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.
------------------
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.
