Pages

Wednesday, 3 April 2013

Green energy and landowners

It may have been a predictable outcome, but more than anyone else, green energy seems to confer its benefits on landowners rather than power consumers. Wind turbines, solar panel arrays and biofuels all require far more land than coal, nuclear or gas for power generation.

From nebusiness last November
THE importance of renewable energy generation is poised to become hugely important to landowners over the next decade.

The findings came from a snapshot poll taken at a conference organised specifically to discuss the issue. The Renewable Projects: Landowner to Landowner event at Stoneleigh Park in Warwickshire, found that 65% believed that renewable energy production would be very important to their overall business in 10 years’ time, compared to 54% in five years’ time, and 19% at the moment.

Oddly enough, even fracking doesn’t occupy much land and as far as eco-fascists are concerned it isn’t green. Supposedly this is because CO2 is generated by burning natural gas, but is that the only factor?

I’m not saying that climate activists are in the pockets of major landowners, but as things have turned out they may as well be. Especially when one considers how inefficient and unreliable green power is.

So are big landowners at least partly responsible for keeping green energy scams alive in spite of the screwed science and obvious lack of warming? Certainly many of them appear to be intent on taking advantage of it, but are big landowners a major factor in the demented government line that CO2 still causes global warming even if it doesn't get warmer?

I don't know, but I wouldn't bet against it.

6 comments:

Roger said...

The only common factor is the colour of grass.

From Adam Smith:- "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty or justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary".

You can be very sure the presentations will hinge on maximising grants, handouts etc etc and the minimising of taxation and the garnering of free funding. The usefulness of the proposals will not figure in the discussions, the power of votes and party funding may.

Sobers said...

Sadly farming has swallowed the 'Green energy' bait hook line and sinker, mainly because they are faced with people arriving on their doorsteps waving cheques for huge amounts of money. More money than they can make from farming in several years, from only a small area of their farms. I personally have had approaches from companies wanting to put solar panels on parts of my farm. I could be pulling in a rent cheque for over £100K/year (inflation linked no less) if I signed up. I refused, because I disagree with the morals behind the schemes (making all people, rich and poor alike, pay more for fuel, so that people like me can get huge amounts of money), and also because I disagree with the science behind it - if the world really was going to fry otherwise I might be persuaded to do it, and give the money away. But as it is its morally degenerate and a fraud on the public. I want no part of it. One day the tide will turn, and the people who take the easy cash now will be publicly mocked and taunted, maybe even made to pay the money back.

Demetrius said...

If only I had enough acres on which to stick a small wind farm. Hyde Park would do very nicely.

A K Haart said...

Roger - good quote, says it all doesn't it? No doubt Prince Charles' reps attend these events too.

Sobers - very interesting indeed. I admire your stand enormously and like to think I'd do the same. £100k pa is hard to turn down though.

You've made my day!

Demetrius - there must be a fair bit of wind coming off the House of Commons.

Sobers said...

It wasn't an easy decision I'll admit. A true test of one's ethics - whether one can stand by ones principles when tempted by extreme riches. I'm lucky I make a good income by any standards from farming anyway, I have no family to support either. And half would have gone right back to HMRC anyway. Once I'd made my decision and informed the solar developer of it, I immediately knew I'd made the right one. I sleep easily at night now - I did have a few sleepless ones before I'd decided what to do.

A K Haart said...

Sober - yes, in the end sleepless nights would do it for me. A scam is a scam and my conscience wouldn't let me forget it.

I hope.