p.16 : ECONOMICS & FINANCE !

Clark's "P.S." (Feb. 24/12)

It has been a bad week for the German renewables industry and their green friends.

Germany had to restart several nuclear reactors because their 22,200 wind turbines could not cope with the cold weather.

Now an article by BjA Lombork, an adjunct professor at Copenhagen Business School, shows the folly of German solar energy policy.

The German Government will slash solar subsidies since their economy cannot afford the cost.

$130 billion has been spent on solar power which only accounts for 0.3 per cent of Germany's total energy.

According to Der Spiegel, even Chancellor Merkel's staff are describing the solar subsidies as a "massive money pit".

Lomborg calculates that by the end of the century, Germany's $130 billion solar panel subsidies will have postponed temperature increases by a laughable 23 hours.

Germans have paid $130 billion for climate-change policies, which have zero impact on global warming.

Germany has the second-highest price for electricity in the developed world.

Denmark is highest.

Germany's experiment with subsidising inefficient solar technology has failed.

Alex Salmond and David Cameron please note - your expensive experiment with subsidising inefficient solar and wind technology has failed.

FIRST RESPONSE!

Dear Sir,

Clark Cross (Letters 24 Feb) correctly criticises the high cost of electricity generated by wind. This cost is subsidised by electricity users by means of a surcharge on every electricity bill, regardless of the ability of the user to pay.

As the only people who benefit from wind turbines are wealthy landowners, and largely foreign based manufacturers, this unfair scheme is no more than the poor making the rich even richer. The fact that wind turbines don’t work is almost irrelevant.

The SNP clearly see nothing wrong with this, which is perhaps something to be remembered at the ballot box.

Yours : Malcolm Parkin  

Politicians always see life from a political aspect alien to that of the electorate. Instead of framing policy to suit the needs of their electorate, they do the opposite, fitting us in afterwards, a practice compounded by refusal to change.

Essential services should be provided at the cheapest level commensurate with safety and available resources. However, the Scottish government pursues a deliberate policy of artificially increasing electricity prices, seeing their unnecessary fixation on renewable supplies as more important then consumer hardship.

The Indian economy is booming to the extent that their government regards UK aid as “peanuts” and actually asked for it to be stopped, but our detached politicians insisted on retaining it. Their reason? It would cause “grave political embarrassment” to Britain. Not to the British public, it wouldn’t!

 Nor, I think, would they have agreed to the EU demand for higher contributions from member countries all having to cut their own domestic budgets. A considerable reduction on present payments would be a more likely reaction.

Uncontrolled immigration is another blight on Britain well known to our government, who nevertheless do nothing about it. I’d bet most of the public would just cry enough and put an end to it. It’s time our politicians looked at life from the public’s point of view.   Bob Dow

This, of course, has no connection to the announcement that Gamesa is planning to build turbines at Leith and create '800 jobs!!!
 
Gamesa's Glenluce wind turbine rejection overturned
 
An 18-turbine wind farm in Wigtownshire has been approved by the Scottish
government after being rejected by Dumfries and Galloway Council.
 
Developer Gamesa Energy UK appealed against the decision about the scheme
at Carscreugh Fell near Glenluce.
 
Councillors refused the bid last April due to concerns about its landscape,
visual and archaeological impact.
 
A reporter to Scottish ministers has now ruled the proposals can proceed
with a string of conditions.
 
The wind farm also includes a control building housing 40 solar panels.
 
A reporter found the energy park would increase the amount of power
generated by renewable resources and "would tend not to overwhelm the skyline".
 
She concluded it was in "broad overall accord with the relevant development
plan".
 
Scottish Natural Heritage and Historic Scotland had asked for a total of
six turbines to be removed from the scheme.
 
However, the reporter found that would not provide an improvement of
"enough significance to warrant the resultant major drop in energy output."
________________________________________   Alastair Harper