Bishop Hill Hughes bites back
Oct 22, 2012 Energy: wind The battle of wits and words between Robert Gross, the Imperial College PR guy turned policy wonk, and Gordon Hughes, the Edinburgh University economist continues apace, with Hughes issuing a pointed response to Gross's criticisms:
The story of wind power in Europe is one of consistent over-optimism about performance and costs reinforced by an apparent unwillingness to define clear policy options and then construct analyses based on concrete evidence. Modelling is not a substitute for evidence. In practice, the Imperial College/DECC claims about the costs of current policies rest upon the old story of “this time everything is going to be different”. Really? How could we test this?
I would propose a simple market test that bears directly on the subject of the original ECC hearing. If the proponents of the Imperial College/DECC view of this issue believe that my calculations of the costs of existing policies are wrong, why do they not endorse a major and continuing reduction in the level of subsidies? For example, the costs claimed would be consistent with a reduction to 0.5 ROCs per MWh immediately and to zero by 2020 for onshore wind and something equivalent for offshore wind.
Reader Comments (24)
Hughes:
Easy. Tot up every time someone has ever said that to you and work out the percentage of times it didn't come true. 97% is of course the standard answer.
That is just the best challenge ever for don quioté of this world. How could they refuse. Oh forgot, they are lying, of course, silly me.
I read with interest an article in the Independent ( online) yesterday about how the UK Govt. looks like it now realises, I presume,it may an energy issue looming and is now looking at subsidising new nuclear power plants. But the academic energy "experts" and others are "screaming foul" over the proposed subsidy. Maybe because they fear a drop in subsidies for wind farming. Hypocrisy at its best.
If the lights go out in a few years' time can we put on trial all the people who have served in the cabinets of British governments over the past 15 years for their gross negligence in failing to avert an entirely foreseeable disaster?
Great news from Scottish Renewables. So much CO2 has been saved by renewable energy that we've offset Longannet coal-powered station.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-20025735
So can we shut down this 'durdy' generator tomorrow and start healing the planet?
Let me shut it down Captain First-Minister.
Let me put those lights out!
So Gross is "the Imperial College PR guy turned policy wonk" while Hughes is "the Edinburgh University economist". You could have said, "Gross, senior lecturer at Imperial College", or "Gross, the Imperial College economist". But that wouldn't have slanted readers' opinions in the right way, would it?
Botbucket,
Misses the point, [surely not?!]..................... yet again.
Athelstan...you forget that Bitty knows nothing (as he always says)...so his opinion is worth nothing and his slurs mean nothing despite their pure source in Mashey-style conspiracy theory nonsense.
@Ross
I read something similar yesterday - but not the Indie.
The writer accepted that "renewables" were not ready for prime time - but this was sooo unfair because fossil fuels had an unfair advantage having been mainstream for a long time.
We need to remember that this is not about science and it's not about a rational approach to energy. Logical thought left the building a long time ago.
With old windbag Salmondo wittering on about the great green Scottish future at a recent green economy bunfight in the North East, he shall surely come a cropper soon, since his SNP "Government" has appointed Professor Hughes to the Scottish Water Quango. Hughes is saying that Windmills Bad, Gas & Coal Good, and this isn't a message that resonates in the corridors of SNP megalomaniacs anonymous. Whatever became of the Scottish Taxpayers Millions that Salmondo gave away to the now deposed and jailed Ex-President of the Maldives. You must all remember surely, it came out the Scottish Guvernmentals Edyoukayshun Bud-Jet or Sumfink. No the closed schools was just a coincidence ye ken pal. Nothing to do with giving away millions of Scottish Budget moneys to some foreign dictator. Why is this not illegal? There is NO Budget for "Foreign Aid" in the Scottish Block Grant, yet Salmondo and Co. seems to throw wads of cash at any vaguely plausible scheme, or should that be SCAM.
All Hail Big Eck,
Cock of the North,
A'body fine kens,
jist what he's worth,
Oh, it's no a Bawbee,
and it's no a Half Crown,
For Ba' Faced Big Eck,
is Naught but a Clown !
pshaw !
diogenes Oct 23, 2012 at 1:00 AM
Not only that, but he won't check a reference, awarded me a gold star for googling (duckduckgo actually). when finding references for him. Quotes that experts say something, when pointed out that all humans have an agenda he then says these are amateurs who therefore are truthful and honest. With logic and the arrogance of youth of teenagers like him there is no point in having any sort of discussion.
Sandy
11:04 PM | Roy
I hear that the Italian scientists who failed to predict the recent earthquake are being prosecuted
HTTS
Correction. "Have been prosecuted" and are doing six years in the slammer e'en as we speak!
Mike Jackson
I bet Michael Fish is glad he's not Italian :)
To stop further windmill madness our scientific hierarchy needs a Peace and Reconciliation Commission so academics can openly confess they succumbed to 'back radiation' mass hypnosis.
This artefact of pyrometers, which block radiation from the other direction by a shield, is a Poynting Vector filed, annihilated by the PV from a hotter body. This physics, derived from Maxwell's Equations by John Henry Poynting in 1884, has been completely forgotten, even by some Professors of Physics.
Political fraudsters of which Salmond is the supreme example, have used this imaginary threat to impose great future hardship on his population; it's a seriously deadly religious cult.
SandyS
Quite!
I haven't read the full story but I confess to being somewhat sympathetic. As far as I know earthquakes are not exactly easy things to forecast. I suppose it comes down to what question they were asked and what answer they gave.
BitBucket
He's a policy wonk! It's the use the word 'policy' four times in his job description that is the clue.I think the problem was, they did not give a proper account of risks, not that they failed to forecast.
The proper account would have been that the risk of an earthquake is very low, and that it is essentially impossible to forecast accurately when one is coming. This means that even the current tremors are very unlikely to be harbingers of a major catastrophic earthquake. But there is a risk that they may be, and the risk is x, and if it is of a certain magniture the casualties will likely be y. So, folks, now you know as much as we do, and now you can figure out whether you want to evacuate. Be aware that if you regularly do this, you are going to evacuate with no need z percent of the time. Good luck with your decision.
Ideally they would have supplied a two by two matrix. Tremors like this, no earthquake x% chance. Tremors like this, earthquake, y%. No tremors no earthquake z%. No tremors and earthquake a%. Then the politicians can really see what their choices are and what the costs and benefits will be.
The problem comes when the scientists go beyond what they know into making policy recommendations which depend on all kinds of value judgments on things they know nothing about. As with AGW.
22 Oct: Forbes: Todd Woody: The Big Solar Sell-Off: Siemens Puts Solel On The Block
German industrial giant Siemens on Monday said it has put its solar assets up for sale, including Solel, the Israel solar thermal power plant builder it acquired just three years ago for $418 million…
With the bankruptcy of German rival Solar Millennium and other companies, the number of solar thermal power plant builders continues to dwindle, leaving just a handful of developers, including California’s BrightSource Energy and SolarReserve, Spain’s Abengoa and France’s Areva…
http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwoody/2012/10/22/the-big-solar-sell-off-siemens-puts-solel-on-the-block/
22 Oct: AP: Germany’s Siemens to give up solar energy business
Several German solar manufacturers, including Q-Cells SE and Solar Millennium AG, have filed for insolvency over the past year. Another German company in the solar market, SMA AG, announced last week that it will slash up to 1,000 jobs — about a fifth of its global workforce — amid falling revenues and a possible annual loss in 2013 due to the growing price pressures…
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i_knzo65TKuU1NKysswahlRYM1BQ?docId=6b129965c16840e6a09f5a91a5b3f9b2
if this comes to pass, i would be totally opposed to any subsidies.
however, it reinforces a theory i've held for some time, which explains why the oddest of bedfellows push the CAGW meme. there's the pro-nuclear camp and there's the renewables camp, and what they have in common is both want massive subsidies from the taxpayer:
22 Oct: Independent: Steve Connor: Government to rip up rulebook and subsidise new nuclear plants
Academics claim ministers are set to break promise not to write blank cheques in bid to reassure foreign investors
The Government is planning to write a "blank cheque" to the nuclear industry by underwriting the cost of new power stations, leading energy academics have claimed in a letter to The Independent.
Under a major policy U-turn being considered by ministers, the taxpayer would be left to cover the cost of budget over-runs or building delays at new nuclear plants. Costly setbacks are almost inevitable with such complex construction projects...
EDF Energy's plans for a plant at Hinkley Point in Somerset are considered the most advanced.
Last night environmentalists accused the Government of plotting to squander public money to protect the profits of energy giants...
In an interview earlier this month, John Hayes, the Energy Minister, hinted at some form of nuclear subsidy, saying: "There are issues around underwriting risk. It's an argument that's been put up many times by people from outside government. That's something I will certainly look at and I do think there's an argument for considering how you imbue the market with sufficient investor confidence to get to where you want to go."...
There are just two new nuclear power plants under construction in Europe, one in Finland and one in France, and both are significantly over-budget as well as suffering severe delays. Both plants use the same type of nuclear reactors that are being proposed for Britain...
A spokesman for DECC said last night: "We're in preliminary discussions with EDF and Centrica about the potential financial terms on which they might go ahead with their Hinkley Point C project... There will be full transparency over the terms agreed. No commitments or final decisions have been made."...
Were Britain to build a new nuclear power station it would most likely be a European Pressurised Reactor model, a newer version of the Pressurised Water Reactor variant used the last time one was built here. Two EPR plants are currently under construction in Europe – at Olkiluoto in western Finland and Flamenville in Normandy, France
Flamanville
Construction began in December 2007. It was originally expected to start operating in 2012 and to cost €3.3bn, but quality control problems, including the discovery of cracks in the concrete base of the reactor, mean the estimated cost has risen to €6bn and the start date has been pushed back to 2016. Protests have been staged across France against the project.
Olkiluoto
Work began in 2005, with the plant originally set to open in 2009. It is now expected to begin operating no earlier than 2015. The cost was estimated at €3bn, but the final price is expected to be closer to €5bn. The joint enterprise between Areva (France) and Siemens (Germany) has been beset by issues with supervision of inexperienced contractors.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/government-to-rip-up-rulebook-and-subsidise-new-nuclear-plants-8219870.html
Anybody else The Daily Politics with Jo Coburn
Now the Uk government is now going to fully Underwrite New Nuclear Stations.Want them on line by 2020.
Jack Straw is on there He was just arguing it out with the Woman from the Green Party.
Jack is Pro Nuclear and Anti Wind
Good man
While I agree with the technical superiority of nuclear (vs. wind) as a large, reliable energy supply, this seems to be merely changing the cronies receiving the government subsidy. Surely nuclear can be built and operated profitably without subsidy, provided the government promised to stay out of their way.
@Bitbucket. Here’s a thinker for you:
You go travel everywhere on a wind powered bike but as the wind does not always blow you have a gas powered bike follow you around so you can change over when the wind stops, is this economical?
You are also paid to travel around on your wind powered bike but not on your gas powered bike is this economical?
Pull windmills off the Public teat.
I, for one, am sick of been drained by the fat parasite that is "green energy"