Chris Huhne - Resignation

Normal protocol is to wait until after the guy has been found guilty of the charge.....

Cheers

Don

I bet he hopes Calum is not selected for jury service...

The back benches is the best place for him. Nothing stopping him from saying what he actually thinks about the coalitions policies. Should be fun and fireworks.

Well put Don. Though I spoke with and photographed a dozen or so of Huhne's constituents late morning and a fair few agreed with Calum, probably about 60/40.

Chris

Am I the only one feeling a massive sense of schadenfreude over this?  We (the lynch mob) know when someone's a wrong'un...

at the moment.......possibly.......

Once he's been declared guilty by a jury..........we'll all pour scorn on him - and his ex misses

Cheers

Don

PS I really should have said "if he's declared guilty....."

This is currently the whole point of any green energy policy. Increased costs  are not negotiable or optional with current technology and economics.

Without a renewable option that is actually cheaper than fossil fuels, ALL green energy policies will load up the cost of power, either directly through higher power bills to the consumer, or indirectly through tax-funded subsidies. There is no getting around this fact. You can't get something for nothing. If we want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, or the dependence on foreign energy supply, it will cost more. If it cost less, we'd already be doing it.

A side benefit of loading power bills  to pay for the shift to renewables (as opposed to subsidies that we pay for through taxation to allow power costs to remain SEEMINGLY low) is that it encourages efficiency and conservation of power.

Winki,

Beautifully put! Some people cannot see beyond the end of their noses. Mostly greed buggers who want to lord it over the plebs as well ...

Best wishes from George

The man in the street knows that green energy (yawn...) and the climate change debate has been created to make those in the climate change industry rich. 

And in real, practical terms, the "green" solution to our energy needs is ?????

Cheers

Don

PS I know what my view is, but I would welcome the views of others who might be closer to the power industry generators

Fusion

Limitless fuel, no nuclear waste. no CO2.

The problem is that it's always 30 years in the future.

Westinghouse PWRs (like Sizewell B).

However, I wrote some of the Fortran code for the LOCA (loss of coolant accident) safety case for this, so I probably have an emotional attachment.

A couple of my friends work at Culham and 30 years seems pretty optimistic to me, even with the proviso of "always 30 years away"

So its down to fission and probably Westinghouse IMHO, and the sooner the UK Gov gets on with it, the better

Cheers

Don

"knows"? Really? How?

Frank,

I didn't listen to the BBC World News programme but it sounds like it was interesting.

Did they talk about the resources needed to provide on-going wind/solar generation of energy and did they talk about the on-going resources needed for energy storage e.g. for batteries or molten salt ?

Cheers

Don

At present, as I see it, the only mass-volume, low-carbon, low CO2 way of generating power is nuclear.

Wind power is on the up, but incredibly expensive, especially if you take into account the mass-storage systems that are needed to make the system independent of fossil fuel or nuclear. And let's face it, those storage costs (assuming practical solutions can be built - e.g. pumped storage schemes) aren't factored into the pricing structure at present.

Getting capitalist investment in such schemes is a whole new ball-game IMHO, in addition to the technical issues.

Whilst following Frank's link above, I stumbled across a UK gov paper from 2008 setting out a few interesting aspects about "sustainable" energy sources. I think it was under something like Parliament POSTNEWS. Probably worth a read for anybody remotely interested in the subject.

Cheers

Don

Parliament.uk/documents/post/postpn306