Kingsnorth crashes - by Richard... Thursday, October 08, 2009 eureferendum.blogspot.com

Kingsnorth crashes - by Richard... Thursday, October 08, 2009 eureferendum.blogspot.com

After all the travails in keeping theKingsnorth power station project alive, E.ON has abandoned its plans to develop the site, blaming lower electricity demands due to recession.

The two units that were to be built, at 800MW each, were to compensate for the loss of the current 1940MW dual-fired power station, which is being forced to close because of the EU's large combustion plant directive. The decision to walk away from the project, therefore, will leave a huge gap in the Britain's electricity generation capacity.

As we have noted before, though, the gap is being filled by the rapid expansion of gas-fired stations. Not only are these relatively cheap to build, they can be commissioned relatively quickly – within two years of approval.

Another factor, albeit not directly cited, must also have been the looming requirement for carbon capture – supported by all major political parties. Looking at the overall investment requirements for new coal plants, and the uncertainties over future requirements, E.ON could only really come to one decision – to hold off for the time being and then, if need be, to go for a new gas plant.

This does not make power cuts any more likely, but it will increase our dependence on increasingly expensive gas supplies, and our reliance in imported energy sources.

Nevertheless, environmentalists have hailed the decision as a victory against dirty coal. "This development is extremely good news for the climate and in a stroke significantly reduces the chances of an unabated Kingsnorth plant ever being built," said Greenpeace executive director John Sauven.

What makes this episode remarkable though is that, while the best efforts of the EU and the greenies - with the assistance of the Tories' Zac Goldsmith - have failed to scupper the project, it has been done for by the recession. No doubt the EU will take note of this. All it has to do is continue its so far successful attempts to wreck our economy and it will have no difficulty meeting its emission targets.

And there will be plenty of people around who want that to happen.

COMMENT THREAD

Permalink

A betrayal of office - by Richard... Wednesday, October 07, 2009

"General Sir Richard Dannatt, the former head of the British Army, is to become a Tory peer and adviser to the Conservative Party on defence, David Cameron is to announce," reports The Daily Telegraph. 

This, of course, puts Dannat's interview with The Sun in perspective. He was talking not as a former head of the Army but as a Tory advisor. And how long he has been assuming that role, we shall never know. But since his message yesterday has not changed from his previous pronouncements, we can only assume that this has been the case for some time.

According to Sky News, however, this need not be an assumption. Jon Craig reports a senior Tory MP telling him: "Between you and me, he has been advising us for years." This MP "wasn't at all surprised" when he heard of Dannatt's new role. "There has been talk at Westminster for some time that he might become a defence minister in the House of Lords if the Tories win the election next year."

For a man who has displayed lamentable judgement in his post as CGS, however, this is but a continuation of that same poor judgement. By tradition, ex-service chiefs, on ascending to the Lords, become cross-benchers, staying above party politics. If indeed, while in the post of CGS, Dannatt has been advising the Tories, it is more than bad judgement. It is a betrayal of his office.

Furthermore, by entering the cockpit of narrow, party politics, Dannatt has diminished himself, his former post, and whatever advice he has given and will give. It will be forever tainted.

How interesting it is that, when Dannatt made his debute on the public stage, the Daily Mail called him "a very honest general". It now turns out that he has been a very dishonest general.

For the Conservative Party also – and Mr Cameron in particular – this is appalling judgement. It plays into the hands of those who would have it that Dannat's advice was tainted by party poltics, as opposed to merely being ill-considered. It diminishes substantially the authority of the post of Chief of the General Staff, the holders now being regarded as potential recruits for the political party machines.

Whatever the intentions of General Dannatt might have been, Mr Cameron should never have even considered, much less allowed, a former CGS to take the Conservative whip. This is a major error on his part, and one he will have cause to regret.

UPDATE: Alan Massie is uneasy.

COMMENT THREAD