We may soon have no money but quite probably no electricity either.
Sometime sooner or later someone is going have to face facts. Unless
we can use our own coal without these restrictions this is going to
be dark, cold and --- broke.
The head of EDF hits the nail on the head when “He said that British
consumers were paying over £100 a year more for electricity than
their French counterparts because the British Government had failed
to invest in new power stations.”
xxxxxxxx cs
===================
EUREFERENDUM Blog 7.10.08
Super Tuesday
Crowding in on an already impossibly burdened news agenda, the
greenies, euro-weenies and sundry other "climate vandals" will be out
in force today, gathering in the Capital of Darkness (which
yesterday, with the rest of Belgium suffered a general strike).
They will be there for what Reuters is calling "Super Tuesday", as
the EU parliament in Brussels tries to ram through a record number of
environment laws, thus attempting to deliver the coup de grass [I get
the pun, but not the joke! -cs] , so to speak, to the tottering
economies of the EU member states.
During the morning session, MEPs will consider the EU parliament
position on how the estimated €30 billion (but probably a lot more)
from carbon allowances auctioned under the EU's emission trading
scheme, should be spent.
Already highly controversial, with many member states – not least the
UK – regarding this money as tax income, with each nation putting
their take in their own general pots, the MEPs want the money
hypothecated and spent on greenie projects like forest conservation,
green technology development and funding "climate change" adaptation
schemes in developing countries.
Other proposals on the table include partial exemptions of certain
industries from the ETS scheme altogether, plus a blocking vote to
try to prevent clean development mechanism carbon credits being used
to offset EU emissions.
The big bone of contention, though, is how the burden of reducing
carbon emissions to the EU’s 20 percent level will be shared amongst
the different member states. That should keep the gathering throngs
entertained for some time.
Then, in the afternoon, if there are any economies left to wreck, the
MEPs will move on to deal with the madcap idea of carbon capture, and
a proposal to throw public money at trial schemes in a bid to develop
this technology for full-scale plants.
Buried in that will be a bid to make the generation of electricity
from coal-fired plants conditional on their being fitted with carbon
capture equipment, a none too subtle attempt to enforce the
Greenpeace agenda and ban coal use altogether – or make its use
prohibitively expensive.
The voting, says Reuters is not the parliament's final say, but it
will set the tone for negotiations with "EU leaders" ahead of a final
agreement seen later this year – they hope.
However, the greenies are not going to get it all their own way. A
powerful coalition, led by Poland aims to block the package, not
least because it would render Poland dangerously reliant on Russian
gas to replace the coal it would not be allowed to use. [see my
“Poland has had enough of "green" nonsense” of 4/10/08]
The refuseniks are getting some support from Germany with Frank-
Walter Steinmeier, the German foreign minister, saying last week,
"This [financial] crisis changes priorities … One cannot rule out
that interest in protecting the climate will change because of such a
crisis" – and that was before the current meltdown.
Nevertheless, attempts are being made to buy off Poland which, on
past form, will make a lot of noise and then cave in. On the other
hand though, if the MEPs pause for one moment to listen to what is
happening in the real world, they might even back Poland and ditch
this whole ridiculous charade.
The chances of that, though, are about as good as our still having a
functional economy by the end of the week. However, we are always
open to being pleasantly surprised amazed.
---------------------------------
Posted by Richard North
======================
LATER
Some sense
The euro-weenies have partially retreated from the abyss, voting to
phase in the ETS auctioning system for energy-intensive sectors.
Instead of 100 percent in 2013, the "compromise" is that they will
pay 15 percent for their EU carbon allowances, rising to 100 percent
in 2020.
The MEPs have obviously come under heavy pressure, especially from
Germany. Avril Doyle, the rapporteur admits, "The clear political
message from us to the commission is we want these energy-intensive
industries looked after."
However, this is not so much Armageddon averted as Armageddon
postponed. The greenies are not going to give up that easily. Climate
Change Derangement Syndrome (CCDS) is still rampant, not least in the
UK.
---------------------------------
Posted by Richard North
======================
YORKSHIRE POST 7.10.08
Cold comfort for Britons with energy crisis on the cards
By Tony Lodge
IF Britain's Energy Minister was a poker player, he would look tired,
worn out and increasingly desperate. His hand of cards would be
dismal and though his excuse would be that he had been dealt a very
bad hand, much of the blame would undoubtedly be his for not paying
more attention to the game and being better prepared.
Britain's energy predicament is certainly not a game, but potentially
a national disaster with far-reaching consequences which could have
been avoided with sufficient forward planning and investment years ago.
This coming winter is likely to witness a human tragedy for Britain's
poorer families and the elderly as many will struggle like never
before to pay soaring gas and electricity bills. It will also see
many energy intensive industries either lay off staff or close as
they simply cannot afford to pay such high energy prices. But why are
we in this position? And why does the Government and the energy
watchdog Ofgem, which published its report on prices yesterday, skirt
around the real issues when attempting to explain and investigate
rising prices? Shouldn't Ofgem now have the remit to fully ^to
examine energy policy and its failures on behalf of consumers?
For years, we have been told that we must better insulate our homes,
become energy efficient and introduce better metering systems to help
conserve and better utilise household energy. All of this is good but
it does not address the big issue; why is our energy so expensive,
why don't we have much cheaper bills like neighbouring France and why
have we reached this desperate situation?
One of the most revealing and important developments this summer was
an admission from one of Britain's biggest energy companies, EDF
Energy, which generates and sells electricity in both France and
Britain.
EDF's chief executive, Vincent de Rivaz, responded to newspaper
reports on the cost of energy in Britain. He said that British
consumers were paying over £100 a year more for electricity than
their French counterparts because the British Government had failed
to invest in new power stations, particularly nuclear plants. In
France, electricity prices are lower because 80 per cent is generated
by nuclear power. By contrast, 75 per cent of electricity in the UK
is from older coal or gas fired-plants. So for electricity
generation, Britain is hugely exposed to volatile fossil fuel prices
as gas, particularly, is now increasingly imported at high cost,
while France is largely insulated through its indigenous nuclear
fleet. EDF plans to build most of Britain's new fleet of nuclear
stations but they will not be operating before 2018 at the earliest.
Because the Government has not invested to diversify, enlarge and
modernise our energy supplies and network over the last decade,
wholesale electricity prices will surge this winter and we could face
a supply shortfall or "gap" this winter. The forward price of
electricity for November hit highs of £133 per megawatt hour, up more
than £10 in a week when the same contract was trading at about
£122.75. In France, the price is £31 per megawatt hour.
More alarmingly, the price of power has risen sharply since National
Grid recently published figures predicting an unusually thin margin
between electricity supply and demand, making this winter potentially
very tight for generators. It is this squeeze which will help push
prices to new highs.
Coupled with this is our ever-increasing dependency on gas for
electricity which last year reached 43 per cent of the grid. This
winter we will need to import record amounts of gas, at high cost, to
get us through. Coal is cheaper and essential with huge potential for
the future, but we are still awaiting a green light for Britain's
first clean coal power station for a generation at Kingsnorth. Its go-
ahead, hopefully with others to follow, will help us to diversify our
energy supplies and help get prices down.
Importantly, domestic coal is now cheaper than imports which should
help ongoing pits to invest in new reserves.
Ofgem have rightly called for greater competitiveness among energy
companies but, though essential, this is not the silver bullet for
hard-pressed consumers. New modern infrastructure harnessing cheaper
and less volatile fuels will ultimately stabilise and reduce bills
and this is the undoubted challenge for the new Energy Secretary and
Doncaster North MP, Ed Miliband. The challenge for the tired poker
player couldn't be bigger; sadly for all of us his hand of cards will
get worse before it gets better.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Lodge is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Policy Studies.
Sometime sooner or later someone is going have to face facts. Unless
we can use our own coal without these restrictions this is going to
be dark, cold and --- broke.
The head of EDF hits the nail on the head when “He said that British
consumers were paying over £100 a year more for electricity than
their French counterparts because the British Government had failed
to invest in new power stations.”
xxxxxxxx cs
===================
EUREFERENDUM Blog 7.10.08
Super Tuesday
Crowding in on an already impossibly burdened news agenda, the
greenies, euro-weenies and sundry other "climate vandals" will be out
in force today, gathering in the Capital of Darkness (which
yesterday, with the rest of Belgium suffered a general strike).
They will be there for what Reuters is calling "Super Tuesday", as
the EU parliament in Brussels tries to ram through a record number of
environment laws, thus attempting to deliver the coup de grass [I get
the pun, but not the joke! -cs] , so to speak, to the tottering
economies of the EU member states.
During the morning session, MEPs will consider the EU parliament
position on how the estimated €30 billion (but probably a lot more)
from carbon allowances auctioned under the EU's emission trading
scheme, should be spent.
Already highly controversial, with many member states – not least the
UK – regarding this money as tax income, with each nation putting
their take in their own general pots, the MEPs want the money
hypothecated and spent on greenie projects like forest conservation,
green technology development and funding "climate change" adaptation
schemes in developing countries.
Other proposals on the table include partial exemptions of certain
industries from the ETS scheme altogether, plus a blocking vote to
try to prevent clean development mechanism carbon credits being used
to offset EU emissions.
The big bone of contention, though, is how the burden of reducing
carbon emissions to the EU’s 20 percent level will be shared amongst
the different member states. That should keep the gathering throngs
entertained for some time.
Then, in the afternoon, if there are any economies left to wreck, the
MEPs will move on to deal with the madcap idea of carbon capture, and
a proposal to throw public money at trial schemes in a bid to develop
this technology for full-scale plants.
Buried in that will be a bid to make the generation of electricity
from coal-fired plants conditional on their being fitted with carbon
capture equipment, a none too subtle attempt to enforce the
Greenpeace agenda and ban coal use altogether – or make its use
prohibitively expensive.
The voting, says Reuters is not the parliament's final say, but it
will set the tone for negotiations with "EU leaders" ahead of a final
agreement seen later this year – they hope.
However, the greenies are not going to get it all their own way. A
powerful coalition, led by Poland aims to block the package, not
least because it would render Poland dangerously reliant on Russian
gas to replace the coal it would not be allowed to use. [see my
“Poland has had enough of "green" nonsense” of 4/10/08]
The refuseniks are getting some support from Germany with Frank-
Walter Steinmeier, the German foreign minister, saying last week,
"This [financial] crisis changes priorities … One cannot rule out
that interest in protecting the climate will change because of such a
crisis" – and that was before the current meltdown.
Nevertheless, attempts are being made to buy off Poland which, on
past form, will make a lot of noise and then cave in. On the other
hand though, if the MEPs pause for one moment to listen to what is
happening in the real world, they might even back Poland and ditch
this whole ridiculous charade.
The chances of that, though, are about as good as our still having a
functional economy by the end of the week. However, we are always
open to being pleasantly surprised amazed.
---------------------------------
Posted by Richard North
======================
LATER
Some sense
The euro-weenies have partially retreated from the abyss, voting to
phase in the ETS auctioning system for energy-intensive sectors.
Instead of 100 percent in 2013, the "compromise" is that they will
pay 15 percent for their EU carbon allowances, rising to 100 percent
in 2020.
The MEPs have obviously come under heavy pressure, especially from
Germany. Avril Doyle, the rapporteur admits, "The clear political
message from us to the commission is we want these energy-intensive
industries looked after."
However, this is not so much Armageddon averted as Armageddon
postponed. The greenies are not going to give up that easily. Climate
Change Derangement Syndrome (CCDS) is still rampant, not least in the
UK.
---------------------------------
Posted by Richard North
======================
YORKSHIRE POST 7.10.08
Cold comfort for Britons with energy crisis on the cards
By Tony Lodge
IF Britain's Energy Minister was a poker player, he would look tired,
worn out and increasingly desperate. His hand of cards would be
dismal and though his excuse would be that he had been dealt a very
bad hand, much of the blame would undoubtedly be his for not paying
more attention to the game and being better prepared.
Britain's energy predicament is certainly not a game, but potentially
a national disaster with far-reaching consequences which could have
been avoided with sufficient forward planning and investment years ago.
This coming winter is likely to witness a human tragedy for Britain's
poorer families and the elderly as many will struggle like never
before to pay soaring gas and electricity bills. It will also see
many energy intensive industries either lay off staff or close as
they simply cannot afford to pay such high energy prices. But why are
we in this position? And why does the Government and the energy
watchdog Ofgem, which published its report on prices yesterday, skirt
around the real issues when attempting to explain and investigate
rising prices? Shouldn't Ofgem now have the remit to fully ^to
examine energy policy and its failures on behalf of consumers?
For years, we have been told that we must better insulate our homes,
become energy efficient and introduce better metering systems to help
conserve and better utilise household energy. All of this is good but
it does not address the big issue; why is our energy so expensive,
why don't we have much cheaper bills like neighbouring France and why
have we reached this desperate situation?
One of the most revealing and important developments this summer was
an admission from one of Britain's biggest energy companies, EDF
Energy, which generates and sells electricity in both France and
Britain.
EDF's chief executive, Vincent de Rivaz, responded to newspaper
reports on the cost of energy in Britain. He said that British
consumers were paying over £100 a year more for electricity than
their French counterparts because the British Government had failed
to invest in new power stations, particularly nuclear plants. In
France, electricity prices are lower because 80 per cent is generated
by nuclear power. By contrast, 75 per cent of electricity in the UK
is from older coal or gas fired-plants. So for electricity
generation, Britain is hugely exposed to volatile fossil fuel prices
as gas, particularly, is now increasingly imported at high cost,
while France is largely insulated through its indigenous nuclear
fleet. EDF plans to build most of Britain's new fleet of nuclear
stations but they will not be operating before 2018 at the earliest.
Because the Government has not invested to diversify, enlarge and
modernise our energy supplies and network over the last decade,
wholesale electricity prices will surge this winter and we could face
a supply shortfall or "gap" this winter. The forward price of
electricity for November hit highs of £133 per megawatt hour, up more
than £10 in a week when the same contract was trading at about
£122.75. In France, the price is £31 per megawatt hour.
More alarmingly, the price of power has risen sharply since National
Grid recently published figures predicting an unusually thin margin
between electricity supply and demand, making this winter potentially
very tight for generators. It is this squeeze which will help push
prices to new highs.
Coupled with this is our ever-increasing dependency on gas for
electricity which last year reached 43 per cent of the grid. This
winter we will need to import record amounts of gas, at high cost, to
get us through. Coal is cheaper and essential with huge potential for
the future, but we are still awaiting a green light for Britain's
first clean coal power station for a generation at Kingsnorth. Its go-
ahead, hopefully with others to follow, will help us to diversify our
energy supplies and help get prices down.
Importantly, domestic coal is now cheaper than imports which should
help ongoing pits to invest in new reserves.
Ofgem have rightly called for greater competitiveness among energy
companies but, though essential, this is not the silver bullet for
hard-pressed consumers. New modern infrastructure harnessing cheaper
and less volatile fuels will ultimately stabilise and reduce bills
and this is the undoubted challenge for the new Energy Secretary and
Doncaster North MP, Ed Miliband. The challenge for the tired poker
player couldn't be bigger; sadly for all of us his hand of cards will
get worse before it gets better.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Lodge is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Policy Studies.
Posts
