Does a Dead Cat Bounce? (if named Footsie?)


So the FTSE 100 went up by over 1.5% today after initially falling by over 4%. This wild fluctuation came after it lost somewhere around 18% in the previous week.

But it went up. So everything is fine and dandy.

(There was me thinking we were up sh*t creek without a paddle.)

The Yanks, are still smarting from being downgraded from AAA to AA+. They are moaning that they only owe 13 trillion dollars.

For the mathematically challenged that is:
$13,000,000,000,000

(I think I got all the noughts in)

The US Treasury is outraged at  Standard & Poors downgrade. Personally Billothewisp thinks Standard & Poors has done a pretty dismal job too.

Billothewisp thinks that, if you have allowed yourself to sleep walk into a position where you owe the aforesaid 13 trillion dollars, really your credit rating should be ZZZ-, not AA+, let alone AAA.

Finally here in England, it seems the (parody of a) government might want to do some more Printing Money Quantitative Easing.

As I remember, one side effect of Printing Money Quantitative Easing is that inflation takes off.

Of course being a simple soul I may be wrong and the current 5% (and rising) inflation is purely coincidental with the last batch of Printing Money Quantitative Easing.

I wonder what inflation will go to after the next print run?

Neodymium and Wind Turbines

Take a look at these two old Chinese NIMBYs complaining about how a six mile wide lake of effluent has ruined their country-side. A lake of effluent, produced mining Neodymium. (See Mail Article Here)


Neodymium is a rare earth metal. It is increasingly being used in wind turbines and is seen by many turbine supporters as a magic bullet. Something desperately needed to improve the farcical output, and improve the reliability of these white elephants.

Neodymium allows turbines to get over the need for horrendously complex gearboxes needed to drive the doubly fed induction generators currently used. Doubly fed induction generators need to turn at about 1500 rpm minimum. You can imagine the gearing ratio needed.

This is what happens when the bearings fail.



With Neodymium magnets, the generator is simplified and the gearbox can be (almost) dispensed with. Grossly ineffective and unreliable turbines become (ever so slightly) less gross.

But at what cost?

To the rich and powerful owners of these things, along with glazed eyed brown nosers who support them, the answer is a small amount of the ROC subsidy for a short time.

To the Chinese peasants who lose their land and see their families broken up the answer is somewhat more devastating.

But, they are only common folk and a world away at that. Even if their existence is known of, they scarcely matter to our eco warrior friends.

Even so, Neodymium cannot break the laws of Physics. The best that you will ever get out of a turbine (it is called Betz law) is theoretically 59% of the actual wind energy, Practically though you would be doing very well to get 40-45%.

Even then, however big and powerful your Neodymium magnets, if the wind does not blow, 40% of nothing is still nothing.

All Neodymium provides are cheaper gearboxes, less embarrassing turbine fires and less need to employ maintenance technicians.

It also provides slave wages to a dispossessed people while lining the coffers of a elitist dictatorship.

Like so many aspects of the wind turbine scam, the rich and powerful, both here and in China, do very well out of Neodymium and wind turbines.

As usual, it is the average person who pays the price.

Turbine, Turbine, Burning Bright


A turbine burns. No doubt the bearings in the gearbox on the doubly fed induction generator failed.

An unattended machine suffering a catastrophic failure.



One turbine. Among many. For the rich and influential owners, an easy and occasional sacrifice.

With the new Neodymium gearboxes, you may argue, even the flaming turbines will be a thing of the past. The horrendously complex gearboxes that fail so frequently  will soon be replaced.

Maybe that is true.

Maybe.

But if you are an avid windy supporter, you need to understand why so many people will be cheering as the flaming monster burns.

You need to understand that those cheering and applauding will inevitably be the bog standard average folk who live nearby.

Those whose lives are ruined, impacted, or maligned by a useless gesture to a Luddite clique.

Meanwhile those reading through the clauses in the insurance policy, the owners of the burning monster, will be the rich and the well connected. The likes of Sir Reginald Sheffield (see who he is related to) would no doubt, be getting one of their minions to sort out the mess.

That is what it comes down to.

Are you with the rich and well connected? As they make their enormous profits while carelessly ruining the lives of many?

Or are you with the common folk, those whose lives and welfare are impacted by these pathetic totems to greed and ignorant stupidity?

The decision is yours.

I hope that you, like me, you are celebrating the burning of the monster.

Peer Reviewed Papers on Turbine Noise


A short while ago Billothewisp was tipped off that a considerable number of scientific papers relating to the harmful effects of wind turbines were going through peer review.

Now the August edition The Bulletin of Science, technology and Society (BSTS)  has published no less than nine peer reviewed papers on wind turbines, noise and health consequences.

This though is only the start.

Unfortunately unless you are a university department or (example) an NHS trust, a mere plebian (like Billothewisp) has to fork out the best part of £500.00 to subscribe to the BSTS, or at least pay $25.00 per paper. Ouch!

Luckily, the National Wind Watch Site Here has published the abstracts

I expect that after initial publication these papers may well become more accessible, so  a google search may well find them. Alternatively, if you have what is known as an "Athens" account (i.e. you work for the NHS or an academic institution) you should be able to get at them on-line now.

These particular papers are:

Professor John P Harrison, Dept Physics, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada,
Paper: Wind Turbine Noise

Dr Bob Thorne Phd. Noise Measurement Services Pty Ltd, Enoggera, Queensland, Australia
Paper: The Problems With “Noise Numbers” for Wind Farm Noise Assessment

Dr. Arline L. Bronzaft Phd.GrowNYC, New York, New York, USA
Paper: The Noise From Wind Turbines: Potential Adverse Impacts on Children’s Well-Being

Dr. Alec N. Salt Phd, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
Dr. James A. Kaltenbach Phd, Lerner Research Institute/Head and Neck Institute, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Paper: Infrasound From Wind Turbines Could Affect Humans

Dr. Carl V. Phillips Phd, Populi Health Institute, Wayne, Pennsylvania, USA
Paper: Properly Interpreting the Epidemiologic Evidence About the Health Effects of Industrial Wind Turbines on Nearby Residents

Dr Robert Y. McMurtry MD FRCSC FACS, St. Joseph’s Health Care, London, Ontario, Canada
Paper: Toward a Case Definition of Adverse Health Effects in the Environs of Industrial Wind Turbines: Facilitating a Clinical Diagnosis

Carmen M. E. Krogh BScPharm, Killaloe, Ontario, Canada
Paper: Industrial Wind Turbine Development and Loss of Social Justice?

Carmen M.E. Krogh BScPharm, Killaloe, Ontario, Canada
Lorrie Gillis, Flesherton, Ontario, Canada
Professor Nicholas Kouwen, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Dr. Jeff Aramini Phd, Intelligent Health Solutions, Fergus, Ontario, Canada
Paper: WindVOiCe, a Self-Reporting Survey: Adverse Health Effects, Industrial Wind Turbines, and the Need for Vigilance Monitoring

Dr Martin Shain Phd, University of Toronto, Caledon, Ontario, Canada
Paper: Public Health Ethics, Legitimacy, and the Challenges of Industrial Wind Turbines: The Case of Ontario, Canada

That, my grubby little Englanders, is the tip of a very dirty iceberg that is about to hit the fan (or windmill - so to speak)

You have to ask: How long does this have to continue before somebody actually does something other than sit on their hands hoping it all goes away?

Billothewisp may well oppose wind turbines simply because they are bloody useless. But before that he vehemently opposes building the things anywhere near peoples homes.

There must be a set-back of at least 1.5 Km instituted NOW.

Anything else is criminal negligence.

The Ship in Wool


It is not often that Billothewisp has been impressed by pub food, but tonight was a rare exception.

A chance encounter entailed a visit to the Ship public house in Wool. Billothewisp was presented with the best pub curry he has had in a very long time. Not only that, the bar staff were friendly, the beer good and the ambience very pleasant.

Previously, on my last visit,about a year ago it felt a bit like eating in Tesco's. But not any more.

The landlord was a great host (sounded like a Brummy... no doubt from the Dagenham mould). Certainly worth another visit. Thursday is Curry night, and it is cheap. I'll be there.

Here is a challenge:

Billothewisp, in true Kolly Kibber style (you haven't read Brighton Rock? Shame on you!) will buy the first person to correctly identify him a pint of Badgers.

But it has to be done correctly. Aka:

"You are Billothewisp, and I claim my free pint"

Of course you risk making a complete Pillock of yourself and getting punched in the face. But even so you will still have had a good curry.

If the person you challenge bursts into tears at the thought of having to pay for someone else's drink, then you know you have the right man.

Regrettibly Billothewisp is significantly over the drinking age limit so cannot claim to be too young, or too poor. Neither can he claim membership of the Salvation army. (although he will try)

Just make sure you stand between him and the door. He is, when asked to pay, quite fleet of foot.

Whatever way he tries to weedle out of paying, take no prisoners.

But make sure you get the right guy (or gal, or pit-pony).

Or you might be spending a night in the cells.

A Murderous Stupidity


What is there anyone can write that will ever address the sea of grief and tragedy that has engulfed Norway? What can you do except recoil in horror at the events that have cost so many children and adults their lives?

But we must look at the preposterous self important fool that performed these terrible acts. He is not just mad. He is not simply somebody in need of treatment.

To think that, would be to degrade those who really do have a mental health problems. They are no more likely to perform such a vile act than the next man or woman.

This murderer is no more mad than the sycophants who did the bidding of Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot. Like these other fools before him he is just a sad little loser looking for something to big himself up on.

His peer group are the dirty murderers who poured the Zyklon B into the gas chambers at Auchwitz. Or slaughtered children ("little traitors") in Cambodia by smashing their heads against trees. Or those responsible for the Omagh Bombing. Or 7/7. Or 9/11.

They all bear the same hallmarks of moronic political incompetence and a vain self-importance.All these terrible acts were performed by people who the rest of us would regard as criminally bigoted idiots.

All of these followers of hate have become so soaked in their own bigotry that no outrage is too extreme however ridiculously unobtainable the demands or aims.

People like these are not mad but they  are evil. And very, very stupid.

This Norwegian murderer's grand plan against Islam involved murdering non Muslim Norwegian children.

Now you have to ask yourself: How fundamentally stupid you have to be to believe that would be an effective strategy?

How ridiculous a political viewpoint do you have to have to think that killing anyones children will endear your dogma to the parents and friends of those murdered children?

There is a danger that since his actions are so vile, so brutally ugly, nobody will countenance mentioning his pathetically stupid goals and aims. But they must be mentioned, and then held up to the ridicule and derision they deserve.

We must also ensure that legitimate debate is never mortgaged by the likes of this evil fool. We need to address the stupidity of narrow minded, bigoted extremism wherever it comes from. We need to show up these murderous fools for what they are and ridicule their evil fairy-land policies. We must not allow them to influence fair and just debate.

I expect this filth is loving his 15 minutes of fame. I expect though, that the next 45 years in solitary confinement, might prove less pallitable.

Whoever locks the door, just make sure you throw the key into the deepest Fjord in Norway.

Then laugh at the bastard as you walk away.

Cold Feet in Turbine Heaven.


On the 12th July the government published its latest white paper of energy reform The Electricity Market Reform Paper 2011 Here

Although this white paper cements in an absurd commitment to a massive expansion and deployment of wind turbines, the bankers and investors are getting cold feet.

They are blaming this on what they say is a lack of clarity in the white paper. (As described in "The Scotsman" Here)

But there is more to the bankers prevarication, as noted in the above article:

[quote]
That was partly due to regulatory uncertainty, he said, but funding for wind farms was also being impacted by low average wind speeds over the last couple of years, which has depressed rates of return on existing projects.
[unquote]

Maybe the bankers have started paying more attention to data indicating a reduction in wind speed across the UK. As described in a paper by Wind Turbine enthusiasts Garrad Hassan.
(see Billothewisp post "Wind Speed In Decline: A Blip or a Trend?").

Maybe now they can see that even with their huge subsidies, erratically performing turbines may not be the sure investment bet they were once thought to be.

Whatever the bankers think, one thing is sure, nobody in government would now risk the wrath of the electorate by giving the bankers a guarantee on any continuation of the currently flawed ROC scheme let alone an increase. If they want a cast iron guarantee on what is really very risky high return investment, they are going to be dissapointed. (at last)

What if these grubby little investors attempt to blackmail us by threatening to take their "green" investments elsewhere?

Billothewisp has two words to say to them

Bye Bye.

The Norwegian Tragedy

Some of the readers of this blog are Norwegian. To my Norwegian friends, I would like to extend my deepest sympathy regarding the appalling events in Utoya and Oslo.  

David Nutt, Drugs and Propaganda


Poor old David Nutt. There he was, on the BBC expecting a factually based scientific argument on the country's drugs and drug recovery schemes. All he got was a blinkered  opinionated journalist. All we got, as licence payers was a smokescreen that hid the vital arguments and data.

But for David Nutt, things went from bad to worse. He then was on a regional program and was confronted by someone who was simply uninterested on Nutts scientific studies or credentials and dismissed mere science as an also-ran. They preferred their own narrow viewpoint and were unwilling to bend, even when confronted with the facts.

A travesty for public information. But for the BBC it all made good television. Guardian Article Here

While alternative viewpoints are always useful, and must be heard, it is highly disturbing to find the BBC so in-thrall to such marginal and unverifyable viewpoints. They have just been hauled over the coals by an independant review. (Here). I expect the BBC will issue a myriad of weasel words, I doubt they will take any notice. they are far too self important for that.

It is a good thing that Murdoch has had his wings clipped. But I do fear that this is simply going to leave a triumphalist and self-centered BBC as an even uglier and opinionated organisation than it already is.

If the way they have treated Professor Nutt is anything to go by, we should not be expecting anything like scientifically accurate or informed commentary from the BBC. Just more self serving and sensationalist propaganda that they clearly prefer.

Wind Speed in Decline: A Blip or a Trend?


It has been knuckle chewing time for the last couple of years for those wind farms that have been stupidly built in the less windy parts of the country. Even those built where the wind actually blows have seen their profitability massively cut. But those who had been planning to cash in on sub 20% capacity factor outputs are now beginning to feel the heat.

Of course we all know that none of them were, are, or ever will be, viable without a massive ROC subsidy. But even with this subsidy some must now be trading on the margins of viability.

Last year for example the output of all UK wind farms fell by 7%. Yet in that same year many more turbines were built. The theoretical (some say imaginary) total wind-farm capacity increased by 13 %.

To me, that looks like over a 21% drop in total.

Ouch!

An unpredictable long term reduction, getting worse year on year. Just what the bankers want to hear (not).

2009 wind speed was low, last year it was lower still.

So, is this a blip? Or is it a long term trend?

Oh, such a quandary and who has the answer?

Actually it is our friendly BWEA to the rescue. Or rather a paper presented by the doyens of the Wind Turbine fraternity: Garrad Hassan and Partners Ltd

I hasten to add this paper was presented first in 2006 and is now dated 2009, both dates are before the current downturn.

You can find the PDF of their paper Here  (if it disappears, Billothewisp has a copy)

It is titled:

LONG-TERM WIND SPEED TRENDS IN NORTHWESTERN EUROPE

The running 15 year trend with wind speed, according to Garrad-Hassan is as follows


It is going down. Now remember this was up to 2005.

Garrad-Hassan then tried valiantly to use some weather indices as proxies to go back further. Back to the 1960's in fact. The most important of these is the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) then there are two other indices used. One is Katalog Der Grosswetterlagen Europas. This is a subjective catalogue of large scale weather patterns over Europe dating back 100 years. Then finally they also used the UK Jenkinson Lamb weather classification (which is similar to the Grosswetterlagen catalogue but for the UK)

Here is what they found for the NAO


here is the Jenkinson Lamb result


Finally here is the Grosswetterlagen graph


Notice how they all roughly correlate.

Also notice the "blip" around 1995.

In their conclusions, Garrad-Hassan try and sweeten the pill of the 15 year decline by suggesting that all that was happening was that wind was returning to stability after a upward blip in the mid 1990's.

However we should remember that this is then essentially returning to a stable "low" wind-speed. Garrad-Hassen re-assuringly write that a further fall in average wind speed should not be assumed. Though, they could not rule it out.

But of course, this Garrad-Hassan data only goes up to 2005. Since then we know that things have actually got worse (significantly so in the last year)

So, are we just bottoming out? Or are we still going down?

Perhaps our previously loan happy banking fraternity should look a little more closely at what they might be letting themselves in for.

Maybe the wind turbine carpet-bagging fraternity will be seeing that big red stamp that spells out "DECLINED" being used a little more on their loan applications from now on.

Maybe a few of their pals who have built these things in totally inappropriate areas will soon be queuing up at the local Licensed Insolvency Practitioners office.

Then I expect the poor bloody rate-payer will have to fork out to pull the things down.

What a waste.

Time to Break the Energy Cartels


Go onto any price comparison site. Select one of the big utility companies. Have a look at how many different tariffs there are.

Here is the result of one quick scan I did for electricity tariffs. It includes dual fuel, but only on a variable direct debit.

  • NPower have 29 different tariffs
  • British Gas have 58 tariffs
  • Scottish Power 15 tariffs
  • EON have 10 tariffs
  • OVO 54 tariffs

Don't forget this is only variable direct debit. God knows how long the full list of tariffs is.

This is not done for "customer choice" this is done to obfuscate and confuse. It is a deliberate policy of making things difficult to understand so as to undermine the customers visibility of what they are really paying.

But even forgetting about the massive casquade of apparently different though essentially identical tariffs,  there are even worse liberties taken with consumers.

Take some elderly relatives of mine.

They are hardly infirm and are still very much in command of their faculties.

But they don't get on with the internet and they come from a period of time when Utility Companies were trusted and held in high regard. A bit like the banks (need I say more?)

Needless to say, these fine people are inevitably on a high tariff.

Nobody at Npower has told them that they could save £150 simply by changing their current tariff for another virtually identical one.

But it gets worse.

Npower have recently increased their monthly direct debit.

They have done this even though NPower currently owe them £400.

Thats is a continual and increasing overcharge worth currently over half their annual bill.

A free loan from the old to the averacious bastards at another greedy energy utility.

This is shameful. Dare I say for any normal business it would also be regarded as immoral. An deplorable activity bordering on criminality.

Energy Utilities are given a virtual profit guarantee and an easy market.

I don't think that it is too much to ask for them to behave in a moral and decent manner.

Until this scandal is addressed, more and more people are going to be forced into energy poverty. More and more of the old and vulnerable will die for the lack of a little heat.

Just so the utilies can continue amassing their huge immoral fortunes.

This has got to stop.

But is there anyone in government with the balls to address the problem?
I have my doubts.

King Coal Aberdare and Devil: Corrections


Thanks to JAA I've found the tomb of the Penitent Coal Baron. (See Post Here)

Here it is:

(above image copyright Ray Jones licensed under Creative Commons Licence)

Actually though,  Robert Thompson Crawshay (1817 - 1879) was an Iron Baron, Victorian rather than Edwardian, and not as bad as some of his peer group.

Further more he is buried in Merthyr Tydfil rather than Aberdare.

Except for that (and a few other minor embellishments) the story was at least 372% accurate. Wikipedia page on R.T. Crawshay here

My only defence for the errors in my story are excessive quantities of alchohol, a 40 year gap and the fact that it was told to me by a retired and poetically drunk Welsh miner.

But personally I don't consider my error (or the miner's) that bad.

Under the circumstances, I think we both did quite well.

King Coal, Aberdare and the Devil


For a while, back in the early 1970's I lived in Aberdare. Aberdare is (or was) a Welsh mining town. My father and mother both were born there, early in the 20th century. My father,  like his father before him, and many of my mother's relatives, worked in coal mining.

But like so many poor Welsh folk in the pre-war years, they yearned to move away from the poverty and grime. Finally they succeeded. They only returned in their latter years.

Like so many Welsh parents they vigorously ensured that none of their children had anything to do with mining coal.

When I was in Aberdare in the early 70's the mines had mostly closed. The only evidence of a massive mining industry were a decreasing number of slag heaps and a Furnacite plant.

Even then in the 1970's regulation was lax. The prevailing wind regularly blew the filth from the Furnacite plant on to the hillside opposite. That hillside was a wasteland. It only recovered when the plant closed in the 80's.

As for the slag heaps, they had, for over a 100 years, been piled ever higher with no regard to safety or health. Things changed in 1966 when in nearby Aberfan a slagheap collapsed onto a school killing nearly 150 people, most of them children.

Today Coal Free Aberdare is a far better place than it was in the 1970's let alone in the 1930's or earlier. Slag heaps are a thing of the past and the river runs clean. But only after an enormous amount of clean up.

So what?

We all know early-mid 20th century coal was a dirty disease ridden energy source. How does that relate to today?

Today, even in the West, coal mining still has a significant casualty list associated with it. It may well be smaller than in the past, but it is still horrendously long.

As for China and the Third World, conditions are often as barbaric as 1920's Aberdare.

At this point I could expound on alternatives to coal. On how bad wind is, and how nuclear is the only solution.

But this post is not about nuclear or wind.

It is about King Coal.

Aberdare.

and The Devil.

One dark and stormy night in 1972 I was in a pub called the General Picton in Aberaman on the outskirts of Aberdare. In those days this was a "Men Only" pub and this was firmly stated on the public bar door.

The beer was advertised as Brains Brilliant Ales. Actually Draught Pale Ale as I remember. The slogan on the advert was accurate. I had a few. It tasted very, very good.

For part of the night I talked to an old retired miner. We talked politics, nationality, sport and finally discussed the effect the coal industry had had on the local area.

After a while he told me the tale of the Penitent Coal Baron:

A local Edwardian Coal Baron was rapidly approaching the end of his life. Everywhere he looked he could see the fruit of his exploitation.

The dirt and grime.

The misery and poverty.

He became increasingly alarmed at the prospect of Eternal Damnation.

So in the last months of his life he desperately set about good works.

At the same time he frantically worked on the epitaph he wanted put on his tomb stone. He tried all sorts and shades of biblical text. But they all came out sounding pompous and self serving.

The Lord would surely have none of that.

The Devil Beckoned.

Finally as his life slipped away, almost with his last gasp, he hit on a real devil stopping quotation to put on his tomb stone.

From what I was told, somewhere in Aberdare cemetery there is a large Victorian/Edwardian tomb belonging to the Penitent Coal Baron.

His tombstone epitaph is simple and really should be read by every rapist of the countryside. Every person who thinks trampling over local people to get their way is acceptable. Everyone who thinks it acceptable to sacrifice someone else's environment so they can make a "statement" or a quick profit.

The epitaph on which the Coal Baron had spent so much time agonising over has just three words.

God Forgive Me.


p.s. Although drinking related, this is actually a true story (though soaked in age and alcohol) If you know who this Aberdare Coal Baron was, I would love to know.

The Great ROC Rip Off


A worked costing example for a 4 turbine Industrial Wind Turbine Plant. This is a little rough and ready in places but it is not far off centre.

Factors: 

1. Turbine size 2.5MW
2. Capacity Factor (CF) examples 15% 20%, 25%, 30%
3. Average Trading value of each ROC certificate (1 MW) £50.00 (an under-estimate) See ROC trading last 3 months Here
4. Trading value supply of 1MW/Hr £45 taken as a rough average of NETA buy/sell price 14/07/11 see graph below:


For those who don't know, the Capacity factor is the actual percentage of the boiler plate rating that the turbine really generates. So a CF of 25% on a turbine means it only really (on average) produces a quarter of the turbines supposed rating. The national average last year was 22%

 Electricity generated per year:

15% CF = 8760 x 0.15 x 2.5 x 4 = 13140 MW/hr
20% CF = 8760 x 0.2  x 2.5 x 4 = 17520 MW/hr
25% CF = 8760 x 0.25 x 2.5 x 4 = 21900 MW/hr
30% CF = 8760 x 0.30 x 2.5 x 4 = 26280 MW/hr

Payment for generation at £45 per MW/hr

CF 15% £591300
CF 20% £788400
CF 25% £985500
CF 30% £1182600

ROC Income based on £50 per ROC certificate (1 MW/hr)

15% CF £657000
20% CF £876000
25% CF £1095000
30% CF £1314000

So total annual income per year for each of the above CFs

15%  CF £1,248300
20%  CF £1,664400
25%  CF £2,080500
30%  CF £2,496600

Turbine cost: around £750,000 per MW + £150,000 Installation = £900K per MW installed

So our 4 turbine site costs 2.5 x 4 x £900K = £9M

Maintenance, extended warranty and repair, about £150 per day per turbine all in. Plus rent to the landowner and other sundries. Say £250K per year all in.

Capital loan at 7.5% for £9M = 675K year (diminishing) plus capital repayment 10M/25 = £400K per year.

Initial total annual outlay = 250K + 675K + 400K = £1.325M. diminishing as loan is repaid to around 650K after 25 years..

So, on those figures a CF of 15-16% is just viable. But this is only because of the ROC subsidy.

If you excluded the ROC even a CF of 30% (less than 8% of UK turbines achieve this) is bordering on non viability.

But because of the ROC, anything above about 16% is financially viable - even in the short term. With 15% CF capital repayment could be offset against future profits, so even a dismal 15% CF would be attractive.

All because of the ludicrous generosity of the ROC.

I hope that explains why these things are being built in wholly inappropriate areas. As long as the Capacity Factor is a pathetic 15% or more then the generators are onto a nice little earner, irrespective of the damage they do to local communities in building their white elephants.

This is not going to get any better. Nothing is going to happen next year or even in ten years which will alter the laws of physics so these white elephants can actually contribute without being propped up by massive subsidies from the consumer.

We are stuck with this for 25 years.

But if our little carpet bagger friends have turbines running at last years average of 22% CF then they are raking it in. But only because of the ROC. Without the ROC the things are wholly unviable.

If the ROC was withdrawn tomorrow, I would bet that nigh on every wind turbine in the land would be scrapped within 6 months.

Junk Energy in its "purest" form.

Hacked off


You may not be aware of the Billothewisp's opinion of the Great, Good and Extremely Well Fed.

Sadly this opinion is very low. Some would say subterranean.

But happily this cave dwelling troll of an opinion has a friend and partner.

Equally ugly and stinky,  Billothewisp's opinion of the Murdoch Empire is as rotten and putrid an the Murdoch Empire itself.

But this stinking pair of opinions often cancel each other out.

As a result, Billothewisp cares nothing for the phone hacking of John Prescott (why did they bother?) or any of the other wannabee celebrities on their pleasure excursion to fame and riches. All I can say to them is: If you don't like the heat, stop pigging out in the kitchen.

But when it come to the disgusting infringement of the rights private ordinary people, most of whom had only been thrust into the spotlight by horror or tragedy, then that is a a step too far.

In fact more like a whole staircase too far.

These arseholes at News International should be severely punished for crimes they have committed. Especially for the suffering they have inflicted on those who already have more than enough grief and suffering to contend with.

Examples need to be made.

Just for starters, may I suggest that Murdochs takeover of BSkyB is vetoed?

That actually is a good idea anyway. So maybe we need to think up something else to punish the arseholes with as well.

This bunch of bastards need to be brought to heel.

Good News from Africa.


It is not often that something good happens in Africa. But today the world welcomes a new Country, South Sudan.

Exploited, dominated and brutalised by the Northern Khartoum dictatorship for the last 30 years, now the people of South Sudan have a chance to pull their desperately poor country into the 21st century.

This is good news due to the potential in this new country and the hope and determination of it's people. Perhaps if South Sudan comes good then we may see an "African Spring" which will involve the removal of the old ugly despots who tyrannise almost the rest of Africa.

Will South Sudan bloom into the Central African torch bearer of freedom and development?

I really hope so.

Because they start with a clean sheet, South Sudan must command our backing and support. Compared to the other countries in Africa which have squandered aid and then slid into the mire of factionalism and corruption, South Sudan is a beacon of hope in a sea of despair.

Let us hope the West gives real practical support to South Sudan and not just the feel-good mediaeval style indulgences that have often passed for aid but have simply bought off corrupt elites at vast expense.

If anywhere in Africa deserves our support, it is South Sudan.

The Crime of Economy 7


First of all let me make this clear the concept of the Economy 7 domestic electricity tariff is excellent. It is just the execution that is flawed. (Wikipedia description here)

Economy 7 is a scheme dating from the 70's. Basically the consumers electricity is provided on two separate tariffs. The daily tariff is more than the night-time tariff. The night-time tariff is significantly lower than the median price. This is because during the small hours, electricity demand is low.

At night, electricity  generated from base load generation is often barely required and much generation capacity is wound down to minimum (and inefficient) levels.  During these quiet periods, generators sell their electricity at knock down prices. The theory of Economy 7 is that consumers can cash in on these quiet periods by using cheap electricity at unsocial hours.

Initially the driving force was to provide energy for night storage heaters. They  used the surplus night time electricity to provide heat during the day. Often derided, night storage heaters do not really deserve their dreadful press. True, they do have their limitations. But night storage heaters were the first practical example of domestic energy storage - which has yet to be beaten.

The practical problem with Economy 7 is that it impacts on the huge profits made by the utilities selling it. If the electricity at night is sold at half the day time tariff, even after winding their margins up, the utilities still earn less from each KW/hr than they would from a flat tariff. Utilities don't really care if the night-time energy goes to waste. They also know that most Economy 7 customers have night storage heaters and have no choice but to use Economy 7.

To ensure their (guaranteed) profit stays as high as possible, the utilities charge Economy 7 customers double for day time electricity so the 7 hour night period price can be halved. An Economy 7 customer needs to use at least 40% of their electricity during the night period which is 29% of the day. They need to do this just to break even.

If there was any common sense to this we would all be on Economy 7 tariffs, but at fair differentials not ones dictated by greed.

More of us would use washing machines and other heavy load appliances during the slack periods. This would make better use of our available electrical resources. There would be less waste, and actually less wear and tear on the infrastructure of the grid.

But the massive profits of British Gas, RWE nPower and the others would take a (slight) knock. But no government has yet had the guts to suggest the utilities should behave responsibly.

So don't expect ground-breaking Economy 7 deals any-time soon.

A Grid Tie Revolution


Or the Law of Unexpected Consequences

One of the most clever and potentially game changing pieces of kit to come out of the mad dash to solar PV is the grid tie inverter.

Is this going to be a whimsical tekkie diatribe? Well, partly. But there is a sting in the tail at the end.

The small grid tie inverter is the piece of equipment that has made domestic Solar PV technically viable.

It is very, very clever.

Due to the fact that reference designs by companies like Microchip are freely available, small grid tie inverters rated at about 250-300W are cheap and plentiful. They cost about £70 -£150 on ebay (p.s. you get what you pay for)

So what is it and why is it so special?

Well, a grid tie inverter, like a normal inverter will turn a DC low voltage source into an AC mains voltage source. So your low voltage solar panels end up outputting mains electricity.

But that has been done for years.

The clever part is that the grid tie does this synchronously with the mains feed into the house.

Why is this important?

Because the grid tie is synchronised to the main frequency, you can use the power output of the grid tie to supplement/replace or even output power to the mains. Without this sychonicity all you would end up with is a lot of sparks and smouldering electronics.

The result of this is that you do not need to abandon a normal electricity supply and go off grid. If for example, when you want to use the washing machine that may take 2KW, your grid tie contributes to that value. You do not need to provide the maximum power your washing machine needs. But anything the grid tie does produce will reduce the amount of power you draw from the grid, thus reducing your electricity bill.

The whole of the current FIT subsidy orgy could not take place without cheap and effective small grid ties.

Currently, in order to claim the FIT subsidy, you need an "approved" installer with "approved kit" that are registered with a trade cartel (er.. sorry i mean trade body) and it costs A LOT of money. Of course it costs everyone else even more to pay your FIT, but that's the way it is.

But what if you don't claim the FIT? What if you set up a system that simply offsets your mains usage? You still massively reduce your electricity bill. There is incidentally at least one company on the market already doing this. FIT free (and cheap)

But what about "approvals" "Part P" etc. Well, as I understand it, most of the modern small grid ties are G83 approved and are advertised as "Plug and Play" They literally plug in like an appliance, but they actually drive electricity into your ring main not suck it out. Setting up a couple of solar panels to supplement your electricity supply could not be simpler. You reduce you electricity bills and so don't personally end up paying other peoples FITs, and you system is massively cheaper than an "approved" installer one. As you can appreciate this gets more and more worthwhile the higher electricity prices go.

But here is the sting in the tail.

The current Grid ties almost universally have what is known a MPPT (Maximum power point tracking) front end that is tailored to extract the most energy possible from solar panels.

So what happens when someone comes up with a cheap grid tie that instead of interfacing to solar PV, interfaces to a small generators? Or even more likely when some clever wag designs an interface to fake up an MPPT output  from a petrol generator?

We end up with people backing off the mains with polluting small generators simply because electricity has become so expensive due to the ridiculous ROC and FIT subsidies.

But surely mains electricity is cheaper than equivalent petrol or diesel? Today? Only just. But if you use LPG or Tesco's best sunflower oil, probably not even today.

Remember you do not need to power your maximum requirement you just reduce it, so a small cheap generator is all that is needed.

If electricity prices continue to rise, people will find ways to beat the system and solar PV will only be a small part of it.  We will end up with distributed pollution rather than distributed "renewables".

But worse, the people still paying for the ROCs and the FITs will be the poorest and most vulnerable who don't have the wherewithal to beat the system.

A Landmark Wind Turbine Bill


A landmark wind turbine bill has just about to go into committee stage in the House of Lords.

The bill  ( See Here ) is intended to ensure a sensible distance (or set-back) is enforced to separate houses and wind turbines.

These are the distances in the Bill

If the height of the wind turbine generator is—

greater than 25m, but does not exceed 50m,     - 1000m;
greater than 50m, but does not exceed 100m,   - 1500m;
greater than 100m, but does not exceed 150m, - 2000m;
greater than 150m,                                            - 3000m.

This is an very important bill. Even if it is the bloody House of Lords.

Furthermore this is going to get alot of people asking why this has not already been done. Especially when we have all clearly seen the distress these unprincipled carpet-bagging turbine developers have caused to people forced to live next to their monstrosities.

Questions are going to be asked as to why some councils ever approved the travesty of set backs of sometimes less than 300m.

It should now give councils everywhere pause for thought before approving the siting of these useless monsters close to peoples homes.

One would hope that this will give some legal redress to those folk who have been forced out of their homes by the inappropriate placing of turbines.

Do I hear blood curdling howls of joy from the no-win no-fee legal shyster's? Do I hear them revving their engines in a dash to file compensation claims?

This time Billothewisp won't be complaining too much.

Chris Huhne and Dennis Moore


Dennis Moore - the unforgettable and inept highwayman in Monty Python.

He starts out as a champion of the poor, but only steals Lupins. Finally he is convinced by the starving peasants to steal items of value.

But he ends up robbing the poor to give to the rich.

Dennis Moore has a rousing anthem, sung to the tune of Robin Hood. The final verse of Dennis Moore's anthem says it all:

Dennis Moore, Dennis Moore
Without a merry band
He steals from the poor
And gives to the rich
Stupid bitch

So has Chris Huhne become the real life incarnation of Dennis Moore? Has he become the Lupin Czar of the Coalition?

Maybe not. But he is eagerly pursuing hair brained policies that give tax breaks to the rich while making the poor pay for them.

Lets just leave the lunacy of the ROC subsidies for wind power to one side for the moment and look at the other great plank of renewable subsidy. The FIT subsidy for Solar PV. FIT stands for Feed In Tariff.

Basically a householder would spend about £12-25000 on having an "approved" solar PV system fitted. This of course is done by an "approved" installer.

The FIT subsidy then pays the house-holder about 41p for every unit of electricity they generate (even if they use it themselves).

The electricity generated also offsets previously bought in electricity. This saves about 13p per unit, knocked off the electricity bill.

Finally, if they manage to export electricity to the grid (unlikely) they will be paid roughly what it cost to generate by any normal means - 3p.

The tax free return on the initial investment is said to approach 10%. ( See Here ).

Not bad. especially if you are a higher rate tax payer.

The scheme is paid for by a levy on all domestic electricity bills. Rich and poor all pay the same.

So, who has £10-25K just floating around gathering dust?

I don't mean who has saved £25K for a rainy day, their kids education, weddings or retirement or whatever. I mean who has £25K, surplus to requirements. Money that can be locked up long term in a Solar PV investment.

The answer is of course - the well off.

So, for the well off, fitting solar PV is an extremely tax efficient way of using a spare £25K that is probably just rotting in a bank account.

I have nothing against people being canny with their money. Taking advantage of this ludicrous scheme is a no-brainer. After all, it is government approved! Looking after your own tax efficiency and wealth is a good thing.

Taking advantage of gross governmental stupidity is more akin to sport than anything else.

But you can guarantee that those on low incomes, won't be queuing up for their FIT approved Solar PV panels any-time soon.  Most don't have 25p going spare, let alone £25K.

But thanks to Chris Huhne's levy, it will be the poor who will be paying. Along with those who cannot justify the long payback time-scale or initial outlay.

There is perhaps a case for some encouragement for getting people to fit solar PV, but punishing the less well off to give what is essentially a tax break to the rich is hardly equitable.

Along with that, the current scheme with "approved" installers and "certified" panels etc. is just a dodgy salesmen's dream come true.

You can guarantee that there is a huge mark-up on this "approved" kit and on the hourly rates being charged by these newly badged up installers.

But it is still worthwhile getting FIT approved solar PV installed. If that is, you have the money to spare.

So Billothewisp's Top Tip:

If you have the money and are not going to need it in the short to medium term, and especially if you are a higher rate tax payer, get some FIT approved Solar PV installed.

If however you are poor or simply cannot afford solar PV then, well, you need to get used to paying the subsidy for other peoples tax breaks.

For that you can thank the aspiring Dennis Moore of the modern age:.

Our own Chris Huhne.

Guinea Pig Stew


The other week it came time to loan out $25 on Kiva that had recently been repaid. I had a quick search through the listings for a suitable borrower. 

My grand-daughter decided to help.

We looked through a few. Then we came across a fine band of Peruvian farmers. They wanted the money to buy chickens and Guinea Pigs.

Stew? My names is not Stew. My name is Brian

My grand-daughter thought about this particular group long and hard. Her wistful expression said it all.

Guinea pigs. Fluffy little Guinea pigs. Nice guinea pigs. Then, by association, nice Peruvians, kind Peruvians, looking after the nice little Guinea Pigs.

I was a coward. I said nothing.

Because of my silence there was no option. The Peruvians got their loan.

Here they are:
The Yayanmarca farmers Group Peru

One day I'll have to summon thhe courage and tell my grand-daughter what the Peruvians farmers plan for their fluffy little Guinea pigs

But not for another ten years, or maybe twenty.

Don't forget, Kiva is great.

Make loans directly to decent people in the third world, not their greedy ruling class. These are loans that get repaid, not lost in a Swiss bank account or a Mercedes Benz dealership.

Everyone gets their own link from Kiva. Here's mine, go on have a look. (you know you want to)

http://kiva.org/invitedby/bill8214

Do I get any money from this link? - don't be bloody daft.  But if you would rather their main site....

http://www.kiva.org/

But I do get a bit of Kiva "street cred" from how many people eventually become loaners from my introduction.

I might need that if the local animal rights looneys come calling. Especially if they start asking pointed questions about what exactly happens to Peruvian Guinea pigs -  and who is financing them.

The Apprentice


Billothewisp does not watch the telly that much.

Tonight though (for his sins) he is watching (with one eye only) "The Apprentice" on BBC1.

There are in this program, as you may know, a bunch  of obnoxious wannbee "iconoclasts" brandishing the egos and generally prancing around. Each one desperately trying to be dynamic and go-getting.

Apparently they are making/selling biscuits.

But most of the time they are more interested in bigging themselves up and knifing each other in the back.

Now, Billothewisp is an average sort of bloke. Moderation in all things is his paradigm. He always tries to accommodate different views and attitudes.

He tries to be  understanding and  tolerant.

But tonight he has to ask:

How have these people managed to live this long without being murdered?

Wind Power Today in June

I haven't visited the excellent NETA-bmreports site for a while so I thought I'd have a quick look tonight just to see how much the wind power generation has improved by since my last visit.

I hit the enter key with a great deal of excitement, would it be wonderful?

Would it be, well, at least an improvement?

After all it couldn't get much worse than my last analysis during last winter (See Here)

I waited impatiently while Firefox fired up Java. The seconds ticked away then I watched as all those wonderful little applets burst into life.

My God! NETA is undoubted one of the best and most informative sites on the net!

Here is the one I was hoping to see an improvement in:


Sadly, I was disappointed (again).

Today the whole of the wind turbine fleet was running with a capacity factor of just under 8%. But tomorrow it goes up (wait for it) to 13.5% Woo Hoo!

So today that equates to 1/4 or a single average sized power station for the whole wind turbine fleet. Tomorrow that equates to 1/3 of a average sized power station.

Now I might have incurred the wrath of those who think that the odd snapshot like this is not really indicative of the true output.

To an extent that is true.

But I would like to point out that neither is the so-called capacity factor that windies like to quote. Often blindly quoted at 30% , last year it was 22%.

But whatever the value, Capacity factor is no more worthwhile than my single snapshot.

Because of the nature of wind energy, turbines will be running for most of the time well below their capacity factor,.

They only make up for it due to a few days of high wind.

Most of the time the output of a wind turbine will be less than 20%. For  30% of the time it is less than  10%.

What we need is the most likely output not some dodgy average of power generated from a cube law.

So, are we getting value for money out of these things? Is the irreparable damage done to the countryside and peoples lives worth this pitiful level of power generation?

I think not.

p.s. I must do another 3 or 6 month rolling appraisal again soon.

European Electricity Prices Compared


Here is a price comparison table from The European Energy Portal.


We can do a little analysis of relative electricity prices in Europe.

Highest prices are in  Denmark closely followed by Germany. France is the lowest in Western Europe and Bulgaria is the lowest overall.

  • The Danish pay well over twice the price for their electricity compared to the French.
  • The Germans pay 190% more for electricity than the French, i.e. nearly double.
  • The Italians pay 49% more for their electricity than the French
  • The Spanish pay 43% more for their electricity than the French. Half as much again.
  • The British pay 12% more than the French.

It is interesting to correlate these price differences to installed generation capacity.

  • The Danes are the world leaders per head of population in installed wind power. They also have, by far the most expensive electricity in Europe.
  • Germany has the largest European installation of wind power. It is number two is this highest priced electricity in Europe
  • Spain is close on Germany's heels for installed capacity. Their prices though are a little more reasonable, they are tenth in the price league table.
  • Italy comes a poor third on total installed wind capacity but like the Spanish, they cough up half as much again as the French.

What does this tell us?

Well, I think that the overriding fact is that French Nuclear power (80% of French Electricity generation is nuclear) provides by far, the cheapest electricity in Europe.

Interestingly, the French have the fourth largest number of wind turbines in Europe but like Italy (No 3) and the UK (No 5) this number is about one quarter of that in Germany and Spain.

Compared to Denmark, France (like Italy and the UK) has less than one tenth of the installed number of turbines per head of population.

It would militate that when installed wind power capacity gets above a certain percentage, the price to the consumer sky-rockets. It also shows that wind power is the inflationary driver behind electricity price hikes all across Europe. Generally the more turbines per head of population, the higher your electricity bills are. French prices are driven low by nuclear. If they dispensed with their windmills then their prices would probably be even less.

But the above table contains another really disgraceful truth.

Compare the prices for all of the above nations for a low level user (left column) and a high level user (right column).

You will find that in most countries, including Denmark, Germany, Spain, France and the UK, the high level user gets a discount. In Western Europe, only Italy and the Netherlands charge more for profligate useage.

Surely, if we are trying to cut down on energy useage, we should stop having the smaller users subsidising the higher users.

In other words, why do we have pensioners and the thrifty, subsiding the extravagance of the well-off or careless?

Is that not basic common sense that we should reward energy thift, no punish it?
---------
[Note: 27/03/2014]
 Sadly, sometime in the last few months the European Energy Portal appears to have removed the comparison tables on national electricity and gas prices. It now only publishes comparison tables on petrol/diesel/lpg. I would suspect that the freely available data has been censored as it seriously undermined EU policy. As this post is now 3 years old I hope to update it in the near future when I identify another straight-forward source of pricing information. (red rags bulls and all that)
Regards Billo
[End Note]

The Case against Coal

Both Coal and Nuclear provide excellent base load electrical generation. Both are in a league of their own for cost and reliability.

So why should we replace the coal plant with nuclear? Why not keep things diversified? Can we not use the coal as spinning reserve for wind?

Besides the CO2 emissions, there is another very good reason why we should build more nuclear and use it the retire coal fired plant. (which of course means we can then forget about the nightmare of wind and its intermittency)

It is in a table at DECC Here screenshot below.



Need I say more?


New Nuclear Sites Confirmed


The government has confirmed the sites for eight new nuclear reactors.

And about time too. See Fuels & Power article Here

All the political dithering and posturing over the last ten years (yes ten) has seriously compromised our ability to produce the base load electricity we will so desperately need now.

All over the country old and obsolete plant is being forced into ever longer service because there is nothing to replace it.

Inevitably old plant is less safe than new plant. For exactly the same reasons that a new Ford Mondeo is massively safer than a 1960's Ford Prefect.

But because of the political dithering and toadying to narrow minded environmental bigotry, we now can ill afford to close any of the old plant whether it is coal, gas, oil or nuclear.

Inefficient as it may be, the 50-60 year old plant has to soldier on.

Why can we not close it down anyway?

Because without it, the country's electricity supply simply could not cope.

If ten years ago we had embarked on a steady and measured programme of renewing our nuclear stock and replacing old coal plants with Generation IV nuclear plant, today we would perhaps (like the French) have the lowest electricity prices in Europe, and also the lowest electricity generation CO2 emissions.

Along with that we would have no dirty coal plant and our dependancy on foreign gas would be diminished. As we currently have "in stock" about 60 - 80 years worth of nuclear fuel just sitting on the shelf, we would also be self sufficient in energy.

But it is no use crying over spilt milk.

What we need to do now is to get those in high office to understand the need for much more new Generation IV nuclear plant. France has 58 nuclear reactors with another 3 in various stages of build.

The French have shown that Nuclear works and is highly cost effective. Their huge success lays bare the lies and propaganda about "subsidised nuclear".

If nuclear is so "subsidised" how come the French (80 % nuclear) have the cheapest electricity in Europe?

How come in windmill ridden  Denmark electricity bills are among the highest?

We don't just need eight new Generation IV reactors, we need to start with at least twice that number.

But that is just a start.

I suppose a confirmation about eight new reactors is better than yet more dithering.

But it is still a long way from what we really need.

A Confidential Crime Policy


Back in 2000 one of the Great Good and Extremely Well Fed was appointed as a "Blue Skies Advisor" to Tony Blair.

The individual was John Birt, previously Director General of the BBC and general stalwart of the New Labour establishment.

His mandate was to pursue "A New Vision for the criminal justice system"

To be fair to Dear John, he was enthusiastic in his task.

Some would say over-enthusiastic.Especially those who did not want the boat rocked, let alone capsized.

The confidential document he produced, or rather, some of the statistics he presented in it, caused a minor governmental earthquake.

The report was suppressed. Ministers were not available for comment. Whenever it or its contents were mentioned, the topic was quickly changed.

After being stonewalled by a red faced government, the press eventually gave up. The report was very quickly buried. Dear John was pensioned off to other things. Various news/media bodies were bought off/debts called in, to ensure the outline of the report only got a very brief public airing and was never mentioned again.

This was one of those gorgeously ugly moments we sometimes have in our land. Where the hidden forces of the state leap in on a damage limitation excercise.

Panic stricken they seek to suppress a document, or the reportage of a demonstration or some foreign debacle. All of which could have catastrophically embarrassing results if not killed off.

Incidentally, this report (funnily enough) is still quite hard to come by. So I've put a rather crap pdf copy of it Here.

The document is still stamped "Confidential - Policy". But have a read anyway.

You know you want to.

So what was so wildly dangerous about Dear Johns report? And why am I blogging about it now? Eleven years later.

The reason I am writing about it, is that unfortunately, I don't think much has changed.

The report also contained some shocking statistics. But not the normal run of the mill, manipulated and sanitised statistics boringly churned out each year, but the real ugly data.

These are statistics  that are normally airbrushed out so the public don't get alarmed at the incompetence of their government and legal system.

For example: (this relates to the late 1990's)

Per year there were 14 million serious offences.

Half of these 14 million offences were committed by a hard core of 100,000 serious persistent offenders.

Each of these hard core offenders was committing on average 90 serious offences per year.

At any one time 15000 of these offenders were in jail and the other 85000 are out on the streets, doing their "business".

82% of this group on release from jail were re-convicted.

The item that almost the whole of the establishment wanted to avoid was that this flew directly in the face of their idolised view of criminality as a sort of base band signal produced as a result of poverty and deprivation. To them it was nothing to do with evil or greed.

Today we have Clarke, Cameron, Clegg and Milliband vying for positive voter feedback on being "tough on crime" or "compassionate" or whatever.

But really they need to read John Birts report. It may out of date, but it is still highly relevant.

It showed that in the 1990's half of all serious crimes were one off's. I would suggest that these people need re-habilitation.

It also showed that the other half were committed by dedicated and perpetual criminals. Each of whom was responsible for 90 serious crimes per year.

To a mere pleb like myself this sounds very much like:

We should be compassionate to crimmo's who have only committed one crime. Give them a second chance. Lots of supervision, support and training.

This in turn makes some space in the prison for:

The bastards who perpetually wreck society and peoples lives. Lock them up and throw away the key.

Just on this reckoning, if we released (or let out early - with supervision) 15000 low rate/first time offenders (out of approximately 65000 low rate/first time offenders) and locked up another 15000 hardened crimmos - or significantly increased their sentences, then that would reduce crime by:

 90 x 15000 = 1.35 million serious offences per year

Or (in 1990's figures) it would reduce the serious crime rate by approximately 10%.

Thats with NO increase in the prison population.

Well, it is just an idea. It would entail a little more leniency for those who have taken a bad turn. It would also involve a lot less tea and sympathy for the hard core. Neither of which is regarded as a vote winning  idea by our Great and Good.

What are the real chances of any government doing anything soon about serious crime, compassion and real justice?

Uh, Don't hold your breath.

Palm Oil and Wind Turbines

Billothewisp regards chopping down virgin rain forest to grow Palm Oil palms as an act of criminal stupidity. (See Another Green Energy Scam Here)

But he also finds the curious double standards of wind turbine supporters rather puzzling.

Ruining the countryside in Malaysia so we can generate electricity with approximately a 25% smaller CO2 footprint than by using traditional hydrocarbons is, essentially stupid, and is, to be fair, usually opposed by those who are pro-wind.

But really, Palm Oil is no more (or less) stupid than ruining the country side in (say) Dorset so we can generate intermittent and pitifully uneconomic wind energy.

If you consider things like:

-The 200 tons of concrete in the base,
-The mandatory spinning reserve (that is to cover no wind, not breakdown - that's extra),
-Cycling up and down the CCGT backup so the turbines can actually do something once in a while,

The amount of CO2 saved by wind generation is actually less than that saved by stupidly inefficient Palm Oil generation.

The little spat going on between Greeny palmoil advocates and Greeny windpower advocates can at times reach a state of high farce. It is after all, a serious clash of dogma, and bizarre fashion statements. A bit like communism versus fascism but without the manifestos and military parades. Or a clash of religious dogmas, but without the incense and hymns.

Although comedic it is also a tragedy for the poor bloody common folk who have to put up this narrow minded hyprocisy, whether they are in Malaysia or Dorset.

Of course with both of these mad schemes it is likely that after a full audit of the gains and the losses the only profit will be to the land owners and operators.

The unthinking supporters of both schemes ensure that the mountain of gold being drained from the common folk in both Maylasia and Dorset gets ever higher. Meanwhile the countryside (either rainforest or Purbeck farmland) goes to hell.

So in finality here are two picture of different groups of Nimbys, one in Malaysia and one in Dorset.



While they may be culturally different they are both fighting for the same cause - protecting their local heritage and countryside. Both groups are often despised and villified, referred to as Nimbys by those keen to spoil the environment for their own gain, either political or financial. But the Nimby label, whether worn in Malaysia or Dorset should be worn  with pride.

After all, if you don't look after your own back yard, how can you ever help to look after anyone else's?

All Billothewisp can say to both groups is: Good luck, and keep up the good fight.

One day this lunatic obsession with Palm Oil and Wind Turbines will abate.

But it won't be because it is finally realised by their supporters that both schemes are next to hopeless in preventing pollution.

It will be because the next fashionable "cause" will come along and displace them.

Hi Ho Hum

One Hundred and Eighty Onshore Turbines for Dorset


This post is about a strategy document, quietly being pushed through by Dorset County Council. This document seeks to industrialise virtually the whole of rural Dorset by building 180 on-shore wind turbines.

The DorsetForYou webpage holding the documents: 

The Draft Document : 

The Technical Appendix:

The good people of Dorset have had some success defending their communities against useless Industrial Wind Turbine Complexes. Two such plans (East Stoke and Silton) have been successfully fought off. But the corporations  are certain to go to Appeal, as has happened elsewhere.

Especially now, as the prize would be a planning precedent that would allow them to cash in all over Dorset with Dorset County Council's blessing.

If you think this is a storm in a teacup and only concerns two villages, I have some very bad news for you. This is only the thin end of the wedge.

Over sixty communities and maybe as many as one hundred and twenty will be lined up for industrialisation. Like dominoes they will be picked off one after the other. Sixty rural villages, towns and hamlets in Dorset. All lined up for having Industrial Wind Turbine Complexes imposed on them. How many (if any) Dorset communities will be left un-scarred?

The Bournemouth Poole and Dorset Renewable Energy Strategy, has been prepared by Dorset Country Council. It is now nearing its final draft stage and has been quietly (silently?) released for public consultation. I have yet to find anywhere that tells the public it is available for comment or what it contains.


In this document, the recommendation is that Dorset should install 180 turbines. Each of these white elephants would be higher than Salisbury Cathedral. This 180 on-shore wind turbine plan is promoted as the "realistic" option. But the report does not rule out their preferred option which would be 360 turbines.

Why 60 villages? Look at a map of Dorset. Rule out the main conurbations. Rule our AONB's. What is left?

If one village is affected by 3 turbines (or two by six), that is 60 communities blighted for 180 turbines. 120 communities ruined for 360.

I repeat this is NOT Off-Shore. This is On-Shore. Next to where people live. The planned Poole Bay off-shore turbine complex is extra to this.

Which bit of Dorset gets ruined the most? Here's some screen shots from the PDF of the Technical summary. (Notice they even sell these figures as including noise mitigation -prior to this the figure was over 1400 turbines!)

First the "Maximum Scenario"

Now the Medium (or as they say, "more realistic") Scenario


I half expect you not to believe me about this. It is so utterly outrageous. So go to the links at the top of this post and see for yourself.

Please post a comment if they "disappear" I have copies and I'll publish here..

When you read about the gallant defence of villages of East Stoke and Silton, remember their planned (and resisted) industrialisation is the thin end of a very ugly wedge.

If we allow their desecration; Your community is next.

Erasing English Politics

My friends at the BBC (of which I have none) have, on their sumptuous website, a main page for each of the countries within these islands.

Tonight we are going to play a little game with some screen shots I have just taken.

Now this is a simple little task. A bit like "I Spy" or "Spot the Difference".

The question is: 

What is the missing topic on the page header....( If you need to cheat...look just above the date)

Northern Ireland:


Scotland:









Wales:








OK so far? 

Now what was the name of that insignificant little country that I have forgotten? 

OH Yes....







So my English dinlows have you noticed the missing little two words? 

That little something the 50 million souls in England clearly cannot be trusted with?

Maybe we grubby little Englanders cannot cope with the stress and strains of (Ugh!) English politics. Maybe it is a good thing that those kindly dears at the BBC have banned it from  polluting our gaze or warping our poor little minds.

It is so good to see that our great benefactors and guardians in Broadcasting House are looking so kindly down on us mere English plebs. 

Goodness! Just Think. 
English people interested in (Ugh!) English Issues? Whatever next?
Heaven Forbid! We'd be wanting an Assembly  next!

But our benefactors at the BEEB also have another brilliant idea. They are trying to breath some life into the corpse of John Prescott's regional dismemberment, er sorry, I mean regionalism plan. 

So they have this:


Oh Joy! Some regional info.

But no politics. Even here the nice kindly people at the BEEB wouldn't want to frighten the simple English folk with any mention of politics. Goodness No.

Much better that England is a Political Free Zone. All politics relating to England and an English identity are airbrushed out, just in case it confuses the English  or possibly frightens the horses.

The BBC can proudly state that their web pages and programs are scourged of English politics. Hurrah!

To end on a serious note: How the hell are any of us in these islands going to progress our democracy while 50 million are airbrushed out of the political landscape?

This not only demeans the English it diminishes the Scots, Welsh and Irish too. If the English cannot be trusted with an Assembly, you have to ask, are the other assemblies and parliaments just tokens? Simply there to appease nationalists rather than progress our democracy?

While the English issues are ignored by the political classes (and the bloody BBC), then the democratic freedoms of everyone in these islands is diminished.



The Camel Assasins


When I first read This Post on "Watts Up With That"  I thought that the author must be on drugs. But as I read on it became all too painfully obvious that this was far from some drug induced hallucination.

It was for real.

Basically, in order to save the planet from Global Warming, the Australian Government plan to gun down one million feral camels. Simply to stop them farting.

You're next sunshine


If this scheme was ever extended to the human race then Billothewisp would have his life expectancy seriously curtailed.

The camels will be humanely shot (Oh - that's alright then), and the amount of CO2 released from the decomposing carcass and the fuel used by the hunting party carefully itemised against that saved by the prevention of camel fart-gas. The resulting "Carbon Credits" can then be traded

No. Seriously. I am not on drugs either. Honestly. Read the Australian Governement paper Here.

Now putting stupidity and drug induced psychosis to one side, on the balance of things, I generally think a mild amount of AGW is taking place. Consequently I often try to present what I consider rational aspects of reducing pollution, like this post on stopping the Indonesian Peat Fires  - due for an update soon.

But unfortunately, any rational argument for stopping bad things like deforestation, and slash and burn farming get thrown out the window when the lunatics and doom-wishers start down the End-Of-The-World-Is-Nigh path and present ever more extreme and absurd scanarios and solutions for global warming.

But I never thought that sections of the Australian government were also in need of Psychiatric care.

I may be disparaged by the true believers in the global warming camp as a mere Luke Warmer, but believe me, lunatic ideas like this will soon reduce that temperature to tepid.