able mobile phones,” “portable arm-mounted wind-turbines,” and other
pointless tat.
Campaigners also mislead. People who want to promote renewables
over nuclear, for example, say “offshore wind power could power all UK
homes;” then they say “new nuclear power stations will do little to tackle
climate change” because 10 new nuclear stations would “reduce emissions
only by about 4%.” This argument is misleading because the playing field
is switched half-way through, from the “number of homes powered” to
“reduction of emissions.” The truth is that the amount of electrical power
generated by the wonderful windmills that “could power all UK homes”
is exactly the same as the amount that would be generated by the 10 nuclear
power stations! “Powering all UK homes” accounts for just 4% of UK
emissions.
Perhaps the worst offenders in the kingdom of codswallop are the peo-
ple who really should know better – the media publishers who promote
the codswallop – for example, New Scientist with their article about the
“water-powered car.” *
In a climate where people don’t understand the numbers, newspapers,
campaigners, companies, and politicians can get away with murder.
We need simple numbers, and we need the numbers to be comprehen-
sible, comparable, and memorable.
With numbers in place, we will be better placed to answer questions
such as these: