Another EU U-turn

It was an email from Joe Public which caused me to do a little research into the latest news about windmills and other renewable energy sources.

Joe drew my attention to the Scottish Climate and Energy Forum, which has been working to produce a survey on the background of participants in the climate debate.  Their website advises that, after some excellent feedback, the survey is ready.  

The aim of the survey is to understand the nature and background of those interested in the climate debate online.  It will provide an invaluable insight into the education and work experience of participants, test the relevance of politics in forming views and assess employment and social factors for their relationship with views on climate.

I completed it a few days ago. It takes less than 10 minutes so if you have a spare 10 minutes, please give it a go.

There has been little said about the latest U-turn from the EU here in Scotland.  Maybe the Scottish Government is waiting for the anger concerning their £400,000 gift to support Malawi’s green policies to die down before they comment.

The EU has scrapped rules that bind countries to renewable energy targets and thereby lifting demands that Britain build more wind and solar farms.  The change paves the way for the Westminster government to expand its use of nuclear power and develop tracking as a major energy source.  Britain will still have to provide 15% of its energy from renewable power by 2020, but after that there will be no target.

Why is Alex Salmond and his ridiculous renewable target policy not been highly criticised in the Scottish press?  He’s tying an expensive millstone around our necks and yet there’s hardly a whimper from the public.  How much cooler will the planet be if we stopped the UK emissions at zero?  None whatsoever.

Even if we in the UK doubled our emissions, it would not effect the global climate at all, or at worst, it will have such a small effect that it would be indistinguishable from error or noise.

Why are we doing it?  Why are we spending billions on something that is guaranteed to have NO global effect whatsoever?

The CEO of my own energy supplier blames our high bills on me - and you. ‘Households waste so much power’ Paul Massara of Npower said ahead of a report which his German-owned company published earlier this week.  It says the cost of green taxes and eco schemes will rise by 272%, (from £75 in 2007 to at least £279 by 2020), thereby driving up energy bills.  Ofgem say Npower has its facts wrong.

He also states suppliers are responsible for only 20% of a bill.  The bills are high because we waste so much. Maybe his daughters need to learn to turn off lights  and appliances when not needed. 

Don’t forget to do the survey. The SCEF do great work and deserve support.  Thanks.

Tweet

Is Scotland's Renewables Policy Unrealistic?

Yesterday this part of Scotland was bathed in sunshine: a bright beginning to a New Year. There was little or no wind and although it was around 7 degrees at the height of the day, it felt warmer owing to the lack of the wind chill factor.

Unfortunately the lack of wind wasn't good news for a local small town which depends upon the wind blowing the turbines which decorate a nearby hillside.  The people of this town were bribed into accepting the wind farm by promises of considerable amounts of money, on a regular basis, for years to come.  I'm informed the monetary income has been far short of what was promised and the reason given to the townsfolk is that the 'right kind of wind hasn't blown often enough'.  The wind farm owners     have yet to explain what they mean by the 'right kind' of wind.

But the right kind of wind is possibly just one of their problems.  In a report by Professor Gordon Hughes of the University of Edinburgh, one of the UK's leading energy and environmental economists, one of his findings involved Scotland:

 Analysis of site-­specific performance reveals that the initial load factor of new UK onshore wind farms, normalized for wind availability and size, declined significantly from 2000 to 2011, especially in Scotland.  It seems that progressively worse sites are being developed.

His study highlights three important implications for wind generation policy.  The first suggests that the subsidies are too generous and should be cut. The second mentions the actual life-span of wind turbines which is 12-15 years.  I know the town here which bought into this particular market were sold it on the basis that the turbines would function for a minimum of 25 years.  Professor Hughes' report cuts that by 50%.

It's all well and good for the Scottish Government to have a target of 100% of Scotland's electricity consumption coming from renewables by 2020, but at what cost to Scotland's consumers?  Last month Ed Davey have a speech in Edinburgh where he stated that, in an independent Scotland, Scottish consumers would have to bear excessive costs for power.  Westminster scaremongering aside, he is not the first to say that costs would be even higher than currently, the Renewable Energy Foundation warned  the government a year ago that the impact on the Scottish consumer would be approximately £300 per household, of which about £140 would be for subsidy alone.

There's also the question of what happens to these turbines once their productive life is over. This should be addressed as soon as possible because planners need to start being honest with people who are affected by wind turbines.  The Scottish public should be told the cost of dismantling and disposing of these massive machines.  It could make the suggested £300 seem very optimistic.

Alex Salmond and his government must re-examine their energy policy now that further evidence is available regarding wind farms.  To allow further wind farm developments in the light of Professor Hughes' findings would be irresponsible.

Tweet

An Example of A Renewable Energy Policy

EDF became the fifth big energy company to announce a price hike yesterday. They are increasing prices by 10.8% from 7 December, citing the (disputable) excuses of higher network charges, energy efficiency and social schemes and wholesale energy costs. Folk living in the north of Scotland will pay even more than the rest of the UK.

The company insisted its new standard variable prices would still be lower than those of the other four big suppliers to have announced price rises recently.

E.ON is the only one of the big six energy suppliers that hasn't announced price rises yet this autumn, having pledged to fix prices until the end of 2012.

Last week the energy regulator Ofgem said it would make the market 'simpler, clearer and fairer' for consumers.  This promise came days after David Cameron urged the energy giants to overhaul confusing tariff systems.

We hear protests from politicians every year and Ofgem isn't fit for purpose.  It has little or no power to dictate to the suppliers.

Let's not forget green taxes make up 20% of household energy bills. The politicians are directly responsible for that as they insisted upon introducing renewable energy policies which they were fully aware would increase prices so much that many hundreds of thousands would fall into the full poverty trap each year.

Pointman has an excellent post this week.  He outlines the position of Germany which quickly changed from a mixed energy policy to one using renewables.  If we don't realise the UK - and Scotland in particular - is running down the same road, but at a slightly different speed, then we're fools.

Tweet

The Rice Video

Australians are protesting loudly at the compulsory carbon tax which their government has introduced.

According to the Scottish Climate and Energy Forum 'Of all the countries in the world, Scotland seems to have the least debate about global warming'.  Why are we so accepting of what politicians say and other propaganda?

Scotland's politicians are slowly, but surely, driving the country towards an energy system composed of highly expensive - and often untested - renewable systems.

We need to make the best decisions for our future energy needs and SCEF's pragmatic stance is admirable.

Tweet