It’s all about power

Monday, January 28th, 2008

As has long been predicted to happen, Britain is likely to face a shortfall in electricity generation within five to seven years. Inenco, an energy and environment consultancy firm, says the number of nuclear and coal plants coming out of service in this time-frame will make shortages likely. But other analysts say new plants can be built quickly and shortages avoided. The government, of course, recently announced it intends to approve applications to build new nuclear reactors, but it will take around ten years for these to come online. Here’s an idea—why not commission Swedish design firm IKEA to build them? A few flat-pack bits and pieces, slot ‘em together in a day and wham—you’ve got a ready to use nuclear power station! After all, the government has put convenience and quick-fix solutions on top of its list of priorities, and has pushed aside safety and waste storage concerns expressed by major environmental groups. So IKEA is a perfect fit.

Seriously, one wonders why it’s still the case that all alternative forms of power generation are required to be plugged into the National Grid: if someone is progressive enough, and currently has enough spare cash, to install their own wind turbine on their own land, and/or solar panels in their own homes, why must they maintain accounts with the power companies if—and only if—they can generate enough power for their own needs? Then, the majority of currently available options for DIY electricity generation are not only expensive but can only provide a small if significant proportion of a household’s total consumption, simply because most of us have only so many windows and only so much land. But why is it against the law to completely disconnect from the profiteering big-wigs? And why doesn’t the government subsidise available options for those of us who would like to try taking some of the pressure off the grid?

A wind turbine for home electricity generation currently costs in excess of two thousand pounds. Solar systems vary in price from a little less to a whole lot more, depending on the size of the property into which they are installed. If costs to home-owners were reduced to, say, £500, then more people could become less demanding on the national network. Then, for what the government is set to spend on setting up a new wave of nuclear power stations, it could instead embark upon a programme of installing standalone eco-friendly solutions in every home, while requiring through legislation all businesses to do the same. The currently available subsidies are inadequate to the challenge of moving forward to a low-carbon society. But solar panels in every occupied building, and wind turbines in gardens where they would actually work—some areas simply don’t have sufficient wind—could prevent the imminent threat of black-outs. It would also mean a revolution in power generation, and an end to the tyranny and overpricing of the power companies. All without the risks to life and planet long associated with nuclear.

The power companies would frankly not be happy, for this could theoretically mean their demise, which is why it hasn’t happened and isn’t likely to happen. We can only imagine the discussions that take place behind closed doors between government and industry figures, with civil servants nervously reassuring the fat cats that, no matter what happens, households will still get bills and be required to pay them if they want to keep the lights on. For the foreseeable future we can only use alternative forms of power generation exclusively as and when the big companies fail to supply us during black-outs; at other times, our self-generated supplies can only legally be used as supplements. Goddess forbid we cut off the revenue streams of the monoliths.

If only the government had the will to free the people from a long-standing and environmentally-unfriendly dependency. It doesn’t.