Government Renewables Strategy

[biffvernon]

Fred Pearce... http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... enpolitics

Interestingly, Fred says of the Severn Barrage

My bet is that will never be built.

but doesn't detail his reasoning in this article.

The trouble is, Fred Pearce is usually right about most things.

[peaky2]

You've got to love Gordon:

Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the UK should be a leader in renewable energy.

Indeed, indeed. But unfortunately the other competitors had already lapped him three times before Gordon even heard the starting gun

And you've got to love Mr Duncan:

For the Conservatives, shadow business secretary Alan Duncan said: "After a series of painful and reluctant u-turns, it seems like the government is at last coming round to our vision of a greener Britain.

Their vision? Oh yes, that will be the one they've espoused for the last 30 years and put into practice when they were in charge. When Dr Beeching decimated our rail network. That sold off our railways and national bus service. That never installed any renewable generation. The vision of which Thatcher said "Any man who rides a bus to work after the age of 30 can count himself a failure in life" and consequently 1990 saw the publication of the "Roads to Prosperity" white paper, described by the Thatcher government as Britain's biggest road building programme since the Romans. The one where David Willetts MP gushed "What got me committed to Conservatism originally was precisely the power and excitement of free market economics." The one where David Cameron said "Replacing Britain's independent nuclear deterrent is clearly in the national interest.". Ah yes, that vision of a greener Britain. I remember it now.

Mind you I think he's right - the Labour and Conservative visions of a greener Britain probably are very close. I'm sure they also share Gordon's vision - [Re: The Stern Report on climate change, Chancellor Gordon Brown] said the green challenge was also an opportunity "for new markets, for new jobs, new technologies, new exports where companies, universities and social enterprises in Britain can lead the world." Yes, yes lead the world. We can do it, I know we can, just as we will in the race for renewables.

And in typical fashion, the Gordon Blair Party, the Blue/Greens and the Lib Dems are all quoted in the BBC article. Needless to say, the Green Party who've been banging on about their vision of a greener Britain for, oh, 30 years or so aren't even mentioned. But then as everyone knows, they're a load of bearded, sandal wearing hippies with some freaky and insane ideas about this sort of thing and if we started taking on any of their policies who knows what could happen.

Now let's see ... I'm sure if we install enough solar panels on the wings and fuselage of that gorgeous new Airbus ([Tony Blair] said said the British government would continue to do all it could to support Airbus. - November 2006) they won't need to any of that nasty kerosene when they operate from that lovely new Heathrow terminal ....

[Adam1]

Fred Pearce... http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... enpolitics

Interestingly, Fred says of the Severn Barrage

My bet is that will never be built.

but doesn't detail his reasoning in this article.

The trouble is, Fred Pearce is usually right about most things.

Yes, I noticed how he slipped that into the article. My immediate assumption was that it wouldn't get built for one of the reasons that lots of new nuke stations won't get built. It's too grand a project for a country with a reduced engineering and manufacturing base during a period of post peak high energy prices.

Thinking about it today, it seems more likely that some sort of barrage will be built than half a dozen nukes. The barrage, although a large project with a significant environmental impact, is simpler than building nuke stations (I would have thought). Has anyone ever looked at tidal stream as an alternative to a barrage in the Severn estuary?