Bishop Hill FiTs: a test of Cameron's conservatism
Sep 18, 2015 Climate: Parliament Energy: grid After Energy and Climate Change questions yesterday, several commenters wondered if the government might be about to backtrack on the swingeing cuts in feed-in-tariffs that were announced recently. MPs on both sides of the house had certainly been very vocal in their demands on behalf of their constituency energy companies and there was scarcely a voice heard in support of the proposals. MP after MP demanded that FiTs be retained for renewables operators. Meanwhile, Aberdonian MPs wanted cash for North Sea oil operators as well. Pressure of the FiTs front continues today.
It's a vicious circle of course and the government risks getting generating a spiral of subsidy, with money having to be thrown at all market participants simply to keep them afloat.
This is going to be a test of Cameron's resolve. Is he going to play the Conservative, and put the consumer interest first, or is he going to cave into the producer interest?
We watch with interest.
Reader Comments (58)
Radical Rodent, President Obama would like another slice of blue-moon cheesecake, to feed to the pink elephants.
Obviously the 200 year claim goes back to Napolean going to Waterloo. These days you can't buy a ticket from Waterloo to St Helena, but some claim original sandwiches are still for sale. Claims made about the 200 yr old science, like the sandwiches, should not be sniffed at, but simply ignored.
It is nearly 40 years since I last failed a latin exam, however concerning the multiple mistakes in IPCC AR5 WG1, it is worth pointing out that 'Erratum' translates as a list of corrections, which implies more than one correction. 'Errata' is a plural, ie more than one list of corrections.
Which ever way you want to look at it, the IPCC has had to admit to many mistakes in AR5 WG1. Given the expertise involved, the multiple authors, many peer reviewers, and robust accreditation techniques, it makes you wonder how many mistakes, deliberate or otherwise, had previously slipped or zipped through into the IPCC's consensus.
No one has ever had the opportunity to check the expenses claims of the IPCC, to check for exaggerated claims, from their distinguished experts , but they never underestimate anything else.
They are absolutely determined to kill off "too cheap to meter" eh?
I notice that the Hinckley Point nuclear price was the subject of some discussion this morning and a statement by Amber Rudd that it is a "bargain" for low carbon electricity.... Like the "bargains" they've been handing out to bandits ransoming power provision (or rather lack thereof) to the renewables crew.
Golf Charlie: aha – I’m one up on you, too! I have never failed a Latin exam (mainly because I have never taken one, but it must count).
Tomo: in a world where everyone drives four-wheeled cars, a government decides that they should really drive 8-wheeled cars, with a 4-wheeled car as back-up. When the idea fails to catch on, despite all the models produced, the spiel they use for selling the latest model is that it is a bargain amongst the 8-wheeled cars available, to buy and to run. Despite the support from their friends in the media, the fact that it is horrendously more expensive than any 4-wheeled car does not fool many of the general population, and the Rudds still do not understand why no-one is buying. However, as government has no real idea how business really works, they simply pass a law which makes 4-wheeled cars almost as expensive as 8-wheeled cars. Problem solved, in their tiny minds.
Radical Rodent, I often wonder how many people watch the "Life of Brian", and don't get how painful it is to see the sketch involving the "Romans Go Home" grafitti being painted on a wall. The sketch was clearly written by Pythons who had suffered Latin teachers. The sketch is incidental to the plot of the film, so is included out of revenge.
It may be that that is the EROEI of the average biofuel. I.e. if you consider that a biofuel is carbon neutral (in itself a big assumption) you merely take the energy content of the biofuel and compare that with the fossil energy needed to grow it as e.g fertiliser and transportation and processing.
It's come to our attention, here on the western shore, that one of your politicians is reported to have conducted some original research into improving methods to assure success of projects proposed in the cargo cult world of politics. He must have learned that the flight of pigs was often a contingency and rather than focusing on the projects themselves, he decided to address himself directly to the pigs, one at a time apparently.
Being young, he must also have supposed that inducing a 'flight of ecstasy' in the pig, might get the job done.
Is there anything to this, or is it just another outbreak of astonishing slander by one of your more extreme 'news' sources?