Afghanistan: the Taliban sends a message
Wednesday 1 May 2013
 Reports are patchy, but the fullest – if not necessarily the most accurate – account seems to be offered by the Mail, which describes the 27-ton vehicle as the "15-tonne Mastiff", two short of theDaily Express, which gives it 17 tons, ten short of the actual empty weight of the Mastiff II/III series. The vehicle was travelling in the Nahr-e Saraj district of Helmand Province, escorting a convoy along Route 611. This is a newly constructed road which had been used to showcase the reconstruction and development which has been taking place in the province, and thus a prime target for Taliban attention. It is a known IED magnet. Some reports had it that the vehicle was specifically searching for IEDs, which is unlikely. That is the role of the Buffalo. And while some Mastiffs are deployed with bomb disposal, these would hardly be carrying solders from the Royal Highland Fusiliers 2nd Battalion, Royal Regiment of Scotland – the unit of those who died. Many of the media reports attest that the vehicle was hit by a very large bomb – "one of the biggest roadside bombs ever used in Afghanistan", says the Express. The blast is said to have been so powerful that it hurled the vehicle "several metres" into the air, flipping it onto its roof as it crashed to the ground. There is agreement in reports that the road was tarmacked, which suggests that the IED could well have been a culvert bomb. This is a classic terrorist technique, commonly employed by the Taliban, and very large bombs have already been experienced - with the threat to mine-protected vehicles identified in 2008. This is not a new problem. As early as June 2009, three Danish soldiers were killed in a Mercedes "jeep", from a such device, estimated at 350Kg weight. But already in Northern Ireland during the Troubles, culvert bombs of 1,000lb were used, one of which took out a Saracen APC near Crossmaglen on 9 October 1975. Ostensibly, this incident vindicates the "bigger bomb" crowd – that vociferous group of critics who opposed the introduction of the Mastiff, on the grounds that the enemy would simply respond by using larger devices, which indeed they have. However, it has taken seven years – the period the vehicle has been in service – finally for the terrorists to overcome the formidable defences provided by the Mastiff, and even then this is not the end of the story. One of the points of using better protection is the very fact that you then force the enemy to use "bigger bombs". This means they are riskier to transport, they take longer to place, increasing the chances of detection, and the number of suitable placement sites is reduced – also assisting detection. With that, detection technology has considerably advanced since the IRA scourge of 1975 andmultiple techniques are now available. It is fair to say that, given the will and determination, incidents such as this current one are eminently preventable – not least through imaginative use of UAV technology, including change detection, employing video mapping. Already, there is speculation as to why this vehicle was caught out. But, as always, the wrong questions are being asked. The issue is not the vehicle, per se, so much as the entire defensive package, of which the vehicle is but one component.
Crucially, even standard route clearance techniques should have been able to pick up a bomb this size - assuming that a culvert denial programme was not in place. And it must be emphasised that the primary defence against IEDs is not protected vehicles, but persistent and systematic route clearance, combined with good intelligence and observation.
The fact that this vehicle was hit, therefore, may suggest that British forces have dropped the ball. Questions might be asked as to whether complacency had set in, or whether simply not enough resources were being devoted to force protection. The main problem, though, may be that route security has recently been handed over to the Afghan National Civil Order Police.
At this late stage in the campaign, though, it is unlikely that there will be any great outcry as there was with Snatch Land Rovers, especially as the bulk of troops are due to be withdrawn next year. Despite that, this incident does have an importance that transcends even the immediate tragedy of young lives cut short. In targeting the Mastiff, and successfully taking one out, the Taliban is sending a message to the people of Afghanistan. Effectively, they are proving that they can overcome the best that the West has to offer, demonstrating their power and the impotence of the "infidels". And although news of this incident will disappear quickly from the British press, one suspects that the message will not be lost elsewhere: when the infidels leave, they will be leaving as a defeated force. COMMENT THREAD Richard North 01/05/2013 |
UK politics: the fruitcakes' revenge
Wednesday 1 May 2013
 Not to be outdone, Marta Andreasen, is also taking a sideswipe at the establishment's favourite whipping boy. She says that it was Mr Farage's jealousy of potential competitors inside the "one-man band" party that had prevented candidates from having their records checked. She says that Farage changed the party's constitution last year "giving him full power on everything, including the establishment of strategy, policies and selection processes for candidates for elections".
The lady has obviously seen through the "cheeky chappie" front, adding, "He has come out saying 'we cannot vet everybody' – well he cannot vet everybody because he wants the control himself. He should have been able to establish an administration with the means to vet, even if it’s 1,700 candidates".
Notably, Andreasen says, "He's the one who put candidates all over the place in as many seats as possible … He's very attractive to the media because he's a showman but he doesn't have the patience or the interest in dealing with data". Despite the ring of truth here, Marta is too late to dent her erstwhile sponsor. The latest poll, as reported by ITV, has Farage's "one-man band" surging to 22 percent of the vote. Amazingly, in this poll, the Tories get 31 percent, Labour drop to 24 percent and the Lib-Dems get 12 percent. Yet, with UKIP rampant, the Tories are still being set up for the slaughter. And so it is that the supposedly eurosceptic Express gives a spot to Ann Widdecombe, to tell us, "Why you must vote Tory not UKIP". A vote for anything other than Conservative is a vote for Labour and thus for high tax and high spend at county halls, she writes. The irony of it all is that she is probably right … but not enough people care. This is a revolt against the political class, and people are determined to give them a kicking. That's all that matters - call it the fruitcakes' revenge. COMMENT THREAD Richard North 01/05/2013 |
Climate change: the juggernaut rolls on
Tuesday 30 April 2013
 This is on the back of COM(2013) 216 final, the strategy document which was published on 16 April, and today's monster report from the the European Environmental Agency (EEA), plus no less than nine Commission staff working documents, such as this one, and this, where the detail is buried. No one outside the loop is going to read but a fraction of the hundreds of pages – life is too short. But the problem for us all is that climate change adaptation is now to take a central part in all EU policy-making, as we see here, in a report which outlines the principles and recommendations for integrating climate change adaptation considerations under the 2014-2020 rural development programmes. That adaptation is now a key policy driver is indicated in the foreword to the EEA report, written by professor Jacqueline McGlade, executive director of Agency. Adaptation, she writes, is not simply about doing more, "it is about new ways of thinking and dealing with risk and hazards, uncertainty and complexity". And in a clue to the mindset, we find McGlade telling us that climate adaptation requires precautionary "science" and approaches, with an emphasis on "probability and multiple reactive thresholds", rather than a reliance on the statistics of the past. There is also scope, we are told, "for increased complementarity between adaptation and mitigation actions". If I were to be honest, I would have to admit that I don't actually know what "probability and multiple reactive thresholds" actually mean. The phrasing does seem to stem from decision field theory - or perhaps not. The jargon is impenetrable. McGlade might just as well be writing in a foreign language. In some ways, she is. Needless to say, the media does not even attempt to penetrate the jargon. Most newspapers ignore today's event, with only the loss-making Guardian running a report. And even then, it focuses on the tangible issues, rather than the true focus of the initiative, with is to re-shape Commission policy. However, with this event occurring a day after Russian scientists warned that we may be entering a prolonged period of global cooling, this is a classic example of the juggernaut rolling on, blind to the reality. A clue to just how distant the thinking is from the real world lies in the COM final, which blithely tells us that "snow tourism" is one of the economic sectors which is "already facing the impact of climate change", despite the industry just having enjoyed a record season. But now, with "adaptation" embedded in the very heart of Commission policy, there will be no rooting it out. This is the intellectual equivalent of the herpes virus - the only sure way of destroying it is to destroy the host. And, before we can rid ourselves of it, that is what we will have to do. Meanwhile, the juggernaut rolls on, and on, and on … COMMENT THREAD Richard North 30/04/2013 |
UK politics: no such thing as bad publicity
Tuesday 30 April 2013
 It is perhaps a measure of how rattled is the political class that we should see the front page of the Daily Mirror devoted to an attack on UKIP.That there are a few seriously unpleasant types attracted to UKIP is a given, as is the case with all political parties. Within the ranks of the Conservative Party, I could point to some deeply objectionable racists, one of misterial rank. And, as one commenter remarked, is the UKIP dross any worse that the "bitter socialists" who cheered the IRA bomb at Brighton, or the vile racist comments at Lady Thatcher? In tactical terms, therefore, the focus on the handful of "embarrassing candidates" – which had Jon Humphries spluttering over his microphone this morning – is a mistake. And, as the actress said to the bishop, there is no such thing as bad publicity - certainly in terms of politics. Throughout its life, UKIP has always struggled to gain attention, and the current media attention is worth millions as advertising. Small wonder then that a YouGuv poll for The Sun is forcasting a 14 percent share of the vote for UKIP, the effect of which is expected to increase Tory losses. Furthermore, the publicity is putting a spark into an otherwise lacklustre campaign, which can only serve to drive up the turnout. That can only assist in offsetting the postal votes already cast. The more people who actually turn out on the day, the better it is for UKIP. If the establishment parties had any sense, they could of course, take UKIP on over its tragically amateurish policies. Their problem is, though, that the policy offerings from the so-called "lib-lab-con" are nothing to write home about either, which leaves them nowhere to go. What they really don't understand is how much they are loathed. UKIP has assumed the mantle of the protest vote, giving the ordinary man an opportunity to kick the establishment in the teeth. And thus, the more the establishment squeals and squirms, the more attractive a vote for UKIP actually becomes. Add to that the brand recognition that the media is obligingly giving, gratis, to the upstart party, and we can expect a comfortable increase in support on Thursday. Interestingly, the rise of the protest vote is a phenomenon happening all over Europe, with numerous dissident parties emerging, all attracting similar levels of support. And in each of the countries where they have emerged, the establishment and media reaction has been similar and equally misguided. Basically, the establishment, and especially the political class, has lost touch with popular sentiment, and has no idea how to respond to it. The rise and rise of UKIP in the UK (largely England) is a testament to that, and it would now seem that the prattling media, unwittingly, have become Mr Farage's greatest allies. And the more they prattle, the better it becomes. COMMENT THREAD Richard North 30/04/2013 |
Energy: they really are serious
Tuesday 30 April 2013
 There has to be a reason why a website specialising in EU news should be carrying this item, and that is undoubtedly because V2G is slated as an essential of the EU's response to increased use of intermittent and highly variable renewable energy, and in particular the use of windmills. A more detailed story about the cars is here, which highlights the upside of this event. Vehicle owners are actually getting paid to connect their vehicles to the grid, but only as long as their stored electricity is available when called for. To explore this further takes us into highly complex areas, delving into the realms of "dynamic demand" – a sophisticated means of adjusting load demands. This is seen as an alternative to the "spinning reserve" system which is based on providing additional power when the demand increases. In the traditional electrical supply system, generators feed electricity into the grid and, when demand increases, as it can do very quickly, additional capacity is brought on-line, usually fossil fuel plants (gas), already warmed up and "spinning", able to feed power into the grid within seconds. With the advent of wind power, when supply can drop very quickly and cannot be increased, things change. "Spinning reserve" would have to be massive, the costs enormous, and the emissions high. Thus, the alternative being proposed is this "dynamic demand". The basis of "dynamic demand" is regulating the grid not by adding capacity but by adjusting (i.e., removing or shifting) the demand continuously, using (in one system) the frequency of the electricity supply as the trigger. In the UK, mains electricity is normally supplied at 50 Hertz. When it drops below a certain frequency level (which happens when the supply is low), the system is geared to shed load. In the case of electric cars in the V2G system, charging is interrupted – thus the load is shed. But, as an added refinement, the accumulated power is returned to the system as a contribution to stabilising the frequency. When there is an excess of power in the grid, the electricity frequency increases and the cars start charging again, bring the frequency back down. When the car batteries are fully charged, there is even a suggestion that the car heaters should be automatically turned on, to use up the "wrong-time" electricity. That is what is meant in practice by yesterday's piece, in which we identified a report to governmentrecording that, "No longer is it considered viable for electricity to be provided 'on demand' in response to the requirements of end-users". In November 2010, former energy minister Chris Huhne called this a seismic shift in energy policy and one which EU commissioner for energy, Günther H. Oettinger, called in the same month a "paradigm shift in the way we produce, transmit, distribute and trade energy". The importance of this cannot be over-emphasised. The historical relationship between supplier and customer has been completely turned on its head. Instead of providing the capacity to meet demand, industry is required to make its priority "decarbonisation". In this new "paradigm", customers will have to make do with what the industry can supply. When electricity runs short, there are two options available. The first is called "demand management" and the second, "demand response" – sometimes called "demand-side response " or DSR. "Demand management" is a euphemism for cutting supply, while "demand response" is a bundle of techniques for shifting consumption from peak periods to times of lower demand. And in what is known as the "market-based approach", the response is initiated at the customer end, on the basis of variable price signals. Underpinning this is a triad of "smart" technology, the "smart" grid, the "smart" meters and "smart" appliances. In the fully developed system, the grid is able to communicate with appliances, via the smart meters, sending information on price levels, which can be changed – increased or decreased - at half-hour intervals. The theory is that individual appliances will be programmed to accept electricity only below pre-set price levels. When the price is increased above the levels set for the appliances, they will either not start, or shut down, and remain inactive until the price drops. In this context, the electric car is just another "appliance", accepting electricity only when the price barrier allows. But, with the V2G system, there is that additional refinement of returning electricity to the grid. A more basic system, though, is set out by the European electricity group ENTSO (European Network of Transmission System Operators), which is defined as "Low Frequency Demand Disconnection (LFDD). Arguably, this is a form of demand management. This does not need a "smart" grid, or even a "smart meter". Instead, appliances rely on the grid supplying electricity at the set frequency. The frequency of the electricity supplied is continuously "read" by chips embedded in domestic appliances and when it falls below pre-set levels, the appliances shut down and will not restart until the frequency is back within limits. What makes this different, in principle, from the "market-based approach" is that there is no communication between the generator and the customer. There is no data transfer. This is "autonomous DSR". But, like the "market-based approach", if it is to support frequency regulation in case of extreme events – severe supply shortages – a large number of appliances must be fitted with chips. Here we come the bombshell. ENTSO is telling the EU commission that the best way to secure the necessary number of appliances is to make fitting chips "a mandatory requirements for a pre-defined list of devices". Fridges are high on the list. Looking at the way the supply situation is deteriorating, it might well come to the stage where the commission believes it has no option but to agree. It will be either that, or Europe-wide power outages. Therefore, in a very short time – by EU standards – we could find a large range of electrical appliances compulsorily "chipped". And then the fun will start. COMMENT: "BIG BROTHER" THREAD Richard North 30/04/2013 |
Wednesday, 1 May 2013
Posts
