BBC pretty exultant that the subsidy cut to onshore wind generation is only going to be 10% and not that 25% that “right wing” Conservatives wanted. The Limp as Lettuce politician Ed Davey was portrayed in heroic tones for seeing off the challenge to the Green Lobby although to be fair he gives such a bad interview that even this was somewhat diluted. Our friend Roger Harrabin was also on hand to join the the backslapping at this “good news”.
IN THE WINDMILLS OF THEIR MINDS
Bookmark the permalink.
Off topic. Victoria Derbyshire a few mins ago: We’ll talk to 2 parents in a moment, both of whom have children. Priceless.
Sorry David it was to good to miss.
The only good news for onshore wind generation would be the election to power of UKIP and the removal of all those hideous windmills from the countryside.
They are ugly, inefficient, expensive, useless and not environmentally friendly. They use more carbon to design, manufacture, test, install, maintain and dispose of, than they save, and all the while when they are used, there needs to be a carbon based energy alternative back up supply for when they are NOT working. So they are hideously expensive, inefficient and do not save an ounce of carbon in reality.
They should be scrapped.
I am in favour of wave or tidal power, solar arrays and other imaginative and genuinely “green” alternative fuels. Genetically modified algae which excrete diesel for example… But wind farms are a very expensive con!
Agreed geyza. Why has Tidal power been ignored, why are these windmills being given the top table when solar power must also be considered. This just looks like another money making exercise. They don’t want a solution, they just want a cause that has to be backed up on a regular basis, thus increasing profits.
Because they are a very visible marker for ‘Green’ policy at work. Hardly anyone will see a tidal station, large numbers will see windmills somewhere on land.
Never underestimate a politicians ability to not see past the trees.
Pah: i would make a slight correction.
Never Under estimate a politicians ability to not see MONEY!!”!
Yes, and they’d like to establish the leaf as currency. Now, how much would one deciduous forest buy?
(apologies to Douglas Adams)
Very good point. Was watching a film last night with one of the younger members of the family – ‘Real Steel’ (no, don’t go there, it’s crap) – set ‘sometime in the near future’. I lost count of the number of on-the-road shots, usually sunset in the background, inspiring soundtrack, where the turbines were still heroically doing their job.
In other words, subliminal shite.
In reality they will become forgotten relics, rusting and dropping their blades in one last despoilation of our countryside, visited only by the believers on the anniversary of Kyoto, like a latter-day Stonehenge.
I agree with everything you say about wind turbines geyza, but not tidal power or solar. Tidal power for the amount we would need to make a difference, would take up half of our coastline, and still suffers from not being available for 3 hours every day during slack water. Solar only works during the day and solar panels degrade at between 4-10% each year so quickly become useless and needing constant replacement.
We have lots of shale gas which would be cheap and efficient supplying power all day every day using existing technology, and following on from that will be Thorium based Nuclear using Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors which will be safe, relatively cheap and we have enough Thorium for around a thousand years and when that’s coming to the end there is lots of Thorium on the Moon.
I agree about Shale, but as for solar, I did not mean solar panels. I meant solar mirror arrays which heat up water and drive turbines. They are not feasible in the UK, but we could set them up overseas and sell the energy to the locals, freeing up gas and oil for our use.
I am also in favour of nuclear.
As for tidal, only having them idle for 3 hours per day, (creating a reliable and predictable maintenance window), would be far better than windmills that can be stationary for weeks on end, depending on the weather.
I take no political or idealistic approach to energy use, but a purely practical one. I support what works
geyza, I see where you are coming from, but checkout Thorium Energy on YouTube a film called: LFTR’s in 5 minutes.
I think you will see why we should not go down the route of a partial solution
Again Osborne proves a quitter, no doubt pressured (blackmailed) by Cameron. The subsidy should be cut by 100%…now! The “National Economic Suicide Act” aka the Climate Change Act should be repealed at the first opportunity, the day they return from their holidays. We may then be able to think of growth, until then it is impossible!
Naughtie was banging on about “de-carbonisation of the economy” as if his life depended on it. He just wouldn’t let it go.
Yes, let’s start with him, he’s a waste of carbon if ever there was one.
You can almost hear the presenters thinking – come on you plebs this is my pension fund you are wrecking.
The only form of alternative energy I support is BBC presenters in bank of giant hamster excercise wheels;
Its alternative, its sustainable, they can run through the night and when there is no wnd, so 24/7 availability.
Pity the beeb never mentioned EU pressure on the government not to cut wind farm subsidies.
How come the hidden hand of Brussels gets so little publicity? It makes most of the rules, after all.
I think Tumble weed would be a great form of energy. Just follow Harmen and Balls around and collect the energy from the gusts of wind that follows their every uttering.