On Friday 9th January, the Westminster Government revealed the nine locations chosen to develop off-shore wind energy. Two of the nine chosen locations for developing off-shore wind farms lie between Anglesey and the Isle of Man, and between the south Wales coast and Devon and Cornwall.
These proposed developments are going to be on a much larger more ambitious scale than anything previously attempted. According to the UK Westminster Government, these schemes as well as trying to solve the on-going problem of energy security, will also be a lot cleaner in terms of emissions.
The Bristol Channel zone 1.5GW windfarm will be called the Atlantic Array and will be developed by RWE Npower Renewables, part of RWE Innogy. For the record the current rules governing planning that relate to energy developments ensure that energy schemes over 50 MW's lie under the remit of Westminster rather than the National Assembly.
Two other proposed development sites lie off Scotland, where things are different. There is a distinct possibility that Scotland (as Alex Salmond believes) may well have hit the energy jackpot for the second time. Originally with North Sea oil and now with Scotland's abundance of potential wind and water power.
While some onshore wind farms have been and are likely to remain controversial - off-shore may well prove to be a whole different ball game. With the renewable energy industry in Scotlandis now turning its attention to offshore wind farms, as well as the technology that may harness and deliver the power of the tides and the waves.
Scotland's renewable energy resources are concentrated in the north of the country, while most Scots live in the south, hence the hugely controversy around the new Beauly to Denny power line. One significant difference between Wales and Scotland is the fact that the discussion and the decision is being made in Scotland - we in Wales, despite our National Assembly might well find that similar decisions are made in Whitehall and Westminster not in Wales.
One thing is true, it comes down to a matter of scale, major renewable energy projects can and do have major impacts on our land and seascapes. When it comes to the environmental benefits of large-scale renewable power generation they will always have to be judged against their own environmental impact.
One thing is certain, the Scots have set themselves some tough climate change targets and the current and future Scottish governments will have many more tough decisions to make in the years ahead if those targets are to be met. It is only fair and just that we in Wales should have the powers to make similar decisions about our future energy needs rather than merely ending up dealing with a combination of either decisions made in Westminster or the consequences of Westminster's indifference.
Saturday, 9 January 2010
Friday, 8 January 2010
FIGHTING THE GOOD FIGHT
A well deserved pat on the back is due for the members of the Severn Tunnel Action Group who’s long term fight to save and develop Severn Tunnel Junction Railway Station is delivering real results for local rail users, with retained rail services, better passenger waiting areas, new electronic information boards, improved parking facilities and the restoration of platform 4 (open as of Monday 4th January 2009) which means that there should be less delays to train services. They have over the years successfully fought (alleged irreversible and permanent) cuts in services which would have made passengers journeying to Bristol, Newport, Cardiff and beyond lives a great deal more difficult. They are carrying on the fight to get the foot bridge and the provision of lifts for easy access for disabled and elderly passengers.
Caldicot Town Councillor David Ashwin and myself (frozen by dawns early light at Severn Tunnel)
For those of you who don't know it, Severn Tunnel Rail Junction Railway station is pretty often exposed to a particularly bitter east wind of the Severn estuary - there have been long term issues with secure parking, decent facilities (including shelter) and access to the from the 'island' platforms int he middle for the station. On a number of occasions outside and during election campaigns I and colleagues have been seriously frozen at Severn Tunnel on a number of times whilst campaigning for better rail services.
The railway station provides a vital link for rail passengers to and from work in Bristol, Bath, Newport, Cardiff and beyond - with passengers travelling from as far a field a Monmouth and the Wye Valley, the Forest of Dean and eastern Newport to catch the train to work. I am convinced that but for the on going fight made by the Severn tunnel Action Group that the station would have been quietly run down following proposed cuts in services, now it has more than a fighting chance of acting as useful transport hub for local rail passengers and residents.
Severn Tunnel Action Group's fight for better services, better facilities for passengers and better access to the 'island' platforms continues and provides a working example of what it is possible to achieve when people set their minds to an objective. Well done!
Thursday, 7 January 2010
THE POWER OF CREATIVE THINKING
Not everything that works in Scotland will work in Wales and vice versa, but every now and then you can come across something that may work very well in Wales or at least provide a glimpse of what might be possible.
The creative and communal approach taken by villagers from Fintry, in Stirlingshire (in Scotland) towards the news that a commercial company was seeking to develop a wind farm, was certainly different and very beneficial towards their village – rather than adopting a not in my back yard approach villagers embraced the project and bought their own wind turbine.
Forming the Fintry Development Trust, villagers have used the income generated to benefit their community and community facilities and projects. Whether we are talking about wind, bio-mass energy generation or small scale hydro-electric projects; the idea that local communities can generate communally owned energy and revenue may provide a useful model for similar developments across Wales.
In the two years since the turbine began producing energy, it has generated more than £200,000 for the village of Fintry. The income generated has gone towards insulating 50% of the homes in the village, with further plans to insulate more and help households covert to greener energy.
Residents receiving new cavity wall and/or loft insulation will be on course to save on average £600 on their annual fuel bill. By not having to spend the money on heating this represents a total increase in annual disposable income for the community of £91,352. The measures also means carbon dioxide in the village will be cut by 464 tonnes each year.
This is creative use of communally owned sustainable energy which benefits the local community and the environment and may well prove a model for simular developments for our commubties across Wales.
The Fintry Development trust
In 2003, when a commercial developer unveiled plans for a wind farm near the village of Fintry (in Stirlingshire, in Scotland) – villagers embraced the proposals and created a renewable electricity supply for the village by buying a wind turbine at the wind farm and use the proceeds to fund a village-wide emission reduction programme.
The project aimed to reduce energy consumption and fuel poverty by funding projects that would cut dependence on fossil fuels. The initial scheme to buy the turbine was funded through bank loans and cash from the then Scottish Executive. By 2007 villagers had set up a charitable enterprise dedicated to cutting energy bills and consumption.
Surplus cash from the project was also used to conduct a village-wide survey to assess energy saving needs like insulation and advice. In 2008, the Fintry Development Trust had received its first income from the turbine and began insulating households.
Website: http://www.fintrydt.org.uk
The creative and communal approach taken by villagers from Fintry, in Stirlingshire (in Scotland) towards the news that a commercial company was seeking to develop a wind farm, was certainly different and very beneficial towards their village – rather than adopting a not in my back yard approach villagers embraced the project and bought their own wind turbine.
Forming the Fintry Development Trust, villagers have used the income generated to benefit their community and community facilities and projects. Whether we are talking about wind, bio-mass energy generation or small scale hydro-electric projects; the idea that local communities can generate communally owned energy and revenue may provide a useful model for similar developments across Wales.
In the two years since the turbine began producing energy, it has generated more than £200,000 for the village of Fintry. The income generated has gone towards insulating 50% of the homes in the village, with further plans to insulate more and help households covert to greener energy.
Residents receiving new cavity wall and/or loft insulation will be on course to save on average £600 on their annual fuel bill. By not having to spend the money on heating this represents a total increase in annual disposable income for the community of £91,352. The measures also means carbon dioxide in the village will be cut by 464 tonnes each year.
This is creative use of communally owned sustainable energy which benefits the local community and the environment and may well prove a model for simular developments for our commubties across Wales.
The Fintry Development trust
In 2003, when a commercial developer unveiled plans for a wind farm near the village of Fintry (in Stirlingshire, in Scotland) – villagers embraced the proposals and created a renewable electricity supply for the village by buying a wind turbine at the wind farm and use the proceeds to fund a village-wide emission reduction programme.
The project aimed to reduce energy consumption and fuel poverty by funding projects that would cut dependence on fossil fuels. The initial scheme to buy the turbine was funded through bank loans and cash from the then Scottish Executive. By 2007 villagers had set up a charitable enterprise dedicated to cutting energy bills and consumption.
Surplus cash from the project was also used to conduct a village-wide survey to assess energy saving needs like insulation and advice. In 2008, the Fintry Development Trust had received its first income from the turbine and began insulating households.
Website: http://www.fintrydt.org.uk
Wednesday, 6 January 2010
GOOD OLD UNCLE VLAD...
With the Russian Orthodox New Year rapidly approaching and with temperatures dropping; Vladimir Putin will no doubt pick his moment to revive the long standing feud with Ukraine over gas prices. This time last year the Russians decided to reduce gas exported into Ukraine, through which 80 per cent of Russian gas exports to the EU happen to flow, something which highlighted the real dangers of relying on imported energy.
So what you may say does this have to do with us? A lot is the answer, while Russia may have declining cash reserves over the long term and an economy that is heavily reliant on its trade in oil and gas – the risk of shortages as a consequence of the Kremlin and Mr Putin's geopolitical games is something we in the West can truly all do without. We are in the middle of a cold snap at the moment, and gas is the fuel that is used to heat about two thirds of Britain's homes.
On Monday (4th January 2009) the National Grid issued a warning (a Gas Balancing Alert) to energy providers that demand for gas is threatening to outstrip gas supply. This warning (the last one was sent out in March 2006) follows a 30 percent rise on normal seasonal demand as the cold snap continues. Natural Gas prices rose to their highest level in 10 months (reaching 45 p per therm) – this triggered the import of extra gas from Belgium and Norway via the natural gas (liquefied) importation terminal in Kent.
So what you may ask? Well - quite alot including the prospect of higher energy bills (because we the consumer pay for the shortsighted self interest of the energy companies), higher profits for the energy cartel (sorry companies) and more tax for Gordon Brown’s government. Now while other countries insured themselves against external shocks to their energy needs; successive UK Government’s left it to the market to sort out – so what did the energy companies do, they chased quick short term profits at our expense.
The UK’s market driven approach has been entirely inadequate. One year ago as of January 2009, France could store 122 days of gas and Germany 99 and the UK had storage capacity which would only 15 days. In the 1980’s and 1990’s developing a long term energy strategy or making sensible long term decisions in relation to energy supply was never an option for the Tories during their last tenure on government.
Likewise, the New Labour Government took the best part of a decade to recognise the need to increase storage capacity. The consequence is that UK has to sell gas during the summer because we cannot store it but UK energy suppliers often struggle to purchase gas again when it is needed during a particularly prolonged cold spell as we have at the moment.
The complicit insanity of the Conservative’s headlong shortsighted dash to gas in the 1980’s has been compounded by a real failure in basic strategic energy planning and made worse by the Government's perverse decision to half-heartily look at developing diverse reliable alternative energy sources. This New Labour Government has ignored repeated warnings that it was setting the UK on a path towards higher prices and blackouts.
As I have said before (and will say again) that as a matter of urgency the Westminster Government, the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly and the Northern Ireland Assembly should work with the Irish Government to make these islands entirely self sufficient via renewable non market driven energy resources.
If we develop a flexible self-sufficient energy development strategy within these isles that encourages decentralised micro generation schemes and by actually implementing it this could create jobs, useful skills and help to bootstrap the economy out of the developing recession as well as helping consumers.
So what you may say does this have to do with us? A lot is the answer, while Russia may have declining cash reserves over the long term and an economy that is heavily reliant on its trade in oil and gas – the risk of shortages as a consequence of the Kremlin and Mr Putin's geopolitical games is something we in the West can truly all do without. We are in the middle of a cold snap at the moment, and gas is the fuel that is used to heat about two thirds of Britain's homes.
On Monday (4th January 2009) the National Grid issued a warning (a Gas Balancing Alert) to energy providers that demand for gas is threatening to outstrip gas supply. This warning (the last one was sent out in March 2006) follows a 30 percent rise on normal seasonal demand as the cold snap continues. Natural Gas prices rose to their highest level in 10 months (reaching 45 p per therm) – this triggered the import of extra gas from Belgium and Norway via the natural gas (liquefied) importation terminal in Kent.
So what you may ask? Well - quite alot including the prospect of higher energy bills (because we the consumer pay for the shortsighted self interest of the energy companies), higher profits for the energy cartel (sorry companies) and more tax for Gordon Brown’s government. Now while other countries insured themselves against external shocks to their energy needs; successive UK Government’s left it to the market to sort out – so what did the energy companies do, they chased quick short term profits at our expense.
The UK’s market driven approach has been entirely inadequate. One year ago as of January 2009, France could store 122 days of gas and Germany 99 and the UK had storage capacity which would only 15 days. In the 1980’s and 1990’s developing a long term energy strategy or making sensible long term decisions in relation to energy supply was never an option for the Tories during their last tenure on government.
Likewise, the New Labour Government took the best part of a decade to recognise the need to increase storage capacity. The consequence is that UK has to sell gas during the summer because we cannot store it but UK energy suppliers often struggle to purchase gas again when it is needed during a particularly prolonged cold spell as we have at the moment.
The complicit insanity of the Conservative’s headlong shortsighted dash to gas in the 1980’s has been compounded by a real failure in basic strategic energy planning and made worse by the Government's perverse decision to half-heartily look at developing diverse reliable alternative energy sources. This New Labour Government has ignored repeated warnings that it was setting the UK on a path towards higher prices and blackouts.
As I have said before (and will say again) that as a matter of urgency the Westminster Government, the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly and the Northern Ireland Assembly should work with the Irish Government to make these islands entirely self sufficient via renewable non market driven energy resources.
If we develop a flexible self-sufficient energy development strategy within these isles that encourages decentralised micro generation schemes and by actually implementing it this could create jobs, useful skills and help to bootstrap the economy out of the developing recession as well as helping consumers.
Tuesday, 5 January 2010
BRIDGES OR BANKERS?
Tuesday 5th January 2009 - which means that for 4 days commuters, travellers, businesses and visitors to Wales have had to fork out yet more money to do business within Wales and beyond. I was talking to someone today who told me that they could recall paying the princely sum of twelve and half pence to cross the old Severn Bridge in the mid 1970's - what price the £5.50 per car we pay today.
Looking beyond the immediate teeth grinding impact of yet another annual increase in the Severn bridge tolls, there is another issue – one that is beginning to become worth considering, what’s going to happen in 2014, when it has been estimated that the PFI contract will have been covered by toll receipts. Who actually is going to own the bridge (or bridges) and will they stop collecting the tolls?
If not then the bridge (or bridges) sit on the border - but the toll on the newer bridge is collected in Wales, the older one being collected in England - so will the bridge and the tolls simply revert back to the Department of transport? Or if perchance it comes down to the National Assembly, by default or as a result of central government indifference, then does the National Assembly act as merely an agent for the Department of Transport or does it end up with a measure of a degree of freedom of action?
With that thought in mind, what choices could be made - something that might be worth considering is that if the current tolls were halved then, what could be accomplished by using a percentage of the remaining toll fees to cover ongoing maintenance of the bridge and what could be accomplished by using the remainder of the toll for ring fenced capital projects – such as new integrated transport systems, reopening railway lines, funding tram systems and investing in rail freight – which would be far more beneficial for all of us in Wales than any of the future toll fees disappearing into the Westminster coffers merely to help to bail out the bankers?
Looking beyond the immediate teeth grinding impact of yet another annual increase in the Severn bridge tolls, there is another issue – one that is beginning to become worth considering, what’s going to happen in 2014, when it has been estimated that the PFI contract will have been covered by toll receipts. Who actually is going to own the bridge (or bridges) and will they stop collecting the tolls?
If not then the bridge (or bridges) sit on the border - but the toll on the newer bridge is collected in Wales, the older one being collected in England - so will the bridge and the tolls simply revert back to the Department of transport? Or if perchance it comes down to the National Assembly, by default or as a result of central government indifference, then does the National Assembly act as merely an agent for the Department of Transport or does it end up with a measure of a degree of freedom of action?
With that thought in mind, what choices could be made - something that might be worth considering is that if the current tolls were halved then, what could be accomplished by using a percentage of the remaining toll fees to cover ongoing maintenance of the bridge and what could be accomplished by using the remainder of the toll for ring fenced capital projects – such as new integrated transport systems, reopening railway lines, funding tram systems and investing in rail freight – which would be far more beneficial for all of us in Wales than any of the future toll fees disappearing into the Westminster coffers merely to help to bail out the bankers?
Monday, 4 January 2010
HAVING IT BOTH WAYS!
Now it used to be said that you could not have it both ways - unless of course you are a private railway company. When it's convenient for the Rail Companies, they compare their annual price rises with predicted inflation, whereas a year ago, when inflation was on its way down, they compared their price rises with the previous year's inflation.
In reality what they should be doing, is comparing their price rises with last July's inflation which was minus 1.4%. This is about blatantly lining the rail company’s pockets at tax payers and rail passenger’s expense. On average UK train fares are already some 20% higher than the European average and if the UK Government is serious about reducing road congestion then it needs to urgently review the way that rail fares are regulated.
The Association of Train Operating Companies (AToC) faced criticism in early 2009 for failing to itemize each train company's average unregulated fares rise. However, some companies revealed their fare increases; Virgin Trains increased unregulated fares by an average of 2.8%, ScotRail's fares rose by 3%, and turn-up-and-go fares on Southern trains rose by 4% and the Southeastern train company’s unregulated fares rose by 7.3% and other fares rose by 2.8%. A number of companies, including National Express East Anglia, First Capital Connect, TransPennine Express and Merseyrail have frozen their unregulated fares.
As tax payers it is worth remembering that the private rail companies are receiving approximately some £ 5billion per year from the taxpayers, so there can be little justification for rail companies having the right to increase rail fares every year by inflation plus.
The real question is why rail passengers should have to pay higher fares regardless of the quality of service they receive, with UK rail passengers currently facing fares that are twenty percent higher than those paid by our European neighbours.
It’s time to face facts, to most people it is pretty clear that the privatised rail experiment has failed, it’s time to re-unify our rail service and to bring the rail services back under responsible public ownership where service and efficiency comes before profit at passengers expense.
In reality what they should be doing, is comparing their price rises with last July's inflation which was minus 1.4%. This is about blatantly lining the rail company’s pockets at tax payers and rail passenger’s expense. On average UK train fares are already some 20% higher than the European average and if the UK Government is serious about reducing road congestion then it needs to urgently review the way that rail fares are regulated.
The Association of Train Operating Companies (AToC) faced criticism in early 2009 for failing to itemize each train company's average unregulated fares rise. However, some companies revealed their fare increases; Virgin Trains increased unregulated fares by an average of 2.8%, ScotRail's fares rose by 3%, and turn-up-and-go fares on Southern trains rose by 4% and the Southeastern train company’s unregulated fares rose by 7.3% and other fares rose by 2.8%. A number of companies, including National Express East Anglia, First Capital Connect, TransPennine Express and Merseyrail have frozen their unregulated fares.
As tax payers it is worth remembering that the private rail companies are receiving approximately some £ 5billion per year from the taxpayers, so there can be little justification for rail companies having the right to increase rail fares every year by inflation plus.
The real question is why rail passengers should have to pay higher fares regardless of the quality of service they receive, with UK rail passengers currently facing fares that are twenty percent higher than those paid by our European neighbours.
It’s time to face facts, to most people it is pretty clear that the privatised rail experiment has failed, it’s time to re-unify our rail service and to bring the rail services back under responsible public ownership where service and efficiency comes before profit at passengers expense.
Sunday, 3 January 2010
CAMERON'S LEGACY AND INHERITANCE
With David Cameron's Conservatives already (allegedly) thinking out loud about Tory 'legacy projects' before then even win the next Westminster election - they might do well to actually win the election first before planning their legacy. The electorate might do well to think about what they (the Tories) left us the least time they were in Government before casting a vote for the boys and girls in blue.
A growing economy (admittedly one built on questionable credit and even more questionable expansion of the banking sector) - ironically this fact was something which had scant impact with voters and did little to help the Conservatives avoid an electoral hammering in England and Conservative and effective electoral extermination in Wales and Scotland.
A privatised railway system - something which benefited the few at the expense of the many - New Labour had little problem with a privatised railway system, going so far as to say that if it had not been privatised then they (New Labour) would have privatised it themselves.
One thing they (the Tories) won't make much of is the privatisation of the old building societies - which following their disappearance into the larger financial institutions helped contribute in the longer term to the financial mess that we are all paying for at the moment (and for the foreseeable future).
Privatised utilities - a real Tory legacy - the whole process of privatisation can best be described as 'the age of pillage' - when a Tory clique (and their friends in the city) helped themselves at our expense when it came to plundering the assets of the state for a quick short term profit.
The dash for gas - which led to the rapid development and rapid use and decline of a priceless assets, which has left the UK dependent upon imported gas from questionable suppliers in potentially unstable regions of the world.
The damage done to the British Army was accelerated by Jon Major's 'Options for Change' - which was in turn driven by a Conservative Government hastily trying to cash in on the 'peace dividend' following the end of the Cold War.
The NHS...hopspital borne infections, and 'an internal market' within the Health Service, PFI (which has been happily and expensively continued by New Labour) enough said...
Cameron's legacy may (if elected) consist of another bail out for the banks, war with Iran and the quiet ditching of electorally useful green Tory tinge...and more sleaze...
Roll on Polling day...
A growing economy (admittedly one built on questionable credit and even more questionable expansion of the banking sector) - ironically this fact was something which had scant impact with voters and did little to help the Conservatives avoid an electoral hammering in England and Conservative and effective electoral extermination in Wales and Scotland.
A privatised railway system - something which benefited the few at the expense of the many - New Labour had little problem with a privatised railway system, going so far as to say that if it had not been privatised then they (New Labour) would have privatised it themselves.
One thing they (the Tories) won't make much of is the privatisation of the old building societies - which following their disappearance into the larger financial institutions helped contribute in the longer term to the financial mess that we are all paying for at the moment (and for the foreseeable future).
Privatised utilities - a real Tory legacy - the whole process of privatisation can best be described as 'the age of pillage' - when a Tory clique (and their friends in the city) helped themselves at our expense when it came to plundering the assets of the state for a quick short term profit.
The dash for gas - which led to the rapid development and rapid use and decline of a priceless assets, which has left the UK dependent upon imported gas from questionable suppliers in potentially unstable regions of the world.
The damage done to the British Army was accelerated by Jon Major's 'Options for Change' - which was in turn driven by a Conservative Government hastily trying to cash in on the 'peace dividend' following the end of the Cold War.
The NHS...hopspital borne infections, and 'an internal market' within the Health Service, PFI (which has been happily and expensively continued by New Labour) enough said...
Cameron's legacy may (if elected) consist of another bail out for the banks, war with Iran and the quiet ditching of electorally useful green Tory tinge...and more sleaze...
Roll on Polling day...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)