Billothewisp indulged in one of his favorite little vices today. A plate of Sausage Egg and Chips ( As you know , you can take the boy out of the council estate, but....).
It duly arrived. Sausage, Egg Chips and (er...) lettuce.
Someone somewhere is determined that the plebian multitudes (Billothewisp included) get their 5 a day whether they want them or not. Consequently, in order to meet some directive, from somewhere, some buffoon decided that Billothewisp needed some greens. (I wouldn't have minded if it had been peas)
Now I could spout forth about horses and water but instead I'll just 'fess up to leaving the lettuce untouched.
If any of my wind-turbine loving friends ( of whom I have none ) are consequently concerned about Billothewisp's mineral intake, I can assure them that all will be rectified later this evening when pints of Old Rosie (the cider of champions) will flow freely.
No doubt my non-friends (i.e. those who wish to save the environment by destroying it with wind-turbine foolishness ) will be aghast. In fact, I darkly suspect that they would regard Old Rosie as a bio-hazard.
But I can assure them that there is only one safe thing to do with Old Rosie and that is to drink it. Leaving it lying around is much more dangerous. Mainly because some other bastard will probably nick your pint when your back is turned.
Nelsons Column is 51 meters high. Even in London amid a sea of concrete and high rise buildings Nelson's column still dominates the local area.
Which is fine.
It was designed like that at the behest of the local population. It was a tribute to a national hero.
However, impressive as it is, it neither generates noise nor does it move. It is a monument. A stationary tribute to a great man - 51meters high.
Here it is.. to get some scale from it - look at the relative size of the people at the base.
Remember this monument is only 51 metres high. Now imagine it twice as tall. Then add another half a column. Until you get about 125 meters. Two and a half times the height of Nelsons column. Then, instead of having the thing in the concrete environment of London, stick in the countryside, preferably up on a ridge so it dominates the whole county.
But don't stop there add another 4 or 5 all the same height, in a line. Not oppressive enough for you?
OK - lets get them to make unpleasant pulsating noise called amplitude modulation. Finally, in case nobody has noticed them, place a large rotating rotor on each one.
Practically speaking, they will (just like Nelsons column) be pretty damn useless for generating electricity.
Remember though, each of these things is two and a half times the height of Nelsons Column above.
Imagine four of those within 800 yards (or less) of your back door.
If you are going to build these enormous and hopelessly ineffective wind turbines and especially of you reckon they are harmless and "majestic" why not build them in London?
Say, next to Nelsons Column. Or perhaps in Hyde Park. Maybe put a few down the sides of the Mall.
But no. Of course that would never happen. It is much easier to impose them on the countryside. Blight the lives of the yokels. Dare I suggest that if they were to be built in London it would not be long before they came to an untimely (though very welcome) demise.
I picked up an interesting little snippet from Reuters today on Yahoo see This Link
Looks like that in Europe there is a 10% oversupply of natural gas. Meanwhile the Utilities are still hiking their prices to the consumer.
[quote] At projected import, domestic production and consumption levels, the EU's gas market will have 50 billion cubic metres (bcm) more excess supply in 2011 than it did last year, and the system is likely to remain similarly long in 2012, This compares to an EU consumption of 492.5 bcm in 2010, according to BP, and to more than France's annual gas consumption of 47 bcm, and only slightly less than Britain's 57 bcm production in 2010. This year and next year are likely to see an import and domestic production excess above consumption of just over 60 bcm.
Every single per-centage rise in energy prices pushes another 40,000 households into fuel poverty. Most of those households will be pensioners and the poor.
So why did the utilities successfully get away with their recent price hikes?
Because they could.
Why didn't the regulator (Ofgem) veto these rises?
Because it is a self-serving, toothless bureaucracy, incapable of regulating a bag of sherbet let alone a greedy cartel.
Why didn't the Government act?
Oh Come On. Get a grip and don't be silly. The government is part of the cartel. They want prices to rise.
In any normal market an over supply means prices should fall.
So are you expecting your bill to drop as quickly as it went up?
Don't hold your breath.
And particularly don't expect Huhne or any of the other buffoons to do anything about it.
The interview with Chris Huhne on the Channel 4 news last night was surreal.
He talked continuously, spouting on and on and on. Desperately, he tried to talk out the time time slot and refused to allow the interviewer to get in with her questions.
At times he was literally talking gibberish.
The whole interview amounted to him stringing together sound bites with no coherence or intelligibility. It was a bit like a Madonna song but without the sex appeal - lots of emotional words strung together that sound good, but in reality make no sense.
At least Madonna is entertaining.
Huhne point-blank refused to address the issues of fuel poverty and how his policies are forcing millions into penury. He frantically tried to sidestep the government's own figures on how the so called Green Policies are grinding down whole sections of our community. When it got too difficult he simply made it up of the hoof and made himself look even more ridiculous.
I could barely believe that anyone in government could so abjectly and so cynically fail those who need support. Instead he bamboozled and waffled on, trying to deflect focus away from his ridiculous fashion statement "Green Agenda". A policy that is essentially based on hidden taxation. Taxation on the poor to benefit the rich.
When it comes down to it, when you strip away the waffle and obfuscation, Chris Huhne would rather let thousands of pensioners and the poor die of cold rather than call a halt to the current lunatic energy policy.
His laughable solution is to get people to "shop around".
Tell that to the average 80 year old.
Tell the old dear down the road who has never even used a computer that she should use a price comparison site.
Tell the old boy to "shop around" even though he is in his last days and wheelchair bound.
They all deserve better.
Much, much better than the preposterous Mr Huhne.
When it comes to the final analysis, the Government is responsible for this catastrophe.
This government may well be responsible for picking up many of the failings of the last Labour administration. But they are still responsible. After all that is what they were elected for - to take responsibility.
It is no good trying to deflect the blame onto the veracious big six energy companies. The whole of this debacle is simply down to bad and incompetent government. Both in the past and in the present.
We need a government that is willing and capable of breaking the current energy cartel. We need a government that plans energy policy on best practice not on vacuously fashionable but grossly ineffective solutions like wind power.
There are no excuses.
If this coming winter, people die or are left freezing, then it is this governments fault.
Of course it is Huhne's fault. But it will also be Cameron's fault. Hague's fault, and all the others.
They are the government. Fixing problem is what they should be about.
Somebody in government has to do something practical about our looming (or loomed) energy crisis. Mouthing platitudes is not enough.
To get things going, one good step forward would be to give Mr Huhne his P45.
OK. This is a long post. To sweeten the task there is a windtoons cartoon at the end. No cheating.
Perhaps the most obscene aspect to the whole of the wind turbine fiasco is the way the carpet-baggers make up the "facts" to fit their own tawdry little aims. Especially when the truth is somewhat inconvenient. Wide eyed they then go into rant mode in an attempt browbeat everyone into believing their propaganda.
Take this site HERE for example. It is funded by the EU. But look at the bottom of any web page and notice it proudly states it is "co-ordinated by the EWEA" That is the European Wind Energy Association in case you did not know.
To me that sounds a bit like like having NHS Direct run by Glaxo-Smith-Kline-Beecham. Although to be fair to GSKB, I think they would be far more honourable than the average carpet-bagging wind-turbine cartel. But I digress.
On this site they have that favourite set of web pages you find on any of the carpet-bagging websites these days, proudly labelled "Myths". Evidently our carpet-bagging friends want to enlighten the public by "Debunking the Myths" and show us all how wind energy is not only cheap reliable and non-intermittent but will probably cure cancer and teach you child to read as well.
What you actually get is the usual sad self serving deception and hypocrisy one has come to expect from the bureaucratic elite that runs this farce. When Sir Robert Armstrong used the phase "Economical with the truth" during the spy catcher trial of 1986 he really had no idea how the wind industry would take the meaning of the phase to a much higher level.
So let us look at the first myth they want to debunk. The myth which we all so mistakenly believe i.e.
"Wind power is expensive". Their answer to this "myth" is: (exactly as written:)
[quote] Wind power ... can compete with other power generation options at good sites. [unquote]
Now I suspect that a good site to the average carpet-bagger is anywhere they have got planning permission. To the rest of us I suspect a good site would be a windy site. One where, say, the turbine output would meet their often hyped 30% average capacity factor.
Now as you know there are some clever blokes about who love to debunk the debunk. One is called Professor Jefferson who did some research on the whole of the English turbine fleet that was operational for all of 2009 (See pdf Here).
He found that an annual 30% capacity factor was only reached by 7.6% of the turbine fleet. While 74% of the fleet failed to even reach 25% capacity factor. In fact the same percentage (7.6%) of turbines failed to manage 10% as managed to reach 30%.
So, the first deceit here in our "Debunking the Myths" is the "good site" deceit.
If you limited Wind turbines to only "good sites", and assuming that means a site that reaches the often quoted "30%" capacity factor then perhaps they could compete. They forget to mention that this would junk 92% of the turbine fleet in England straight away. Clearly MOST (almost all) wind turbine power generation cannot compete with other power generation.
But it gets worse. They want to elaborate. (Ugh!)
First off they state the bleeding obvious [quote] Wind cannot compete with the cost of producing electricity from an existing power plant that has already been depreciated and paid for by taxpayers or electricity consumers. [unquote]
Uh yes I would go along with that. Unfortunately though wind will never be free of its subsidy. It needs it to survive. If you did away with the ROC all wind farms would close down over night. Consequently wind will never be able to compete on a level playing field. It will always be cash hungry and require subsidy.
Then they contradict their first statement about how competitive wind is and admit that even at "good windy sites" is is not fully competitive, opting for a half way house "increasingly competitive".
[quote] At good windy sites, however, it is increasingly competitive with other new-build generation technologies, especially given the dramatic rise in oil and gas prices. Oil, which influences the price of gas, has increased from an average of $14 in 1998 (in real terms) to around $100 in 2008. [unquote]
Whatever you think about fracking we do now know that in the USA gas is now trading at a 50% discount to Europe. So even the spiteful little hope of other energy source prices rising so high they make wind competitive is history.
But that's just the start. I could go on... and on... But you would get bored as would I.
When you hear about Wind turbine carpet baggers and their brown nosing friends ranting on about "Debunking the Myths" you know that what they really mean to do is ply you with their own deceptive propaganda and half truths.
Always listen to the arguments then ask yourself what is in it for them.
With Professor Jefferson, the CPRE, the John Muir Trust, Country Guardian and many others the answer is a desire to protect countryside and the people who live there.
With our deceptive band of turbine carpet-baggers the answer is money - your money.
Anyway after that rather depressing analysis lets finish with another excellent cartoon from windtoons.com
So my grubby little Englanders, it looks like Infinergy have lodged an appeal. They are keen to overturn the democratic decision which rejected their dirty little money making plan for 4 industrial wind turbines at East Stoke in the Purbecks.
While the average two year old understands that No means NO clearly the ugly corporate monster that is Infinergy cannot do without their filthy lucre, irrespective of the consequences for the local people.
Anyway, as you would expect this blog will be carrying a number of articles regarding windpower, greed and fanaticism over the next few months.