Guest Post at Watts Up..

Green economic thinking ' tata job losses was revenge for Carbon budget' Baroness Worthington, and how we (in the UK) have a tiny group of environmental lobbyists to thank for the climate change act.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/07/green-economic-thinking-revenge-not-economics/#more-41116

Help!
I'm locked out again. Any attempt to do a correction after a preview causes a reset. Close down completely. Re-start. Same thing.
Is it just me?

Richard Glover - Broadcaster and Sydney Morning Herald columnist

"Surely it's time for climate-change deniers to have their opinions forcibly tattooed on their bodies."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-dangers-of-boneheaded-beliefs-20110602-1fijg.html#ixzz1OaqfRGYh

Jun 7, 2011 at 12:40 PM | John Shade

'According to publicly available European Commission data, wwf was awarded nearly €9 million in eu support in 2008 alone. In 2007, the figure was over €7.5 million. The money came from several different eu budget lines, including development aid, “communication,” and the environment dg’s life+ program. Most of the support took the form of ostensibly project-linked grants to wwf-International or its national affiliates. The largest single grant — for €3,499,999 — went to wwf-International in 2007. wwf is so intimately familiar with eu money that it has even edited a handbook on eu environmental funding on behalf of the European Commission. In February of this year, the organization advertised a job opening with the title “European Funding Coordinator.” “The European Funding Coordinator will promote funding interactions between the eu as a donor and the wwf Global programme,” the job description explains.'

http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/43291

In an idle moment, I Googled 'climate porn 2011' and found 11.7 million hits. Including this one, which I think is a useful essay on the compulsion of fund-raising NGOs to use fear to raise money: http://devconsultancygroup.blogspot.com/2011/03/its-their-dna-that-drives-ngos-to.html. This explains the decline of such as the WWF from being concerned with 'world wildlife' to being concerned with raising more money using climate alarmism. It is only a moral decline. Materially, it has been a great success for them.

Jun 7, 2011 at 9:25 AM | Barry Woods

Philip Johnston Daily Telegraph 7 June 2011
"Wind farms aren't just a blight, they're a folly"
Quote:

"To produce the same amount of electricity as one coal-fired power station, you'd need a wind farm the size of Greater London."

This sounded such a killer that I had a look at the "London Array" website.

The following information is spread around the site, so you have to hop around:

"We’ll build wind turbines in an area of around 245km2 on and between two sandbanks, Long Sand and Deep Knock and in waters up to 23m deep. Phase One will cover 100km2.

The turbines for Phase One will have a capacity of 3.6MW each. They’ll be
manufactured by Siemens Wind Power and will be fitted with Siemens’ new 120m rotor.

For Phase One, we’ll need 177 piles – one for each of the 175 wind turbines and two more for the offshore substations."

175 x 3.6 = 630 MW over 100 square km, but allow the usual "20%" capacity factor"

This gives 126 MW effective per 100 square km

Greater London = 1572 square km, therefore equal to 15.72 Phase 1 areas.

15.72 x phase 1 @ 126 MW = 1,981 MW

Compare this with Eggborough coal fired power station ( 4 x 500 MW) = 2,000 MW.

So, Philp Johnston is correct when he says:

"To produce the same amount of electricity as one coal-fired power station, you'd need a wind farm the size of Greater London."

This should be in lights in Piccadilly Circus.

Trebles all round.

Barry,

The comments on the Telegraph article are intense:

'Glad to see Thorium finally being brought to the fore.

As someone who works in a company who operates offshore wind farm maintenance vessels, I can indeed vouch for the horrendous costs and inefficiencies of the beasts.
Our company makes a small fortune in subsidies.

Although I am completely opposed to wind farms, if our company hadn't snapped up the opportunity, someone else would have.

So, speaking as someone with a vested interest in the UK's continued development of wind farms, SHUT THEM DOWN! '

Note to the Bishop:
I just wonder whether your request for further "Financial information (Partially successful)" http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/financial_information_10#incoming-178811
is still being treated as an ongoing FOI request?

My query is only based on the fact that you have not yet had any further acknowledgement and Dave Palmer's previous response to you seemed to suggest that in his opinion he was under no obligation even to partially service your previous request (on the grounds that it took too long).

If you agree that it looks unclear how UEA are treating your request, then may it possibly be less bother (and potentially less time-wasting) to submit a new FOI instead?

Maybe James Delingpole won't feel as alone....

more Telegraph journalists coming out against windfarms, they'll be sceptical next about AGW.....

Telegraph: Wind farms aren't just a blight, they're a folly
It's bad enough that these turbines spoil the landscape, but they don't even work, writes Philip Johnston.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/philipjohnston/8560346/Wind-farms-arent-just-a-blight-theyre-a-folly.html

This article is from last year but should command some current publicity as the climate talks in Bonn are under way.
http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/43291

It is by an American journalist who regularily writes on European themes and the connections between NGO's, Universities and the EU is clearly apparent.