Bishop Hill Tunnelling for money
Aug 26, 2012 Christopher Booker has uncovered some important new information about Tim Yeo's financial interests. Until recently Yeo's interests in Eurotunnel looked rather odd next to his array of interests in green businesses. Now the connecting link has been revealed:
Attention has lately been drawn to the declared business interests of both Lord Deben and Mr Yeo – who last year earned more than £200,000, on top of his MP’s salary of £80,000, working for companies mostly involved in “green” energy schemes. The apparent exception was his role as “environmental adviser” to Eurotunnel, by whom he was paid up to £1,000 an hour. But Eurotunnel, it turns out, is planning to run a £220 million “interconnector” power cable through its service tunnel, to provide back-up from French nuclear power stations for the times when our wind turbines don’t supply enough power to the national grid.
Reader Comments (73)
@Eli Rabett. Just how much will these marvellous interconnectors to the Sahara and Asia cost, bearing in mind an interconnector just 25 miles, or so long, laid through a pre-existing tunnel is going to cost £220 million (about $340 million)?
You claim to be good at maths so work it out and get back to us with the answer.
While your at it please explain why it is a "good idea" to become even more reliant on energy from politically unstable and potentially hostile countries, or is all going to love and peace in your decarbonised Utopia?
Bitbucket
Do you really think that they have investments on the same scale as people like Gummer and Yeo? In any case, none of them is employed by the government to steer important decisions on energy policy neutrally and impartially, a job for which G and Y manifestly seem to have disqualified themselves.
Don
"marvellous interconnectors"
While Eli's at it, he might like to calculate the associated electrical losses, which can only be compensated by increasing the cross-sectional area or supercooling. Not to mention the security problems of siting a large solar farm in the Sahara, for instance. A pretty easy target, I should have thought, both for unstable regimes and sandstorms!
" politically unstable and potentially hostile countries"
Don, do you mean France? If so that is only partly correct.
@Rhoda, I concur with your point about France.
However I was thinking more about those North African countries, which encompass the Sahara.
@Rhoda
Belly laughs hehe
Don Keiller, how much of the £220 million is for the end stations? Only once you know that does the cost per mile become apparent; without knowing it, the distance is irrelevant.
James P, does the scale matter? These people propose themselves as disinterested parties to the arguments. If they do indeed have an interest, then readers should know.
jamesp, HVDC losses are about 3% per 1000km; Morocco is about 2000km. Current AC grid losses are around 7%, so HVDC from Africa sounds manageable, no?
@Bitbucket. "how much of the £220 million is for the end stations? Only once you know that does the cost per mile become apparent; without knowing it, the distance is irrelevant."
You tell me.
[Snip - manners]
Bitbucket
One difference is that Booker, Delingpole of Montford are not making substantial sums from subsidies that they promoted, let alone controlling other similar policies, while ostensibly neutral.
Doesn't it bother you that we are paying for the likes of Lord Drittsekk and Yeo, both through taxation and schemes that appear in our fuel bills?
Bitbucket:
So far as I am aware, you have not published your own financial interests. So, by your own logic @ 8.51 27 August, this makes you an unbelievable correspondent in your view and we may disregard your comments.
"HVDC losses are about 3% per 1000km"
Up to a point, Lord Copper (no pun intended). There are conversion losses at each end, say 5% of the total, and transmission losses go up with the square of the current times the resistance, so you need an awful lot of copper. I have read 800 tonnes per km for the proposed Icelandic interconnect, which at £5000/tonne makes the metal content alone of a 2000km cable worth £8bn.
Anyone friends with a Tunisian scrap merchant..?
Mike Post, I am indeed entirely unreliable, as are almost all of those who post here. I make no claim to be otherwise. But I am flattered that you think my occasional musings here on BH somehow give me equivalence to the influence assumed by Messieurs Booker, Delingpole, Montford et al.
James P, yes of course it bothers me, despite not living in the UK. These people clearly have conflicts of interest and I am surprised that they feel able to remain in post. But at least we know of their interests.
Don Keiller, I have no more information than you, but then I am not exercised by the cost/length etc of the proposed link. You clearly are, so I had thought you might have thought about the issue beyond the headline numbers. Big projects do cost big sums but hopefully deliver big returns - hey look at what £9.5 billion buys; a few stadiums and a few weeks of the "feel good factor".
Bitbucket:
Sorry to hear about your unreliabilty. A bit rich to suggest that almost all of those who post here are as unreliable as yourself, don't you think?
Unfortunately, the provision of reliable electricity to the National Grid is a hard engineering problem that has been hi-jacked by green dreamers aided and abetted by astute rent-seekers. It is quite right that politicians with significant financial interests in "green" investments should be debarred from presiding over parliamentary committees which have the power to enrich "green" investors at our expense and at the risk of our grid consequentially failing.
Ther is no reason at all that I can see or that you have explained why people who criticise these conflicted politicians should need to reveal their own financial interests at all.
Mike
We all know that BB only exists to prove to us that he lives in a world without energy shortages...in fact he does not exist
Mike, clearly they don't need to reveal their financial interests. They have large followings of uncritical readers who will believe whatever they say and who are untroubled by why they say what they say.
But consider correspondent X who has interests in energy company Y that is viewed with disfavor by energy committee politician Z. Is it in X's interest to dig up whatever dirt there is on Z? Sure! Is it in the public interest as well? Again, yes. Is it in Y's interest that the dirt is dug up without its own involvement? Quite likely! Would we view the issue differently if we knew of the complete triangle of interest between X, Y and Z. I think so, yes.
See Tim Yeo's article in the online DT, on why he thinks we now need a third runway at Heathrow.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/9501875/A-third-runway-must-be-cleared-for-take-off.html
@Bitbucket "Don Keiller, I have no more information than you, but then I am not exercised by the cost/length etc of the proposed link."
And that is exactly what is wrong with much of Green thinking.
Unreasoned, uncosted Utopic dreams.
"Delingpole of Montford"
Sounds quite distinguished, doesn't it? I meant to say Delingpole or Montford, of course...
BB
it depends on whether any facts were laid on the table and, as you always say, you have no facts.
Yeah, where facts are concerned, I'm all hat and no cattle. If it is opinions you want, I've got lots of those... ;-)
The conflicts of interest are really important when small changes in policy could mean the difference of hundreds of millions of pounds. For instance proposed changes to the Renewables Obligation rates for offshore wind farms could benefit the proposed Atlantic Array by well over £100m (and maybe over £650m) in a 10 year period.
Please check my workings at
http://manicbeancounter.com/2012/08/28/rwe-atlantic-array-to-gain-gbp169m-in-windfall-profits/
Existence of conflicts of interest does not mean that any financial benefit will actually occur from exploiting these conflicts, any more than people authorising their own expenses will lead to excessive claims. However, auditors insist such conflicts be removed before conflicts can be exploited.
House of Commons
Energy and Climate Change
Committee
Low-Carbon Growth
Links with China
Third Report of Session 2012–13
Formal Minutes Page 64
Tuesday 17 July 2012
Members present:
Mr Tim Yeo, in the Chair
Dan Byles
Barry Gardiner
Ian Lavery
Dr Phillip Lee
Albert Owen
Christopher Pincher
John Robertson
Laura Sandys
Sir Robert Smith
Dr Alan Whitehead
Interests declared, business as usual, nobody needs to question the fact that DECC are spending £200,000 a year until 2014 engaging business for a company that Tim Yeo receives an income of around £45,000 a year.
And why I wonder is Yeo really so keen on another Heathow terminal ...?