It does however
add to the costs (although there is some dispute about the extent of that addition). Whether it’s a cost worth paying is
ultimately a matter of opinion.
Personally I’d like to see the detail of the cost impact before taking a
firm view – it might be that the combination of overhead cables in some areas
and underground cables in others will offer the best trade-off between cost and
scenery.
There are
however two major inconsistencies in some of the statements being made by those
demanding that the links be underground.
The first is
that the same people are also complaining about the high cost of energy, and
wind energy in particular. Yet they are
demanding action which will effectively increase the cost.
The second is
that some of those who now want to dig a trench across Carmarthenshire to bury
electricity cables were implacable opponents of digging a trench across
Carmarthenshire to bury gas pipes. To me
one trench looks much the same as another; insofar as it is damaging, it’s the
trench which does the damage, not what is buried in it.
There are some
hard facts that we cannot easily avoid:
·
We
need to move away from carbon-based energy and base our economy on renewables
·
Effective
use of renewables – wind, tide, hydro, solar – means siting the generators
where the renewable energy is available.
That often means in the countryside.
·
All
energy production and use has an environmental impact; the decision we face is
either not to use energy, or else to decide which environmental impacts we’re
prepared to support.
·
Energy
costs may vary from time to time, but over the long term they are headed in
only one direction – upwards.
Pretending that
one or more of those things are not true, or that the consequences of them
being true can somehow be avoided, may help politicians to win votes in
elections, but it doesn’t make for a coherent energy policy.
Posts
3 comments:
The pipe from Milford Haven to Gloucestershire across South Wales was designed to move vast quantities of fossil fuel gas from a deep water port in the west into England. The transmission lines from the Cambrian Mountains across Powys into Shropshire is designed to move quantities of carbon free electricity from the windy mountains of Wales into England. I've got a better idea. Have a "smart" electricity grid in Wales for Wales. Transmission voltage could the lower due to less power being transmitted allowing less obtrusive pylons, and the pipe from Milford Haven should be lined with insulation to contain a lower power transmission line to Cardiff and the valleys. If England wants our energy, we should send them an invoice. Alternatively they can knock down the Thames barrier to fit an LNG ship, and they can stick the wind turbines over the South Downs and Peak District.
Anonymous does have a point here. The countryside of Wales does have energy potential in the same way that the valleys of Wales have reservoir potential. If there must be an environmental effect on Wales shouldn't it benefit those communities that are being impacted first?
Exporting across the border without first securing energy needs locally is neither morally or politically sound.
The idea that 'England' wants our energy is misleading. Multi-national companies produce the energy and pump it into a National (sic) Grid- which is actually an international grid as it covers England, Wales and Scotland. Ireland is increasingly looking to tap into this grid also.
At no point in this process do England or Wales or Scotland bill each other, nor could they. Companies sell the energy to customers. It's not a situation I agree with but i'm not sure at which point Wales can "send England an invoice". The only time that could happen would be if a Welsh Government was generating and selling the energy, rather than a private company. I'm inclined to think that's a good idea but to make any money it would still have to build alot of power stations in Wales and sell the energy to conurbations of people, most of which are in England. There would then still be pylons.
Post a Comment