“Green Issues? Whoa, There, Not If It Costs Us Money!”

Management at St Joseph’s College, in Beulah Hill, decided against expanding its green energy scheme after it was announced that the solar “feed in tariff” would be cut by up to 87 per cent.

Feed in tariffs provide incentives to set up renewable projects by guaranteeing above market prices for the energy they produce.

In other word, by propping up uneconomical feelgood ecomentalist schemes.

Sean Miller, headteacher St Joseph’s College, said: “The college is very keen to install more panels on the rest of our usable roof space.

Plans are in their final stages of development with start-up funding already agreed with the Government body.

“This has now been abandoned, as the feed in tariff has been removed, it will now not be financially viable. This has caused great disappointment to the college community.”

Why don’t they have a fundraising drive? Dig into their own pockets, rather than mine?

Or are they only ‘passionate about the environment’ when it doesn’t cost them anything?

11 comments for ““Green Issues? Whoa, There, Not If It Costs Us Money!”

  1. ivan
    December 26, 2015 at 12:55 pm

    At least the reduction of the FIT is starting to make some people realise that solar, and wind, energy production will NEVER be viable in the UK unless it is subsidised.

    If there was a true free market for energy in the UK – one not controlled by the watermelons and diktats from the EU – the countryside and offshore areas would not be ruined with wind and solar farms owned by subsidy farmers that leach off the general public.

    For any country to advance it need cheap reliable energy. Without that industry dies and jobs are lost, just as we are seeing in the UK at the moment with the loss of the steel and aluminium industries because of excessive energy costs. And all of this is because the watermelons want to take the country back to some mythical non existent age where they would be in total control.

  2. Hereward Unbowed.
    December 26, 2015 at 2:01 pm

    First off:

    The Victorians understood it very well, the UK CEGB once understood it very well, the Chinese understood it and understands it NOW, India too – understands very well – is that, you base your nation and can only build your nation on the promise of vast amounts of cheap and plentiful electrical power and in order to produce that – you need COAL and ONLY COAL, though nuclear is a close second, where everything else is window dressing including gas which is inappropriate/ so ineffecient for burning to produce electricity.

    This has caused great disappointment to the college community.”

    So, they want to stiff their fellow countrymen by using some very polluting [industrial fabrication of the PV cell process – is unbelievably carbon intensive] wendy house panels [which are fucking useless but look good] on their roof so that, they can all congratulate themselves upon ‘saving’ the planet and wow won’t the parents and school governors be impressed – not to mention NUTs and OFsted.

    Dear God in his heaven, “disappointment” is it? This is supposed to be an educational establishment – not a mimic shop, a house given to chanting the mantras of the green idiot brigade…………oh erm……….. but they are.

    I fucking despair, I really do and we are all doomed – these kids are supposed to be learning to be ‘the future’ – FUBAR is what we are.

    • Johnnydub
      December 26, 2015 at 9:29 pm

      You do realise that the education system has been brainwashing kids with green bullshit for years now.

      We may know its bullshit, but the next generation will not question their new watermelon overlords…

      • January 3, 2016 at 6:04 am

        Yup, all to guarantee that they will be unopposed.

  3. Mudplugger
    December 26, 2015 at 2:32 pm

    In a nation of excess rainfall, inadequate sunlight, unreliable wind, suitable topography, growing population, massively subsidised argicultural land, dependence on insecure foreign energy imports and a passing interest in conservation, why does everyone always ignore hydro-electricity ?
    It’s 24/7/365, it’s cheap, clean, reliable, secure, recyclable, creates reservoirs, stabilises flood-water flow, creates leisure and conservation environments and, at the same time, avoids foreign imports, poltical instability and wasted subsidies to feather-bedded landowners and inefficient farmers. How many more reasons do they need ?

    • Hereward Unbowed.
      December 26, 2015 at 9:13 pm

      Love hydro, but needs big rivers and deep valleys and we have some scant supply of these.

      Drawbacks->

      Plus, not everything shouts hydro electric. Unless where, local topographical and Geology conditions are maximized [ie Norway]. Because, the effect on landscape, underlying Geology, massive hydrological pressure upon the locale – its lithology and seismicity its water table hydrology – is not always greatly beneficial, just ask the Chinese about that.
      In China, where big dam projects are believed to have triggered major earthquake events in provinces adjacent to big dams.

  4. Stonyground
    December 26, 2015 at 7:19 pm

    I think that the problem with hydro electricity is that it requires a certain hilly topography for it to work.

    Regarding educational establishments embracing this kind of green shit and brainwashing their students with it. Small wind-turbines have been installed at some schools. These have shredded bird life while generating very little electricity. So little in fact that they would take 250 years to recover the cost of installing them. They have then succumbed to mechanical failure after a very short time and, when warranty claims have been made, it has been found that the company that made them has gone out of business. Many of our young people are not stupid and I think that they may well have an influence on their less sharp contempories. Reality is a bit of a problem for the greens.

  5. December 27, 2015 at 11:45 am

    Dare I put the head up above the parapet but on a boat, solar and wind vane are the standard battery tricklers. I’ve been looking at a waterwheel dynamo too. Clearly not for a nation though, as we’ve seen.

    • January 3, 2016 at 6:05 am

      Like all inventions, they make sense for the things they were invented FOR. It’s when people see them as a magic bullet that we have problems…

  6. Stonyground
    December 27, 2015 at 1:44 pm

    @James Higham
    I think that most of us can agree that there are applications were wind and solar power can work very well. I have a solar powered wristwatch. For the kind of on demand electricity supply that we, for now at least, take for granted, they are hopeless. The thing is, this must have become obvious as soon as a handful of solar or wind generators had been installed somewhere. It would not be difficult to monitor the output from the first ones and work out how huge the fluctuations would be if you built any more of them.

    • December 28, 2015 at 2:23 am

      It is not so much that they ‘work well’, but that there is no friggin’ alternative. The size of the boat matters. You don’t see ocean liners reying on windmills and solar panels for generating electricity. They have bloody big motors.

Comments are closed.