Interesting Background On The Kingsnorth Decision

A letter from the North West Lib Dem MEP Chris Davies in Saturday's Guardian shed an interesting light on the recent decision to shelve the development of the Kingsnorth power station -

Professor Catherine Mitchell asks "why did E.ON postpone its Kingsnorth plan?" (Kingsnorth's coal bluff, 9 October). The answer lies in Brussels. On 1 October the European commission presented a technical committee of the council of ministers with its recommendations for seven carbon capture and storage projects across Europe that should each receive a €180m initial EU subsidy, the sum to be matched by national governments. Applications from the UK included schemes at Kingsnorth, Hatfield, Longannet and Tilbury, with just one to qualify. The decision will be announced publicly in a week or so, but it's an open secret in this city that the commission did not recommend funding for Kingsnorth. My money's on Hatfield.

Chris Davies MEP

Liberal Democrat, North West

We should see within the week if Davies is right in his suspicions.

Victory over Veolia!

Good news!
The giant multinational waste, transport, water and services conglomerate Veolia has been defeated in its' attempts to withhold important information from local anti-incinerator activists and Council Tax Payers in Nottinghamshire. The decision of the High Court on 1st October is a landmark decision and a victory for dynamic PAIN* and UKWIN* activist Shlomo Dowen and Friends of the Earth in the UK who supported the case against Veolia.

The court case came about when activists sought to see details of the fantastically expensive waste contract signed between Veolia and Notts County Council under regulations governing local government auditing. Under these rules members of the public are allowed to see Council accounts and financial details during the audit process. Veolia sought an injunction against anyone seeing details relating to the County Waste Contract which includes the controversial incinerator plans for Rainworth in Sherwood Forest.

This led to the farcical situation of Notts County Council, (aware of their legal duties and the likelihood of them loosing a challenge if they complied with the wishes of Veolia) confronting their favoured contractor in court.

This is all a good omen for the Public Inquiry into Veolia's White Elephant Notts Incinerator (improved waste treatment technology and increasing recycling rates are already making it increasingly obsolescent before it even has final approval - the argument for an alternative waste strategy strengthens by the day) - the Inquiry starts in Rainworth next Tuesday and the public have their right to have their say on 14th October in the evening session of the Inquiry at Rainworth Methodist Hall.

Well done to Shlomo, PAIN, UKWIN and FOE and good luck for the Inquiry!



Notes
* PAIN - People Against Incineration - local Notts campaign against projected Veolia incinerator in Sherwood Forest.
* UKWIN - National anti-incinerator network, UK Without Incineration.

Green Jobs and Energy Meeting In London

"Green Jobs and the Green Energy Revolution: is the government doing enough?"
Start: 07 Sep 2009, 7:00 pm
Where: Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, Holborn tube

A Public Meeting on Monday 7th September, in Conway Hall at 7.00pm.

Speakers will include :
John McDonnell MP (Labour, Hayes and Harlington),
Bob Crow (General Secretary of the RMT - National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers),
Tony Juniper (ex Director, Friends of the Earth, Green Party candidate)
Ian Terry (worker from the Vestas wind turbine factory )
Phil Thornhill (Campaign against Climate Change)

Don't miss this important meeting on the UK's future direction in the era of Climate Emergency - are we moving full steam ahead towards Green Jobs and the Green Energy Revolution at a speed that we can and should?

US Anti-Incineration Academic To Speak In Shrewsbury

Incineration: an unacceptable practice in the 21st Century
A public talk by Paul Connett

Paul Connett is a Professor of Environmental Chemistry at St Lawrence
University, New York State, USA

The talk will take place:
Friday 27 March, 7.30 pm
Alington Hall, Shrewsbury School,
SHREWSBURY SY3 7BA

Planning applications have been received for burner-incinerators at Battlefield, Shrewsbury and Granville, Telford.

Find out from a renowned international expert why incineration as a form of waste management is the worst possible option for our communities.
Discover the sustainable, cheaper and safer alternatives.

For more information contact:
safe_waste_shropshire@yahoo.com or

Telford PAIN info@telfordpain.co.uk

Visit www.safewasteshropshire.co.uk and www.telfordpain.co.uk

The Great Lightbulb Debate

Some of the tabloid media are having a field day over the rather hamfisted attempts of the UK government to gradually phase out "traditional" lightbulbs.
A debate was started on Urban 75 which has raised some good points and helps to dismiss some of the more far fetched myths about the current situation, so I will post some of the more relevant posts here.
First one of the resident Toryboy reactionaries on Urban stated the Daily Telegraph Case for the prosecution:

Alright
Traditional Lightbulbs Being Phased Out
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ned-by-EU.html

The traditional "candescent" bulbs are said to use more energy than the new, chunky "Fluorescent Lumps" (FLs) that won't work with dimmer switches.

However, FLs use a lot more energy whilst warming up than they do whilst running afterwards, so switching them on and off will COST energy ... ESPECIALLY as this shortens their life to the same existence of a trad bulb.

However, if you leave FLs on all the time you're not saving energy in the long run. In essence, their energy consumption is that of the old fluorescent strip-light. And the light is just as harsh.

The high-frequency flicker is the same, causing some people headaches and doing no favours to epileptics. FLs contain mercury, so disposal could be a nightmare. If they break in your home, mercury could be widespread. They are more expensive than trad bulbs. And they don't reach "full light" for a few minutes.

Is the decision to ban "trad" bulbs really a good idea?

Further on there was an informative reply from the poster known as Extra Refined:

Extra Refined
Whilst I don't think tungsten bulbs should be banned, for several reasons; a tax on CO2 emitting electricity generation would work better; exceptions will make it pointless; the nonsense spread about CFLs pisses me off no end.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alright
However, FLs use a lot more energy whilst warming up than they do whilst running afterwards, so switching them on and off will COST energy ...

This is a lie

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/consume.../mytopic=12280

Quote:
Turning off fluorescent lights for more than 5 seconds will save more energy than will be consumed in turning them back on again
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alright
ESPECIALLY as this shortens their life to the same existence of a trad bulb.

This is wrong. To reduce the life of a CFL to that of a tungsten bulb you'd have to switch it on and off every 5 mins. Even then, its lifecycle CO2 emissions would be lower than the tungsten.

https://www.rmi.org/images/PDFs/Clim...ort_080401.pdf

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alright
However, if you leave FLs on all the time you're not saving energy in the long run.
You would have to usea CFL five times as much as a tungsten bulb to use as much energy

https://www.rmi.org/images/PDFs/Clim...ort_080401.pdf

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alright
And the light is just as harsh.

Modern CFLs are available in different colour balances (unlike tungsten bulbs which are all around 3000K). If you find daylight balance too harsh, in which case I assume you dislike going outside in the day, you can use warm balance. Up to you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alright
The high-frequency flicker is the same, causing some people headaches and doing no favours to epileptics.

Modern CFLs flicker at frequencies in the kHz range. No can discern this.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...bulb-headaches

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alright
If they break in your home, mercury could be widespread.

Some modern CFLs contain no mercury. The rest contain tiny amounts ~5mg. This is less than the amount of mercury released by burning the quarter of a ton of coal needed to power a tungsten bulb for 10,000 hours.

https://www.rmi.org/images/PDFs/Clim...ort_080401.pdf

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alright
They are more expensive than trad bulbs

Running a 100W tungsten bulb for 10,000 hours will use 1000kWh of electricity. This will cost ~£100. A 20W CFL will cost £20 in electricity, a saving of £80. Against this the cost of the bulb is insignificant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alright
And they don't reach "full light" for a few minutes.

Modern CFLs reach 80% brightness or more in seconds, which you'd actually have a very hard time discerning from 100%, but if you really care, just buy one a few watts brighter. You can buy 30W CFLs (which I have fitted in my front room) which are FAR brighter than 100W tungsten bulbs.

Furthermore, in a couple of years LED lighting will be affordable (although compared to the lifecycle cost of tungsten it already wins). This instantly reaches full brightness, contains no more dangerous chemicals than any other electronics, and can potentialy be any colour you want.