SamCam’s father nets £350,000 a year from subsidised wind farm

The BBC and their pet scientists frequently lament the fact that so many people are sceptical about global warming and the attendant political policies forced upon them.

Why oh why they ask in despair does no one believe them?

Could it be for instance the inconvenient revelations in the CRU emails?  Could it be the rigged ‘inquiries’ into those emails? Could it be that both scientists and the BBC are not keen to let the public see the data or who is saying what in their secret seminars? Could it be the lack of any real ‘science’ that proves CO2 is the actual driver of climate change?

Could it be as mentioned in the last post that in the quest for a carbon free energy policy it seems that all morality and common sense has gone out of the window as illustrated by Lord Smith’s desire to deny cheap energy to the masses and impose hugely expensive renewable energy upon them instead…

Coal on the global market is so cheap that it threatens government attempts to tackle climate change, the chairman of the Environment Agency has warned.

“The government must ensure it doesn’t continue.”

Or could it be something like this example, Via Bishop Hill, of the arrogant desire to hide yet more inconvenient and very awkward truths about wind turbines….that they are wearing out much faster than claimed…and thereby also losing efficiency as well…and costing us even more?

The Government’s scientific advisor, Prof. Mackay is in full denial mode:

Readers will no doubt recall the study by Gordon Hughes, which suggested that wind farms are wearing out much more quickly than previously thought. This was the subject of a bit of to and fro at BH the other day, when Prof David Mackay, the chief scientist at DECC, appeared in the comments to dispute the findings.

Renewable Energy Foundation published some background, explaining that the two sides had in fact been discussing the issue since the original Hughes paper appeared in 2012. Hughes had apparently met with Mackay and had at that time apparently persuaded him that the model was in fact identifiable. Mackay had then shifted position somewhat, claiming only that the decline in performance was overstated (he suggested 2% per annum compared to Hughes’ 5%). However, by May Mackay had apparently reverted to his earlier position, namely that Hughes’ model was non-identifiable.

The REF’s summary of the story to date ended with this strikingly robust statement:

Professor Mackay has made considerable efforts, first to persuade us to withdraw Professor Hughes’ paper, and now publicly, and on dubious grounds, to discredit work which is obviously original and draws attention to a previously undiscussed phenomenon, the decline in load factor over time, that was not acknowledged, for example, in the Department of Energy and Climate Change’s own levelised cost estimates for wind power. This is extraordinary behaviour for a Chief Scientific Advisor to government. Rather than shooting the messenger, Professor Mackay might more fruitfully be advising government on how best to ensure that consumer gets better value for their subsidy, and that we present a more economically compelling example of the low carbon economy to the developing world. 

 

Ensuring the consumer gets better value for their subsidy?

Pull the other one…never happen…not as long as Cameron’s father-in-law, and his ilk, are raking in the dosh from the windfarms.

Wonder just how many investments the good Tim Yeo, Chair of the DECC, has?

Is the BBC investigating any of this?  Is it heck as like!

As Christopher Booker says:

The BBC,  now has a “narrative” shaping its coverage in only one direction on almost every issue, from global warming and wind farms to the EU and the activities of what they call our “brave” social workers. And the most telling giveaway of anyone who has passed into the grip of a “narrative” is how they instantly fall back on denigration of anyone who questions it, dismissing them as “flat-earthers”, “idiots”, “cranks”, “Right-wingers”, “creationists”, “in the pay of Big Oil”, and so on.

Also, more detail on the wind turbines from Roger Helme:

A paper  by distinguished environmental economist Professor Gordon Hughes of Edinburgh University shows that in the UK, on-shore wind farm relative output (actual output as a percent of rated maximum) declined from an average 24% at the outset to 15% after ten years and 11% after fifteen years.  Danish offshore wind farms declined even more catastrophically, from 39% initially to 15% at age ten.  The output of larger turbines (now favoured by the industry) declined more rapidly than that of smaller turbines.

This decline may be attributable to wear and tear on the mechanical parts and bearings, plus degradation of the aerodynamic surfaces of the blades (I daresay those clots of eagles’ blood and feathers don’t help).  Degradation of the blades can create instability and vibration, in turn leading to mechanical wear, damage and failure.  And offshore, the strong winds and harsh conditions constitute an extraordinarily challenging environment for wind turbines.

These findings have important implications for policy towards wind generation in the UK. First, they suggest that the subsidy regime is extremely generous if investment in new wind farms is profitable despite the decline in performance due to age and over time. Second, meeting the UK Government’s targets for wind generation will require a much higher level of wind capacity – and, thus, capital investment – than current projections imply. Third, the structure of contracts offered to wind generators under the proposed reform of the electricity market should be modified since few wind farms will operate for more than 12–15 years.

The BBC’s Ethical Man laments the ineffectiveness of wind turbines  (cheap energy is only possible at the moment thanks to fossil fuels):

Professor David MacKay, the new chief scientist at the Department for Energy and Climate Change, has done the maths on this. Instead of kW, he calculates power in kWh, and he estimates that if we put wind turbines across the windiest 10% of the country, we would generate only 20 kWh per day per person in Britain.

According to MacKay, it takes 40 kWh to drive the average car 50km.

Add in offshore turbines covering a third of the available shallow water locations (44,000 turbines) and installing deep water turbines in a 9km-wide strip all round the entire British coast and you get an additional 48kWh day per person.

That’s a lot of power, but even on quite conservative estimates the average UK resident uses 125 kWh day.

It leads to a dispiriting conclusion. Wind is, at best, only a very partial solution to the problem of how to generate low-carbon energy.

Some prices to consider:

A Biased BBC reader notes;

“I watched Wild Winter: Surviving Avalanches on BBC4 last night (Tuesday). A fantastic documentary, except for the following. At the 39 minute mark we have cine material showing the snowy Cairngorms in the 1960’s, and then scenes of the next two snowless decades. This is followed by news footage of the last three years of sever snow. The narrator adds a token global warming comment and then goes on to explain how weather is affected by many things. BUT, right in the middle of this a bizarre scene has been crudely inserted where a ‘climate scientist’ tells us he knows what the weather is going to be in 2080, and it’s going to be hot! Cue scene with orange glow. I have watched it again and again, and if you mute this brief segment, the narrator’s voice effortless segues, making perfect sense. I have shown this to a colleague who doesn’t share my bias, and he agrees that this clip appears to have been edited in afterwards in order to remain ‘on message’.  The programme is on iplayer now on BBC4, fast forward to 39 minutes and watch BBC warble gloaming propaganda at its finest.”

Oh Mr Miliband, you DO so impress us. First you take on the “Big 6” energy companies and now you take on the “Big 5” banks. Amusingly, you then send Chris Leslie, shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, onto the Today programme and ..oh dear, it’s a car crash. Did you hear it by chance? Just after 8.08am Mishal Husain was pretty straight with him and he wiggled like a worm, showing just how lightweight Labour is on this topic. So, top marks for her but I did notice that Nick Robinson was doing his usual spot of cheer-leading for Miliband’s nonsensical new big idea.

Middle of the month, my birthday, so a new Open Thread for you and I am off for the day shortly! Enjoy.

China is still massively hooked on coal.

Roger Harrabin has been reporting the ‘excuses’ for China’s use of coal and telling us how wonderful the Chinese are at tackling environmental issues for a long time.

There are always two threads he likes to emphasise….firstly that China must continue to develop economically, it’s only fair, and that the West is responsible for China’s emissions as they buy Chinese products.

Harrabin never questions those ‘orthodoxies’.

Despite being told the Planet is about to burn unless we immediately reduce all carbon emissions China et al can continue to pump out massive quantities of the stuff…so kind of gives the lie to how urgent the environmental issue is….so is it all just ‘political’…a leftwing conspiracy to close down Western industry?

“A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the
United States. De-development means bringing our
economic system into line with the realities of
ecology and the world resource situation.”
– Paul Ehrlich,
Professor of Population Studies

Here is a Harrabin  report from 2011….

It is virtually impossible for the world to keep within the CO2 limits defined as safe for the climate, according to the chief economist of the International Energy Agency think tank.

Dr Fatih Birol told an audience in London that key nations were not prepared to take the steps necessary to cut carbon growth.

Dr Birol said the unsayable – that peaking emissions by 2020 was virtually impossible, and that in those circumstances we could “kiss goodbye” to the 2C target.

“We would need to double decarbonisation efforts, then double them again to keep emissions (of CO2 and equivalent gases) within 450 parts per million,” he said. “The bulk of the effort needs to take place in countries where climate change is not high on the policy agenda. We have to be realistic.”

Dr Birol referred to the debate in Europe as to whether the EU would cut emissions by 20% or 30% by 2020 against 1990 levels. The difference between these two targets, he said, was equivalent to just two weeks of China’s emissions.

He said the West could not blame China because per capita emissions and car ownership there were still comparatively very low and he urged the UK and EU continue with “climate leadership”.

Did you note that sentence?

“The bulk of the effort needs to take place in countries where climate change is not high on the policy agenda. We have to be realistic.”

In other words countries like China must make the most effort to reduce emissions.

Still, can’t blame China.

and one from 2007

China is now building about two power stations every week, the top climate change official at the UK Foreign Office, John Ashton, has said.

He said there was no point blaming China for rising global CO2 emissions.

Rich nations had to set an example of low-carbon development for China to follow, Mr Ashton told the BBC. 

There is  a moral case.  Most of the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have been put there by developed countries without the constraint of having to worry about the climate. That means we should bear the leading edge of responsibility.

Rivers of Gold

So the ‘West’ has to pay twice….we’re already pumping massive amounts of money into China’s economy..in infrastructure and manufacturing investment and then by buying the products yet more goes in…and now we’re also supposed to provide compensation for making China rich?

But what does China do with all that money?

‘Provincial governments and state-owned enterprises often see more political and financial advantage in diverting the river of investment money flowing into China towards polluting heavy industries.’

Here from 2009 we see that China thinks its emissions will peak, that’s right peak, between 20 and 30 years from now….

‘a modelling exercise published recently by three respected organisations – the Energy Research Institute (ERI), Qinghua University, and the State Council Development Research Centre – concludes that emissions could peak between 2030 and 2040.’

Harrabin of course can’t lavish enough praise on the Chinese and thinks they are the saviours of the planet……

‘It is almost impossible to tell industrial policy and environment policy apart.’

The blog ‘Not a lot of people know that’ tells a different tale where China is combating pollution in the cities…by moving it out into the countryside:

A Look at China’s Current and Proposed Coal Use

With its rapid economic development in recent years, China has been expanding coal power generation capacity at an astonishing speed for the past decade (see graph below). It is worth noting that this period of rapid expansion followed a period of relatively slow growth in new coal-fired capacity. The action plan marks the first time the Chinese government has introduced a ban on new coal-fired plants.

However most of China’s coal development is moving westwards to less developed regions. The graphs below show that current coal consumption is strong in northern provinces (left), and the geographic distribution of proposed coal power projects (right) indicates a further growth of coal consumption in the northwestern provinces. Most of these regions are not covered by the action plan, and more than 80 percent of the proposed projects in the 2012 pipeline are currently exempt from the ban and special standards.

So China is still building coal fired power stations at the rate of one a week…and emissions will continue to rise until maybe 2040.

Yep……no problem there then if you believe in CO2 powered Global Warming, Climate Change or is it Global Weirding?

And by the by this gives the lie to just how much politicians and the great and the good really care about energy prices…..from last year……

Cheap coal ‘threatens UK pollution targets’

Coal on the global market is so cheap that it threatens government attempts to tackle climate change, the chairman of the Environment Agency has warned.

Lord Smith says the UK’s share of electricity generated by coal is up to 40% – the highest since 1996.

Unless this trend is curbed, he says, the UK will miss its targets on curbing climate change and sulphur pollution.

The price of coal has been driven down by the dash for shale gas in the US.

Lord Smith told the BBC: “There’s lots of talk about a dash for gas but in effect we’re in a dash for coal that’s completely unsustainable.

The government must ensure it doesn’t continue.”

Yes…can’t have cheap energy can we? Instead we must meet some emissions targets driven by scientists who have allowed themselves to be trapped in their own hubris and desire for the massive research grants to continue and by a political set that are also caught in their rhetoric on the subject and in many cases by a desire to use climate change as a vehicle for change socially, industrially and politically.

Now, to be honest I could not care less who or indeed what Francois Hollande sleeps with. Firstly, he is not President of my country and second, it’s what he is doing to the French economy so vigorously that is the real concern. BUT his liaisons with a french actress and the hypocrisy involved is surely an issue worth some coverage? No. Or so BBC correspondent Hugh Schofield informs us….

A long half-hour of less-than-riveting talk about the economy finally ended, and the first question came from the French press. As expected, it asked the president to clarify the position following the allegations about his affair with the actress Julie Gayet. His answer was concise and not especially revealing. Yes, he was passing a difficult moment in his private life. And yes, there would be a decision about the status of Valerie Trierweiler in advance of his planned visit to Washington next month.  But for the rest, this was a private matter – and therefore he was not ready to say any more. The French press accepts this. It is perhaps to its credit that it agrees that private matters should remain just that.

However, when it comes to similar affairs involving Conservatives, the BBC never flinched from reporting suchlike. Privacy for the left, but not les autres…

About a decade ago, Qaradawi issued a fatwa on the gradual conquest of the entire continent of Europe via Islamic exhortation (dawah) and the demographic factor, leading to the fulfillment of Muhammad’s prophecy on the conquest of the cities of Constantinople (Istanbul), Jerusalem, and Romiyyah (Rome) as a condition for the emergence of the Mahdi, the Muslim messiah.

Welcome to the dawah of political Islam. With its high octane blend of politics and religion as potent as any of history’s grand ideas.   John Ware, Panorama

Funny thing…the BBC spent a lot of time and effort to counter ‘myths’ about Muslim demographics….the Muslim birthrate…

Disproving the Muslim Demographics sums

&

Debunking a YouTube hit

Even producing their own little YouTube counterblast:

Strange now though how quiet the BBC is about the frontpage story in the Times which tells us that 10% of child births are ‘Muslim’.

Of course talking about Islam is not the done thing….criticising Islam is ‘polluting’ polite society as Sarah Montague reminds us:

‘It’s one thing to say these are extremist groups on the fringes [The EDL]…but it’s the extent to which they pollute the rest of the population I suppose in terms of how you deal with it is the concern and how much pollution do you think has gone on?’

The BBC only refers to it in ‘What the papers say’ and links to that on Twitter.

Could it be that the BBC is hiding certain news that it thinks will cause a bit of a stir…..‘‘the one-in-ten birthrate statistic could “generate alarmism”.’

And alarmism there might be…or is that genuine concern?……

Matthew Goodwin, a leftwing academic has made it his job to study the ‘far Right’ and the ‘Counter Jihad movement’……from his work we can see that 50% of his poll agree that there will be a ‘clash of civilisations’ between white Britons and Muslims…36% disagree.  Further more 52% of Conservatives, 33% of Labour, 18% of UKIP and 24% ‘other’, and only 5% of the BNP agree with the EDL (as was).

So probably a good thing to talk about such concerns and not brush them under the carpet as the BBC does.

The BBC weren’t so quiet when it came to a Christian birthrate:

A Womb is a Weapon

Across the world, and increasingly in Europe and the UK, a unique Christian evangelical movement is growing.

For some, encouraging larger Christian families is part of a project to outbreed other religions, particularly Islam, winning back the world for Christ one baby at a time.

The BBC’s Giles Fraser, in his alternate gig at the Guardian said this:

“Why do you have so many children?” I asked [a Palestinian in Gaza]. Perhaps it was a rude question. But I didn’t get how in so poor a place as Gaza it made sense to have a dozen kids. “It’s political,” the man said – going on to explain that Yasser Arafat had told to them that their victory was to be found in “the Palestinian womb“. I was shocked. But in a place whose very existence is threatened, having children is all about national survival.

So no doubt there then that demographics is important.

The Guardian does its own bit of counter ‘alarmism’  trying a similar tactic to the BBC to reassure everyone that there really isn’t a problem:

Is it true there is a ‘startling’ rise in the birthrate of British Muslims?

The figures do not calculate birthrate as such, but show that almost a tenth of babies and toddlers (under-fives) in England and Wales are Muslim.

But are these figures anything new? No.  [Well…that’s OK then]

The story points out that fewer than one in 200 over-85s are Muslim. [Of course it’s the over 85’s that are likely to become fundamentalists aren’t they?] 

What about the focus on Muslims?……the one-in-10 birthrate statistic could “generate alarmism”.   [So best to hide it eh?…Never mind why it might generate alarmism]

The Spectator takes it’s own look at the story:

I suppose that The Times should be congratulated for reporting at all a fact which most of our media  refuse to touch.  The majority still go along with an ‘expert’ quoted in the Times story who warns that ‘the one-in-ten birthrate statistic could “generate alarmism”.’  [See Guardian for proof of that statement]

There are certainly a lot of people who go along with that line of thinking. Something big may be happening, and people can see it is happening, but best not to mention it in case people are ‘alarmed’. Elsewhere in the piece there is an account from Batley in West Yorkshire of how the growing young Muslim population there has led to ‘pubs, hospitals, houses and public buildings’ being turned into ‘Muslim private schools, madrassas, mosques and a Sharia court to satisfy rising demand from families.’

All of which nicely demonstrates part of the pickle this country is in. Even the papers that will report on one of the biggest underlying stories of our time, and one which demonstrates an unprecedented change in the make-up of our country, must on all accounts be turned into a good news story. And since expressing any worries about the fact is undoubtedly terribly bigoted and nasty, we’ll all just have to nod our heads, keep our fingers crossed, mouth the same platitudes and all put our collective future in the hopes of Sheikh Mogra.

Sheikh Ibrahim Mogra, the assistant secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain. He doesn’t seem to see the large increase in the Muslim population of the UK as posing any particular challenges and is quoted saying: ‘I just wouldn’t want our fellow citizens to be alarmed by an increase in number… This generation is very much British. They feel very much this is their home.’

Others might agree, but are more honest about the eventual intended ending….

Dawa is prescribed in the Quran as an obligation of all Muslims.

In the 1990s, Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the prominent spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, dramatically re-envisioned the strategy of the worldwide Islamist revivalist movement, and in the process, offered a bold new vision for Islamic dawa in Western countries.

For Qaradawi, Muslim settlement in the West isn’t simply religiously permissible. It is, he argues, a religious necessity and an obligation for the worldwide Islamic revival movement. The Muslim presence in the West is necessary because it enables the conduct of dawa, which in Qaradawi’s view serves multiple purposes—from proselytization to Europeans, to creating Islamic enclaves and an Islamic environment for Muslim immigrants and European converts, to influencing the social and political climate towards Islam and the Muslim Nation (umma) within Western societies.
Qaradawi ultimately believes that Islam will be established as the dominant religious and political force in Europe through dawa. As he has written, “Islam will return to Europe as a conqueror and victor after being expelled from it twice … the conquest this time will not be by the sword but by preaching and ideology….Muslims must start acting in order to conquer this world.”

Most people who praise Qaradawi’s liberalism do not recognize that he defines Muslims in Europe not as European Muslims but as “expatriates” who live under special conditions of weakness and hardship. The rules he developed for Europe should not, therefore, be understood as a liberalization of Islam in general, nor as an attempt to develop an independent European Islamic law with permanent validity.

‘We do not disassociate Islam from war.  On the contrary, disassociating Islam from war is the reason for our defeat.  We are fighting in the name of Islam.  Religion must lead to war.  This is the only way we can win.’
Said by the moderate and respected Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, February 2006

The BBC did once venture down this road:

Panorama with John Ware in 2006….  The Muslim Brotherhood movement already dominates many Islamic groups here. Islam Expo was a further attempt by the movement to position itself as mainstream. Its followers are foot soldiers to the most influential dawah missionary of political Islam today, Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi. But it is only to Middle East audiences that the Brotherhood’s spiritual leader, the Sheikh of the Mujahideen, unveils his prophetic dream. Europe, as he sees it, Islam’s next frontier. 

YUSUF QARADAWI: So Constantinople has been conquered and now the second part of the prophecy remains, which is the conquest of Rome. This means that Islam will return to Europe once again.

Perhaps the next conquest will be the conquest of dawah and ideas. There’s no need for conquest to be with the sword. We might conquer these countries without armies. We want armies of dawah preachers and teachers. WARE: Islam is undergoing a huge revival, here and everywhere, and it is the Muslim Brotherhood who are leading it. Welcome to the dawah of political Islam. With its high octane blend of politics and religion as potent as any of history’s grand ideas. You can comment on tonight’s programme or find out more by visiting our website.

There’s the Truth, and there’s the Truth as reported by the BBC…as Rod Liddle points out…

In Sweden there are riots…almost all the people doing the rioting were, to adapt Nick Robinson’s phrase, people of non-Swedish orign.  These were…are..race riots.

It was not the ordinary Swedes rising up against the oppressive Swedish state; it was immigrants.  Come on James – why not tell us the truth?’

Mein Kampf becomes an ebook bestseller

Digital editions of Adolf Hitler’s fascist screed, in less public format, attract surge in readers

The Today programme (08:24) reports, with a shudder, that interest in Hilter’s Mein Kampf has risen…it is number one bestseller in its Amazon category.

We are told….It’s an important book because it influenced millions of people…and post war it still does…on the Far Right.

We are told it can come with a health warning for readers…..

Mein Kampf is an evil book but it is important to read it…for all who care to safeguard democracy.

We were told it’s had a following all over the world…including India and the Middle East.

Mishal Husain asks…‘Why India?’

Why  the interest in just India from Mishal Husain you might ask….because it isn’t Indians chasing Jews from Europe once again….surely relevant to the topic under discussion.

It is certain fundamentalists who read an equally disturbing book that is perfectly legal to buy, indeed praised and admired by many…possibly those who haven’t actually read it.

A book that Churchill compared to Mein Kampf:

“All was there—the programme of German resurrection, the technique of party propaganda; the plan for combating Marxism; the concept of a National-Socialist State; the rightful position of Germany at the summit of the world.  Here was the new Koran of faith and war: turgid, verbose, shapeless, but pregnant with its message.”

Or another British Prime Minister, William Gladstone, who called the Koran an “accursed book” and once held it up during a session of Parliament, declaring: “So long as there is this book there will be no peace in the world.”

When the BBC starts to examine the contents of the Koran in as rigorously challenging and uncompromising  manner as it looks at Mein Kampf, and indeed the Christian Bible,  we might get some genuine, if inconvenient, truths.

OK folks, here is a new fracking approved Open Thread. Anyone spotted Barbara Plett crying about Ariel Sharon? Nope? What a shocker. The floors is yours….