Do you know that 6000 people die in the UK every year from Asbestos related illnesses?
Back in the sixties and seventies, did you ever clean out your brakes using an air hose? Ever smashed up an old asbestos roof and seen all those little fibres floating in the wind? Maybe you even tossed around some of the murderous Blue Asbestos. Yet Asbestos looks so benign, harmless even. A wonder material with so many uses. Today our older schools, hospitals and public buildings are still full of the stuff.
Makes your blood run cold doesn't it?
If someone had told you back then, that emerging research had shown that there might be a problem, maybe you would have taken a few more precautions. Certainly those responsible for the safety of the community would have been expected to put people first. Maybe that yearly death toll would not now be 6000 (that is in this country alone).
But we were not told. Vested interest saw to that. There was too much money involved. It took independent and often disparaged researchers to prove the ill effects of Asbestos. By then for many, it was too late.
Today wind turbines are increasingly being implicated in causing illness in people forced to live in their proximity. There are an increasing number of reports and studies raising concern about the hidden consequences of living next to wind turbines.
The response from the wind industry is one of denial. Funded research from the wind industry reaches the unsurprising conclusion one would expect from such reports: There is no problem. Their current masterpiece “Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects” which did a non systematic review of existing literature did not even have an epidemiologist on the panel. Commenting on this review, the highly respected NHS website ( HERE ) disparages the lack of an epidemiologist and makes some very scathing observations on both the methodology of the review and its conclusions.
I am reminded of another industry and how it manipulated the truth through paid research. Remember Big Tobacco? Remember how nobody has ever proved a link between smoking and lung cancer? Remember how they routinely disparaged honest researchers and even ruined careers to hide their dirty little secret? How many millions of lives has that cost?
There should be no more land based turbines. Especially anywhere near where people live (as is the case now in Denmark). This is after all, only a cautionary approach. It should be adopted at least until these urgent medical issues have been resolved. People must come before wind turbines. Especially when the only plus side is pitiful amounts of highly expensive and intermittent electricity.
Finding out there really is a problem in 5 years time will be too late. There will be no excuses. Especially for those making the decisions today.
A Business Banking Rebellion
Once upon a time us grubby little Englanders regarded our banks as respectable, honest institutions. Pillars of society. Bank managers were respected and viewed with awe. Meeting one was usually regarded with a level of trepidation. A bit like being called to see the headmaster or waiting to see the dentist.
Your money was safe in banks. They paid interest on your savings and charged appropriate rates for loans. They made a respectable profit on the difference. They were seen as the basis for fair dealing and financial honesty thoughout the country.
Small businesses could go to them assured that their situation would be given fair consideration, even if "the interview" was a bit like an interrogation by Special Branch. But if you had a good history you could get the money to expand your business. You could trust the banks.
How things change.
At the moment the small businesses requiring short term loans are being crucified. Even if they are offered loans they are often at extortionate rates of interest.
This reluctance to lend becomes a self fulfilling propecy. No loans mean businesses cannot expand or modernise. No expansion or modernisation means they lose market share. They become less viable. As they are less viable they are even less likely to attract a loan. Eventually they go under or are taken over. Hey Presto. The bankers were right all along.
But there is hope.
Lenders and borrowers are rebelling against the tyranny of the banks.
The new revolutionary concept of Peer to Peer banking is storming ahead. This is where the "banker" acts like a facilitator or intermediary and does not actually hold the purse strings itself. Real, actual people are the lenders and they decide the rates.
Most of the development so far has been with enabling peer to peer lending to individuals. The main player in this market has been the highly successful firm ZOPA. Now the model has been extended into the business sector by a new company called Funding Circle.
Funding Circle is soley concerned with facilitating loans to small and medium sized businesses. They are in their infancy at then moment but the concept looks good. It works by letting individuals directly loan money directly to small businesses. Funding Circle is simply the intermediary
Small businesses needing cash can register to borrow money.
A single lender will make many very small loans (£20) to many businesses. A single credit checked borrower will have their loan constructed from many small lenders.
The interest rate is decided in exactly the same way as done at ZOPA. The lender decides what rate he wants to achieve and then the loan offer is contructed from the lowest offers. So if you offer to loan money at a ridiculously high rate you will have no takers, while the borrower is classified according to a credit rating so he will only be offered a loan from borrowers who will have adjusted their rate to take into account the credit risk. On any one borrower, a lender is only risking a small amount of money.
The end result is that businesses can achieve loans at significantly lower rates than offered by the banks while lenders (i.e. savers) get a return (that takes into account potential bad debt) which is at least twice that offered by the banks. You can, by the way lend as little as £500. This is not a scheme simply for the rich.
Before you ask, I have no financial or work interest with Funding Circle. That is other than that I have bunged in £500.00 to see what happens. So far I am very impressed.
If your small company needs a fair loan, have a look at Funding Circle. If you have some savings and you want to get a good return (and actually use your money to do something useful) then I recommend you look to become a lender. As well as that, in a small way you also get to screw the greedy banks.
Next (or soon) I will be looking at the third very interesting leg of Peer to Peer banking with KIVA and the charity sector.
Your money was safe in banks. They paid interest on your savings and charged appropriate rates for loans. They made a respectable profit on the difference. They were seen as the basis for fair dealing and financial honesty thoughout the country.
Small businesses could go to them assured that their situation would be given fair consideration, even if "the interview" was a bit like an interrogation by Special Branch. But if you had a good history you could get the money to expand your business. You could trust the banks.
How things change.
At the moment the small businesses requiring short term loans are being crucified. Even if they are offered loans they are often at extortionate rates of interest.
This reluctance to lend becomes a self fulfilling propecy. No loans mean businesses cannot expand or modernise. No expansion or modernisation means they lose market share. They become less viable. As they are less viable they are even less likely to attract a loan. Eventually they go under or are taken over. Hey Presto. The bankers were right all along.
But there is hope.
Lenders and borrowers are rebelling against the tyranny of the banks.
The new revolutionary concept of Peer to Peer banking is storming ahead. This is where the "banker" acts like a facilitator or intermediary and does not actually hold the purse strings itself. Real, actual people are the lenders and they decide the rates.
Most of the development so far has been with enabling peer to peer lending to individuals. The main player in this market has been the highly successful firm ZOPA. Now the model has been extended into the business sector by a new company called Funding Circle.
Funding Circle is soley concerned with facilitating loans to small and medium sized businesses. They are in their infancy at then moment but the concept looks good. It works by letting individuals directly loan money directly to small businesses. Funding Circle is simply the intermediary
Small businesses needing cash can register to borrow money.
A single lender will make many very small loans (£20) to many businesses. A single credit checked borrower will have their loan constructed from many small lenders.
The interest rate is decided in exactly the same way as done at ZOPA. The lender decides what rate he wants to achieve and then the loan offer is contructed from the lowest offers. So if you offer to loan money at a ridiculously high rate you will have no takers, while the borrower is classified according to a credit rating so he will only be offered a loan from borrowers who will have adjusted their rate to take into account the credit risk. On any one borrower, a lender is only risking a small amount of money.
The end result is that businesses can achieve loans at significantly lower rates than offered by the banks while lenders (i.e. savers) get a return (that takes into account potential bad debt) which is at least twice that offered by the banks. You can, by the way lend as little as £500. This is not a scheme simply for the rich.
Before you ask, I have no financial or work interest with Funding Circle. That is other than that I have bunged in £500.00 to see what happens. So far I am very impressed.
If your small company needs a fair loan, have a look at Funding Circle. If you have some savings and you want to get a good return (and actually use your money to do something useful) then I recommend you look to become a lender. As well as that, in a small way you also get to screw the greedy banks.
Next (or soon) I will be looking at the third very interesting leg of Peer to Peer banking with KIVA and the charity sector.
Labels:
alternative banking,
Funding Circle,
Kiva,
peer to peer lending,
ZOPA
The Bankers Achilles Heel
Billothewisp has been watching the unfolding farce surrounding bankers bonuses with probably as
much disbelief and disgust as the rest of you grubby littleEnglanders.
I suppose it really was too much to expect the arrogant ignorant and greedy to put anyone else before themselves. Even when we are all up to our bottom lips in their debt.
The bankers feel invincible. They can ignore the shrill cries about fair play and responsibility. They can sneer at the common hard working folk while gloating over their own growing mountain of gold.
This travesty will continue year in, year out. Until, out of nowhere, "something" will happen that turns them from an arrogant elite into a flock of foolish redundant dinosaurs.
And maybe that "something" had already happened.
Maybe an event has already taken place that spells doom for out extremely well fed friends. Perhaps they have been so busy swindling the rest of us that they did not notice the high tide of banking excess has reached a turning point.
Revolutions, even against the most despicable tyrants, never happen unless there is someone, or something of a revolutionary nature that sparks the gunpowder.
Billothewisp reckons (or at least hopes)the today that spark has arrived and has the name of Peer to Peer banking.
Currently the most popular manifestation is a company called ZOPA but there other infant companies like Funding Circle. The concept has even expanded into the charity field with an organisation called KIVA.
Currently all of these companies simply deal with arranging and financing loans. But all revolutions have to start somewhere.
Peer to Peer banking works in a completely different way to normal banking.
With a bank you borrow off the bank. They decide the rate. You get what you are given. The money they take in from savers gathers derisory interest. The bankers pocket almost all the profit.
Companies like ZOPA work in a completely different way. They are an arranger. They do not own the loans, but they take a commission for sorting things out.
A loan for £500 will have 50 lenders, each lending £10. Each lender, lending in total £500 will lend £10 to 50 different borrowers. All borrowers are credit checked as for a normal loan, and the risk of bad debt is reduced by the spread of the lenders money over many borrowers.
The best part is that the interest rate is determined by what the lenders is prepared to lend it for - and what the borrower is prepared to pay. Hence the name ZOPA (Zone Of Possible Agreement). Borrowers pay less and lenders gain more. This would have been impossible before modern computers.
It is revolutionary. The cobwebbed ossified banks have no answer.
I hope it works.
I hope ZOPA, its clones and competitors continue to grow exponentially. I really hope the greedy banking elite come to rue the day the scorned and swindled the British public. Maybe with a real revolutionary alternative to the big banks we will avoid ever getting in this mess again.
I'm having a go with ZOPA (you want to try lending through them, you can start with £50.00), also Funding Circle and soon KIVA. It's worth a punt.
I'll tell you how it goes.
much disbelief and disgust as the rest of you grubby little
I suppose it really was too much to expect the arrogant ignorant and greedy to put anyone else before themselves. Even when we are all up to our bottom lips in their debt.
The bankers feel invincible. They can ignore the shrill cries about fair play and responsibility. They can sneer at the common hard working folk while gloating over their own growing mountain of gold.
This travesty will continue year in, year out. Until, out of nowhere, "something" will happen that turns them from an arrogant elite into a flock of foolish redundant dinosaurs.
And maybe that "something" had already happened.
Maybe an event has already taken place that spells doom for out extremely well fed friends. Perhaps they have been so busy swindling the rest of us that they did not notice the high tide of banking excess has reached a turning point.
Revolutions, even against the most despicable tyrants, never happen unless there is someone, or something of a revolutionary nature that sparks the gunpowder.
Billothewisp reckons (or at least hopes)the today that spark has arrived and has the name of Peer to Peer banking.
Currently the most popular manifestation is a company called ZOPA but there other infant companies like Funding Circle. The concept has even expanded into the charity field with an organisation called KIVA.
Currently all of these companies simply deal with arranging and financing loans. But all revolutions have to start somewhere.
Peer to Peer banking works in a completely different way to normal banking.
With a bank you borrow off the bank. They decide the rate. You get what you are given. The money they take in from savers gathers derisory interest. The bankers pocket almost all the profit.
Companies like ZOPA work in a completely different way. They are an arranger. They do not own the loans, but they take a commission for sorting things out.
A loan for £500 will have 50 lenders, each lending £10. Each lender, lending in total £500 will lend £10 to 50 different borrowers. All borrowers are credit checked as for a normal loan, and the risk of bad debt is reduced by the spread of the lenders money over many borrowers.
The best part is that the interest rate is determined by what the lenders is prepared to lend it for - and what the borrower is prepared to pay. Hence the name ZOPA (Zone Of Possible Agreement). Borrowers pay less and lenders gain more. This would have been impossible before modern computers.
It is revolutionary. The cobwebbed ossified banks have no answer.
I hope it works.
I hope ZOPA, its clones and competitors continue to grow exponentially. I really hope the greedy banking elite come to rue the day the scorned and swindled the British public. Maybe with a real revolutionary alternative to the big banks we will avoid ever getting in this mess again.
I'm having a go with ZOPA (you want to try lending through them, you can start with £50.00), also Funding Circle and soon KIVA. It's worth a punt.
I'll tell you how it goes.
Labels:
bankers bonuses,
Funding Circle,
Kiva,
national debt,
ZOPA
Wind Power: The Damning Results
Here is the results from some analysis of the 3 month NETA Wind Turbine metered output. This NETA data is independant and used to pay power generators. There is no wishful thinking or political slant on this data. This data is freely available and continuously updated HERE.
The snapshot I used is available HERE
The first graph below is a frequency plot of power output against half hour billing slots. It shows how often, within the 3 month period wind power contributed a particular power level (power level - X axis number of half hour periods - Y axis. (Sorry forgot to label the graph properly)
The most shocking outcome from this graph is that the most common output from the whole of the national metered wind power system is 300MW. That equates to 12% of their maximum rating of 2430MW. They were running at this level, or less for more than 30% of the 3 month period.
The graph indicates that while in the 3 month period the output fell to close to zero (less than 100MW ) for no less than (in-total) 147 hours, at no no time it ever reach anywhere near the often hyped maximum rating. In fact the total output never even reached 85% of this rating. The absolute maximum achieved was 2065MW (84.8%). This was achieved for (in-total) one hour in the three month period.
This graph below shows the half hourly power ratings linearly from low to high. Wind energy is governed by a cube law. Double the wind speed and get 8 times as much power (unfortunately the reverse is also true - halve the speed get 1/8th the power). Here you can see the cube law in action and how it skews the output so most of the time wind power generation is BELOW the Capacity Factor
The raw average (or capacity factor), which is arrived at by simply adding all readings up and then dividing by the number of readings gives an capacity factor of 25%. (608MW) On their website the BWEA suggest it is 30%. Often the figure gets inflated further. The press blindly accept what they are told.
This otherwise laudable Daily Mail Article falls into exactly this trap.
Remember these NETA figures include offshore as well as onshore sites so the Capacity Factor is certain to be even poorer for on shore turbines alone.
The BWEA suggest that the capacity factor taken in isolation is meaningless. I (sort-of) agree with this. As electricity generation cannot be stored, the duration of the power generation operation is as important (or arguably more so) than the averaged value.
In this three month period the wind output only managed to reach or exceed this capacity factor (25% - 608MW) for less than 40% of the time. If you use the much hyped BWEA figure of a 30% capacity factor, then this value was only reached or exceeded for 23% of the 3 month period.
Due to the cube law relating wind speed and power output, we find that half the 3 months energy arrived in less than 25% of the time leaving the other half to cover the remaining 75% of the period. This is actually an improvement on the single facility figures of about 15% found in the USA (Lee Ranch Sample Data (1/2 way down this page) .
This improvement from 15% to less than 25% is the contribution from the grossly overstated "if its not blowing here its blowing somewhere else" argument. Clearly, in the UK, the power averaging due to the geographic separation of the turbines falls very far short of the usual bland statement that "things even out".
This is a graph of nuclear power output over this 3 month period. Notice how steady it is as it provides us with essential, solid, predictable Base Load generation. The variation is where the Power generator is matching demand not the result of a lack of "fuel" or wind (interestingly, there does appear to be a drop-out. and that, my friends is exactly what spinning reserve is for!)
The mess below is the wind power output for the same period.
It is a chaotic unpredictable set of short duration spikes smeared over a grindingly low background. How anyone could suggest that this can be used to reliably provide 30% of our power is beyond me. There are those though who even suggest that this could be used for base load power generation.
God help us all if the likes of Chris Huhne is stupid enough to continue pushing us down this road.
Love & Kisses
Billothewisp
The snapshot I used is available HERE
The first graph below is a frequency plot of power output against half hour billing slots. It shows how often, within the 3 month period wind power contributed a particular power level (power level - X axis number of half hour periods - Y axis. (Sorry forgot to label the graph properly)
The most shocking outcome from this graph is that the most common output from the whole of the national metered wind power system is 300MW. That equates to 12% of their maximum rating of 2430MW. They were running at this level, or less for more than 30% of the 3 month period.
The graph indicates that while in the 3 month period the output fell to close to zero (less than 100MW ) for no less than (in-total) 147 hours, at no no time it ever reach anywhere near the often hyped maximum rating. In fact the total output never even reached 85% of this rating. The absolute maximum achieved was 2065MW (84.8%). This was achieved for (in-total) one hour in the three month period.
This graph below shows the half hourly power ratings linearly from low to high. Wind energy is governed by a cube law. Double the wind speed and get 8 times as much power (unfortunately the reverse is also true - halve the speed get 1/8th the power). Here you can see the cube law in action and how it skews the output so most of the time wind power generation is BELOW the Capacity Factor
The raw average (or capacity factor), which is arrived at by simply adding all readings up and then dividing by the number of readings gives an capacity factor of 25%. (608MW) On their website the BWEA suggest it is 30%. Often the figure gets inflated further. The press blindly accept what they are told.
This otherwise laudable Daily Mail Article falls into exactly this trap.
Remember these NETA figures include offshore as well as onshore sites so the Capacity Factor is certain to be even poorer for on shore turbines alone.
The BWEA suggest that the capacity factor taken in isolation is meaningless. I (sort-of) agree with this. As electricity generation cannot be stored, the duration of the power generation operation is as important (or arguably more so) than the averaged value.
In this three month period the wind output only managed to reach or exceed this capacity factor (25% - 608MW) for less than 40% of the time. If you use the much hyped BWEA figure of a 30% capacity factor, then this value was only reached or exceeded for 23% of the 3 month period.
Due to the cube law relating wind speed and power output, we find that half the 3 months energy arrived in less than 25% of the time leaving the other half to cover the remaining 75% of the period. This is actually an improvement on the single facility figures of about 15% found in the USA (Lee Ranch Sample Data (1/2 way down this page) .
This improvement from 15% to less than 25% is the contribution from the grossly overstated "if its not blowing here its blowing somewhere else" argument. Clearly, in the UK, the power averaging due to the geographic separation of the turbines falls very far short of the usual bland statement that "things even out".
This is a graph of nuclear power output over this 3 month period. Notice how steady it is as it provides us with essential, solid, predictable Base Load generation. The variation is where the Power generator is matching demand not the result of a lack of "fuel" or wind (interestingly, there does appear to be a drop-out. and that, my friends is exactly what spinning reserve is for!)
The mess below is the wind power output for the same period.
It is a chaotic unpredictable set of short duration spikes smeared over a grindingly low background. How anyone could suggest that this can be used to reliably provide 30% of our power is beyond me. There are those though who even suggest that this could be used for base load power generation.
God help us all if the likes of Chris Huhne is stupid enough to continue pushing us down this road.
Love & Kisses
Billothewisp
Labels:
intermittency,
reliability,
wind power
Denmark: No More Land Based Wind Turbines
Billothewisp is busily hacking his way through the 3 month NETA data on wind turbine power output and has some rather startling, (nay - shocking) preliminary figures. To be presented here soon.
But not tonight.
But I must quickly mention a few things.
Today I came across a truly awesome Canadian site with masses of information on the sheer hopelessness of wind power.
It is not bitchy. It is not nasty and it presents the facts about a whole range of issues surrounding this truly failed technology.
The site is: http://windfarmrealities.org/ I highly recommend it.
Just another quick aside on a couple of things I've picked up:
1. Denmark (the doyen of the Wind lobby) has declared that it will no longer build any more wind turbine on land. (That is none, nil, zero) The reason? Because of masses of complaints about noise!
The Telegraph version of this news item is HERE
2. The good people of Hinkely Point, famous for its nuclear power station, have forced a wind turbine company to abandon its plans to descrecrate their countryside with 12 or so turbines.
Hinkely will soon have a new nuclear plant. This new nuclear plant leaves the people of Hinkely un-phased, although I expect the day-dreaming luddites with their windmills are wide-eyed in disbelief!
Good for the people of Hinkely Point.
The article from the Independant is HERE
Love and Kisses
Billothewisp
But not tonight.
But I must quickly mention a few things.
Today I came across a truly awesome Canadian site with masses of information on the sheer hopelessness of wind power.
It is not bitchy. It is not nasty and it presents the facts about a whole range of issues surrounding this truly failed technology.
The site is: http://windfarmrealities.org/ I highly recommend it.
Just another quick aside on a couple of things I've picked up:
1. Denmark (the doyen of the Wind lobby) has declared that it will no longer build any more wind turbine on land. (That is none, nil, zero) The reason? Because of masses of complaints about noise!
The Telegraph version of this news item is HERE
2. The good people of Hinkely Point, famous for its nuclear power station, have forced a wind turbine company to abandon its plans to descrecrate their countryside with 12 or so turbines.
Hinkely will soon have a new nuclear plant. This new nuclear plant leaves the people of Hinkely un-phased, although I expect the day-dreaming luddites with their windmills are wide-eyed in disbelief!
Good for the people of Hinkely Point.
The article from the Independant is HERE
Love and Kisses
Billothewisp
Labels:
denmark,
nuclear power,
wind turbines
Wind Turbines: National 3 Months Data
See last post... Here is the raw 3 month NETA data and a tidied version in xls and ods formats
Files Are Here
The four files are attachment on the bottom of the home page.
The first two are the two complete zip files from NETA for the last 3 months power generation output. Downloaded by me tonight.
The other two are cleaned up versions of the CSV file saved in ods and xls formats.
No data has been deleted in the cleaned up xls and ods files, but I have added a header showing which column is which. The only caveat here is that both the Irish interconnector and the "other" generation methods were all zeros so I dont know which is which. But as they are all zero it doesn't really matter.
Love & Kisses
Billothewisp
Files Are Here
The four files are attachment on the bottom of the home page.
The first two are the two complete zip files from NETA for the last 3 months power generation output. Downloaded by me tonight.
The other two are cleaned up versions of the CSV file saved in ods and xls formats.
No data has been deleted in the cleaned up xls and ods files, but I have added a header showing which column is which. The only caveat here is that both the Irish interconnector and the "other" generation methods were all zeros so I dont know which is which. But as they are all zero it doesn't really matter.
Love & Kisses
Billothewisp
Labels:
NETA,
power generation,
wind power,
wind turbines
Wind Power: Three Months Data
I am following a very interesting thread on the IET (formerly IEE) website regarding the sheer uselessness of windpower during the cold snap we have just had. (See Here) It makes interesting reading.
While I have been following the excellent Neta Website myself for a few weeks, I did not realise that they actually provide a full 3 month data set for all the various methods of power generation. This displays actual outputs on a half hourly basis. (Thanks to "Ipayyoursalary" on the IET thread for pointing this out)
I have one minor criticism of this data. While the XML data set looks good, the potentially more immediately useable CSV data lacks headers and you have to go digging through the XML equivalent to figure out what is what.
But even so, this is an absolute gold mine. Or, if you are a greedy wind farm developer, possibly a nest of vipers.
Congratulations must be given to those who run the Neta site, not only for producing this data set, but also for coherently displaying the fluctuations and methodology of the country's power generation.
I downloaded the CSV and XML data sets tonight and have had a first hack at simply tidying up the CSV file so people can use it in Excel or Calc. I'll be having a crack at some analysis myself in the next few days but I know some of the folk who read this blog can do things with a spreadsheet that would make my ears bleed.
I will try and figure out a way of getting this file available for general download and will raise another post when I have sussed it out.
Love & Kisses
Billothewisp
While I have been following the excellent Neta Website myself for a few weeks, I did not realise that they actually provide a full 3 month data set for all the various methods of power generation. This displays actual outputs on a half hourly basis. (Thanks to "Ipayyoursalary" on the IET thread for pointing this out)
I have one minor criticism of this data. While the XML data set looks good, the potentially more immediately useable CSV data lacks headers and you have to go digging through the XML equivalent to figure out what is what.
But even so, this is an absolute gold mine. Or, if you are a greedy wind farm developer, possibly a nest of vipers.
Congratulations must be given to those who run the Neta site, not only for producing this data set, but also for coherently displaying the fluctuations and methodology of the country's power generation.
I downloaded the CSV and XML data sets tonight and have had a first hack at simply tidying up the CSV file so people can use it in Excel or Calc. I'll be having a crack at some analysis myself in the next few days but I know some of the folk who read this blog can do things with a spreadsheet that would make my ears bleed.
I will try and figure out a way of getting this file available for general download and will raise another post when I have sussed it out.
Love & Kisses
Billothewisp
Labels:
NETA,
power generation,
wind turbines
BBC: England Almost Unstruck
Regular visitors to this blog will know that Billothewisp has a very low opinion of the BBC. Especially the way the BBC has airbrushed England out of the political landscape of these shores.
The BBC's stance on the non existence of anEnglish identity was initially explored in This Early Post Of Mine.
As it is a year since I wrote about this, I thought I would revisit the BBC monolith. Lo and Behold! The BBC has partially relented.
Today on This Page you will find a reference to "AroundEngland"
Of course while N. Ireland Politics, Welsh Politics and Scottish Politics all have detailed references to their own assemblies All the pitiful "AroundEngland" entry boasts is a section on "Blogs around the Regions" Ugh.
Obviously the Great Good and Extremely Well Fed at the BBC are still wedded to Prescotts "Final Solution" to the West Lothian Question. They are fully on-board the concept of destroyingEngland by dismembering it into some regionally antagonistic nightmare. The thought of having an area actually devoted to English politics is still a bridge too far.
I suppose this is progress. Even though it feels like we are all just trying to drag an rusty and obsolete old car up an steep incline. Maybe, one day, this festering travesty of a public service will actually fulfil its duty and really acknowledge anEnglish identity and the existence of English political issues.
Until then, in this blog,England remains stuck out.
The BBC's stance on the non existence of an
As it is a year since I wrote about this, I thought I would revisit the BBC monolith. Lo and Behold! The BBC has partially relented.
Today on This Page you will find a reference to "Around
Of course while N. Ireland Politics, Welsh Politics and Scottish Politics all have detailed references to their own assemblies All the pitiful "Around
Obviously the Great Good and Extremely Well Fed at the BBC are still wedded to Prescotts "Final Solution" to the West Lothian Question. They are fully on-board the concept of destroying
I suppose this is progress. Even though it feels like we are all just trying to drag an rusty and obsolete old car up an steep incline. Maybe, one day, this festering travesty of a public service will actually fulfil its duty and really acknowledge an
Until then, in this blog,
Labels:
bbc,
England,
West Lothian Question
A Christmas Wish
In the new year, may all of our lives be enriched by honesty.
May our politicians tell the truth and look out for those who elect them rather than just themselves.
May our bankers guard the money entrusted to them and fairly treat those indebted to them, rather than just lining their own pockets.
May our environmentalists devote themselves to facts and people rather than just fashion statements and wishful thinking.
Happy Xmas.
Love and Kisses.
Billothewisp
p.s. Yes. I know. Fat Chance.
May our politicians tell the truth and look out for those who elect them rather than just themselves.
May our bankers guard the money entrusted to them and fairly treat those indebted to them, rather than just lining their own pockets.
May our environmentalists devote themselves to facts and people rather than just fashion statements and wishful thinking.
Happy Xmas.
Love and Kisses.
Billothewisp
p.s. Yes. I know. Fat Chance.
Labels:
bankers bonuses,
christmas,
environmentalists,
politicians
Predicting the wind - update
Just an early morning comment. This is the latest NETA data
Notice NETA almost got it right. But the wind arrived late, about settlement period 7 ( 3.30am) on the 23rd when nobody wants it. NETA had estimated that the wind would arrive during peak household demand period in the evening of the 22nd.
Luckily, the amount of power (even from new higher wind) is so inconsequential it would not have caused any issues. But if we had been relying on wind for 30% of our power there would have been mayhem.
Look at the graph. When I say the "wind arrived" I actually mean the total metered wind turbine output rose from 2% of the much lauded turbine rating to a peak of 18.5%.
Just as an example. If this was the planned Alaska windfarm at East Stoke in the Purbecks which has a projected boiler plate rating of 9.2MW, the actual output would have risen from 0.184MW through to a peak of 1.7MW. That of course ignores the amount of power used internally to heat the turbine blades and gear box to stop them freezing.
Don't forget, these are nationally based statistics, and it has been like this (or worse) for days
Luckily, the amount of power (even from new higher wind) is so inconsequential it would not have caused any issues. But if we had been relying on wind for 30% of our power there would have been mayhem.
Look at the graph. When I say the "wind arrived" I actually mean the total metered wind turbine output rose from 2% of the much lauded turbine rating to a peak of 18.5%.
Just as an example. If this was the planned Alaska windfarm at East Stoke in the Purbecks which has a projected boiler plate rating of 9.2MW, the actual output would have risen from 0.184MW through to a peak of 1.7MW. That of course ignores the amount of power used internally to heat the turbine blades and gear box to stop them freezing.
Don't forget, these are nationally based statistics, and it has been like this (or worse) for days
Labels:
Alaska windfarm,
East Stoke,
purbecks,
wind power,
wind turbines
Predicting the Wind
If wind turbines are to be used productively then there the wind must be reliably forecast.
NETA produce a prediction of the wind power contribution to the grid. They produce a sliding three day window using their initial and latest predictions with the actual outcome shown for the (usually) first day and a half of the window.
NETA (New Electricity Trading Arrangments site) are the people who sort out trading in wholesale electricity. As part of this they have produced a really informative and detailed site that is constantly updated. They do their very best to stay on top of many different changing parameters that affect electricity generation.
In my post yesterday (and using their data), I indicated that the national output from the turbines looked like it was about to rise to 16% of their maximum rating. This was from around 4-5% per cent - where it has been languishing for days.
While 16% is still pathetically poor, the predicted wind has not arrived. The output prediction has now been ramped down to 147MW ( 6%)
Believe me, I am not getting at NETA for the variability in the figures. NETA is doing the very best job it can in exceptionally difficult conditions.
We call know about the unpredictability of the weather. We know how often the Met Office foul up on really short term weather forecasts. This again is not an issue of competence it is an issue of how very difficult predicting the weather is.
These figures underline in thick black pencil that nationally wind power is unreliable and unpredictable.
It should also be noted that the absolute maximum output that was very briefly reached on the 18th December was barely 23% of their advertised rating. Most of the time during these four days the national output of all metered turbines on the grid has been well below 10%.
I have added the last four sliding window graphs below. Remember they all overlap so you can see the initial forecast (orange), the latest forecast (blue) and the actual outcome (red line) for three of the four days. The settlement period indicates the time. NETA settle accounts in 48 half hour blocks, so block one starts at midnight, block 24 at midday and so on.
(Note: the vertical scale changes between graphs 2 and 3)
NETA produce a prediction of the wind power contribution to the grid. They produce a sliding three day window using their initial and latest predictions with the actual outcome shown for the (usually) first day and a half of the window.
NETA (New Electricity Trading Arrangments site) are the people who sort out trading in wholesale electricity. As part of this they have produced a really informative and detailed site that is constantly updated. They do their very best to stay on top of many different changing parameters that affect electricity generation.
In my post yesterday (and using their data), I indicated that the national output from the turbines looked like it was about to rise to 16% of their maximum rating. This was from around 4-5% per cent - where it has been languishing for days.
While 16% is still pathetically poor, the predicted wind has not arrived. The output prediction has now been ramped down to 147MW ( 6%)
Believe me, I am not getting at NETA for the variability in the figures. NETA is doing the very best job it can in exceptionally difficult conditions.
We call know about the unpredictability of the weather. We know how often the Met Office foul up on really short term weather forecasts. This again is not an issue of competence it is an issue of how very difficult predicting the weather is.
These figures underline in thick black pencil that nationally wind power is unreliable and unpredictable.
It should also be noted that the absolute maximum output that was very briefly reached on the 18th December was barely 23% of their advertised rating. Most of the time during these four days the national output of all metered turbines on the grid has been well below 10%.
I have added the last four sliding window graphs below. Remember they all overlap so you can see the initial forecast (orange), the latest forecast (blue) and the actual outcome (red line) for three of the four days. The settlement period indicates the time. NETA settle accounts in 48 half hour blocks, so block one starts at midnight, block 24 at midday and so on.
(Note: the vertical scale changes between graphs 2 and 3)
Labels:
weather reporting,
wind power,
wind prediction
Wind Power, Winter and No Wind
Just a short update on the contribution the theoretical 2.4GW of metered wind generation is making at this critical time.
Here are some figures from NETA and a little commentary from me.
Using the same data set, yesterday and earlier today, NETA came up with these predictions:
This gives peak output (NOT the average) as 4% rising to 5% of the rated output. The prediction is that output may treble tomorrow. But this will still be only 16% of the total boiler-plate rating - and will peak at 21:00 - just in time for people to start turning in for the night. Even then it is still a shamefully low figure.
If we look at the contribution made by different types of generation :
We see that the contribution from windpower is 0.1%. From the much lauded boiler-plate rating it should be just under 4.5%
That is, the total metered wind-turbine supply in all of the UK, at this time of maximum demand is providing us with 1/1000th of what we need. The boiler-plate rating the wind industry keeps boasting about states it should be about 1/25th.
We have actually been buying 12 times as much as this from the French. Even the pumped storage facility in Wales (usually used to meet short lived demand peaks and to control the mains frequency) provided eleven times as much. Hydroelectricity, of which we have very little, still provided double the wind power output.
It has been like this for days.
Luckily we are not in a position where we are dependant on wind for serious power generation.
But what if we were?
What if we were dependant on wind power or, in this weather, on its spinning reserve? What if the wind power "enthusiasts" get their way and we largely replace coal generation with wind turbines backed up by CCGT (Combined Cycle Gas Turbines)
On first look, it appears that it would not matter - during a time like this we simply would be using the CCGT spinning reserve.
Regrettibly it does matter. It matters massively. Dare I say it matters catastrophically. During weather like we are having right now, it would push our dependence on Gas to almost 70%. We would need to significantly increase the gas transport infrastructure to feed these CCGT stations. Most importantly we would need to stockpile much more gas. At the moment, our meagre 7 day supply relies on the fact that power generation can, over a number of days, maximise use of coal and nuclear and minimise gas. That goes out the window if you need to guard against wind power failing and have no other option but to use gas..
I'll explain fully in a future post. Possibly the next, maybe the one after that. But I havn't got time to elaborate at the moment.
Here are some figures from NETA and a little commentary from me.
Using the same data set, yesterday and earlier today, NETA came up with these predictions:
This gives peak output (NOT the average) as 4% rising to 5% of the rated output. The prediction is that output may treble tomorrow. But this will still be only 16% of the total boiler-plate rating - and will peak at 21:00 - just in time for people to start turning in for the night. Even then it is still a shamefully low figure.
If we look at the contribution made by different types of generation :
We see that the contribution from windpower is 0.1%. From the much lauded boiler-plate rating it should be just under 4.5%
That is, the total metered wind-turbine supply in all of the UK, at this time of maximum demand is providing us with 1/1000th of what we need. The boiler-plate rating the wind industry keeps boasting about states it should be about 1/25th.
We have actually been buying 12 times as much as this from the French. Even the pumped storage facility in Wales (usually used to meet short lived demand peaks and to control the mains frequency) provided eleven times as much. Hydroelectricity, of which we have very little, still provided double the wind power output.
It has been like this for days.
Luckily we are not in a position where we are dependant on wind for serious power generation.
But what if we were?
What if we were dependant on wind power or, in this weather, on its spinning reserve? What if the wind power "enthusiasts" get their way and we largely replace coal generation with wind turbines backed up by CCGT (Combined Cycle Gas Turbines)
On first look, it appears that it would not matter - during a time like this we simply would be using the CCGT spinning reserve.
Regrettibly it does matter. It matters massively. Dare I say it matters catastrophically. During weather like we are having right now, it would push our dependence on Gas to almost 70%. We would need to significantly increase the gas transport infrastructure to feed these CCGT stations. Most importantly we would need to stockpile much more gas. At the moment, our meagre 7 day supply relies on the fact that power generation can, over a number of days, maximise use of coal and nuclear and minimise gas. That goes out the window if you need to guard against wind power failing and have no other option but to use gas..
I'll explain fully in a future post. Possibly the next, maybe the one after that. But I havn't got time to elaborate at the moment.
Labels:
cold snap,
electricity,
spinning reserve,
wind power,
winter crisis
Wind Power Today Revisited
I just thought I would give you grubby little Englanders an update on how the mighty wind turbines have done over night.
Fresh from the BMReports Page At NETA.....
So, it looks like yesterday things actually picked up a bit and the national real output from our spinning monsters actual broke through the 4% of their rated value. Woooaaaa!
And tomorrow, (wait for it.) their output almost reaches 5%.
Strewth. With overnight improvements like that perhaps we should just shut down all the other power generation plant ready for the mighty wind turbines to take over!
Just as a comparison. If your economical one Litre car was reduced to 5% of its power it would like ripping out the one litre engine and then replacing with the engine from a 50cc moped. I dare say though, that there are some supporters of this wind turbine fantasy who would actually consider this a good idea.
Unfortunately, there is one figure missing in the NETA table. We must always remember that a wind turbine is a machine operating in a unpredictable and harsh environment. They must never be allowed to stop turning in very cold conditions and freeze up. Unfortunately, when the wind stops blowing they stop. To get round this problem they all have heaters. Electric heaters in fact. This is to ensure that they do not freeze solid. Alternatively some can be "motored" This is usually used to start the thing turning in sub-optimal wind conditions. This incidentally is a nice little feature often exploited to give the impression of useful work being done even when the wind is too slow to actually turn the things. An absolute boon when trying to impress a politician or two.
So, in these freezing times when power generation is being severely tested, not only are the mighty wind turbines providing bugger-all of next to nothing in the way of power, they are no doubt, in many places actually acting as a further drain on the grid.
Pathetic isn't it.
Fresh from the BMReports Page At NETA.....
So, it looks like yesterday things actually picked up a bit and the national real output from our spinning monsters actual broke through the 4% of their rated value. Woooaaaa!
And tomorrow, (wait for it.) their output almost reaches 5%.
Strewth. With overnight improvements like that perhaps we should just shut down all the other power generation plant ready for the mighty wind turbines to take over!
Just as a comparison. If your economical one Litre car was reduced to 5% of its power it would like ripping out the one litre engine and then replacing with the engine from a 50cc moped. I dare say though, that there are some supporters of this wind turbine fantasy who would actually consider this a good idea.
Unfortunately, there is one figure missing in the NETA table. We must always remember that a wind turbine is a machine operating in a unpredictable and harsh environment. They must never be allowed to stop turning in very cold conditions and freeze up. Unfortunately, when the wind stops blowing they stop. To get round this problem they all have heaters. Electric heaters in fact. This is to ensure that they do not freeze solid. Alternatively some can be "motored" This is usually used to start the thing turning in sub-optimal wind conditions. This incidentally is a nice little feature often exploited to give the impression of useful work being done even when the wind is too slow to actually turn the things. An absolute boon when trying to impress a politician or two.
So, in these freezing times when power generation is being severely tested, not only are the mighty wind turbines providing bugger-all of next to nothing in the way of power, they are no doubt, in many places actually acting as a further drain on the grid.
Pathetic isn't it.
Labels:
cold weather,
turbine efficiency,
wind power
Wind Power: The Reality Today.
In these frozen autumn days, Billothewisp thought he would cheer himself up by having a look at all that free energy flowing into the grid. After all wind turbine generators get a Billion quid a year in subsidy paid for by the likes of Billothewisp and other assorted grubby English folk, so perhaps a little payback in the form of happy-time may be in order.
He had a look at the NETA Site, which is the site that shows the day-today costings and accounting for the countries power grid. It tells us how our electricity is made, transmitted, paid for and regulated.
Billothewisp puzzled over the figures for the mighty wind turbines. Surely there was something wrong. There must be a mistake! There was no happiness here! A single tear rolled down his knarly cheek.
He had seen this graph:
His rheumy old eyes misty with tears, could barely make out the contribution from wind power. A billion quid seemed a lot of money for a barely legible pixel wide line!
Then he read this.
For a moment his sorrow was placated as he read the bottom line (or boiler plate rating) giving the theoretical output for his billion quid. But then he looked up.
Oh sorrow on sorrow!
The boilerplate rating for all the wind turbines in the country was 2430 MW but the maximum nationwide output today was 276 MW.
11.3% of their much lauded boilerplate rating.
But then it got worse . He looked at the predicted output for the next day. The maximum output was going to be just 94 MW.
That is 3.8% of their boiler plate rating.
I will write that again in large letters in case you missed it.
3.8%
But even worse than that. This maximum occurs at midnight. Just when Billothewisp and the rest of oldEngland is tucked up in bed, with the low energy light bulbs turned off.
Don't forget these are national figures. Not a single isolated case. National. All major turbines. And these are the PEAK values for these days.
So much for the argument that if the wind isn't blowing in one place it will make up for it elsewhere.
These figures are so bad, so dreadful, so outrageous that I feel I must have made a mistake. Our politicians and assorted environmental dreamers are not really this gullible are they?
Surely we are not spending and extra One Billion quid a year for this?
Thanks to Jockdownsouth and his comment on This Post at WUWT that tipped me off to the magnificent NETA site and the distinctly un-magnificent figures for wind generation.
I think I am going to have some serious fun here with the figures from NETA in the future.
He had a look at the NETA Site, which is the site that shows the day-today costings and accounting for the countries power grid. It tells us how our electricity is made, transmitted, paid for and regulated.
Billothewisp puzzled over the figures for the mighty wind turbines. Surely there was something wrong. There must be a mistake! There was no happiness here! A single tear rolled down his knarly cheek.
He had seen this graph:
His rheumy old eyes misty with tears, could barely make out the contribution from wind power. A billion quid seemed a lot of money for a barely legible pixel wide line!
Then he read this.
For a moment his sorrow was placated as he read the bottom line (or boiler plate rating) giving the theoretical output for his billion quid. But then he looked up.
Oh sorrow on sorrow!
The boilerplate rating for all the wind turbines in the country was 2430 MW but the maximum nationwide output today was 276 MW.
11.3% of their much lauded boilerplate rating.
But then it got worse . He looked at the predicted output for the next day. The maximum output was going to be just 94 MW.
That is 3.8% of their boiler plate rating.
I will write that again in large letters in case you missed it.
3.8%
But even worse than that. This maximum occurs at midnight. Just when Billothewisp and the rest of old
Don't forget these are national figures. Not a single isolated case. National. All major turbines. And these are the PEAK values for these days.
So much for the argument that if the wind isn't blowing in one place it will make up for it elsewhere.
These figures are so bad, so dreadful, so outrageous that I feel I must have made a mistake. Our politicians and assorted environmental dreamers are not really this gullible are they?
Surely we are not spending and extra One Billion quid a year for this?
Thanks to Jockdownsouth and his comment on This Post at WUWT that tipped me off to the magnificent NETA site and the distinctly un-magnificent figures for wind generation.
I think I am going to have some serious fun here with the figures from NETA in the future.
Labels:
ROC,
wind efficiency,
wind power,
wind subsidy
Immigration and the Elected Government
I am only an old oily English rag, but as I remember, the elected government of this country decides the policies that this country should pursue. If my memory serves me correctly, we elect this government.
That is us - The People. Nobody else.
As I further remember, the current coalition promised to try and stem the flood of immigrants (legal and illegal) pouring into this country (Look at the population forecasts - See Here).
Usually elected governments tend to rescind on difficult policies but this one has actually tried to do something about this particular issue. Even though it could be argued that what they are doing is too little too late.
So what the hell is an unelected, unrepresentative judge doing saying the recently imposed migrant cap is "illegal". For Christ's sake nobody elected this pompous elitist bastard, so how the hell can he overrule the policy of a legitimately elected government? (See Here)
When it comes to the crunch, we don't have a real democracy anymore. It has been subsumed by a tangled self serving elite who can veto at whim, and direct at their pleasure, what the government does.
The elected, democratic parliament of this country must reassert its authority.
Or ten years down the road there really will be trouble.
You have to ask: What the hell is going on?
That is us - The People. Nobody else.
As I further remember, the current coalition promised to try and stem the flood of immigrants (legal and illegal) pouring into this country (Look at the population forecasts - See Here).
Usually elected governments tend to rescind on difficult policies but this one has actually tried to do something about this particular issue. Even though it could be argued that what they are doing is too little too late.
So what the hell is an unelected, unrepresentative judge doing saying the recently imposed migrant cap is "illegal". For Christ's sake nobody elected this pompous elitist bastard, so how the hell can he overrule the policy of a legitimately elected government? (See Here)
When it comes to the crunch, we don't have a real democracy anymore. It has been subsumed by a tangled self serving elite who can veto at whim, and direct at their pleasure, what the government does.
The elected, democratic parliament of this country must reassert its authority.
Or ten years down the road there really will be trouble.
You have to ask: What the hell is going on?
Labels:
elitism,
immigration cap,
parliamentary authority
Drug Laws and Politicians
It is a pity Bob Ainsworth did not have the courage of his convictions about drug law reform when he was in office. (Telegraph Report Here).
Instead he sat in a government that buckled to the whim of the press, played to the gallery and crassly reversed policy on drug law reform. Finally his almer-mater Gordon Brown went on to sack Professor Nutt for his inconvenient though scientifically based views.
All this and not so much as a squeak out of Bob Ainsworth.
You have to ask if any of our politicians are really up to the job of making informed decisions on reforming drug law. Especially after they have now packed the ACMD (Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs) with yes-men and other assorted non scientists.
If anyone should have influence on this matter it is exactly the type of people Bob Ainsworth and his pals sacked that we should be listening to. (Guardian Article on David Nutt here)
Perhaps we should pay more regard to people like the Independant Scientific Committee On Drugs rather than spineless politicians out for a bit of quick publicity.
Professor David Nutt's blog is HERE It makes interesting reading.
In our society anyone who sells alcohol needs a license, needs to be approved by a magistrate and must be regarded as an upstanding citizen. Because of this the very severe damage that can be caused by alcohol is mitigated.
Yet to sell illegal soft/hard drugs exactly the opposite criteria are required. Any form of scum-bag can set up shop. Illegal he/she may be, but with no competition (except from other scum-bags) they can sell whatever they like.
It is no wonder that our society is a mess.
There is very little trade in illegally brewed/distilled alcohol because a known and safe source is available. People don't buy dodgy booze so criminals have no market.
Legalise the lot. Tax them, regulate them and use the money to mitigate the problems - Cut out the criminals.
You know it makes sense.
Instead he sat in a government that buckled to the whim of the press, played to the gallery and crassly reversed policy on drug law reform. Finally his almer-mater Gordon Brown went on to sack Professor Nutt for his inconvenient though scientifically based views.
All this and not so much as a squeak out of Bob Ainsworth.
You have to ask if any of our politicians are really up to the job of making informed decisions on reforming drug law. Especially after they have now packed the ACMD (Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs) with yes-men and other assorted non scientists.
If anyone should have influence on this matter it is exactly the type of people Bob Ainsworth and his pals sacked that we should be listening to. (Guardian Article on David Nutt here)
Perhaps we should pay more regard to people like the Independant Scientific Committee On Drugs rather than spineless politicians out for a bit of quick publicity.
Professor David Nutt's blog is HERE It makes interesting reading.
In our society anyone who sells alcohol needs a license, needs to be approved by a magistrate and must be regarded as an upstanding citizen. Because of this the very severe damage that can be caused by alcohol is mitigated.
Yet to sell illegal soft/hard drugs exactly the opposite criteria are required. Any form of scum-bag can set up shop. Illegal he/she may be, but with no competition (except from other scum-bags) they can sell whatever they like.
It is no wonder that our society is a mess.
There is very little trade in illegally brewed/distilled alcohol because a known and safe source is available. People don't buy dodgy booze so criminals have no market.
Legalise the lot. Tax them, regulate them and use the money to mitigate the problems - Cut out the criminals.
You know it makes sense.
Labels:
bob ainsworth,
david nutt,
drugs,
prohibition
Once Upon a Russian Blonde
My friendly trusting gullible little English compatriots, I have a fairy tale for you.
Once upon a time, in a very old and crumbling land lived a large jovial bearded man. A politician non-the-less. This rather fat but happy individual was so important he was charged with looking after the defences of that crumbly land.
Like all the great good and extremely well fed, he spent long, long hours filling out expense claims. In those odd moments when he was not form filling, or at lunch, or berating his peers for something or the other, he managed to spend time on the more trivial aspects of government. Like nuclear deterrence or procuring advanced weaponry.
But like the other Great Good and Extremely Well Fed, he needed assistants. People in trusted positions. Dare I say, people charged with the safety and security of the nation.
Now, the foolish and paranoid would insist on those aids being security cleared nationals of this crumbly land. But Oh! That is just sooooo politically wrong. Sooooo incorrect.
If you want to show the world exactly how "globalised" you are, you hire willing and pretty foreigners. Even foreigners from countries that not so long ago were mortal enemies.
Prime candidates among these foreigners are attractive young blonde Russian girls. Maybe even one called Katya.
Of course you can tell they can be trusted, just by looking at them. You can always trust a sweet innocent blonde Russian girl. Especially with the nations secrets.
But could her loyalty really be to her Motherland?
Could she be a spy?
No. No. Nooooo. That would be just too silly.
After all, things have got so run down in this crumbly old land that other countries only spy on it for sport.
And pretty young Russian girls simply don't do that sort of thing.
But some foolish members in crumbly lands MI5 have taken it all too seriously.
Even though the fat politician whined and complained and declared his pretty aid innocent, the cruel zealots in the security service still arrested her and will soon send her back to Russia.
Goodbye Katya.
I expect you did a really first class job.
It is a pity you are not taking your bumbling incompetent ex-boss with you.
Once upon a time, in a very old and crumbling land lived a large jovial bearded man. A politician non-the-less. This rather fat but happy individual was so important he was charged with looking after the defences of that crumbly land.
Like all the great good and extremely well fed, he spent long, long hours filling out expense claims. In those odd moments when he was not form filling, or at lunch, or berating his peers for something or the other, he managed to spend time on the more trivial aspects of government. Like nuclear deterrence or procuring advanced weaponry.
But like the other Great Good and Extremely Well Fed, he needed assistants. People in trusted positions. Dare I say, people charged with the safety and security of the nation.
Now, the foolish and paranoid would insist on those aids being security cleared nationals of this crumbly land. But Oh! That is just sooooo politically wrong. Sooooo incorrect.
If you want to show the world exactly how "globalised" you are, you hire willing and pretty foreigners. Even foreigners from countries that not so long ago were mortal enemies.
Prime candidates among these foreigners are attractive young blonde Russian girls. Maybe even one called Katya.
Of course you can tell they can be trusted, just by looking at them. You can always trust a sweet innocent blonde Russian girl. Especially with the nations secrets.
But could her loyalty really be to her Motherland?
Could she be a spy?
No. No. Nooooo. That would be just too silly.
After all, things have got so run down in this crumbly old land that other countries only spy on it for sport.
And pretty young Russian girls simply don't do that sort of thing.
But some foolish members in crumbly lands MI5 have taken it all too seriously.
Even though the fat politician whined and complained and declared his pretty aid innocent, the cruel zealots in the security service still arrested her and will soon send her back to Russia.
Goodbye Katya.
I expect you did a really first class job.
It is a pity you are not taking your bumbling incompetent ex-boss with you.
Labels:
katya,
Mike Hancock,
Russian spy
A Special Subservience
Wiki Leaks has laid bare the true nature of the so called UK-USA Special Relationship.
My grubby little Englander readership may well find these revelations somewhat shocking. But I have to tell you that you are hearing just a fragment, a fraction of the truth. I gather that, at the moment, there are more D notices flying about than cruise missiles.
Even so there is some brutally accurate commentary. Take this article. It ends with a starkly accurate assessment of the the so called special USA-UK relationship. [I quote]
But the underlying message of all this is that the relationship is defined in this way and if, or probably more likely when, the day arrives when the Brits cannot or will not offer so much, they will find that the relationship they still regard as "special" will be very much more ordinary.
For the last sixty years this unnatural and one sided loyalty has slowly seen the corrosive and debilitating subservience reduce and diminish our country. As each year passes , the usefulness of the UK to the Americans reduces. The UK supporters get ever more hysterical and sycophantic in their promotion of this doctrine.
Undoubtedly some Americans have been, and will continue to be our friends. But others, like Hilary Clinton only see us as a diplomatic cash cow, to be milked and loathed.
One day the milk will stop. Then do not expect anyone, especially the likes of Hilary Clinton to ride to our assistance.
Labels:
special relationship,
UK,
usa,
wiki leaks
A Strange Wind Turbine Morality
Well, the night was lost. The council planning department had originally recommended rejection. But the councillors, after a barrage innuendo, superstition and false moral outrage decided to allow the wind turbine application to proceed.
The supporting groups had a clever coordinated and focussed mantra. There was running theme through the whole of their speeches. A bogus child centric theme was pushed and pushed. Non-existent moral high ground was claimed again and again. The moral turpitude of the massive subsidies was brushed under the carpet. No mention was made of the sheer incapability of these things to meet our needs. Only rosy and hopelessly inaccurate figures on carbon reduction and noise output were made. Landscape impact was denied or glossed over.
The average common folk who actually lived in the area were outnumbered and out spoken. Unaccustomed to public speaking their defences flowed uneasily. Other speakers against the turbines tried to show how ineffective wind turbines are. Others showed that they were incapable of addressing our real energy needs. But all to no avail. The motion was passed 6-3.
One small victory for stupidity
One more step on the slippery slope.
More of the average folk, their homes and families, sacrificed to the false god of Green.
A Final Note:
NIMBY?
Actually it will not affect me. I don't live in East Stoke. So why do I bang on about this?
Because I care.
I care about our environment and I care that we should not fall into stupid dead end traps that will deprive our kids and grand kids of a decent life. Neither do I want to line the pockets of the shysters who push these things. Outside of certain niches, wind turbines are a hopeless dead end. In years to come this will become painfully apparent, but by then it will be too late for the people of East Stoke.
Because I care.
I care about our environment and I care that we should not fall into stupid dead end traps that will deprive our kids and grand kids of a decent life. Neither do I want to line the pockets of the shysters who push these things. Outside of certain niches, wind turbines are a hopeless dead end. In years to come this will become painfully apparent, but by then it will be too late for the people of East Stoke.
As for being a NIMBY. If you like labels, then sure. Not In My Back Yard. Not In My Neighbours Back Yard and certainly Not In My Kids Back Yard.
Labels:
East Stoke,
planning,
purbeck,
wind turbines
Football, Honesty and Consequences
So the English World Cup bid was resoundingly rejected. It looks like the bid has been publicly punished for the publicity and scandal surrounding corruption in FIFA. With just the English vote and one other vote from the FIFA board, a clear message was sent. FIFA were not happy with the publicity surrounding their corrupt officals .
There has been lots of talk about whether the exposes on the corruption in world football should have been airbrushed or re-scheduled. But to do so would have been to quietly collude with the fraudsters.
Honesty, like freedom has a heavy price and sometime severe consequences.
At least we have done the right thing.
And look on the bright side - It will save us 15 Billion quid.
There has been lots of talk about whether the exposes on the corruption in world football should have been airbrushed or re-scheduled. But to do so would have been to quietly collude with the fraudsters.
Honesty, like freedom has a heavy price and sometime severe consequences.
At least we have done the right thing.
And look on the bright side - It will save us 15 Billion quid.
Wind Turbines in a Pit
Now, where would you build a wind turbine?
If you were a corporate utility company slavering over the subsidies then I suppose the answer is:
Anywhere you can.
Take one proposed location in the middle of Purbeck. (Incidentally the clue is in the name.)
It is called (wait for it.....)
Masters Pit.
Actually it is a quarry . In places it is up to 25 meters deep.
Though Masters Pit is technically just outside the AONB (Area Of Natural Beauty), by a matter of a few hundred yards, these monstrosities will blight the landscape for miles.
The fact that the pit ( sorry ..quarry) is up to 25 meters (75 feet) deep has not phased Infinergy. They simply plan to chock up these four monstrosities on a mixture of old stone tailings and probably any other crap they can lay their hands on.
So really these monsters will not be a mere 125 meters to the top of the blade but actually anything up to 150m from existing ground level. (that is approximately 487 feet)
If it were not for the massive subsidies (almost £ for £ on the electricity production) then they would be totally unviable.
How long are we going to put up with greedy utility companies trampling over our precious countryside so they can stick their noses in the subsidy trough?
Really, if these things could repay their damage with meaningful quantities of use-able electricity (say a meagre 100MW) then maybe they would be worth a closer look. But with a derisory average (and intermittent) output of 0.575 MW per turbine they simply squander valuable financial resources that could be used to fund electricity generation that really works.
Or even, dare I say it, the subsidy could fund effective programs to reduce energy demand.
But of course, that is the LAST thing any utility company wants to encourage!
The money being squandered on these hopelessly ineffective monstrosities could be used so much more effectively. Once this money has been spent it will be gone. With little (except a fat dividend) to show for it.
Tomorrow there is going to be a public meeting followed by a council vote on this planning application. The meeting is in Wareham (at Purbeck School 7.00pm).
The council planning department have quite rightly recommended rejection. If you are reading this in Purbeck, try and come along and help fight this obscenity.
Labels:
Alaska Wind Farm,
Masters Pit,
subsidies,
wind turbines
Homes and Wind Turbines
So how many “homes” does a wind turbine power?
We all know that there are lies, damn lies and statistics. But there is also lies, greed and manipulation of the truth.
Say you want to desecrate a large area of rural England with wind turbines the height of Salisbury cathedral. You know that these turbines are only viable because of the massive subsidy you get. You know they produce next to nothing in the way of useful electricity. But you need to con the gullible, the wishful thinkers and the Luddites into supporting your ruthless avarice. What do you do?
You make it look homely, warm, benign even.
You describe the output in terms of how many “homes” your monstrosities will power.
But of course, you are, as ever, economical with the truth. Especially when it comes to using simplification to airbrush out the real truth of the matter.
Take this site which offers lots and lots of propaganda for a proposed four turbine complex deep in rural Purbeck. They state their turbines are rated at 2.3 MW. That is 9.2MW in total.
Sounds impressive.
To be fair, they realise that no one is conned by these maximum rating figures.
So when they calculate the number of “homes” they can provide for, they appear to use the pathetic average of one quarter of the boiler-plate rating. In other words each turbines real rating is an average of 0.575 MW. But they do not display this figure. It is after all derisory.
If they then take the average household consumption of electricity as the figure given here they can offer up that their assertion that this four turbine carbuncle on the face of Purbeck will fuel 5000 homes.
Sounds good. 5000 homes Hmm-mm. Wholesome.
But there is a problem. In fact there are two problems.
The first problem is that while the average output of these things really will be about 0.575MW each and the average requirement for a household really is about 600W, the figure blatantly avoids the demographics of household electricity use.
Households use their energy mainly in well defined time bands. For example their use at 3am is small yet in the early afternoon is at least a couple of kilowatts.
(graph from mpoweruk.com )
Simply put, the average turbine energy output is inadequate at times of peak demand (by at least a factor of four) and at other times the power they produce is unneeded and wasted. These four turbines are not capable of meeting anywhere near the day to day demands of 5000 homes.
But it gets worse.
Wind turbines are governed by the vagaries of the wind and the wind is governed by the certainties of Physics. The power of the wind is proportional to the cube of the wind speed. The harder it blows the more energy there is in the wind.
The result of this is that half of the energy in the wind is delivered to the wind turbine in just 15% of the time.
So half of their annual power output will arrive in a total period of less than 60 days. So not only are they intermittent they are also peaky. There will be times when they are maxing out and demand is low
(graph - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power Note the graph is the total wind energy and frequency of occurrence at different wind speeds. The throughput is calculated through an imaginary 100 meter disk. Energy data recorded 2002 Lee Ranch facility USA)
If you take out this brief peak period and concentrate on their output over the majority of the year, we find that the 300 day average output of these things falls to:
365/300 * 0.575/2 = 0.35 MW per turbine.
That is 1.4MW for the whole 4 turbine farm.
So most of the time they can provide only an average “home” load for 2300 homes.
But do not forget that is the averaged household demand NOT the day to day demand which is itself peaky though predictable. During many defined periods of the day the average homes will use 2+ KW.
During these times these things, on average over the 300 days, then can only provide for about 600 "homes".
The ability of wind turbines to provide reliable energy for “homes” is overstated, deceptive and fuelled by massive amount of wishful thinking.
I often use the old now redundant small nuclear station up the road from me in Winfrith as a comparison for Wind Energy.
This old nuclear station regularly and routinely provided 62MW to the national Grid. No peaking, no troughs, It never stopped because of the weather.
If you do the maths in the same way the wind industry does, ( i.e. “homes”), this old reliable nuclear reactor provided power for well over one hundred thousand “homes”.
Of course the other big con in all this "homes" nonsense is that household electricity is only 30% of the total demand. The rest is split across industry and services.
So why are we building these useless wind farms? Why are we desecrating our country-side?
Unless you are getting the subsidies, the reasons appear unclear.
We all know that there are lies, damn lies and statistics. But there is also lies, greed and manipulation of the truth.
Say you want to desecrate a large area of rural England with wind turbines the height of Salisbury cathedral. You know that these turbines are only viable because of the massive subsidy you get. You know they produce next to nothing in the way of useful electricity. But you need to con the gullible, the wishful thinkers and the Luddites into supporting your ruthless avarice. What do you do?
You make it look homely, warm, benign even.
You describe the output in terms of how many “homes” your monstrosities will power.
But of course, you are, as ever, economical with the truth. Especially when it comes to using simplification to airbrush out the real truth of the matter.
Take this site which offers lots and lots of propaganda for a proposed four turbine complex deep in rural Purbeck. They state their turbines are rated at 2.3 MW. That is 9.2MW in total.
Sounds impressive.
To be fair, they realise that no one is conned by these maximum rating figures.
So when they calculate the number of “homes” they can provide for, they appear to use the pathetic average of one quarter of the boiler-plate rating. In other words each turbines real rating is an average of 0.575 MW. But they do not display this figure. It is after all derisory.
If they then take the average household consumption of electricity as the figure given here they can offer up that their assertion that this four turbine carbuncle on the face of Purbeck will fuel 5000 homes.
Sounds good. 5000 homes Hmm-mm. Wholesome.
But there is a problem. In fact there are two problems.
The first problem is that while the average output of these things really will be about 0.575MW each and the average requirement for a household really is about 600W, the figure blatantly avoids the demographics of household electricity use.
Households use their energy mainly in well defined time bands. For example their use at 3am is small yet in the early afternoon is at least a couple of kilowatts.
(graph from mpoweruk.com )
Simply put, the average turbine energy output is inadequate at times of peak demand (by at least a factor of four) and at other times the power they produce is unneeded and wasted. These four turbines are not capable of meeting anywhere near the day to day demands of 5000 homes.
But it gets worse.
Wind turbines are governed by the vagaries of the wind and the wind is governed by the certainties of Physics. The power of the wind is proportional to the cube of the wind speed. The harder it blows the more energy there is in the wind.
The result of this is that half of the energy in the wind is delivered to the wind turbine in just 15% of the time.
So half of their annual power output will arrive in a total period of less than 60 days. So not only are they intermittent they are also peaky. There will be times when they are maxing out and demand is low
(graph - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power Note the graph is the total wind energy and frequency of occurrence at different wind speeds. The throughput is calculated through an imaginary 100 meter disk. Energy data recorded 2002 Lee Ranch facility USA)
If you take out this brief peak period and concentrate on their output over the majority of the year, we find that the 300 day average output of these things falls to:
365/300 * 0.575/2 = 0.35 MW per turbine.
That is 1.4MW for the whole 4 turbine farm.
So most of the time they can provide only an average “home” load for 2300 homes.
But do not forget that is the averaged household demand NOT the day to day demand which is itself peaky though predictable. During many defined periods of the day the average homes will use 2+ KW.
During these times these things, on average over the 300 days, then can only provide for about 600 "homes".
The ability of wind turbines to provide reliable energy for “homes” is overstated, deceptive and fuelled by massive amount of wishful thinking.
I often use the old now redundant small nuclear station up the road from me in Winfrith as a comparison for Wind Energy.
This old nuclear station regularly and routinely provided 62MW to the national Grid. No peaking, no troughs, It never stopped because of the weather.
If you do the maths in the same way the wind industry does, ( i.e. “homes”), this old reliable nuclear reactor provided power for well over one hundred thousand “homes”.
Of course the other big con in all this "homes" nonsense is that household electricity is only 30% of the total demand. The rest is split across industry and services.
So why are we building these useless wind farms? Why are we desecrating our country-side?
Unless you are getting the subsidies, the reasons appear unclear.
Labels:
energy subsidies,
turbine efficiency,
wind farms
Steaming into a Crisis
Today I took an elderly relative down to the local railway station to watch an old restored steam train pass by as it pulled a few hundred enthusiasts on a journey to London.
I am not really into steam but I must admit that these trains do make a evocative and picturesque sight (and hey, a family outing is always welcome!)
After the lumbering monster had passed through, dousing us in steam and soot, the old boy turned to me and smiled.
“In ten years we are going to need all these old relics”.
Regrettably he is probably right.
He knows, I know, and I bloody well hope that you know, that in this country, within ten years, there is going to be a shortfall in electricity generation capacity of crisis levels.
All it will take will be a severe cold snap, or the Russians getting uppity about their gas or one or a number of the old decrepit run down nuclear or coal plants breaking down.
Please, whatever you do, do not be stupid enough to think that wind power is going to get us out of this hole. All the current focus on wind energy is doing is digging us in deeper.
At a time like this we need an energy minister capable of making informed, difficult and decisive decisions. But all we have is Chris Huhne.
At least he has put in motion the construction of half of the new nuclear stations we need, which is a step in the right direction. But he is still wedded to the fairy-land fantasy of using wind power to provide a significant proportion of our power.
This means is that money that really should be allocated to building generating plant (that actually works) is diverted into wind farms so the utilities operating these wind farms can cash in on the subsidies. This money ends up in the coffers and share dividends of the greedy utility companies while the looming crisis gets ever deeper.
With the subsidy, the cost of wind power (an intermittent, unreliable and ineffective power source) is actually not far off double that of other forms of generation. The huge profits to be made on wind farms is crippling re-investment in vital non wind generation plant.
If (or should I say when?) there are power cuts, it will be interesting to see how long the electrified railways can keep going.
Maybe then, our old relics will come in handy.
Steam trains to the rescue? Far fetched? Maybe.
But no more fantastical than the belief that wind power can prevent the energy gap crisis happening, let alone provide a long lasting contribution to out electricity supply.
I am not really into steam but I must admit that these trains do make a evocative and picturesque sight (and hey, a family outing is always welcome!)
After the lumbering monster had passed through, dousing us in steam and soot, the old boy turned to me and smiled.
“In ten years we are going to need all these old relics”.
Regrettably he is probably right.
He knows, I know, and I bloody well hope that you know, that in this country, within ten years, there is going to be a shortfall in electricity generation capacity of crisis levels.
All it will take will be a severe cold snap, or the Russians getting uppity about their gas or one or a number of the old decrepit run down nuclear or coal plants breaking down.
Please, whatever you do, do not be stupid enough to think that wind power is going to get us out of this hole. All the current focus on wind energy is doing is digging us in deeper.
At a time like this we need an energy minister capable of making informed, difficult and decisive decisions. But all we have is Chris Huhne.
At least he has put in motion the construction of half of the new nuclear stations we need, which is a step in the right direction. But he is still wedded to the fairy-land fantasy of using wind power to provide a significant proportion of our power.
This means is that money that really should be allocated to building generating plant (that actually works) is diverted into wind farms so the utilities operating these wind farms can cash in on the subsidies. This money ends up in the coffers and share dividends of the greedy utility companies while the looming crisis gets ever deeper.
With the subsidy, the cost of wind power (an intermittent, unreliable and ineffective power source) is actually not far off double that of other forms of generation. The huge profits to be made on wind farms is crippling re-investment in vital non wind generation plant.
If (or should I say when?) there are power cuts, it will be interesting to see how long the electrified railways can keep going.
Maybe then, our old relics will come in handy.
Steam trains to the rescue? Far fetched? Maybe.
But no more fantastical than the belief that wind power can prevent the energy gap crisis happening, let alone provide a long lasting contribution to out electricity supply.
Labels:
energy crisis,
railways,
steam,
wind farms
Wind Turbines: The Subsidy
Few people realise the extent or extravagance of the subsidy given to the large corporate operators of wind turbines.
A recent article in “Private Eye” and reproduced on the DART website here displays the sheer amount of money (your money) being sloshed about.
First, a little seed capital gets slopped in the direction of the land owners.
The traditional reward of 30 pieces of silver for selling out your neighbours is somewhat less generous than what is currently on offer. Today the payment amounts to about £10,000 per turbine per year. So for four turbines, over 25 years, this amount to a cool £1 Million.
While this yearly payment has sometimes reached £17000 per turbine, it is pathetically small when compared to the money that gets funnelled in the direction of the corporate owners of these monsters.
A wind turbine, rated at 2 MW (which averaged over a year actually only produces about 0.5MW/yr) will be paid about £250,000 for the electricity produced . But on top of this there is a subsidy of £220,000. So for a 4 turbine installation, over the 25 year lease period, the operating company will get no less than £22 million in subsidy alone.
Currently, with only a fraction of the planned insanity in place, we are paying over £1 Billion a year in subsidies. (See Here)
That is a guaranteed profit. Paid for by the government. As to the true operating profit, that will be little, nothing or even negative. The operating margin on the electricity produced alone would never be sufficient to finance these turbines.
Truly, the apple on the tree is the subsidy.
The emphasis will not be on producing useful electricity. The emphasis will be on maximising the amount of electricity produced irrespective of whether it is needed or not.
Electricity generated at 3 am (when nobody wants it) gets the same subsidy as electricity generated during peak times. So do not expect the operators to be doing their maintenance other than 9-5. If a turbine breaks down in winter when wind speeds are low, do not expect it to be repaired in a hurry. The chances of noisy turbines ever being replaced with quieter, less environmentally unfriendly versions is nil.
In real power stations the maintenance and repair schedules are ruthlessly based around getting generation back on line to support periods of maximum use. Do not expect this from wind turbine operators, there is no incentive.
For the luxury of feeling “Green” we are actually fuelling inefficient power generation and rip-off electricity utilities. The stupidity of those who queue up to support the likes of Aon, NPower, Centrica and Scottish & Southern beggars belief.
But truly the real evil in all this is the foolish concept that we can force our way to a greener environment by simply throwing money at a technology that has already proven that it is simply not up to the job.
A recent article in “Private Eye” and reproduced on the DART website here displays the sheer amount of money (your money) being sloshed about.
First, a little seed capital gets slopped in the direction of the land owners.
The traditional reward of 30 pieces of silver for selling out your neighbours is somewhat less generous than what is currently on offer. Today the payment amounts to about £10,000 per turbine per year. So for four turbines, over 25 years, this amount to a cool £1 Million.
While this yearly payment has sometimes reached £17000 per turbine, it is pathetically small when compared to the money that gets funnelled in the direction of the corporate owners of these monsters.
A wind turbine, rated at 2 MW (which averaged over a year actually only produces about 0.5MW/yr) will be paid about £250,000 for the electricity produced . But on top of this there is a subsidy of £220,000. So for a 4 turbine installation, over the 25 year lease period, the operating company will get no less than £22 million in subsidy alone.
Currently, with only a fraction of the planned insanity in place, we are paying over £1 Billion a year in subsidies. (See Here)
That is a guaranteed profit. Paid for by the government. As to the true operating profit, that will be little, nothing or even negative. The operating margin on the electricity produced alone would never be sufficient to finance these turbines.
Truly, the apple on the tree is the subsidy.
The emphasis will not be on producing useful electricity. The emphasis will be on maximising the amount of electricity produced irrespective of whether it is needed or not.
Electricity generated at 3 am (when nobody wants it) gets the same subsidy as electricity generated during peak times. So do not expect the operators to be doing their maintenance other than 9-5. If a turbine breaks down in winter when wind speeds are low, do not expect it to be repaired in a hurry. The chances of noisy turbines ever being replaced with quieter, less environmentally unfriendly versions is nil.
In real power stations the maintenance and repair schedules are ruthlessly based around getting generation back on line to support periods of maximum use. Do not expect this from wind turbine operators, there is no incentive.
For the luxury of feeling “Green” we are actually fuelling inefficient power generation and rip-off electricity utilities. The stupidity of those who queue up to support the likes of Aon, NPower, Centrica and Scottish & Southern beggars belief.
But truly the real evil in all this is the foolish concept that we can force our way to a greener environment by simply throwing money at a technology that has already proven that it is simply not up to the job.
Labels:
East Stoke,
subsidy,
wind farms
The PIIGs: Who is Next?
Robert Peston may have a funny way of speaking but he does seem to have a good grip on the Euro crisis. He is very pessimistic about the long term outcome. See Here
From the look of it, Portugal is already on the slide with bond yields already at 7% (Irish bond yields are still at over 8% and that is after the bailout package). Obviously those who buy bonds are none too confident that their money is safe and the rate has been cranked up to appeal to their greed rather than common sense.
So at what point do the Germans chuck their hand in?
They, after all are the only reason the whole thing has not collapsed already. Greece and Ireland are the smallest of the sick men of Europe. It has been difficult enough as it is.
God help us all if (say) Spain or Italy went down. If Portugal fails to make it through the next two weeks without holding the begging bowl out I cannot see the Germans continuing to issue blank cheques.
Going back a few months, when this crisis first broke out I picked up a report that Germans were closely examining their high denomination Euro notes. Evidently you can tell which country printed what. The report stated that the rattled Germans were only accepting notes printed in Germany.
I don't expect anything has changed.
From the look of it, Portugal is already on the slide with bond yields already at 7% (Irish bond yields are still at over 8% and that is after the bailout package). Obviously those who buy bonds are none too confident that their money is safe and the rate has been cranked up to appeal to their greed rather than common sense.
So at what point do the Germans chuck their hand in?
They, after all are the only reason the whole thing has not collapsed already. Greece and Ireland are the smallest of the sick men of Europe. It has been difficult enough as it is.
God help us all if (say) Spain or Italy went down. If Portugal fails to make it through the next two weeks without holding the begging bowl out I cannot see the Germans continuing to issue blank cheques.
Going back a few months, when this crisis first broke out I picked up a report that Germans were closely examining their high denomination Euro notes. Evidently you can tell which country printed what. The report stated that the rattled Germans were only accepting notes printed in Germany.
I don't expect anything has changed.
Wind Turbines and Spinning Reserve
When the supporters of wind turbines run out of wishful thinking they usually try disparaging the legitimate concerns of those of us who view these ineffective monstrosities with the contempt they deserve.
For those who do not know the jargon: We have our power supplied mainly by base load generation. That is power stations running on full load. Nuclear power is particularly good at this. This is then backed up by spinning reserve. This spinning reserve can provide small corrections to the power requirement in which case it is said to go from spinning reserve and into generation. But is there mainly ready to kick in if anything goes wrong, like a major grid failure or power station failure. Spinning reserve power stations are using fuel but providing no electricity. The energy used is dissipated in the cooling towers.
It has long been pointed out that due to the vaguaries of the wind, there needs to be a backup ready to take over when they stop turning. The latest jolly wheeze our dreamworld compatriots have come up with is that there does not need to be any more backup as there is already enough spinning reserve.
For those who do not know the jargon: We have our power supplied mainly by base load generation. That is power stations running on full load. Nuclear power is particularly good at this. This is then backed up by spinning reserve. This spinning reserve can provide small corrections to the power requirement in which case it is said to go from spinning reserve and into generation. But is there mainly ready to kick in if anything goes wrong, like a major grid failure or power station failure. Spinning reserve power stations are using fuel but providing no electricity. The energy used is dissipated in the cooling towers.
The pro wind turbine lobby assert that as the spinning reserve is bigger than any single power supply unit then it should also be quite capable of coping with any drop of output from wind turbines. On a (very) shallow level that sounds like a good point but really we need to look at what the spinning reserve is there for.
Spinning reserve is an emergency backup. Its size is calculated to allow the grid to cope with major failure of otherwise reliable and predictable components.
And that is the point.
The major failure of a power station is a crisis and the spinning reserve is there to ensure there are no power cuts. The spinning reserve currently built into the system is most certainly not there to iron out the erratic output of wind turbines as well.
If (god forbid) anyone actually builds another of these off-shore wind farm abortions and it then suffered a major grid failure, well: Yes. That is what the spinning reserve is for.
But it is most certainly not there to cope with the wind suddenly dropping. If you want to cope with that you need more spinning reserve.
The most shocking aspect of the pro-turbine dreamers is their sheer propensity to be at best, economical with the truth and at worst, lie through their teeth.
One day we will look back on all this lunacy and view it with derision. I just hope and pray that when that day comes the lights will still be working.
Euro Crisis; Relying on Germany
There was an old 2008 joke: "What is the difference betwen Iceland and Ireland?"
The answer was one letter and six months.
To be fair that 6 months dragged out to be two years but the essence of the joke is brutally true.
Dear Angela Merkel is going to have to butter up her German electorate a lot more to get them to pay for not only Greece, but now Ireland. Maybe soon, Spain, Portugal and Italy.
But let us all remember that hard work is what the Germans are renowned for. So perhaps the rest of Europe will let the Germans do what they do best with their 60 hour weeks and unremitting efficiency. Maybe the dynamic German economy can, under pressure, support virtually the whole of Europe.
Then the bankrupt laggards known collectively as the PIIGS (Portugal, Irelend,Iceland,Greece and Spain) can get back to what they are good at... and go down the pub.
The answer was one letter and six months.
To be fair that 6 months dragged out to be two years but the essence of the joke is brutally true.
Dear Angela Merkel is going to have to butter up her German electorate a lot more to get them to pay for not only Greece, but now Ireland. Maybe soon, Spain, Portugal and Italy.
But let us all remember that hard work is what the Germans are renowned for. So perhaps the rest of Europe will let the Germans do what they do best with their 60 hour weeks and unremitting efficiency. Maybe the dynamic German economy can, under pressure, support virtually the whole of Europe.
Then the bankrupt laggards known collectively as the PIIGS (Portugal, Irelend,Iceland,Greece and Spain) can get back to what they are good at... and go down the pub.
Labels:
banking crisis,
euro,
imf,
ireland
British Gas: Fair Profit Or Exploitation?
Since the peak gas price in 2008 British gas has reduced its prices by 17%. But Since the peak gas price the wholesale price of gas has fallen 40%. See Here
British Gas' profit this year has soared by 98%. In the first half (i.e. 6 months) of 2010 British Gas' profit was £585 million. So it would suggest that their profit this year is going to be in excess of £1 Billion.
All utility companies are in a steady business (and trusted position) of providing our industry and people with a regular vital resource.
So how the hell can one of them suddenly double its profits?
I don't expect any of the other utility companies will go bust any time soon. So there is only source for that huge profit. That source is you, my grubby derided littleEnglish consumer.
The whole basis of the privatisation of the utilities was to get rid of a self serving "jobs-worth" monopolistic culture and replace it with a set of responsible and efficient companies.
Their rivalry would guarantee that costs to the consumer were kept down. These new private companies were trusted with providing a strategic national resource. In exchange they were virtually guaranteed a profit.
But today these companies now act as if they are just a multiple set of heads on a monstrous Hydra monopoly. Essentially the Gas and Electric utility industry has all the hallmarks of being an ugly and viciously exploitative hidden cartel.
British Gas and its buddies faff around, pretending there is competition between them. They swap a few hundred thousand consumers to make it look good but they all indulge in conning the public with discounts as summer approaches. Then they hit them with massive rises as winter (and the need for gas) rises. Now Britsh Gas is leading the pack with a shameful 7% rise. The others will follow soon no doubt.
They may be an improvement on the old nationalised cash haemorrhaging relic they replaced. But they are still very far from offering the public a real competitive choice.
Of course, there is nothing wrong with making a profit, even a healthy profit. Especially if you company provides what the customer wants.
But British Gas like the other utility companies do not provide what the customer wants. It provides what the customer needs. They have been given this business on a plate in exchange for acting responsibly.
Double profits in a dynamic cutting edge producer of goods that people queue up to buy is really good.
Double profits in a utility company is a disgusting exploitation of a trusted position.
British Gas' profit this year has soared by 98%. In the first half (i.e. 6 months) of 2010 British Gas' profit was £585 million. So it would suggest that their profit this year is going to be in excess of £1 Billion.
All utility companies are in a steady business (and trusted position) of providing our industry and people with a regular vital resource.
So how the hell can one of them suddenly double its profits?
I don't expect any of the other utility companies will go bust any time soon. So there is only source for that huge profit. That source is you, my grubby derided little
The whole basis of the privatisation of the utilities was to get rid of a self serving "jobs-worth" monopolistic culture and replace it with a set of responsible and efficient companies.
Their rivalry would guarantee that costs to the consumer were kept down. These new private companies were trusted with providing a strategic national resource. In exchange they were virtually guaranteed a profit.
But today these companies now act as if they are just a multiple set of heads on a monstrous Hydra monopoly. Essentially the Gas and Electric utility industry has all the hallmarks of being an ugly and viciously exploitative hidden cartel.
British Gas and its buddies faff around, pretending there is competition between them. They swap a few hundred thousand consumers to make it look good but they all indulge in conning the public with discounts as summer approaches. Then they hit them with massive rises as winter (and the need for gas) rises. Now Britsh Gas is leading the pack with a shameful 7% rise. The others will follow soon no doubt.
They may be an improvement on the old nationalised cash haemorrhaging relic they replaced. But they are still very far from offering the public a real competitive choice.
Of course, there is nothing wrong with making a profit, even a healthy profit. Especially if you company provides what the customer wants.
But British Gas like the other utility companies do not provide what the customer wants. It provides what the customer needs. They have been given this business on a plate in exchange for acting responsibly.
Double profits in a dynamic cutting edge producer of goods that people queue up to buy is really good.
Double profits in a utility company is a disgusting exploitation of a trusted position.
Labels:
British Gas,
energy cartel,
exploitation,
price rise
British Gas - Won't Get Fooled Again
So, my grubby little English mates. Some of you have just got shafted by our friends (of whom we have none) in British Gas.
A 7% rise non the less.
I heard their spokesman whinge on about wholesale gas prices going up. He did not mention the year on year BG profit rise of 98% (yes nearly doubling year on year - see here
Neither did he mention that in the last couple of years, wholesale gas prices have fallen massively from their peak in 2008 (see here)
Needless to say, I expect the other festering corporate monsters that inhabit the Gas and Electricity sector are greedily eyeing your pay-packet as you read this.
What we need here my grotty, snotty fellow littleEnglanders is either a little less of the bloated monopolistic suppliers running their cosy cartel or more regulation. More regulation, as you probably know is something I would wish to avoid.
Personally I'd go for encouraging another twenty or so companies into the energy market, give them some tax breaks to get them going.
Make the bastards actually compete with each other . Oh how that would hurt!
Get some real competition into a market that currently has all the hall-marks of an ugly and malign Cartel
A 7% rise non the less.
I heard their spokesman whinge on about wholesale gas prices going up. He did not mention the year on year BG profit rise of 98% (yes nearly doubling year on year - see here
Neither did he mention that in the last couple of years, wholesale gas prices have fallen massively from their peak in 2008 (see here)
Needless to say, I expect the other festering corporate monsters that inhabit the Gas and Electricity sector are greedily eyeing your pay-packet as you read this.
What we need here my grotty, snotty fellow little
Personally I'd go for encouraging another twenty or so companies into the energy market, give them some tax breaks to get them going.
Make the bastards actually compete with each other . Oh how that would hurt!
Get some real competition into a market that currently has all the hall-marks of an ugly and malign Cartel
Labels:
British Gas,
cartel,
gas prices
Housing Benefit vs Houses
Last year 21 Billion was spent on Housing benefit.(see here)
110,000 new houses were built in the same year. (See Here)
The average cost of a home in the UK is about £165,000 (See Here)
So...... (Wait for it)
The cost of Housing Benefit last year could have purchased the ENTIRE new housing stock built in our ravaged little country.
What is more, there would still have been plenty left over for MP's expenses.
Don't figures like that just knock you out!!!!
Love & Kisses
Billothewisp
110,000 new houses were built in the same year. (See Here)
The average cost of a home in the UK is about £165,000 (See Here)
So...... (Wait for it)
The cost of Housing Benefit last year could have purchased the ENTIRE new housing stock built in our ravaged little country.
What is more, there would still have been plenty left over for MP's expenses.
Don't figures like that just knock you out!!!!
Love & Kisses
Billothewisp
Labels:
affordable homes,
house building,
housing benefit,
new houses
Housing Benefit costs 500,000 homes
Billothewisp would like to explore some figures with you my grubby little Englander mates concerning Housing Benefit, house building, house prices, rentals, political dogma and how all these thing are sadly related.
Housing benefit is currently £21 Billion per year.
In total, about £75 Billion has been spent on Housing Benefit in the last 5 years.
How many houses would this build?
The average house price (from here) is about £165000
So the last five years "lost" money spent on Housing Benefit could have built just over 450,000 homes. As our "average" house price is inflated by land costs it is easy to see that the cost of Housing Benefit, over the last five years, would have financed the building of at least half a million homes.
How many extra social houses did Gordon Brown, Ed Milliband and friends actually build? According to Radio 4 this morning, there was a net increase of 14000. That though, was in 13 years. But here, to make the maths easy, we will be kind an say they managed it in 5.
So for every 35 houses (lifespan 100 years) they could have built, they built one and blew the cost of the other 34 on short term "down the drain" solutions and social engineering.
One issue raised on Radio 4 breakfast time by a council leader from Kensington and Chelsea (i.e.very expensive area) was that normal working people could no longer afford accommodation in his borough, because they were priced out of the market by the unemployed on housing benefit. So we have this hullabaloo about people being ethically cleansed, when in fact it has already happened. But it is not the unemployed. It is the common working folk who have the audacity to hold down a job and fend for themselves who are the victims.
Then you have to ask why market rent is so high. It does not take a brain surgeon to work out that if you are pumping 21 Billion into the rental market each year then rents are bound to inflate. Artificially inflated rentals then inflate house prices as buy to let landlords buy up low end stock and price the young out of the market.
Then tack on to this the uncontrolled immigration over the last 10 years. (See this site and be appalled at the figures). If the net levels of immigration had stayed the same as they were in the 1980's/early 90's then there would now actually be a surplus of 200,000 homes.
It is an absolutely awful vicious circle.
All because of out of control housing benefit, uncontrolled immigration and essentially long term bad government.
What an absolute utter mess.
Housing benefit is currently £21 Billion per year.
In total, about £75 Billion has been spent on Housing Benefit in the last 5 years.
How many houses would this build?
The average house price (from here) is about £165000
So the last five years "lost" money spent on Housing Benefit could have built just over 450,000 homes. As our "average" house price is inflated by land costs it is easy to see that the cost of Housing Benefit, over the last five years, would have financed the building of at least half a million homes.
How many extra social houses did Gordon Brown, Ed Milliband and friends actually build? According to Radio 4 this morning, there was a net increase of 14000. That though, was in 13 years. But here, to make the maths easy, we will be kind an say they managed it in 5.
So for every 35 houses (lifespan 100 years) they could have built, they built one and blew the cost of the other 34 on short term "down the drain" solutions and social engineering.
One issue raised on Radio 4 breakfast time by a council leader from Kensington and Chelsea (i.e.very expensive area) was that normal working people could no longer afford accommodation in his borough, because they were priced out of the market by the unemployed on housing benefit. So we have this hullabaloo about people being ethically cleansed, when in fact it has already happened. But it is not the unemployed. It is the common working folk who have the audacity to hold down a job and fend for themselves who are the victims.
Then you have to ask why market rent is so high. It does not take a brain surgeon to work out that if you are pumping 21 Billion into the rental market each year then rents are bound to inflate. Artificially inflated rentals then inflate house prices as buy to let landlords buy up low end stock and price the young out of the market.
Then tack on to this the uncontrolled immigration over the last 10 years. (See this site and be appalled at the figures). If the net levels of immigration had stayed the same as they were in the 1980's/early 90's then there would now actually be a surplus of 200,000 homes.
It is an absolutely awful vicious circle.
All because of out of control housing benefit, uncontrolled immigration and essentially long term bad government.
What an absolute utter mess.
Labels:
ethnic cleansing,
house building,
housing benefit,
immigration
Something Fishy with Foreign Aid
Billothewisp is perplexed. George Osborne has brought a heavy axe down on the grotesque cancer of public spending excess. But there is one exception. Foreign aid is to grow by 37%. Notice dear readers not so much a squeak about this out of Labour, SNP, Plaid, or any of the others. The silence is deafening.
Furthermore, reporting of the many billions increase in foreign aid has been almost non existent (with the odd notable exception see here.) Do not expect any expose from the BBC any time soon.
There is something not quite right here.
This simply does not fit.
Realistically, any government of any colour would rationally cut the foreign aid cloth to fit the economics of the day. But that is not what's happening.
A 37% increase, especially by a government in a challenging economic situation is simply bizarre.
Especially when it is an open secret that 80% of African foreign aid ends up in the Swiss bank accounts of the gangster rulers. While India and Pakistan use it to pay indirectly for their nuclear weapons programmes.
There has to be a reason, probably a dark reason why this is happening.
Is it some form of Dangeld? (see here) Or what?
I cannot figure it out. But to suggest it is the magnanimous gesture from our Great and Good for no reason other than righteousness is trite.
There is something seriously wrong about this.
We are not being told the truth.
Furthermore, reporting of the many billions increase in foreign aid has been almost non existent (with the odd notable exception see here.) Do not expect any expose from the BBC any time soon.
There is something not quite right here.
This simply does not fit.
Realistically, any government of any colour would rationally cut the foreign aid cloth to fit the economics of the day. But that is not what's happening.
A 37% increase, especially by a government in a challenging economic situation is simply bizarre.
Especially when it is an open secret that 80% of African foreign aid ends up in the Swiss bank accounts of the gangster rulers. While India and Pakistan use it to pay indirectly for their nuclear weapons programmes.
There has to be a reason, probably a dark reason why this is happening.
Is it some form of Dangeld? (see here) Or what?
I cannot figure it out. But to suggest it is the magnanimous gesture from our Great and Good for no reason other than righteousness is trite.
There is something seriously wrong about this.
We are not being told the truth.
BBC: Whine Whine Whine
Good evening my sour faced little Englander friends. This morning Billothewisp had a nasty scare while driving to work. Just after I had turned on the radio, there was an awful whining noise. It modulated up and down. It would stop for a short while only to restart shortly later.
Cambelt shredded?
Breaks binding?
Perplexed I turned off the radio to try and identify the problem. But immediately I did this the noise stopped.
Puzzled, I turned the radio back on. There it was again!
Finally I realised this intermittent whinnying and whining was not my trusty Ford but a gaggle of overpaid and over fed BBC presenters moaning about they would have to suffer the indignity of reduced claret and caviare rations as the licence fee has been frozen.
Further more, they complained that the BBC would actually have to pay for the foreign broadcasting service. Funny that. I thought that sort of thing was what the licence fee was for. But never mind.
So what exactly was this collection of financially replete individuals whinging about? Evidently the BBC has been “bullied” into the freezing of an over-priced licence fee which could result in a real terms reduction of 16% (essentially due to inflation) over five years.
Hardly compares to what the lads at Redcar have had to put up with does it?
Or the Harrier pilots shortly to be given their P45's for that matter.
But personally Billothewisp was rather shocked at this attack on the BBC. If Billothewisp had been in charge I would guarantee that this freezing of the licence fee simply would not have happened.
Instead Billothewisp would have abolished the licence fee completely. The BBC would be financed directly by the treasury who would, one would hope, demand a level of financial rigour the BBC is blatantly unaware of.
Actually I would also probably also cut their budget by 40%, but that is just me and my nasty streak.
The arcane days of unaccountable gravy trains being able to raise their own particular poll tax should be over.
But OH my God can you think of the amount of whining that would raise?
We would all need ear defenders.
Cambelt shredded?
Breaks binding?
Perplexed I turned off the radio to try and identify the problem. But immediately I did this the noise stopped.
Puzzled, I turned the radio back on. There it was again!
Finally I realised this intermittent whinnying and whining was not my trusty Ford but a gaggle of overpaid and over fed BBC presenters moaning about they would have to suffer the indignity of reduced claret and caviare rations as the licence fee has been frozen.
Further more, they complained that the BBC would actually have to pay for the foreign broadcasting service. Funny that. I thought that sort of thing was what the licence fee was for. But never mind.
So what exactly was this collection of financially replete individuals whinging about? Evidently the BBC has been “bullied” into the freezing of an over-priced licence fee which could result in a real terms reduction of 16% (essentially due to inflation) over five years.
Hardly compares to what the lads at Redcar have had to put up with does it?
Or the Harrier pilots shortly to be given their P45's for that matter.
But personally Billothewisp was rather shocked at this attack on the BBC. If Billothewisp had been in charge I would guarantee that this freezing of the licence fee simply would not have happened.
Instead Billothewisp would have abolished the licence fee completely. The BBC would be financed directly by the treasury who would, one would hope, demand a level of financial rigour the BBC is blatantly unaware of.
Actually I would also probably also cut their budget by 40%, but that is just me and my nasty streak.
The arcane days of unaccountable gravy trains being able to raise their own particular poll tax should be over.
But OH my God can you think of the amount of whining that would raise?
We would all need ear defenders.
Labels:
bbc,
financial cuts
Huhne and Humble Pie
I could crow about Chris Huhne's U turn on nuclear power but I won't. He has after-all, done the decent thing. He has at last abandoned the ridiculous dream world of relying on wind and tidal power and has now ordered 8 new nuclear power stations. See Here
Evidently the fairy-land lunatics in the Liberal party are outraged. Of course they would much rather maintain their bizarre Luddite-ism, even if it means the old and frail dying in the dark and cold.
The only problem is though is that there is still going to be a shortfall. Huhne needs to gather his courage and order at least four more.
Through gross incompetence and hysterical propaganda our own nuclear industry has been allowed to wither on the vine. Once our nuclear industry led the world but now these new power stations are going to rely on French or American expertise.
What a shame.
But at least, we can hope pensioners will not be confronted with power cuts and non working central heating boilers in ten years time.
Evidently the fairy-land lunatics in the Liberal party are outraged. Of course they would much rather maintain their bizarre Luddite-ism, even if it means the old and frail dying in the dark and cold.
The only problem is though is that there is still going to be a shortfall. Huhne needs to gather his courage and order at least four more.
Through gross incompetence and hysterical propaganda our own nuclear industry has been allowed to wither on the vine. Once our nuclear industry led the world but now these new power stations are going to rely on French or American expertise.
What a shame.
But at least, we can hope pensioners will not be confronted with power cuts and non working central heating boilers in ten years time.
Labels:
chris huhne,
nuclear power
Liverpool sale blocked by Texas judge
Billothewisp, being a grubby little Englander is without doubt a bit dim.
But please, can someone explain to me in short stubby little words, what the hell an American Judge in Texas has to do with the sale of anEnglish football club? Especially when that sale is being conducted in England under English law?
Am I missing something or what? Or is this just plain unbridled arrogance?
But please, can someone explain to me in short stubby little words, what the hell an American Judge in Texas has to do with the sale of an
Am I missing something or what? Or is this just plain unbridled arrogance?
Labels:
liverpool football club
Quango'd at the TSA
OK you grubby semi-literate little Englander chums. Billothewisp is going to tell you how the Great, Good and Extremely Well Fed at the TSA are going that last mile – just for you.
What is the TSA? Funny you should say that. That was my first thought when I came across it.
Well, you fellow stupid littleEnglanders, its the Tenants Service Authority.
What do they do? Uh, well. I'm still working on that one. have a look at them Here
But believe me it involves eating a great deal of lunch.
It must be truly hell but, just to make sure they can cope with all this forced eating they are given some small tokens in the way of bonuses as well.
Further more, they have obviously also been charged with distributing a great deal of of the quantative easing money to the poor and needy.
And what a better way than packing it into their pay packets?
Neither are they secretive about their pay/bonuses or expenses. They actually appear to think they are above reproach! see it all Here
So you grubby littleEnglanders, are you wondering if the job will last out to the end of the week? Maybe you are thinking about economising on the £2.50 bacon butty you have for lunch. Well, here is what these Great, Good and Extremely Well Fed folk at the TSA have to put up with.
Are you sitting comfortably? (or at least stood well clear of breakable objects?)
Here are a few of the snippets from their pay and expenses.
Pay:
Chief Executive: 2010 pay £165,000.
But to be fair that is only a miserly rise of £8162 on the previous year – that is a derisory 5% (how much did you get?)
This noble individual was only awarded a further £11,000 in bonuses a massive drop from the previous years £17531.
As you may remember the Great, Good and Extremely Well Fed in our Mother of Parliaments were recently involved in a little tryst over expenses.
But the Chief Executive has no worries because, just by chance, he has decided to waive his bonus this year. Of course, there is absolutely no relation between the two, or the pay rise.
Really. You have to ask.
How does he cope?
Even worse off are the four executive directors three of them only get £125,000 and one poor soul only gets £100,000. Their bonuses range from £5000 for the £100K wage victim, through to £9479 for the less financially challenged directors.
The chief executive does though have a personallacky assistant because he has so, so, so much to do.
She earns a more modest £29000 up by a mere 30% on the previous year. Although to be fair this is around the plebian pay level of mere minions like you and me.
Then of course, there are the pension benefits......(have a look). Even the Great Good and Extremely Well Fed grow old and of course, they have got used to an extravagant lifestyle. It would be cruel to require a little modesty in their retirement.
The TSA is less straight forward about their “other ranks” pay. So it is a good job that lunch appears to come free.
Take the published expenses for “lunch”. These people are at least consistent with £70.00 per claim being the apparent average (hey! that one hell of a lot of bacon butties).
Then there are the grace and favour lunches where other Great and Good foot the bill. But really, honestly, somebody has to do it.
It is only like buying your mate a bacon butty because he has just lost his job. It is just 25 times more expensive. Thats all.
Needless to say the expenses per individual are hundreds and hundreds of pounds per month. But somebody has to do this job. Aren't you pleased that these fine follows have taken on the challenge?
After all, my plebian proletariateEnglish mates, I don't expect you have to even bother with such claims!
Think of all the expense form filling, indigestion and extra arterial deposits.
Oh you lucky, lucky littleEnglish proles! You are so fortunate to be able to leave this sort of thing to your quango betters.
But what is this I hear? The TSA is being axed!
But, what it did was so important!
So vital!
So absolutely crucial to the well being of the nation! (whatever it was)
When this particular little TSA train finally hits the buffers, just be careful myEnglish buddies.
Be careful that you don't get drowned in the spilt gravy.
What is the TSA? Funny you should say that. That was my first thought when I came across it.
Well, you fellow stupid little
What do they do? Uh, well. I'm still working on that one. have a look at them Here
But believe me it involves eating a great deal of lunch.
It must be truly hell but, just to make sure they can cope with all this forced eating they are given some small tokens in the way of bonuses as well.
Further more, they have obviously also been charged with distributing a great deal of of the quantative easing money to the poor and needy.
And what a better way than packing it into their pay packets?
Neither are they secretive about their pay/bonuses or expenses. They actually appear to think they are above reproach! see it all Here
So you grubby little
Are you sitting comfortably? (or at least stood well clear of breakable objects?)
Here are a few of the snippets from their pay and expenses.
Pay:
Chief Executive: 2010 pay £165,000.
But to be fair that is only a miserly rise of £8162 on the previous year – that is a derisory 5% (how much did you get?)
This noble individual was only awarded a further £11,000 in bonuses a massive drop from the previous years £17531.
As you may remember the Great, Good and Extremely Well Fed in our Mother of Parliaments were recently involved in a little tryst over expenses.
But the Chief Executive has no worries because, just by chance, he has decided to waive his bonus this year. Of course, there is absolutely no relation between the two, or the pay rise.
Really. You have to ask.
How does he cope?
Even worse off are the four executive directors three of them only get £125,000 and one poor soul only gets £100,000. Their bonuses range from £5000 for the £100K wage victim, through to £9479 for the less financially challenged directors.
The chief executive does though have a personal
She earns a more modest £29000 up by a mere 30% on the previous year. Although to be fair this is around the plebian pay level of mere minions like you and me.
Then of course, there are the pension benefits......(have a look). Even the Great Good and Extremely Well Fed grow old and of course, they have got used to an extravagant lifestyle. It would be cruel to require a little modesty in their retirement.
The TSA is less straight forward about their “other ranks” pay. So it is a good job that lunch appears to come free.
Take the published expenses for “lunch”. These people are at least consistent with £70.00 per claim being the apparent average (hey! that one hell of a lot of bacon butties).
Then there are the grace and favour lunches where other Great and Good foot the bill. But really, honestly, somebody has to do it.
It is only like buying your mate a bacon butty because he has just lost his job. It is just 25 times more expensive. Thats all.
Needless to say the expenses per individual are hundreds and hundreds of pounds per month. But somebody has to do this job. Aren't you pleased that these fine follows have taken on the challenge?
After all, my plebian proletariate
Think of all the expense form filling, indigestion and extra arterial deposits.
Oh you lucky, lucky little
But what is this I hear? The TSA is being axed!
But, what it did was so important!
So vital!
So absolutely crucial to the well being of the nation! (whatever it was)
When this particular little TSA train finally hits the buffers, just be careful my
Be careful that you don't get drowned in the spilt gravy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)