When the Government finally publishes its much-delayed energy strategy, probably on Thursday, it should carry an apology for all the mistakes that it and its predecessors have made over the past two decades.
In the midst of a worldwide energy crisis caused by Russia’s war in Ukraine, these missteps have made this country especially vulnerable to escalating gas and electricity prices, as well as possible shortages. [bold, links added]
The Government’s apology might go something like this…
We’re sorry that, under pressure from the Green lobby, decisions were taken to shut down coal power stations without creating adequate affordable alternatives, the more so as there are vast coal reserves in the UK.
Foolish
In particular, we regret that little has been done to develop new nuclear power stations, though it has long been known that our existing nuclear power stations will soon reach the end of their natural life.
We also acknowledge that, insofar as any thought was given to a new generation of nuclear power stations, it was extremely foolish to rely on a company controlled by the Chinese state.
Furthermore, we can now see that it was premature to ban fracking in England in 2019.
As a result of an idiotic devolution settlement, the Scottish and Welsh administrations had previously vetoed fracking.
We were wrong to follow suit without properly weighing the arguments.
Fracking may not be without risks, but we now see that these have been greatly exaggerated by the Greens.
Indeed, it is probably environmentally less damaging than onshore wind power, which the Greens continue to champion, oblivious to its effect on the countryside and nature…
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the Government said something like that?
Fat chance.
We can be certain that, as it confidently lays out its new energy strategy, there won’t be the slightest acceptance of past errors.
All that can be said by way of consolation — and it isn’t much — is that the German government has got itself into an even bigger mess, with its reliance on Russian gas and oil imports, and its rejection of new nuclear power stations.
In Berlin, there is serious talk of energy rationing.
The mistakes of the British State can be easily summarized.
Energy security has been sacrificed on the altar of Green ideology.
Of course, we should decarbonize, though remember that this country is responsible for only one percent of all global emissions.
But the process towards net-zero shouldn’t proceed at such a rate that people face the prospect of astronomical energy bills, whose small print they may end up studying with the help of a flickering candle.
I wish I believed that the Government had learned from past errors, but I fear it has only partially done so.
In one respect, it may be about to make things worse.
One of the relatively rare achievements of David Cameron’s administration was to make the erection of onshore wind farms in England impractical if there is local opposition.
The Tories realized that most people don’t like to see the countryside disfigured by turbines almost as high as St Paul’s Cathedral.
Wind turbines are not only ugly. They are also noisy, and present a hazard to birds, killing many thousands every year.
Why don’t the Greens care more about that?
Over recent days, there have been disquieting media reports that Boris Johnson and Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng want onshore wind power in the UK to double by 2030, and treble by 2035.
The rights of local people in England to object might have to be watered down, though Government sources deny this.
Several Cabinet ministers are unhappy.
One of them, Transport Secretary Grant Shapps, made clear his displeasure during a TV interview yesterday.
Dozens of Tory MPs are against wind turbines.
We’ll have to wait and see exactly what the Government proposes.
How strange that Conservatives, of all people, should contemplate facilitating the ruination of vast tracts of the unspoiled countryside!
It’s not just about aesthetics.
Wind turbines are unreliable producers of energy.
They’re effective when the wind is blowing but useless when it isn’t.
As Matt Ridley recently pointed out in these pages, in 2020 less than four percent of the UK’s primary demand for energy was supplied by wind power.
Zealots who defend wind power (they are not infrequently beneficiaries of lavish government grants) claim that methods of storing electricity are becoming less expensive, and so it won’t matter if the wind doesn’t blow.
As things stand, though, these costs remain high.
Danger
So we should be alarmed by reports that Boris Johnson, who loves huge projects, would like to carpet the Irish Sea with turbines.
When the danger to birds was pointed out to him, he is said to have asked why they can’t learn to fly higher.
What is certain is that neither offshore nor (God forbid) onshore wind turbines can provide a solution to the energy crisis.
Their main advantage is that they take less time to set up than alternatives.
But what is the good of that if they aren’t fully effective?
More dependable sources are needed.
To be fair to the Government, it has grasped the need to develop nuclear power.
Kwasi Kwarteng suggested yesterday that up to seven new nuclear power stations could be built as part of Britain’s quest to become self-sufficient in energy.
There is also the idea of building smaller nuclear reactors.
Rolls-Royce is racing to secure approval for its own mini reactors.
A company linked to American multi-billionaire and serial entrepreneur Elon Musk has its own proposals for even smaller reactors.
Rage
The problem with all these nuclear plans, sensible though they undoubtedly are, is that they are likely to take a decade or more to come to fruition.
In the meantime, the lights could go out.
That is why the Government must take another look at fracking, which could supply a rapid bonus.
Let’s hope that the energy strategy will contain a commitment to do so.
Ministers have also indicated that efforts will be made to ramp up North Sea gas and oil production, where there are significant untapped reserves.
This commitment is likely to be included in the energy strategy.
If it is, the Green lobby will squeal with rage.
In fact, although some Greens may accept the expansion of nuclear power, and virtually all will cheer for more wind turbines whether offshore or onshore, many will vigorously object to the Government’s overall energy strategy.
Any plans to reverse the decline in North Sea production and to undo the moratorium on fracking — if the Government has the guts to put it in — will lead to many beatings of breasts by the Greens.
To which I say: so what?
Net-zero can come later.
For the next few years, we are talking about survival — about people’s ability to heat and light their homes at a reasonable cost, and for the economy to function.
Numerous mistakes have been made, usually as a result of putting greenery in front of practical considerations.
Maybe Vladimir Putin’s monstrous behavior will serve as a wake-up call, and our rulers will at last show a little common sense.
Read rest at Daily Mail
No, the energy crisis was not caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine but it has exacerbated it by exposing the weakness of the west’s energy plans. Wind and solar can NEVER supplant reliable sources such as fossil fuels and nuclear. But the UK and in particular Germany have made themselves totally vulnerable to Putin’s machinations. Nuclear is critical but both countries could go a long way to making Putin and his gas and oil inconsequential by fracking their own gas and exploiting their coal reserves while the new nuke plants are constructed (or for Germany, restarting the plants stupidly shut down by the Merkel government.
Just another example of a route that the U.S does not want to continue down. Ideology & “aspirations” are NOT sound policy prescriptions when you are dealing with energy imperatives. As the article states: “Energy security has been sacrificed on the altar of Green ideology.” Based on ongoing results, hard to argue with that statement…