Unthreaded
@gc
The Greens factor in costs of losing a vexatious application - if they had to pay for the MSM coverage as display ads that cost would be prohibitive...
They knew the JR application would be refused as BS.
tomo
It is time someone calculated the additional CO2 emissions generated by all the protesters, and their transport costs. It will be significantly reduced, now that Greens have to pay their own costs.
golf charlie
Dropped a comment on the NI-RHI thread about the all encompassing database of UK renewable energy and thought it worth publishing a bit wider ....:
Everything should be in there - who, how much, when - I suspect that the variablepitch renewables monitor (motto:"Let the Facts Speak for Themselves") gets it's data from that.
Looks like a useful lever on the renewables crew - and Ofgem.
There is some slackness in maintaining the database - and I can see that enforcing the reporting might annoy some subsidy bandits. If Ofgem don't maintain it properly then it's something that could usefully be complained to MPs about :-)
If you get the way the database should work - i.e. post your "production" >> get paid - a certain amount of embarrassment could ensue.
tomo
I caught the tail-end of an item on 5Live about Frack Free Ryedale. Don't normally listen to Five but was amazed at the antagonism of the female interviewer, and the stupidity of her line of questioning. She actually asked the CEO of the fracking firm if he accepted that Ryedale was a beautiful part of the country - and if he had ever visited it!! I was impressed he kept his cool and explained very simply that as the CEO he had led the last two years of planning meetings and had been running the gas well for many years. But she was determined to paint his company as a despoiler of the countryside. She could not accept that the fracking rig, as the CEO said, would only be present for three months and that the gas well is not visible in a drive-by. I switched off.
Harry Passfield
According to The Guardian, Friends of the Earth have been ordered to pay £10,000 in costs towards the Planning Review. Seems someone omitted a few zeroes from the sum.
The Flaming-Oes in the the Kirkby Misperton sanctuary should now be monitored to see if their diet is adjusted to cause them to go white in time for a promotional photograph, to coincide with the first flipping frack.
golf charlie
Site cleanup fees
Pity Dartington Council didn't think about that when they not only gave planning permission, but actually paid for, that eco school which didn't even give 1 year of use and they eventually knocked down.
stewgreen
Martin A
Not me straight cut and paste, but didn't notice. Liked the irony.
SandyS
It is nice to have some people agree with me, for a change. Please allow me to take some time to bathe in my smugness.
Dec 20, 2016 at 2:46 PM | Radical Rodent
We tend to agree with you, apart from your need to luxuriate for too long.
golf charlie
"Whats a 5MW farm in north UK actually generate ?"
Not a lot if the weather here today is anything to go by!
Dec 20, 2016 at 2:26 PM | Mark Hodgson
The weather doesn't seem to make them unprofitable, due to the SUBSIDIES they are guaranteed to generate.
golf charlie
tomo 5:37 funnily enough, that was sort of my next query. How is the Wiltshire Times financed, such that the Green Blob get such instant PR? Obviously a lot of local newspapers are not independent, but part of larger Big Newspaper Corporate Greed.
If "Costs" are deemed payable by a court or planning procedure, how many times can a Registered Charity pay them without the Charity Commissioners enquiring about the competence of the Trustees of the Charity? If a private person pays the £10,000, is his or her identity available to the public?
Any sensible organisation will factor-in "losses" into a business plan. Depending on the actual wording of this particular ruling, further Judicial Reviews may now be a guaranteed "loss". Most private individuals and companies are wary of donating money, on the basis it will be wasted on bad publicity.