Why are you Green?

Comment: Response to Liberal Democrats' data mining question "Why are you Green?" Like most political parties the LDP have bought the idea that wind farms are part of the answer for the future of green technologies rather than the uneconomic environmental con that they are. Most people are bamboozled by the iconic status that the wind farm image holds but seldom realise that it is the most economically nonviable form of alternative energy  there is. However, energy companies are planning to make a killing nonetheless, following the same formula of corporate hijacking that routinely takes place in so many other sectors. Ecological awareness is just as vulnerable to corruption as anything else yet we are strangely blind to the fact. 

------------------

By Christine Metcalfe

Gaining and achieving a beneficial energy policy for our country is a cross party problem and should be, but clearly isn’t, above petty party politics.  It is at the heart of all present and future needs. Only those with open minds, who can appreciate that it is both possible and necessary to hold on to the basic ethics of supporting the wish to change damaging environmental behaviour, while also accepting that it must be accompanied by a healthy scepticism on any emerging questionable dogma, or high jacking of original principles, will read on.  If considering renewable energy technologies, this is an admittedly complex area to fully understand.

Before imposing an energy policy upon a population however, a responsible government must first prove claims made relating to emission savings and benefits  - and that it is being done without inflicting actual or indirect harm to a vulnerable  electorate. This includes full transparency of plans and compliance with International Treaty legal obligations.  In this respect the UK has been found to be non compliant with Article 7 of the Aarhus Convention regulations to which it is signed up. For those interested in protecting the democratic process, that ratified ruling  and the complaint which led to it, can be found at the UNECE website under ACCC/C/2012/68.   One clear point of agreement, is that everyone can support authorities being held to account as to object would be illogical.

No rational or compassionate person would wish to do otherwise than the best they can for our planet - as its health and functioning are directly linked to the survival of our own and all other species. It is however, of extreme importance that we do not allow vested interests or political agendas to mask problems relating to energy production technologies which have the capacity, through excessive implementation, to cause the opposite effect.  Wind power is one such technology as is being graphically demonstrated by negative effects both to the environment and economy. There is no proof for claims made relating to :-

1.           monitoring of investments

2.           assessment of cost

3.           assessment of security of supply

4.           assessment of emissions saving

See Scottish Audit report: http://www.audit-scotland.gov.uk/docs/central/2013/nr_130912_renewable_energy.pdf

Para 67  Total investment in the Scottish Economy by the renewable energy industry is not monitored.

Para 72  However the number of jobs specifically in the renewable energy sector is not monitored or reported.   

It is correct that the Scottish Government commissioned a report (October 2010) that gave information on items 3 and 4.  This was however an 'Energy Storage and Management Study' and the investigation was not based on the present targets for renewable energy production.  No other report on these issues in the public domain is known.  Engineers have so far been ignored in their requests for independent reports on these issues.  We need to know why these are not being produced and made public.   

Since wind energy needs to be subsidized by increasingly unsustainable amounts, it is not presently cost competitive with thermal generation.  The real cost can only go up, not down, because expensive thermal generators will need to be kept available to meet demand.

There are many good and valid reasons why the air quality of the planet needs to be protected and improved by removing toxic emissions produced by the industrial world. Ditto the serious and burgeoning earth pollution problems.  Many are reasoning that it is becoming clear that climate change events are cyclical and/or cannot be avoided, citing various bases for their scientific beliefs and studies.  Should they be even partially correct, vast funding and subsidies for wind power whilst emerging and powerful nations revert to traditional forms of energy production, is denying the urgent need for such resources to be switched to means of protection of those at risk from inevitable events. 

Food sources and new methods of production for more adverse conditions also desperately need funding.   What must be avoided is the rapid imposition of policies based largely upon weak/unproven theories, ideologies, or political expediency - while having the real capacity for economic and environmental harm and disproportionately benefiting the few, to the detriment of others.

History can teach us much about the adoption of such routes, and some of the Committee members considering our UN complaint had experienced exactly what it is like living with a loss of democracy. 

It is worth noting that the Committee had never before had so many observers for one case present at a Hearing. They came from all over Europe, e.g. Spain, Germany, Portugal, Switzerland, Belgium the UK and Eire. Due to their own experiences relating to wind power’s negative effects, the integrity of the submissions made were clearly recognised as important to support.  If we do not insist that those in power act in our best interests via the rule of law and compliance with treaties involving human rights and aspects involved, we are risking a similar loss of democracy evolving.