Spiral of subsidy

One of the points I made in my Spectator speech was the effect of wind power on the rest of the electricity system - a familiar subject to readers here. Assuming we have no coal-fired generation in the future, the baseload power generation market will have to be divided between wind and nuclear. However, with ministers declaring that there will be an expansion of the subsidised wind sector, that marketplace does not look ripe for investment in new nuclear. Generators in that sector are therefore holding out for generous incentives of their own.

Last month, EDF told the Telegraph that they wanted a guaranteed price of £140/MWh roughly double what gas might cost us. The chief executive of Scottish and Southern today argues that a line should be drawn in the sand at £65/MWh and that nuclear generators should get their costs down.

You can see where this is heading: each generator will demand more and more support to keep them in the marketplace. A guaranteed price for nukes will have to be met by an increase in support for wind. We will end up with a disastrous spiral: subsidy after bung after price floor after graft after corruption. All paid for by you.

So here's a novel idea. How about we do away with the rules and regulations and see who is really the cheapest?

My speech from the Spectator debate

A slightly adapted version of my speech from the Spectator debate has been posted at the magazine's Coffee House blog.

Read it here.

Lean over the top

Geoffrey Lean's latest article has an air of panic about it as it becomes increasingly clear that his battle to prevent the shale gas revolution is being lost. Accusing the Conservatives of insanity, he goes on to launch a barrage of disinformation on the new energy source:

But what about shale gas, which has seen prices plummet in the US? I was one of the first British journalists, back in January 2010, to report on its “game-changing” potential, but I must admit it seems to have been overhyped. The US cost crash arose from a glut of wells coming on stream as the economy flatlined: prices are now increasing and are expected to double within three years.

Click to read more ...

Shale momentum

The momentum behind the shale gas revolution is beginning to look almost inexorable. The Institute of Directors has now come out with a report backing the large-scale exploitation of this resource:

A new report from the Institute of Directors (IoD) reveals the huge potential of Britain’s shale gas reserves, calculating the job creation, decarbonisation and economic benefits of exploiting the shale gas on our doorstep.

Britain’s Shale Gas Potential, the latest report in the IoD’s Infrastructure for Business series, explores the extent of UK shale gas, the practical and policy implications of fracking and the lessons that can be learned from the US’s experience opening up their reserves. New polling of IoD members shows that British business leaders support developing a UK shale gas industry.

Is it now only Ed Davey and the environmentalist staff at DECC who stand in the way of wholesale change?

Antarctic ice

An article at the Live Science website says that we sceptics are putting far too much emphasis on the current high levels of Antarctic sea ice. The title is a bit of a straw man:

Record-High Antarctic Sea Ice Levels Don't Disprove Global Warming

I don't think anyone has actually said this - certainly the article doesn't give any examples, although it does stoop to putting words into Steven Goddard's mouth:

Click to read more ...

Tip drive

This seems like a good time for a tip drive - I haven't had one for a while. Help keep the BH show on the road using the tip jar on the right, or better still by hitting the subscribe button.

A win against the windies

Last night's Spectator debate produced a resounding victory for the forces of light. Votes were held on the motion "Scotland's energy policy is a load of hot air" before and after the debate. Struan Stevenson and I were ahead after the first vote, although not strongly so, but produced a strong swing during the course of the evening which left us with a resounding victory.

Click to read more ...

Save your Scientists! Josh 185

Click image for a larger version

Inspired by the huge amount of help currently being offered around the blogs to Lew with his infamous Moon Landing paper. I am sure readers will continue to be generous with their time in this worthy cause.

Cartoons by Josh

Update on Sep 20, 2012 by Josh

Many thanks to the eagle eyed Hilary, cartoon now signed. Here is a higher res version for desktops or printing out and sending to your local climate scientist.

Update on Sep 20, 2012 by Josh

Here is a 1600 x 900 desktop version. Hot from UEA, of course. Let me know if it does not fit - I can resize. And feel free to suggest other things we might find on a UEA/CRU desktop.

It looks like this by the way:

Click for full size version

Analysis on bias and preconceptions in the climate debate

The BBC's Analysis show has been looking at how one's preconceptions and biases affect the climate debate. It reatures Dan Kahan and Roger Scruton among others.

Lou's wind problem

Louise Gray assesses Owen Paterson's elevation to the cabinet, and in particular his attitude towards wind farms.

He suggested that wind farms can be “inefficient” – and fail to cut carbon emissions - because they have to be backed up by gas turbines.

“I am not convinced building wind farms in my area is the right way [forward] because you have more problems. You have to have back up from gas – that is operating inefficiently. “

Click to read more ...

You civil servants care for you

This correspondence between a member of the public and Defra comes via the Countryside Guardian email newsletter.

From: Dr T****
To: noise <noise@defra.gsi.gov.uk>
Sent: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 16:18
Subject: Wind turbine noise

Dear Sirs
 
I would be most grateful if you would let me know to what extent your Department has had discussions with independent ( ie not Government or wind industry funded) medically qualified experts on the environmental health problems associated with the installation of wind turbines near homes. My literature researches identify a number of  truly independent medical experts who express very real concerns at the adverse noise effects on resident health and especially from the low frequency component of the turbine noise..

Click to read more ...

ATI statement on UVa FOI case

This just in from the American Tradition Institute

Yesterday the American Tradition Institute (ATI) participated in more than four hours of oral argument in the Prince William County Circuit Court, in its effort to have faculty emails which were paid for by the taxpayer, in pursuit of taxpayer funded employment, declared public records, declared subject to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (VFOIA) and released under that Act. The trial-court level judge ruled from the bench, siding with ATI on the first two questions, with the University of Virginia on the third, while rejecting the arguments of intervenor Michael Mann. ATI's comments on this development are as follow.

Click to read more ...

Idle scientists

The pressure put on anyone or anything that doesn't toe the AGW alarmism line is something to behold. As we have seen, the merest hint that Owen Paterson might have doubts on the subject has been enough to provoke a frenzy of campaigning journalism from the BBC and the Guardian.

I've reported in the past on the article at the Chronicle of Higher Education, in which Peter Wood wondered, quite reasonably, if Penn State University's willingness to cover up the Sandusky child abuse affair suggested that they would also find it within themselves to cover up wrongdoing by Michael Mann.

This has now generated the most extraordinary set of letters from Mann's supporters in the academy, each claiming, implausibly, that Wood is trying to suggest that Mann is a child abuser.

Don't they have jobs to do?

Anthony on PBS

Anthony's appearance on PBS last night can be seen at WUWT, together with a transcript, for those who prefer the written word. I haven't noticed anything particularly new - the show was about Muller and his critics - but it looks to have been a reasonably balanced piece.

Lewer and lewer

The Lewandowsky story rumbles on, demonstrating an abilitity to generate new storylines that I'm sure few of us thought it ever could have.

Over at Climate Audit, Steve McIntyre reports that he has been unable to replicate Lewandowsky's results and, in the comments, reports some major concerns over Lew's statistical acumen.

I think that the Lewandowsky data set may have a chance of entering the robust regression textbooks.

OLS methods (of which a correlation matrix is an example) are VERY poor methods for this sort of data set. Lewandowsky may set a sort of incompetence landmark in this respect that will take many years to surpass.

...his discussion of correlations is beyond bizarre. He has so little understanding that it’s hard to know where to begin.

Meanwhile, statistician Matt Briggs has similar feelings:

Everything that could have been done wrong, was done wrong. Every bias that could have been manifested, was manifested. Every fallacy pertinent to the matter at hand was made. The conclusions, regurgitated from unnecessarily complicated statistical procedures, did not follow from the evidence gathered, which itself was suspect. In its way, then, the paper is a jewel, a gift to the future, a fundamental text to how easy it is to fool oneself.

The story is, even now, rumbling on. Lewandowsky has posted further thoughts in a new blog article, while Hilary Ostrov notes one of Lew's most active supporters now claiming that the paper's title, linking climate sceptics to the moon landings, was actually a joke. Beyond bizarre, indeed.