Green death - by Richard... Wednesday, August 03, 2011

Green death - by Richard... Wednesday, August 03, 2011

Wind turbine accidents involving injuries and equipment damage have surged over the last decade, peaking in 2008 with 128 incidents worldwide, according to the Caithness Windfarm Information Forum, via the Los Angeles Times. Since the 1970s, there have been 78 fatalities, with about half in the U.S.

The number of solar incidents is harder to gauge, but most industry workers say it's rising. Solar workers perform tasks similar to those in the most dangerous professions: roofing, electrical work and carpentry.

In April 2010, Hans Petersen was taking a break from graduate theology studies and had been installing solar panels for six months when he stumbled off the sloped roof a Northern California public housing complex and plunged 45 feet to his death.

Even the public can be at risk, watchdog groups say. Fires atop wind towers have scattered burning debris, according to neighbours, who also describe hastily built wind installations collapsing within months and harsh weather conditions exacerbating wear and tear.

The complicated wiring under solar panels have left some fire fighters so bewildered that they have allowed residential rooftops to burn. Some panels contain materials such as cadmium and selenium, which could be explosive or even carcinogenic, according to the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition.

But hey! All this is green energy, so it's good for the environment. These are green martyrs who have died for the cause. Every good religion needs it them, and we should be proud to have had so many prepared to make the noble sacrifice.

Next, I think, we invite the greenies to line up on the top of burning windmills and hurl themselves off. Greater love hath no man ... and all that.

COMMENT THREAD

Share

Print ready

Insult to injury? - by Richard... Tuesday, August 02, 2011

Perhaps one of the least-loved figures in London is Bob Crow, he of the RMT, whose predilection for industrial action has caused endless misery. Thus, we would struggle to find anything on which we would commend him, although on the Thameslink contract, he has a point.

He and his colleagues have "blasted" the Government for spending £15 million of taxpayers' money on consultants for the rail contract which was then awarded to Siemens, with Crow saying that the consultancy costs "added insult to injury".

The information he is working on comes in a written letter from rail minister Theresa Villiers, who has admitted that, "From May 2008, the department has spent approximately £13.1million (excluding VAT) to date on specialist consultants and advisers to evaluate the Thameslink Rolling Stock project".

She continues: "This resource has included financial, procurement, technical, legal, planning and other specialist advice required to deliver the Thameslink Rolling Stock Project, which is one of the largest rolling stock orders in the country. Of this figure, £5.3 million has been spent since May 2010" – i.e, since the election.

But what is now emerging is that, according to the EU rules which la Villiers says she has obeyed, and on which the government has so expensively paid for advice, the contract need not have been given to the German firm. Thus comes via the Derby Telegraph, which has Siemens heavily involved in worldwide corruption, which could have barred the company from the competition during the tendering process.

While Siemens was bidding for Thameslink, it was fined a record $800 million in the USA and €395 million in Germany over bribery charges, in addition to another 201 million euros it paid out in 2007. It was barred for two years from bidding for contracts from the World Bank.

Kevin Bampton, Head of Law at Derby University, now says: "If they don't think that enough has been done to resolve the corruption issue, it is not just that they could change the decision now – they SHOULD change the decision now". This is especially the case that a further potential bribery case was discovered at Siemens' business unit in Kuwait.

Needless to say, the Department for Transport (DfT), is trying to dead-bat this issue. Officials are claiming laws allowing them to exclude bidders from contract competitions only apply to individuals, not whole companies like Siemens. No individuals involved in corruption, it says, had been part of the Thameslink bid. But University of Hull's law expert Chris Bovis reckons the DfT's interpretation of the EU rule "defies belief". And Bampton says that the Government may have "misdirected" itself in law.

There lies the ultimate irony. The Government has consistently said it could not give Bombardier a contract which would have secured thousands of jobs in Derby because it had to stick to EU rules. Yet it now transpires there is one rule it discounted - the one which says it could have banned Bombardier's rival, Siemens, from taking part in the Thameslink competition.

Yet what sticks in the craw is that these high-priced consultants, ripping off the taxpayer with the mega-fees, could not even see that. But then, is there an even bigger story here? One of the principal firms involved is the MVA Consultancy, owned by the French consultancy, Systra, with shareholders which include the French government-owned rail company SNCF.

And is there a financial relationship between SNCF and the corruption-ridden Siemens? Watch this space. This is looking considerably more than just an "insult".

COMMENT THREAD

6Share

Print ready

What are we doing? - by Richard...

This is madness. Not only is water supply a strategic industry, it is also a natural monopoly. Furthermore, the owners are in a privileged position as "statutory undertakers", with special duties and responsibilities.

As such, the company should be British-owed. Personally, I think water should be publicly owed. In an industry where there is no local competition, there are few benefits to private ownership, and many disadvantages.

This notwithstanding, to sell of tranches of our domestic infrastructure to a foreign enterprise is madness, utter madness. Next, we sell off our town halls and local authorities to the highest bidder? Now there's a thought.