So what is to be done then throw our hands in the air & wait for disaster to strike or maybe lady luck to save the day?
Hi Chris. Forgive me, but I think that you are falling into the classic trap of feeling that "something must be done = anything must be done".
The fact that a problem may or may not exist does not justify ANY policy. It has to be established that the policy has at least a reasonable chance of solving the problem, which in the case of most government schemes aimed at renewable/alternative energy technologies is very far from being the case. One must also consider what is lost or given up once a decision is made - all policies have opportunity costs.
I think we all need to remember a few facts here, things like, that government you have no faith in, is there because we the people elect them, maybe if we all took a bit may notice/interest in what they are doing in our name they might get more right, they at least would not be able to pay themselves loads more of our money!!
Two observations. Firstly, no-one voted for a coalition government, and only about 30% of eligible voters voted Tory. The actual election is decided by a few tens of thousands of voters in each of a hundred or so marginal seats. Most of these electors could not define the differences in policy between the parties on obvious things like tax and spending plans, let alone their respective energy policies. As I think you were suggesting, this is a sad comment on the state of democracy in the UK, but at least we agree that there is no democratic mandate for current government policy in this area.
The power generation industry is not a free market & it is very unlikely to ever be. Nuclear generation is a good case in point with the amount of money that governments have to commit to, not only get them built but to under-right the costs of decommissioning etc. They would never be built by a for profit company & taking the amount of time that it takes to get them online how could one be built in response to a demand?
Why not? They are in France and in many other countries in the world. The reason they wont in Britain is because they dont trust the government not to change the rules. We have already had the unedifying spectacle of the opposition effectively torpedoeing potential policy by saying "if we get in at any point, we will change the rules". Since its almost a certainty that they will get in at some point in the 30-50 years of a power stations life, it is too risky to invest. This is not a weakness of private enterprise, its just childish schoolyard politics.
I am not arguing for an
unregulated free market. All free markets actually require some regulation to make them work. For example, the enforcement of weights and measures, trades descriptions and contract law are all genuine ways that a free market is aided by the government and would be poorer without it. I don't know if a single serious economist who has argued for unregulated markets since the mid 19th century - they are a complete strawman invented by those in favour of central planning.
As I said in an earlier post, the problem with the lack of investment in generating capacity is because our political parties have refused to put party politics to one side and come to a consensus on the regulatory environment in which they can make long term investments.
The Law you so dislike (lets say for example building to a certain insulation standard) is only in place because as a society we have got together & decided that we need to save energy otherwise it will effect our generating, supply or reserve capacity. If there are no rules we all know what happens the insulation does not get fitted cos it cost a little bit more.
I don't dislike the law at all. I dislike people who seek to use the law to enforce their prejudices and opinions on other people. The proper place for the law in this case is a) to enforce minimum safety standards and b) to ensure honest reporting and description.
For example, the food industry is an example of "good" regulation. If I ask for a kilo of cheese, I will get a kilo, because the weights and measures law will be enforced, and it will be cheese, because the trades descriptions law will be enforced. The whole horsemeat scandal was the exception that proved just how much we take this for granted.
The cheese will also be labelled to show me how much fat and salt there is in it. Some public money has been spent to educate me on the risks of fat and salt. After that, its left up to me, even to the point of killing myself with cholesterol, to choose how much cheese to eat.
If the people who run building control standards also regulated the food industry, we would not be allowed any fat or salt, (or beer) and it would be compulsory to eat our roughage and our five per day.
No doubt we would all be a little healthier. And also a little less free and a little less human.
Vive le fromage! To the barricades mes braves...
