A bit windy...

Romney Marsh wind farm is largest in SE. Kent is becoming centre for wind farm education, technology and jobs

It is particularly interesting to note the move by a hundred (mostly Conservative) MPs today writing to David Cameron to oppose subsidy of onshore wind facilities.

Medway Conservatives are pro-onshore wind and have given Planning Permission on the Grain Peninsula despite local objections by residents. Many other Conservative controlled Councils are also open to onshore options and Kent County Council has even supported mini-turbine initiatives and Kent is quickly becoming the centre for the UK for wind farm technology with many aligned engineering firms beginning to express major interest in offshore and onshore production. Many local colleges are also investing in engineering schemes for future success for Kent.

You would think therefore Kent MPs would perhaps not sign up to something which could, and will likely, hurt local jobs.

The Tory letter today states that

"In these financially straitened times, we think it is unwise to make consumers pay, through taxpayer subsidy, for inefficient and intermittent energy production that typifies onshore wind turbines"

The contradiction is that the subsidy is even larger for offshore wind then it is for onshore. Under the logic of Conservative MPs lobbying they would either be calling for a reduction in subsidy to all wind energy (which I believe is the end game and so will Wind Energy Companies) or they will be choosing to subsidise even more heavily a more expensive off-shore only exercise, which will leave the bill or rate payer forking out more to the energy companies in terms of bills.

This nullifies the argument on cost which makes the letter a contradiction in terms.

It currently costs UK wind farms from £2,000 to £4,000 to produce one kilowatt of offshore wind, whilst in comparison it ranges from £1,250 to £1,573 to produce one kilowatt of onshore wind power.

Tory MPs cant have it both ways; a ruling out on onshore wind would mean more subsidy and expense on the tax-payer for the same energy output.

I also have my concerns about the Conservative NPPR planning process; I think the Tories are about to sell out to the housing developer. If they can flog off our forests then nothing is sacred...

But opposing and ruling out onshore wind turbines, as this change would do, is non-sensical and damaging and comes from Tory ideology over climate change and not the interest of the public.

Given the threat posed by climate change there is a need to move away from high-carbon producing energy production. The UK agreed binding targets in 2008 which gave our committment to deliver 15% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020. Soberingly, while these targets already provide an immense challenge, the UK will have to go far beyond them in the following decades, to achieve 30% by 2030

In response to these targets, Danish-owned company Vestas is building a new plant in Kent to build turbines for the offshore wind industry. These 2000 jobs though supporting the production of offshore capacity may also be used to support ongoing and future onshore growth. The company has a number of existing UK onshore wind facilities for its Vestas V90 onshore turbines and a number in production. The company I believe expects further demand in onshore and offshore production hence its investment.

Worryingly one local MP did not seem to be aware that Vestas operated a site in North Kent

Many companies across North Kent have supply-chain contracts with Vestas and other aligned companies; the damage in threatening this company and its business model could be very damaging to business in Aylesford and elsewhere who supply component parts or support.

In addition, there are significant moves by Conservative controlled Swale Council to review potential onshore wind options in the locality; it may even have persuaded the company to locate to Sheerness on the basis that onshore wind may very well be a future job creator

Note that Gordon Henderson MP did not sign the letter. Perhaps he is aware of something that we are not.

There is a clear drive by the national and local government to promote both offshore and onshore wind development as a response to this challenge. This is the correct position to take in terms of cost to the taxpayer. A mixed economy which reduces the cost to taxpayer for solely off-shore production and makes us open to business.

Vestas is a very cautious company and has a history of closing factories when the market shifts and they are very much concerned about the political dimension to this argument:

Ditlev Engel, chief executive of Vestas, said the UK was

"probably one of the most difficult places in the world to get permission"

Vestas have been lobbying the government for stability in the wind market

"Before our customers can provide us with the needed order pipeline, they need stability in the market and a long-term political and regulatory certainty that ensures their business case,"

The intervention today by Conservative MPs in Kent does not create stability, or long term political and regulatory certainty in the market. If the argument against onshore subsidy is allowed to play through its a no-brainer that Tories will target offshore subsidy as well shortly afterwards.

Vestas is investing in the UK because it believes we will be a market for all its product base; to rule out part of its core business market in the UK is not sensible and will impact potential business decisions about future investment. Already; the Swale proposal may be put on a back-burner and with a company like Vestas we can not afford to make another mistake.

Local MPs should be aware of the importance of wind power and the potential job impacts of a loss of government interest on both onshore and offshore wind.