Cooking with Tories

 The latest trend I'm seeing from Conservative representatives is that if poor people knew how to cook properly they wouldn't be facing the cost of living crisis. The Tories that are saying this are clearly living in a High Looking down on the plebs with displeasure.

They have clearly never been in a situation where when you are paid the bare minimum you can get towards the end of a month and face a regular panic. You scrape together all the change you can find to maybe buy enough food, and basic provisions at that, to last until pay day. Or maybe it is to go unto your electric key or gas card for you prepayment meters, or maybe to see if you can afford to get to work. This is not a new occurance it is something I faced at times around 2008.

It was not caused my me not being able to cook. In fact I was not purchasing pre-cooked meals as it was cheaper to buy ingredients to cook. I had a selection of all the dried pulses you could imagine and ate a largely vegetarian diet as meat was so costly. In fact when I was forced to live like this I did spend longer before going to the shops working out how to balance my diet, and within my budget, that at times when I had more disposible income on which to life.

Currently the sitution is dire. There are people whose fuel bills have gone up so much that they are having to ask their energy companies for credit, which is actually debt, to tide them over. This they will have to repay and therefore there is a further hole in their weekly budgets.

There food shop is already going up and the fact that there are now more food banks across the UK than McDonalds restaurants should tell anyone looking at those figures that we are heading towards Dickensian disparities between the rich and the poor.

So Tory MPs telling people how to economise or that they don't know how to cook are not aware of how much scraping around people do when they live on the edge. Food does not get thrown out it is used up, somehow. Basics are there and yes sometimes there is survival with basic bread and basic baked beans. However, when even the prices of the stables, bread, pasta, cooking oil are all subject to price rises due to the war in Ukraine affecting supply, along with a removal of the cap on energy price rises, pay is not keeping up to costs.

Yet in the Queen's Speech provided yesterday there was no major statement about how to help those in need now, nor how to prevent more slipping into a poverty trap.

Ed Miliband and the quest for power

So Ed Miliband's big idea should he form the next government is to freeze fuel bills for 2 years until 2017.

A grand headline grabbing pledge, but it is doable?

Remember that Labour have been telling us for the last 5 years that this current financial crisis is a global situation that had nothing to do with their slack regulation of British banks. Or not spending all the taxation revenue on vanity projects rather than dealing with excesses in public budgets or dealing with improving infrastructure, indeed shipping spiraling debts on the public sector as a result of Private Finance Initiative funding.

So unto the next big idea. Most of our energy in 2015-17 will still come from oil fired power stations. The price of oil is not set by Westminster, but by global markets. So what if there is another war in the middle east that will affect oil prices once again. How would Ed Miliband deal with keeping everyone fuel costs as they are? How would he fund a pay freeze under such circumstances.

He has promised not to renationalise the energy providers, so how is he going to enforce a cost freeze on these companies? This is a very grey area, especially as some of the fuel companies that operate in the UK are not largely let alone wholly owned within the UK. Surely the only lever he could operate over costs would be the taxes he levies on fuel, but that would reduce the amount that ends up in the Government coffers.

I'm not even going to address the fact that our energy companies are saying they will only have 2% spare capacity come 2015 and will be needing to invest in infrastructure, a question mark over where that money would come from if they are loss making as a result of Ed's bright idea.

So is this a workable idea? Or is it just pie in the sky?

The lost opportunity because of that stupid cartoon

There was much made of the stupid cartoon that came out the Scottish Lib Dem press machine, but there is something to just what dreamworld Alex Salmond is living in over his quote about Scotland and Qatar. What he said was:

"As nations, we both have considerable expertise in oil and gas production, but as we look to the future and a low-carbon economy, we must increasingly develop new technologies.

"We discussed the remarkable similarities between our respective nations.

"Although both Scotland and Qatar have common strengths in the oil and gas sector, we are both seeking to develop our low carbon energy industries.

"This is where Qatar's focus on becoming a global knowledge hub links well with Scotland's considerable reputation as a world-leading education nation."

Scotland a world leading nation in education? Where is that league table. According to the Programme for International Student Assessment that is just average. Edinburgh may be the 36th Rank University in the World this year, with St Andrews 85, but out of 12 UK universities that is just 2. Glasgow does come in at 102, Aberdeen 151and Dundee 176, none of this is totally top of the world stuff, though not to be sniffed at.

So the real issue that the Scottish Liberal Democrats should have been attacking Salmond on was education from that cartoon. That and the commitment to green energy as Patrick Harvey did the other week. Unfortunately those ships have sailed.

Now maybe my former colleagues in Scotland are trying to pretend it is business as usual, maybe they are scared of the impact that the elections in may had. But there is something that has to be done it is choose where, when and how to attack. Sadly such insight was lacking on this occasion. With backs against the wall trying to avoid seeing Scotland swept away on a Nationalist tide you need to be smart in how to stem that tide not give it more power to the waves that come with it.

N-Power Overpricing

In late November 2008 I used uSwitch to see if I could get my energy supplied any more cheaply. My major concern was the vast changes that Scottish Power were making quarter to quarter based on my fuel bills despite what they called graduated charging to smooth out the curve and the pain. As I result I shifted to N-Power.

Now with the general election and other stuff since then the ability of me to be when the meter reader called round was non-existent. Also the little reminder card to ask me to send off my own readings got neglected amongst the plethora of junk mail. Thus the last two actual meter readings on my house were in December and March.

Anyone who recalls the weather we had during that period, ie the temperature barely rising above zero will understand that quarters bill to have been high. So it was that when I moved out I sent off the final readings, I got the final settlement when I was away over the weekend. My bill is in credit to the sum of £622.39. This actually equates to over three months of the current rate they were charging me at. This is from a provider I was only with from December 2008. Therefore I had been overcharged by some quite considerable margin for 21 months I was with them.

Many power companies are now offering you the opportunity to send in your own reading. In future I will be checking my own reading more regularly and comparing it to the bills I'm being sent or using the online reporting of my usage system more regularly.

It also brings to my mind a project that one of my former flatmates was working on down in London. It was to make gas meters readable without having to visit the site. This was in the early days of the Internet, but it does make me wonder why we still insist on analogue metering that has to be monitored on site, leading to estimates of usage, which invariably are proven to be off in either direction at some point in the future.

The Arabia of Renewables

Today marks the day that the Pentland Firth is being opened up by the Crown Estate to developers seeking to build marine renewable schemes in the area. Up to 700 megawatts of power is expected to be created by the area by 2020.

The Pentland Firth is the stretch of water off the north east tip of mainland Britain where the Atlantic Ocean and North Sea collide between the mainland and Orkney. It is the greatest potential for harnessing of wave energy but other main potentials exist at the ends of the Irish Sea, the Bristol Channel and English Channel. The last of course is least likely to be exploited imminently due the pressures of this as a shipping lane.

The move to harness the UK's maritime currents though overdue is welcome as we seek to get a sustainable, sustained alternative to fossil fuels generating our power needs through a balanced portfolio of renewable sources. Tidal power is more reliable than wind generation and adds to the ability to sustain renewable capability. While it is liable to be the big projects that first garner attention in the Pentland Firth this development of technology will hopefully lead to more micro marine projects as efficiency is increased.

Hockey Mom has Done a U-Turn

Hat tip to Concerned08 who posted this comment.

It appears that Governor Lipsticked Pitbull doesn't quite know whether she supports of disagrees with Sen. Barak Obama's energy policy. On September 3 while accepting the Republican nomination for Vice President she said:

"...we Americans need to produce more of our own oil and gas.

"And take it from a gal who knows the North Slope of Alaska: we've got lots of both.

"Our opponents say, again and again, that drilling will not solve all of America's
energy problems - as if we all didn't know that already.

"But the fact that drilling won't solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all."

Nothing she says it what her opponents are going to do yet from the State of Alaska archive less than a month before on August 4, she said:

"I am pleased to see Senator Obama acknowledge the huge potential Alaska’s
natural gas reserves represent in terms of clean energy and sound jobs,”
Governor Palin said. “The steps taken by the Alaska State Legislature this
past week demonstrate that we are ready, willing and able to supply the
energy our nation needs."

In a speech given in Lansing, Michigan, Senator Obama called
for the completion of the Alaska natural gas pipeline, stating, "Over the next
five years, we should also lease more of the National Petroleum Reserve in
Alaska for oil and gas production. And we should also tap more of our
substantial natural gas reserves and work with the Canadian government to
finally build the Alaska natural gas pipeline, delivering clean natural gas and
creating good jobs in the process."

Governor Palin also acknowledged the Senator’s proposal to offer $1,000
rebates to those struggling with the high cost of energy.

"We in Alaska feel that crunch and are taking steps to address it right here
at home," Governor Palin said. "This is a tool that must be on the table to buy
us time until our long-term energy plans can be put into place. We have already
enjoyed the support of Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, and it is gratifying to see
Senator Obama get on board."

The Governor did question the means to pay for Obama’s proposed rebate —
a windfall profits tax on oil companies. In Alaska, the state’s resource
valuation system, ACES, provides strong incentives for companies to re-invest
their profits in new production.

"Windfall profits taxes alone prevent additional investment in domestic
production. Without new supplies from American reserves, our dependency and
addiction to foreign sources of oil will continue," Governor Palin said.

Of course the Governor doesn't suggest any other way to pay for these rebates, but seeing as she has been slashing state spending no doubt she'd expect Obama to find this from Federal funds so she can blame it on Washington when she has to seek re-election as Governor or when she may challenge for the Presidency in 2012.

If you ask me the only one who's prepared to do nothing about this herself is the Governor of Alaska not the Democratic Nominee for President.

Room for More Hydro-Electric Generation

I've long held the belief that small scale renewable projects as well as the mass scale ones is the best way forward to help reduce our reliance on carbon based energy generation. Therefore I'm glad to see that the Forum for Renewable Energy Development has reported that an extra 650MW of Hydro power can be produced by hundreds of small scale projects.

That's about 50%, or 600,000 extra homes (equivalent of Edinburgh) of what is currently produced primarily through the big dams up in the Highland Glens, even before the new Glendoe facility comes on line next year. Smaller schemes do not need to flood valleys, they use existing weirs of can use the natural down flow of rivers with minimal effect.

Like wind water is one resource we very rarely run out of here in Scotland and I'm glad to see the Government at least getting encouraged about the scheme to produce more renewable energy.

Green Whisky

No don't be alarmed they aren't adding dye to Scotland's favourite dram but Diageo are linking up with energy company Dalkia to create a bio-energy plant at Cameronbridge, Fife. Using two of the distilling industries bi-products the wash and steam used at the plant to create the largest non-utility company plants of its kind in the UK.

The net effect of using 90,000 tonnes of residue that would normally need transporting off site to would result in the project seeing a cut of 56,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions annually, the equivalent of 44,000 family cars. Its good to see big industry not just thinking about how to go green but also working in combination with energy companies in how they can use waste products effectively to help combat climate change as best they can.

Although this particualar scheme set for Cameronbridge is on a large scale there are many smaller schemes that could be implemented by other producers and careful consideration should be taken by companies setting up or expanding and the Government in how to encourage and develop these alternative fuel sources and provisions.

Volunteer to be a Nuclear Dumping Ground

David Miliband the 'Wayne Rooney' of Tony Blair's cabinet want to sweep the issue of the waste created by nuclear power station under the carpet, or at least under the ground in a willing local authority.

Obviously after decades of consideration weighing this up this has been considered the safest option open to the government. That is clearly why they will be offering hte willing local authority a multi-million pound bribe, sorry, investment incentive to volunteer. Of course the officers of the local authority who agree to having the nuclear depository built in their area will propably be long out of office by the time it comes online, as it is expected to take 40 years to construct the at least 500 metre deep dumping ground. So obviously it will be as 'safe' as houses then.

The previous attempt to try and get a deep nuclear dumping site established was scraped in the 1980s due to public resistance. Of course then public awareness was far more worried of nuclear fallout coming from the sky if America and Russia got a little too heated.

Of course the best way to avoid having to dispose of nuclear waste is to avoid creating new nuclear power stations. There is plenty of options for other energys to be utilised that will reduce our countries carbon footprint and be safer and cleaner to use.

100% Renewable Energy For Scotland

That is the target that Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Nicol Stephen has announced as acheiveable by 2050.

It is going further than the executives current proposals to reach 40% by 2020 but as Nicol says these plans are 'deliberately bold', adding: 'Apollo to the Moon was a challenge.'

Ross Henderson, of the renewable energy company Ocean Power Delivery, backed up the Lib Dem proposal saying:

"It's absolutely possible, but it requires a complete change in Scotland's infrastructure. We welcome the pledge, and it's not such a wacky suggestion. The technology is now starting to become available and a lot of progress has been made on renewables in the last ten years. Scotland has the potential to become a world leader in wave energy."

Martyn Williams, of the campaign group Friends of the Earth, is another who welcomed the pledge. He said:

"It's very ambitious, but it is possible. For this to work, it would have to be done as a mix of onshore wind farms, solar power, offshore turbines and hydroelectricity. Studies have shown that it could be done and we have the space in Scotland to do it."

However, other parties do not share the view of these experts. Richard Lochhead, the SNP's energy spokesman in the Scottish Parliament said it lacked ambition they had pledged to make Scotland 'all-renewable' by 2050. However, a main thrust of SNP funding for an independent Scotland is meant to be coming from Scotland's oil and gas, so how does that work if they are committed to defending the planet.

The Tories are not talking the Dave Cameron talk. Their energy spokesman Alex Johnstone, dismissed it as "pie in the sky". He said:

"This will have damaging implications for industry and the economy, particularly as the technology is nowhere near ready to achieve that."

Maybe he should listen to people like Ross Henderson of Ocean Power Delivery and others who say that the technology is ready to step up and deliver. As Martyn Williams of FotE says it needs the right balance. Mr Johnstone and his fellow Tories should stop listening to the petroleum and oil bosses whose money helps finance the Tory party and look at reality.

How Healthy is Blair's Green Energy Committment?

So we've all heard Tony Blair talk the talk:

I am not saying that nuclear is the only answer—of course it is not. There are renewables, energy efficiency and everything else.

Hansard 14 June 2006 Column 764

So why if is and Jack McConnell the Scottish First Minister do we read today that a renewable energy firm is in danger of closure due to lack of orders.

Some people have complained that all we ever seem to have on the renewable agenda is wind farms yet here is Camcal doing great work to harness wave energy under threat of closure. Where is the promise to a balance portfolio of renewable resources? Is Camcal just the tip of the iceberg? Is the Prime Minister's nucleur myopia going to have ramifications on orders for the renewable energy industires that are trying to make a difference to how we generate our power?

Power Station May Silence McConnell's Plans

Oh dear what can the matter be, poor old Jack has had a catastophe.

The First Minister said that he hoped to extend the life of the Torness and Hunterston nucleur power stations. Only for the aging reactors to say dear Mr McConnell we really are starting to crack up a should be allowed to retire gracefully.

The nucleur safety watchdog has uncovered cracks at six reactors across the UK including Hunterston B in Ayrshire. They have warned that a radioactive leak could be "inevitable" if action was not taken about these. There are claims that this should halt any suggestion of extending the life but British Energy deny this is the case. However David Howarth, the Liberal Democrats' energy spokesman said:

"This could spell an earlier end to nuclear plants, rather than an extension of their life-cycle that the government had hoped for.

"The evidence is mounting that the government is taking a huge gamble by pushing for a new generation of nuclear power plants.

"Over-reliance on large, centralised and risky nuclear plants could seriously threaten our electricity supplies if one or more reactor is shut down due to these sort of safety concerns."

Labour's Nucleur Future for Scotland

Labour MSP Dr. Elaine Murray has spoken the words that Jack McConnell has feared to say in saying that her party will rule out a veto on new nucleur power station in Scotland.

While the Scottish Party is alone in Scottish politics on taking an official stance on the subject Dr. Murray told BBC Radio Scotland yesterday that Scottish Labour had no objection in principle. She said:

"The position of the Labour Party going into the Scottish Parliament elections will be that we would not, on principle, block an application for a new nuclear power station in Scotland.

"We would consider any planning application on its merits."

Last week the First Minsiter had said he wanted to see a "massive expansion" in renewables. However, there were the first hints of expanding nucleur reliance as Mr McConnell refused to downplay nucleur as a potential future provider in Scotland.

Already Torness and Hunterston nucleur stations have been muted to have their lives extended.

So Tony What is Changing?

Much as I'd like to think Sir Menzies Campbell read my blog this morning and aimed his question at PMQs today based on that, I doubt it. After all he did speak on the subject yesterday to a group of businessmen.

However, Ming added a new twist which must have made the fading shade of green Chameleon shirk in his seat across the ailse as he asked something that David William Donald Cameron wouldn't dare to test his party's green credibility. What Ming asked was what had changed since 2003 when an energy review criticised the option of new nuclear power stations on the grounds of cost and waste.

Mr Blair's response was that a balance of new sources of power was needed (is this a climb down from his over reliance on nucleur) and also that the technology of nuclear power was also changing. It may be changing Prime Minister but the issues of cost and waste have not yet been address. As the Prime Minster said 'also' this must mean that he acknowledges that other low-carbon energy production methods are also changing. They are becoming more economical, less wasteful of what is produced and more with greater efficiency.

At the moment Blair with his push for more nucleur no matter what the costs or effects is setting him up for an Arnie Vinnick type nightmare some time hence.

Scotland can be Green Hub of Europe

Nicol Stephen has laid down a challenge to Labour over nuclear power for Soctland. He stated that the Scottish Liberal Democrats will be distancing themselves from the policy that Labour are veering towards which is embracing new nuclear power stations for Scotland.

Nicol said that Scotland is ideally poised to harness its unrivalled potential in wind, wave and tidal power to make a major contribution to climate change. He announced that biomass, marine, offshore wind and hydrogen developments would be targeted with an additional £20 million funding support to ensure that Scotland's natural resources can be fully exploited.

While Tony Blair is making statements that nuclear power is the way to go and Scottish Labour are looking at a three pronged approach to energy provision including to "keep options open" for new nuclear power stations, this is a clear statement of intent. Scotland can beat the targets for clean energy creation by renewables without falling back on nuclear, which at present will still leave an unsatisfactory legacy for generations to come.