Kids Company And All That

If the news reports are to be believed I find the issues surrounding Kids Company somewhat disturbing - especially the apparent lack of decent scrutiny.

A few years ago I was employed by an organisation that operated largely on grant funding from government and for a time I was responsible for day-to-day liaison with the funding department. Every year I was charged with compiling a comprehensive plan of proposed future work programmes, including budgets, planned outcomes, milestones and key performance indicators. This plan was strongly critiqued by my opposite number in the department and also presented to the great and the good from all interested departments - an event which included a no-holds-barred question and answer session.

Then, during the year I had to regularly report on progress, in particular addressing any departure from the planned budget or milestones, accounting for any adverse outcomes and highlighting particular successes.

It would appear, if one believes the news reports, that Kids Company managed to avoid much of this scrutiny. If this really is the case then both sides of the deal have behaved very shabbily. This is public money we're talking about (i.e. your and my taxes) and to play fast an loose with it - either by cutting corners to acquire it or by being too lax in how it was granted - is just not on.

Do We Need Nuclear?

Having come up through the ranks of the good old CEGB, I have not been as averse to nuclear power as many. However, a couple of things are really bothering me. One is the ridiculous guaranteed price being offered for Chinese/French built stations at Hinkley and (I expect) Sizewell and Bradwell, All this is being posited at a time when the renewables industry is having the rug pulled from under its feet.

The other is fuel storage and disposal, and site clean up. I have been reading about the mess at Sellafield and wonder whether for current and future reactors things are going to be much better. Sellafield was a rush job to provide weapons-grade material with the gloss of civil power plonked on top. This, not surprisingly, has resulted in a less than ideal situation. Consider, for instance:

> Pile no 1 where the infamous fire occurred in 1957. That's just sealed and is being left alone. Does anyone know what's going on inside?

> Pile fuel storage pond. A deteriorating concrete structure full of radioactive sludge. Sludge removal is underway - hopefully safely.

> Pile fuel cladding silo. Jammed with aluminium cladding from weapons reactors. Sealed since the mid-1960s but many worry about the potential for H2 build-up because of corrosion.

> Magnox spent fuel storage pond. Considered the most dangerous industrial building in Europe. It's open-air - and cracks have resulted in seepage into the surrounding soil. No-one knows exactly what's in there.

> Magnox swarf storage silo. The second most dangerous industrial building in Europe. Again seepage has occurred. And again there is an H2 build-up risk from corrosion.

OK - so for modern reactors we're not talking about aluminium or magnesium-based cladding. And disposal planning has to be better. But how much will you bet on it being adequate?

(I mentioned the CEGB at the start of this piece. Last year Dieter Helm published a nice little article suggesting that there is a phoenix rising from the ashes. It's worth a quick read).

And More....................

On Monday Edie pointed to a Grauniad article further outlining the stresses currently placed upon the solar industry. The newspaper states that 4 companies have already announced in the last fortnight that they will be going out of business and another 25 have talked of redundancies or worse.

Now some of these businesses were probably rocky anyway - to close so quickly even before the legislation is in place suggests that they were already skating on thin ice - but that doesn't exonerate Government from the mess they've created. The solar industry should very soon be able to stand on its own two feet, as Amber Rudd stated at the Tory conference, but when you're teaching kids to walk don't you lightly hold their hands until they are confident? Plonking the child upright and walking away is going to cause a lot of bloody noses as they subsequently hit the floor.

A stable and predictable legislative environment is all the industry wants. A glide path to a zero subsidy world would work; stalling the aircraft in mid-flight results in disaster.

Another Rudd Victim

Another solar company has called it a day - this time Southern Solar. The founder of the company, Howard Johns, has written a very measured piece on his company's demise in the Grauniad. And, guess what? The problem is once again Government's stop-start, knee-jerk, inept support management. Perhaps if our MPs, and ministers in particular, had lived in the real world for a few years before picking up the reins of power we would have some sensible policy making. As it is now, we are watching the solar industry being kicked in the teeth while we prepare to pay way over the odds for Hinkley, Sizewell and Bradwell. It's nuts.

New Waste Facility In Clyde; But Surrey Going Backwards

Two contrasting items here:

A proposed new recycling facility in the Clyde Valley will have the potential to help 5 local councils recycle up to 90% of their waste. And much of what cannot be recycled will be converted to RDF. Looks as tho' someone is managing some straight thinking.

Meanwhile, Surrey CC has been consulting on what to do with its community recycling centres, offering just two propositions:- pay for deposition of "non-household DIY waste" and/or reduce the opening hours of the facilities. No upside proposal then!! Both options sound like recipes for increased fly-tipping to me. There's an e-petition seeking to have the council retain current practice. It may be found here. If you have any connection with Surrey, please read and sign.

Amber Rudd, Renewables Costs, & the Mark Group

Energy Secretary Amber Rudd claims that renewable energy "can stand on its own two feet" and that therefore the removal of subsidies is justified. Well, maybe Amber but chop and change management of those subsidies does nothing for the industry's confidence and certainly nothing for investment planning. Look at what happened to the Mark Group. They were so badly burned by the sudden virtual disappearance of insulation schemes that they had to go to the market and find a fairy godmother. Now that fairy godmother has called in the receivers because Mark's hoped-for new business, solar power, is no longer viable. Now I suspect that there is, or has been, underlying poor management at Mark but perhaps Amber might like to go around the 1000 or so Mark employees who have been made redundant and explain to them the cost competitiveness of green energy.

What La Rudd appears not to appreciate is that there is an urgent need to switch away from CO2 producing energy sources. Possibly the best way of engineering that would be the imposition of realistic carbon taxes. However, in the absence of anything meaningful in that direction, renewable energy subsidies had a similar effect.

One could accuse Rudd of loosing the plot but I suspect she never had it in the first place!

Plastic Confusion?

So, the plastic bag charge starts in England today. But why not make it universal as has been done in the rest of the UK? Somehow the civil servants in Defra (I presume this is where it was drafted) manage to over-complicate everything. The message should be a very simple one - bring your own bag - no matter where you shop. Perhaps with time common sense will prevail. This is, after all, about changing behaviour and the more straight-forward the message the better. Sending confusing signals is just not helpful. However, it's a start.

The New VW?

I guess we can look forward to a spate of reports like this. Yesterday Edie reported that some Samsung televisions appear to be less efficient in "real life" mode than in tests. Are they set up to "game" the tests? Samsung have provided a fairly robust response arguing that their "motion lighting" feature (which dims the screen in response to various forms of real-world content) is an "out of the box" setting, not something that specifically detects test conditions, and that the lower test readings are just an artifact of the test conditions. The implication is that the test conditions are a poor substitute for real-life. Various industry sources, however, are suggesting that some TVs really do have "defeat" devices installed that recognise the standard test film. The report notes that TVs typically account for 10% of household electricity consumption. This one could run and run (but not necessarily on diesel).

Carney Warns of Risks from Climate Change

Mark Carney, the Bank of England governor, has issue a strong warning that climate change could lead to financial crises and falling living standards. This was in a speech to Lloyd's of London warning insurers that they are heavily exposed to climate change effects. Carney terms it "the tragedy of the horizon" suggesting that for monetary policy that horizon is only two or three years out, and even for financial stability it is perhaps just a decade or so. In other words, by the time climate change becomes a defining issue for financial stability it may already be too late.

In order that exposure to climate change threats be more clearly defined Carney advocates the development of consistent, comparable, reliable and clear disclosure around the carbon intensity of different assets. It is good to see such warnings coming from so eminent a source but will it have the required effect? Owners of carbon intensive assets have hardly embraced the climate change story so far - I have my doubts that this intervention will change that situation.