« George Osborne: I did make a mistake over Deripaska but I didn't break any rules | Main | Conservatives need their own democracy agenda »


Excellent post.
We were behind the curve on the recession. We mustn't be behind the curve on the energy crisis. I hope your faith in Greg Clark is well founded.
Hopefully he won't be taking advice from Polly Toynbee in this portfolio.

As revealed on "File on Four" at the weekend, the current UK generating reserve for November is 800MW - less than one power station. We have so many off-line at present that the lights could indeed go out.

The most likely time is at the end of East Enders when millions of kettles go on. Each night, power stations get ready to deal with the "pick up". If we lose another power station, the "pick up" could be nasty.

Did anyone else notice how, in his Big Speech this morning, the Prime Minister referred with some relish to "oil" and "renewables" with regard to energy.
He did not mention coal.
What I don't know is this: how much coal is there actually remaining under our sceptred isle?

Prediction: demand for energy is going to crash thanks to the credit crunch

Let`s hope he comes out with a clear plan to put keeping the lights on first,and being "green" second. This means cancelling the wretched subsidised wind farms and building nuclear and more coal fired plants urgently.

This will upset David Cameron`s friend, wealthy contributor to party funds and PPC for Richmond Park Zac Goldsmith, who supports criminal damage to coal fired power stations.

Has he got the bottle for it?

True Kirk but what will crash faster Kirk: Supply or demand?

a few points:

- energy demand will fall with economic slowdown. Supply will not fall until plants start coming offline in 2015.

- the party have already announced funding for several new coal plants to be fitted with CCS to bring them down to gas fired emmissions levels. this could provide 5 or 6 GW of power, more than the government have planned.

- nuclear is a SUBSIDISED energy source in the UK and always has been. This is not even considering the vast legacy clean up costs.

- renewables, all carbon considrations aside offer the opportunity to provide us with energy security and, in the longer term, cheaper energy. The potential for economic growth due to green collar jobs is also immense. One turbine manufacturer alone is talking about creating more jobs than Nissan in the next 5 years in the NE.

-whilst there is a challenge in the short term to replace our energy generation sensibly- as a good deal of plant is set to come offline in the next few years- taking the right choices is crucial and scaremongering and rash decision making a dangerous possibility. Rather than ruling out technologies the best approach will be to avoid prejudicial poerspectives. Let everything compete, rule nothing out, provide infrastructure and a strategic overview that appreciates emerging technologies, home growth engineering and experitise and a sensible appreciation of our longer term carbon comittments (see the climate change bill REPORT STAGE TODAY!).

NB in the light of the current slowdown, even the governments conservative projections of new energy supply will be more than enough and certainly nothing worse than the last 10 years.

Cost of energy and fuel poverty is a far more pressing issue, both politically and socially and this energy crisis panic is a dangerous distraction.

The Tories had been dragging their feet on energy policy although latterly have been making more positive noises about nuclear energy and clean coal.Great sentence .....

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker