Some thoughts from Dale Vince on these DECC proposals: “You have to question the thinking of a government that says “there could be more solar deployed than is affordable”. On the face of it, the price of solar is on a par with nuclear, but it does not have the clean-up costs of nuclear nor the 35 years of support nuclear has. So in effect, it’s actually cheaper. “It’s a classic tactic of the coalition - to dress up a cut in renewable support as some form of long term thinking, or as measures to assist renewables, and to suggest their motivations are about cost-effectiveness when the facts suggest that simply isn’t true. Weve seen onshore wind held back - in planning and economic terms - in favour of offshore, which costs twice as much; weve seen big solar cut to save money for small solar, which was itself cut later; and now its big solar again being cut with the argument that rooftop or industrial solar is benefiting. “So each time the government cuts support for one form of renewables, they suggest that another form is still benefiting – which is then later cut. Usually its the most successful and cost effective forms of renewable energy that are losing out. Theres a pattern here and its about stalling and disabling renewable energy.”
Posted on: Wed, 14 May 2014 09:26:57 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015