A year and a half ago, a climate street-blocking couple became infamous for blocking a federal highway near Stuttgart – “for the climate” – then traveling to Thailand (and Bali?) for months, skipping their court case to do so.
When online BILD and others made the double standards public, the perpetrator Yannick S. wrote a letter to the Berlin newspaper taz, in which he made a hilariously defiant statement. When it came to light that Yannick S. had dropped out of engineering school and was involved in the construction of combustion engines, it was quite clear that street-blocker and his partner were not the least bit concerned about “the climate”.
The couple probably only used the hip topic to pursue individual interests. This may be the assumption of stardom, which later leads to a well-paid, low-effort job at an NGO (“The work is done by others”, Helmut Schelsky 1974). Or it may be a certain pleasure in the suffering of the working population.
Nothing seems to embarrass Yannick S., which is why he glued himself to the tarmac at Frankfurt Airport after returning from his upper-class vacation under palm trees.
Delightful thought: what if there were a lot of left-wing green voters and other climate activists on the long-haul flights he stopped? After all, it’s the high summer holiday season, and the daughters of lawyers and sons of doctors don’t want to be stranded sweating on the tarmac. Instead they would rather enjoy their own prosperity under palm trees.
At least there is one ray of hope: Yannick S. has now been sentenced to a fine of over 100,000 euros for his frequent sticking, which he is unable to pay. If NGOs or collection campaigns don’t help out, the climate-blocking criminal could end up in prison as a substitute. How many years would that amount to?
Another 4 billion down the drain. Still it’s only money, eh!
Ofgem has today confirmed its final approval on the costs associated with delivery of Eastern Green Link 2 (EGL2), enabling construction to start on the 525kV 2GW subsea connection between Peterhead in the north-east of Scotland and Drax on the east coast of England. The energy regulator’s final decision on the project assessment for the 500km+ high voltage direct current (HVDC) connection is the key final approval in the regulatory process and allows construction to get underway later this year, with the connection due to be operational in 2029.
At a total expected nominal investment of around £4.3bn, it is the single largest-ever investment in electricity transmission infrastructure in Great Britain and one of the most significant, strategic investments in energy infrastructure the country has seen in recent years.
Back in March, the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee produced a report on long-duration energy storage (LDES). This report urged the Government to “get on with it”. Among its key recommendations were to ask the Government to “support no-regrets investments for hydrogen”.
However, some of the members of the committee have significant conflicts of interest and incestuous relationships that call into question the objectivity of the report and the integrity of Government.
What Did the Lords LDES Report Say?
The Executive Summary of the report talks about “cheap” renewables and insists the prize for investing in storage is that the electricity system will be cheaper. We do not need to rehearse all the arguments against this statement again. It is sufficient to note that all existing renewables, whether funded by Contracts for Difference (CfDs), Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs) or Feed-In-Tariffs (FiTs) are currently more expensive than gas-fired electricity, as most recently discussed here.
A grid that is solely or mostly powered by renewables will therefore be more expensive than a gas-fired grid. However, as wind and solar power are intermittent in nature, they require some sort of backup or storage to ensure that the grid can always meet demand. Adding storage adds extra capital costs to the system but does not increase the amount of electricity generated. This extra expenditure must therefore increase the full system costs of electricity. So, the opening premise of their report is wrong, calling into question the rest of their analysis.
They then go on to quote extensively from the Royal Society report on long term storage (dismantled here) which farcically suggested the system cost of a renewables plus hydrogen storage grid would be ~£60/MWh. However, this cost is less than half what we pay for renewables alone today and much lower than the prices being offered in AR6. The required electrolysers, storage caverns and generators will not come cheap and will further increase the system cost of electricity. It is likely that the true costs of a renewables plus hydrogen grid will be three or four times that suggested.
How Did the Lords Get It So Wrong?
It is worrying that such an eminent committee should get things so wrong. To understand how and why they made such a glaring error, we need to look at the composition of the committee.
Baroness Brown of Cambridge chairs the Lords Science and Technology Committee. Her register of interests shows she is also the chair of the Adaptation Sub-Committee of the Committee on Climate Change (CCC). By pure coincidence, Baroness Brown is also a non-executive director of Ceres Power Holdings, which describes itself as a leading developer of “electrolysis for the creation of green hydrogen and fuel cells for power generation”. Baroness Brown’s other interests include chairing the Carbon Trust, and she is also a non-executive director of wind farm operator and developer Ørsted.
Seen in this context, it becomes easier to see why the LDES report is so enthusiastic about renewables and securing spending on hydrogen storage.
However, the web of relationships runs even wider. Professor Keith Bell acted as Specialist Advisor to the committee in the production of the LDES report. Professor Bell is also a member of the CCC having taken up the position of power sector specialist in 2019 and recently had his contract extended to April 2025.
One wonders if it is appropriate for one of the most senior people responsible for decarbonising the grid by 2030 should be a staffer for a Baroness and have such a close relationship with someone with such obvious vested interests in wind power and hydrogen.
We can see that the tentacles of the green blob have extended deep into the heart of the establishment and Government. One might term this situation a two-tier system of ethics. The extensive web of commercial interests and personal relationships makes it difficult to avoid the conclusion that the recommendations of the Lords Science and Technology Committee report on long term energy storage are tainted. It is also difficult to take seriously any recommendations made by the Climate Change Committee and the new Head of Mission Control. It’s so incestuous, seriously someone should check their hands and feet for extra digits.
Older trees are able to accelerate their rates of absorbing planet-warming emissions, scientists at the University of Birmingham have found.
A forest of mature oak trees was exposed to elevated levels of carbon dioxide for seven years and in response, the trees increased their production of wood – locking in the greenhouse gas and preventing it from warming the planet.
Iowa Climate Science Education 