhouse (Liberal Democrats) – Ms Hobhouse points out that there is no financial case that fracking will provide cheap energy in the UK and that she is opposed to fracking in North East Somerset.

Ernie Blaber (UKIPs) – Mr Blaber opposes fracking in North East Somerset – unless the gas companies offer loads of money and there is a local referendum that supports it.

Katy Boyce (Green) – Ms Boyce said in the Somerset Guardian that she opposes fracking in North East Somerset, no surprise there.


So, the local Conservative, Lib Dem, Labour and UKIP candidate are all NIMBYs when it comes to their party manifesto statements. We are all NIMBYs now it seems.

Despite what they have publicly said Mr Blaber and Mr Rees-Mogg haven’t signed the Friends of the Earth I’M NOT BACKING FRACKING frack-free promise, the other candidates have signed. If you feel so inclined then you can ask Mr Blaber and Mr Rees-Mogg to sign up here.