Greenest government ever – FAIL
I am sorry but, being positive is very hard work; especially when you find out that your government is being incredibly hypocritical. This happened to me last week, when I finally caught up with what the UK Coalition government did to our planning policy guidelines six months ago. First, however, here is a quick re-cap of the relevant issues:
With regard to carbon capture and storage (CCS or “clean coal”) and extracting methane from strata that do not release it naturally (by hydraulic fracturing or “fracking”), I have been on a bit of a personal odyssey in the last 6 months. With a background in geology and hydrogeology – and an MA in Environmental Politics – I would like to think I have a better-than-average appreciation of the issues. Therefore, although I think I have reached a destination, I still feel deeply troubled by both CCS and fracking.
I think humanity has proven itself to be so stupid – and so willing to allow worship of the god of economics to subvert sensible acknowledgement of the reality of science – that we will now have to rely upon making CCS work. This is because, if we don’t make it work, modern civilisation is probably history. Fracking on the other hand, remains – as David Roberts called it – an insane piece of collective hypnosis. Fracking is definitely not the answer. Fossil fuels are like heroin; they are a self-destructive habit we need to get off ASAP.
In the UK, we are now being told we are less than 3 years from blackouts (because sensible EU regulations will force the closure of our worst-polluting coal-fired power stations). That being the case, the solution should not be to do more of the same. The answer should be to move away from fossil fuels. The UK government is now preparing to spend billions of pounds supporting a new generation of fossil fuel based power generation infrastructure – power stations and distribution networks. However, the priority of our politicians should not be to preserve the profitability of fossil fuel business set up in the 19th Century; it should be to preserve the habitability of planet Earth into the 21st Century.
———
OK, so what of planning policy, etc.? Well, on the eve of the Conservative Party conference this week, here is the email I sent my MP last Friday:
Dear [X],
Presuming you are attending, I hope you enjoy it. However, I am hoping you will read this brief email before Monday.
In light of the way in which our“greenest government ever” has removed Feed-in Tariff incentives for people to invest in Solar PV; overturned the presumption against opencast coal mining in planning policy; is forcing opencast developments on communities and county councils that had rejected them; and is ignoring its own scientific advisors to pursue decades of unabated gas-fired power generation… I am inclined to feel that my friendship (as opposed to membership) of the Conservative Party may be under threat.
If this is what happens while in a Coalition with the LibDems, goodness knows what will happen if we ever get a Conservative majority! Don’t get me wrong though; I am not about to vote LibDem or Labour. I cannot do so because I am not a Liberal; and Labour is still not living in the real world: Consequently, Ed Milliband’s speech to his own conference was memorable for only one thing – hypocrisy. Neither am I a fan of protest groups such as UKIP (because they are climate change deniers)… So I am basically very tempted to waste my vote on the ultimate protest group – the Green Party – at least I will have a clear conscience if I do that. However, the Conservative Party has 32 months in which it could yet decide to embrace reality and stop pretending that economics can invalidate science: I think economists are very unwise to pick a fight with either history or science. However… I hope you will watch this 1 minute and 47 second video…
Regards,
———
With regard to the claims made in this email, the Coalition Government…
– Has failed to level the playing field with regard to early pioneers who decided to invest in domestic solar PV installations and has removed the incentives for large-scale Solar Farms. It has therefore made life very difficult for firms to predict where the market is heading. Wikipedia has a good summary here.
– Has removed the presumption against opencast coal mining in the National Planning Policy Framework, which now allows economic need to trump any concern over the environmental sustainability of burning coal.
– Is overturning decisions made my County Councils like Northumberland (Halton Lea Gate site) and is forcing opencast coal mining on communities that don’t want them.
– Has ignored the views of its own scientific advisors and is about to commit the UK to at least another 20 years of burning natural gas, which will be obtained predominantly from fracking (in order to limit our dependence on imported gas) using new power stations with no CCS technology (even if and when it becomes available).
Although I have some sympathy with local residents who don’t want opencast coal mining in their neighbourhood, restoration techniques are now much better than they used to be. Therefore, the reason these developments should be opposed is not because of their temporary effects on local communities (as unpleasant as they may be). These developments should be opposed because they are perpetuating the environmentally unsustainable use of the Earth’s resources; and increasing the financial burden that will fall on future generations trying to preserve a reasonably-hospitable environment here on planet Earth.
Therefore, although I am (or have been) a Conservative voter, I find this position hard to justify because David Cameron and George Osborne have proven themselves to be entirely in the pocket of big business and – even when confronted with the folly and/or illegality of what they are doing – they refuse to change course.
In short, I think they are in denial about the nature, scale and urgency of the need for us to decarbonise our energy generation systems as fast as possible and, as a consequence, I think power cuts will be only the beginning…
Hi , Martin, I am perplexed. Judging from your posts I am curious to know what makes you a Conservative, whether it be ‘friend’ or voter. The only party that suits your radical politics is the Green Party. I think we are agreed that the issues are so major that only governments are in a position to make the huge changes to our transport and energy infrastructure. Also they require inter-governmental action through bodies like the UN and EU which I thought was un-conservative.
As a green/socialist/anarchist, of which some is just inherited and drives me to vote Labour despite reservations, I think my opinions would surprise you: I do believe elements of the welfare state have failed and government should be smaller. But what is evident is that the choice between averting ACD and doing nothing goes beyond politics – personal choice [the watch-word of the Conservatives] is at odds with what is needed. As I am personally aware individual actions are limited as I am going to make little difference recycling, shopping at Waitrose, fitting solar and driving a Leaf.
BTW, I had a surprising turnaround on Solar PV, not major but my mind is open, it occurred to me that cars spend most of their time in the carpark whilst we are at work, why not charge them up on all those acres of roof space in towns and cities, drive them home, off load spare capacity back to the grid for peak hours and top up the battery in the early hours. As battery technology improves it could be a means [in 20 years time] to store and redistribute solar electricity.
And… as for carbon capture the cheapest option is to irrigate the deserts and plant trees rather than spend a big chunk of energy capturing flue gas and piping it into old oil wells.
I look forward to your next blog but some solutions would occasionally be welcome.
julesbollocks
8 October 2012 at 09:10
Sir, in view of the fact that the amount of fresh water on the planet is finite, I would be interested to learn whence the freshwater for your gigantic irrigation schemes in the desert regions is to come? I recall a statement by the late Pope that the planet is not in the least overpopulated; all that is necessary is to apply ourselves and our planet-wasting technologies and “make the desert bloom”! Problem solved. If only it were so easy! Voltaic panels also have one drawback. The sunlight/radiation they capture is thus unavailable to heat the roofs and the space they contain and this means extra heating of the building will be required. As you must know, there is really no such thing as something for nothing.
Duncan
8 October 2012 at 09:34
With regards to deserts blooming, the Libyans have already done this. There is massive amount of freshwater in the Nubian sandstone aquifer beneath the Sahara desert but, no one should be under any illusion that they are doing anything other than mining groundwater!
However, the Pope was clearly just repeating the tripartite Christian fundamentalist mantra that overpopulation/climate change/ecocide/ cannot happen because God will not allow it! This may still be a common delusion in the USA but, fortunately, rare here in the UK (more on this topic next week).
As for “…there is really no such thing as something for nothing.” Stephen Hawking disagrees; he says the Universe is the ultimate “free lunch”…
Martin Lack
8 October 2012 at 12:27
Saudis and UAE are busily investing in solar power (thermal and PV) to run desal plants.
Also – Apollo and Neptune are growing tomatoes… http://bit.ly/NmQyzk
Gillian King
10 October 2012 at 00:22
Nice to hear from you again, Gillian. Thanks for the link to your blog. As a teenager, I was fascinated by ancient Egypt (and more recently by the stores about it briefly embracing monotheistic Sun worship under Akhenaten). However, as it happens, I have now documented all the reasons why the Sun is our best hope today; especially now we can store the electricity and discharge it while the Sun is below the horizon.
Martin Lack
10 October 2012 at 09:19
I agree, the logical thing for me to do would be to vote for the Green Party. However, I have been voting Conservative in the genuine hope that the Party could become what it claimed it would be – the greenest government ever. Two of the main reasons I am a conservative are that I believe human beings:
(1) Are all inherently selfish and somewhat less than perfect; and
(2) All have equal rights but do not have equal abilities.
That being the case, it is inappropriate for political ideologues to try and make us all equal. In the UK, social mobility was greatest one hundred years ago, when kids from poor neighbourhoods could get into grammar schools. One hundred years later, despite over 40 years of repetitive failure, socialist dogma is still preventing our education system from getting the best out of everybody. (There are other reasons I could give you, but it would probably be illegal for me express my opinions.)
Your suggestion about placing solar PV panels on car roofs sounds good (although it presumes the persistence of personalised transportation) – which will surely have to be abandoned eventually.
The solution to our environmental problems is simple – we need to build a popular demand for a change of course (i.e. clearly radical rather than “conservative”). I am just sorry I do not know how to help bring it about (other than encouraging individuals to embrace the reality of what is happening to our planet – and demand that their representatives actually represent them).
Martin Lack
8 October 2012 at 09:43
Still puzzled by you politics! Primarily the left seeks state control and the right leaves it to the market, although the UK conservative is left of the Democrats and quite a few centre European ‘right parties’. Would you believe the left also has issues about education but simply rejects grammar schools as the option?
As for solar PV, you mis understand me, I was thinking of those acres of office buildings and out of town shopping centres for the panels. I think the likes of B&Q and Tesco are missing a trick, with the amount of suitable roof space they could offer free recharging to get those middle class greens into their stores. My original concern of solar vs nuclear [and I am anti the state-control, nuclear police, freedom etc that comes with this option] was that you do get plenty of energy for a few hours mid-day and storage and redistribution was the problem.
As to Duncan’s issues, [and me being pro solar now!] the panels absorb radiation in the summer thus making those big buildings easier and cheaper to keep cool. In the winter months when pv production is low, the sun is low in the sky and passively heats buildings through entering windows rather than hitting the roof. Carbon capture using trees requires passive desalination using a system of honey combs to trap salt and greenhouses to condense the water. The biggest energy use is pumping sea water inland which could be done with solar. http://www.seawatergreenhouse.com/ [some of the sahara is in basins -lower than sea level]
As Martin is keen to point out, the technology is available today [unlike CCS] we need only invest now, save money, and save the cheerleader.
julesbollocks
8 October 2012 at 11:13
I think I have said enough about how or why I may be socially conservative yet environmentally radical. In a nutshell, Conservatives should be concerned about conserving the environment not just the status quo! With regards to Grammar Schools, if you are opposed to them then you clearly have not watched the Hugh Dennis episode of Who Do You Think You Are?
Socialist ideologues will never escape from the delusion that a ‘one size fits all’ policy can get the best out of all children. It is an impossibility to do this in mixed ability classes. Such a policy is a triumph of politics over common sense; and it has been failing our children for decades. Encouraging everyone to go to University was also mad; and is the main reason government can no longer afford to help pay students to go there. On both fronts, the Conservative Party has seemingly lost the nerve to admit where it went wrong…
Martin Lack
8 October 2012 at 12:22
Grammar schools, perhaps you could do a blog so I don’t take this off topic, but how a t.v program about a period 100 years ago would influence my beliefs is odd. But schools stream, my son would have failed 11+ but his english has improved to the point he is above average. I failed and at 30 picked up a few qualifications [just a couple although there are 8 degrees in our household]. I agree about degrees but ONDs, HNDs etc still cost money unless of course you are arguing for an uneducated underclass to do all the delta jobs ;-0
Still think you are a green socialist, but just can’t come out! [smiley face!]
julesbollocks
8 October 2012 at 14:31
One thing I forgot to pick you up on earlier, Jules: Personal choice is a central dogma for Libertarians; not Conservatives. The two are often seen in public together but they are not a single item.
Hugh Dennis’ grandfather was a son of a coal miner who became an Army Officer after getting a place at Grammar School.
I am in favour of courses for horses. End of story.
Martin Lack
8 October 2012 at 14:38
[...] comment posted on this blog on Monday concludes with the words “…I look forward to your next blog but some solutions would occasionally be welcome”. As it happens, I stumbled upon a TV programme (in the Nova series), which was re-broadcast on [...]
Saved by the Sun « Lack of Environment
10 October 2012 at 00:08
[...] Last week, I re-published Nele Marien’s ‘20 years of unsustainable development’ – commenting that I knew this stuff but had not presented it to as clearly as Nele did. Today, I would like to try and re-formulate Nele’s message in view of what the UK government is doing (or rather not doing) – as I summarised on Monday. [...]
The 3 pillars of unsustainable denial « Lack of Environment
12 October 2012 at 00:11
I was writing elsewhere (Climate Progress – Joe Romm I think) recently that the prospects of power blackouts by 2015 were being presented in preparation for us to accept that more coal fired power stations would be required.
David Rose in the UK Mail Online provides the concrete for my thinking with this scurrilous piece of hackery:
Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released… and here is the chart to prove it.
Where we see this:
Which I figure is the whole reason for this cherry pie of a piece of Mail tom-foolery.
But then Rose is a serial dis-informer with a well known track record.
Lionel A
14 October 2012 at 13:03
Thanks Lionel. If Hayes really did use the phrase “borgeois Left-wing academics” he is more of a fool than he looks. It may play well at a party conference, and in the eyes of Daily Fail readers, but the ideologically-motivated rejection of science is going to get us all in a lot of warm and deep water…
Martin Lack
14 October 2012 at 20:53
[...] 2012/10/08: LoE: Greenest government ever – FAIL [...]
Another Week of GW News, October 14, 2012 – A Few Things Ill Considered
15 October 2012 at 14:34
And now we have UKIP’s policy document, note this gem at foot of page 13:
Didn’t I say that the threat of blackouts is going to be used as an excuse to bring back coal fired. Now Roger Helmer should know that there is no such thing as ‘clean coal’.
But then of course we can read this at Wiki:
.
It is quite clear that he is much of a muchness with Monckton on climate issues.
Lionel A
16 October 2012 at 16:10
Thanks Lionel. Nigel Farage is a complete fool. Watching him try and debate these issue with Caroline Lucas was hysterical. UKIP’s anti-science position will ensure I never vote for them.
Martin Lack
16 October 2012 at 16:33
Martin, I don’t watch much television so is there a clip available of that exchange.
On the incumbent government, well the Tory part at least (who should no longer be considered the Conservative Party but The Regressive Party, just think of Gove’s trampling over education and the stealth attacks on the NHS), here is an article by Roger Harrabin from back in July this year:
Treasury messing with UK clean energy policy, say MPs
which points the way to where these regressives wish to take us.
My Harrabin search was to pick up on that infamous misquoting of Phil Jones WRT significant warming since 1995 found in this exchange here:
Q&A: Professor Phil Jones , which has raised its ugly head again thanks to the latest underhand article in the Mail from David Rose.
Lionel A
17 October 2012 at 11:38
I can’t find the extemporised exchange I saw (on College Green in front of the Victoria Tower of the House of Commons) on YouTube. However, I did find an interesting audio of Farage and Lucas in discussion with George Galloway and pollster Peter Kelner…
As my recent posts should show, Lionel, I am not a Conservative Party ideologue. However:
1. Our Health and Education systems both need a major overhaul.
2. The previous administration threw huge sums of money at both and succeeded at doing only one thing – wasting it!
3. David Cameron is therefore quite right (IMHO) to mock the Labour Party as a party of one notion – borrowing!
Martin Lack
17 October 2012 at 12:55
[...] Greenest government ever – Fail (8 October 2012) [...]
Osborne 1, Planet 0 – but it is not Game Over yet « Lack of Environment
28 November 2012 at 00:03