tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34826293005783760692024-03-18T03:01:39.228+00:00The UK TodayIf you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever. Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.comBlogger93125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-24690052148406806152013-02-26T23:21:00.002+00:002013-02-26T23:54:30.695+00:00Windpower<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Switch off the mind and let the heart decide<br />
who you were meant to be<br />
<br />
- Thomas Dolby, Windpower</blockquote>
<br />
Let's get one thing clear to start with; I like wind turbines. I think they're pretty cool in a sort of 80's near future sf movie kind of way. That slow, steady apparently inexorable turning is in some ways fascinating. At the same time I can appreciate that a lot of people would prefer that they were built out of sight - off shore for example - rather than smack in the middle of unspoilt countryside.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dcwmdDEdqAc/US1BKGGt2II/AAAAAAAAAI0/fq7ysLt6xQI/s1600/Gunfleet_Sands_Offshore_Wind_Farm.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="212" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dcwmdDEdqAc/US1BKGGt2II/AAAAAAAAAI0/fq7ysLt6xQI/s320/Gunfleet_Sands_Offshore_Wind_Farm.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Cool to look at, but does it make sense...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
I should also make public my bias in favour of nuclear energy. It's low carbon, fuel is plentiful (anywhere between 3,000 and 100,000 years of fissionables available) and the Generation 3 and 3+ designs are a significant advance on efficiency and safety when compared to the Generation 2 designs (e.g. Fukushima's Boiling Water Reactors or Chernobyl's RBMK). As for Generation 4 designs, such <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor">Molten Salt Reactors</a>, well although they're probably 20 years or so away, they potentially offer a realisation of Lewis Strauss's vision where <i>"Our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter."</i><br />
<br />
However you can pretty much guarantee that in any group of environmentalists the majority will, at the mere mention of nuclear power, start banging on about Fukushima this, Chernobyl that, Three Mile Island the other. "Build more wind turbines" they say, "wind is good, clean and can meet our energy needs". Last summer Mark Jacobson and Cristina Archer published a paper which backed this up.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Wind turbines convert kinetic to electrical energy, which returns to the atmosphere as heat to regenerate some potential and kinetic energy. As the number of wind turbines increases over large geographic regions, power extraction first increases linearly, but then converges to a saturation potential not identified previously from physical principles or turbine properties. These saturation potentials are >250 terawatts (TW) at 100 m globally, approximately 80 TW at 100 m over land plus coastal ocean outside Antarctica, and approximately 380 TW at 10 km in the jet streams. <b>Thus, there is no fundamental barrier to obtaining half (approximately 5.75 TW) or several times the world’s all-purpose power from wind in a 2030 clean-energy economy</b><br />
<br />
Mark Z. Jacobson and Cristina L. Archer<br />
Abstract <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/08/31/1208993109.abstract">here </a>(paper requires subscription)</blockquote>
<br />
So that's okay then. Wind power can meet global requirements several time over. And with the right infrastructure periods of low wind in one country can be covered by power generated in other countries or regions. In fact the good professors reckon that 4 million wind towers spread across the globe could be generating 7.5 terawatts by 2030. Which seems pretty good. Except that the World's population is growing and while some nations will be making efforts to reduce their energy consumption it is safe to assume that other developing nations will be disinclined to follow suit. So 7.5 terawatts may well be considerably less that 50% of global requirements by 2030.<br />
<br />
And 4 million wind towers? Now 7.5 terawatts across 4,000,000 wind towers is roughly 1.9 megawatts per tower. But current designs have an energy yield of around 30% (best designs currently in production) so we'd require each tower to have about 6 megawatt capacity. That's a big tower, a big expensive tower. Northern Power Systems have an <a href="http://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1093487/Close---Northern-Power-plans-8MW-offshore-turbine">8MW design</a>, good for winds up to 36km/h. Now a 100m tower (and the NPS design has a rotor diameter of 175m, so the towers will be significantly taller than 100m) would cost around $500k. And that's on land. Without any additional infrastructure costs. Or taking in to account inflation.<br />
<br />
So to generate less than 50% of global energy demand from wind by 2030 would require a spend of in excess of $2,000,000,000,000 just for towers. I dread to think how much the cost of connecting to the various national power distribution networks would cost. Or the maintenance costs. At least as much again I suspect. So a spend of around $4 trillion. That's not a solution, let alone a viable one.<br />
<br />
It turns out we may not have to worry about funding such an exercise. A recent paper by Amanda Adams and David Keith reckons that sustainable wind power generation per square metre has been significantly overstated. Rather than the 2-4 Wm <sup>−2</sup> usually quoted, a more realistic limit is 1Wm<sup>−2</sup><br />
<sup><br /></sup>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Estimates of the global wind power resource over land range from 56 to 400 TW. Most estimates have implicitly assumed that extraction of wind energy does not alter large-scale winds enough to significantly limit wind power production. Estimates that ignore the effect of wind turbine drag on local winds have assumed that wind power production of 2–4 W m<sup>−2</sup> can be sustained over large areas. New results from a mesoscale model suggest that wind power production is limited to about 1 W m<sup>−2</sup> at wind farm scales larger than about 100 km<sup>2</sup>. We find that the mesoscale model results are quantitatively consistent with results from global models that simulated the climate response to much larger wind power capacities. Wind resource estimates that ignore the effect of wind turbines in slowing large-scale winds may therefore substantially overestimate the wind power resource.</span><br />
<br />
Amanda S Adams and David W Keith 2013<br />
Abstract and link to paper <a href="http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/1/015021/">here</a></blockquote>
<br />
So before tackling the challenges of building, linking and maintaining 4 million wind towers across the planet, we need to face the fact that we may not be able produce any more than 25% of global requirements at best.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-fIIIf7e_d3Q/US1CQQoGLXI/AAAAAAAAAJA/FjKgRGMKnX0/s1600/Nuclear_Power_Station.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="214" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-fIIIf7e_d3Q/US1CQQoGLXI/AAAAAAAAAJA/FjKgRGMKnX0/s320/Nuclear_Power_Station.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Don't hold your breath waiting for this to be built</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Assuming we all want to survive in style rather than accept reduced circumstances and take to living in yurts then wind isn't going to comprise anything more than a very small portion of any future power generation system. Which makes me question whether we ought to be subsidising wind generation at all.<br />
<br />
More viable alternatives would appear to include hydroelectric (all forms including tidal), geothermal and solar (proper solar generation, not the domestic installations which appear to be more of an long term investment scheme for those with spare cash than a genuine attempt at small scale renewables). But in the UK neither large scale solar (not necessarily appropriate) nor tidal (very much appropriate) is getting much of a look in.<br />
<br />
And the program to build a new generation of nuclear power stations in this country is becoming farcical as more companies pull out. Last year it was <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/9173233/E.ON-and-RWE-scrap-UK-nuclear-power-plans.html">E.ON and RWE npower</a>, and more recently <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/04/centrica-withdraw-new-nuclear-projects">Centrica</a> have also abandoned plans to build new nuclear power stations.<br />
<br />
With <a href="http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Markets/WhlMkts/monitoring-energy-security/elec-capacity-assessment/Documents1/Electricity%20Capacity%20Assessment%202012.pdf">Ofgem predicting blackouts within 3 years</a> (<span style="font-size: x-small;">link is PDF</span>) it is probably time to break out the candles and wood burning stoves ready for those cold dark days and nights when the electricity is turned off. And having lived through the "three day week" in 1974 I can assure you that it isn't a romantic or charming prospect.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cTZg8CZ8KFw/US1CnApVlrI/AAAAAAAAAJI/8IKz7cPZtkk/s1600/Yurt.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cTZg8CZ8KFw/US1CnApVlrI/AAAAAAAAAJI/8IKz7cPZtkk/s320/Yurt.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The way we'll have to live???</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-80191414959807218392013-02-24T22:08:00.000+00:002013-02-24T22:08:00.278+00:00Addicted to ideologyThe number of people who are unaware that the UK has lost its<i> prestigious</i> triple-A rating with Moodys must be pretty damn near zero.<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But does it really matter?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
On a day-to-day basis investors will have been factoring in the negative outlook from the ratings agencies for a while now, so it is possible that this downgrade will have no immediate noticeable effect. And given the less than stunning performance of the ratings agencies in the past (credit default swaps rated AAA; Enron; etc) then I suspect their influence has been significantly reduced too.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
However from a political perspective the loss of the AAA rating will further diminish the credibility of George Osborne (assuming he has any). After all the primary justification <i><b>given </b></i>by the coalition for the austerity waltz was the need to preserve this rating. Which is a pretty damned stupid mast to nail your colours to, when as Chancellor you have no control over Moodys, S&P and other agencies.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But I deliberately emphasised <i>given </i>above because I doubt that the motivation for austerity talk was ever anything to do with our credit rating. Rather the objective was always to roll back the state, privatise public services and above all put the fear of God into everyday working people. A clue is in the employment figures; unemployment isn't rising, but that's down to the number of people working part time or going self employed. I suspect the real level of employment is much lower that the statistic indicate.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So will the political impact of the rating downgrade have any impact policy?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Probably not. Austerity was talked up for ideological reasons, and the ratings loss will be used to further the current agenda. Einstein once stated that <i>The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results</i>. Now if Osborne truly believed that austerity was the panacea he claims it to be, then he would indeed be a candidate for a shirt that fastens at the back for refusing to change direction. However, given that the beneficiaries of the current policies are his fellow travellers, it is safe to assume that this continued destruction of society's security is the desired result. Why else was the schools building programme cancelled; the banking system protected; taxes for the rich cut? </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
No, Osborne is not insane, just ideologically motivated and disinclined to support a healthy society.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-84953048749328330362013-01-28T22:32:00.003+00:002013-01-28T22:32:56.771+00:00In my backyardSo the preferred routes for the extensions to <a href="https://www.gov.uk/hs2-phase-two-initial-preferred-route-plan-and-profile-maps">HS2 north from Birmingham</a> have been published.
Looking in detail at the route from Sheffield to Leeds it would appear that the line is going to cross the valley behind my house on a 150m long viaduct before diving down a 1-in-50 gradient into a tunnel.
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-y3MfDsMG6ug/UQb8NLiyliI/AAAAAAAAAFY/h6JoxpN9LwY/s1600/HighSpeedtrainimage.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="154" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-y3MfDsMG6ug/UQb8NLiyliI/AAAAAAAAAFY/h6JoxpN9LwY/s400/HighSpeedtrainimage.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
Now there's going to be a massive amount of NIMBYism over these routes, but my own personal attitude is <i>bring it on</i>. I'm looking forward to seeing high speed trains hurl themselves across the valley before diving underground. The only problem is that I'll probably be a geriatric old crumbly by the time the line is built.<br />
<br />
One thing is for sure, there're countless people lining up to slag off the whole project; <i>it'll take too long; it'll go over budget; it'll only benefit a wealthy few</i>, yadda, yadda, yadda... And certainly there's an argument that the billions could be spent on new schools, hospitals, roads, etc.
But sometimes you need to take the long view. The current rail network is struggling with express services between cities fighting for paths with local trains and freight. Moving high speed services on to dedicated lines could free up capacity for more freight to be transported by rail, or for more frequent local services.<br />
<br />
And all this talk of the line never being used tends to overlook the fact that big transport infrastructure projects quite often end up fulfilling an equally valid yet different role. An example is the Great Western Railway. Built to maintain Bristol's status as Britain's second port and maintain its share of trade with America, its main source of revenue was passenger traffic with freight peaking in the 1920's.<br />
<br />
A closing thought; Brunel's line is still in use today more than 170 years later. If HS2 is built well, the country could be reaping the benefits well into the next century.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-51249858662605107622013-01-26T19:58:00.002+00:002013-01-26T20:21:45.352+00:00A dream and a fear<b><i>Perhaps life is just that... a dream and a fear. - Joseph Conrad</i></b>
<br />
<br />
<br />
For Boeing the 787 Dreamliner would appear to be Conrad's quote made real. But perhaps, just perhaps, Boeing are architects of their own downfall, their hubris and arrogance finally coming back to bite them.
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PPFE1F8Nrvw/UQQzFwyQcsI/AAAAAAAAAFE/Qwh-5XmLGEo/s1600/787_Battery_Bay_Fire.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Dreamliner 787 Electronics Bay Fire" border="0" height="210" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PPFE1F8Nrvw/UQQzFwyQcsI/AAAAAAAAAFE/Qwh-5XmLGEo/s400/787_Battery_Bay_Fire.jpg" title="Dreamliner 787 Electronics Bay Fire" width="400" /></a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Now certainly the 787 would appear to be a masterpiece of technological advancement, but with the whole fleet grounded and investigators still unclear as to why the batteries keep catching fire, perhaps there are more fundamental reasons that mere tech?
For example, if we look back to 2009 it would appear that the FAA have given Boeing significant authority to self-certify their own aircraft as airworthy.
<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on Tuesday extended the authority of Boeing Commercial Airplanes to self-certify its aircraft and aircraft technologies. Under the agency's new safety oversight model, Boeing manufacturing and engineering employees will perform delegated tasks for the FAA, including signing certificates approving new designs.
- <a href="http://seattletimes.com/html/boeingaerospace/2009700988_webboeingfaa20.html">FAA extends Boeing's authority to self-certify aircraft</a></blockquote>
<br />
Now no one would imagine that Boeing would deliberately cut corners, but with MBAs running technical departments, there is more than just a weather eye on the bottom line, and financial pressures can lead to oversight.
So why would the FAA grant such powers to Boeing? I doubt it is down to any form of back-handers passing between the two bodies. More likely we're just looking at the FAA once again siding with the industry over the public (look at the origins and background to the NTSB for more evidence).
Back to the batteries; li-ion rechargeable batteries have form in the area of spontaneous combustion. There was the case of the <a href="http://metro.co.uk/2011/11/15/apple-recalls-ipod-nanos-over-fire-risk-from-battery-221315/">flaming iPods</a> or <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4793143.stm">Dell's burning batteries</a>. Heck, even Boeing has had problems with the damn things during testing.
<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
In 2006, a devastating lab fire in Arizona showed just how volatile Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner lithium-ion battery can be if its energy is not adequately contained.
A single battery connected to prototype equipment exploded, and despite a massive fire-department response the whole building burned down.
- <a href="http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2020199686_787batterysafetyxml.html">787 battery blew up in ’06 lab test, burned down building</a>
</blockquote>
<br />
<br />
Now a fundamental problem with Li-ion batteries is that they can liberate oxygen from their own combustion products, so simple foam or inert gas extinguishing systems aren't going to cut it. Instead you're looking at heavy smothering agents (sand would work well, but not at 20,000 feet!!). There are safer battery alternatives such as NiMH or LiFePO4, but they weigh more and the Dreamliner's big selling point is fuel efficiency which means cutting as much weight from the design as possible.
In the meantime the NTSB, Boeing, GS Yuasa and other involved parties will keep looking, and the Dreamliners will gather dust in hangers.
<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
Chairman Hersman also expressed concerns about the adequacy of the systems to prevent such a fire from occurring. "The investigation will include an evaluation of how a fault that resulted in a battery fire could have defeated the safeguards in place to guard against that," said Hersman. "As we learn more in this investigation, we will make recommendations for needed improvements to prevent a recurrence."
- <a href="http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2013/130124.html">NTSB Chairman says 'We have not ruled anything out' in investigation of Boeing 787 battery fire in Boston.</a></blockquote>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com54tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-31915587502279981482012-12-31T17:45:00.001+00:002012-12-31T17:45:36.239+00:00Back from the dead - in a manner of speakingI started this blog the best part of 9 years ago, in the days of the war on terror (and other abstract nouns), Blairism (an extension of Thatcherism but with more PFI and public spending and the presidency of George W "Mission Accomplished" Bush. It was all pretty smug, shouty stuff, tinged with a naive belief that perhaps blogging could make a difference.<br />
<br />
By 2007 I'd pretty much had it, idiots and self publicists had jumped on the bandwagon and any quality content seemed to be drowned in the noise. So the blog effectively died, apart from occasional zombie-like lurches when the odd post would sneak out.<br />
<br />
But hey, it'll soon be 2013, we're nearly 3 years in to a coalition of incompetents and gullible sacrificial lambs. And I still have the urge to rant. So back comes The UK Today, all Lazarus-like. The old stuff is here (or will be as it gets uploaded) under the Antediluvian label. Some of it was good (imho), some not so good and some downright embarrassing. Nevertheless it's all there.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-41403249439166391142004-03-02T08:45:00.000+00:002013-02-26T23:42:48.300+00:00I feel better alreadyWell, that's alright then. <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3524025.stm">Nick Raynsford is threatening to cap council tax increases</a> to ensure that rises don't exceed 6%. While that is half the percentage increase of last year, it is still nearly 3 times the rate of inflation.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com21tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-40356095835100640492004-03-01T15:47:00.000+00:002013-02-26T23:40:06.975+00:00About time tooLooks like the Conservatives have come to their collective senses, and
decided to <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3523199.stm">pull out of the Butler
whitewash</a>. Taken them a while, but they finally seemed to have cottoned on to what the rest of us
realised weeks ago; that the Butler Inquiry will achieve nothing with regards to revealing the truth.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile the Government is doggedly hanging in there, <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3521673.stm"> still refusing to reveal the Attorney General's
legal advice</a>. In many ways Tony Blair now reminds me of HAL9000 from Kubrick's 2001: A Space
Odyssey. Faced with trying to maintain a high-level deception, the poor thing became psychotic, much
like HAL9000. However I do think it unlikely that Tony will resort to murder to maintain the lie, at least
not directly.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=496545">This</a> may give an insight into how the legal position was identified. After Foreign Office experts decided that war would be illegal, the US suggested that Tony find <em>himself some
new lawyers</em>. So Lord Goldsmith wanders over to Professor Christopher Greenwood of the LSE,
the most hawkish lawyer he could find, and based his advice to the Government on Greenwood's
opinion.<br />
<br />
John Major, himself no fun-loving fan of human rights, waded in on Breakfast with Frost
yesterday, pointing out the obvious that <em>country will remain divided as long as Lord Goldsmith's
double side of A4 remains for the eyes of the Cabinet only</em>. And although Tony Blair keeps falling
back on the defence that the Attorney General's advice is covered by constitutional convention, there are
exceptions to the rules defined in the parliamentary rule book, with disclosure occurring as recently as
1971. Besides which, Blair can't have it both ways. On previous occasions (most recently with the
leaking of Dr Kelly's name to the press) he has shown himself to be no stickler for constitutional niceties.
Either Butler's remit must be extended, or the inquiry scrapped and a new one set up in its place, with
broader terms and members appointed by all parties. Until this happens, there can and will be no
progress on other areas, not in health, education, welfare, transport, etc, etc. Instead this government will
remain hog-tied and ineffectual, while the cancer of doubt gnaws at its heart.<br />
<br />
And <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3522461.stm">Tony has the temerity to be disappointed
with Clare Short</a>. Maybe he should take a look around him at just how disappointed we are with his
performance.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-90277027164783917632004-03-01T15:38:00.000+00:002013-02-26T23:36:31.098+00:00Faintly disturbingAs someone who has grown up hearing about the Troubles on the news as a child, being caught in bomb scares in London, etc, there always seemed to be a perception of the IRA and Sinn Fein as the <em>bad guys</em>. Even though I am older and more enlightened, there are times when the words of reason uttered by Sinn Fein still catch me out. And to be honest, I do sympathise with the Republican Movement in the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Northern_Ireland/Story/0,2763,1159261,00.html">latest squabble around restoration of powers</a>. Even the DUP don't seem to be screaming and shouting as much as David Trimble's UUP. And from a purely demographic perspective, the various Unionists ought by now to becoming to terms with the fact that their historical dominance cannot last much longer.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-22949588566220207262004-03-01T13:14:00.000+00:002013-02-26T23:30:21.562+00:00GreenObviously the only thing green about the UK Armed Forces is some of
the camouflage, especially if their <a href="http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/environment/story.jsp?story=496551">objection to wind farms</a> is anything to go by. Apparently any wind farm within 45
miles of a radar station interferes with signals, but only in the UK. In Germany it is only a problem if the wind farm is within 5 miles, and elsewhere it just isn't a problem. I can only assume that the MoD is still using WW2 vintage radar in an effort to make savings, as it is hard to believe that a modern radar system can distinguish between aircraft and missiles and ranges of 100s of miles, but gets confused by a windmill half a county away.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-56238084159816910172004-03-01T12:57:00.000+00:002013-02-24T22:31:57.660+00:00Audit?<a href="http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/story.jsp?story=496549">Westminster City Council and the Met</a> have brought a new meaning the word<em> Audit</em>. According to them, auditing beggars in Westminster involves arresting, finger-printing, taking DNA samples and then bailing them. As if criminalising them is going to solve the problem. And it gets better. Apparently charities that run soup kitchens could be prosecuted for parking or environmental health violations. I kid you not!Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-70389500789645750152004-03-01T10:55:00.000+00:002013-02-24T22:30:41.957+00:00Yeah right, we all believe that.So <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3496772.stm">Tony once roughed it on a London park bench</a>, having travelled there to try and become a rock star. Or at least that is what Cherie would have us believe. Once again, Tony is portrayed as a man of the people, who can empathise with the suffering in society.
<br/><br/>
What a load of bollocks. After all, we've been here before.
<br/><br/>
Anyone remember Blair's claim to have sat at the Gallowgate End, watching his teenage hero Jackie Milburn play football for Newcastle? The only problem being that when Milburn retired, our Tone was only four, and the Gallowgate End had no seats at the time.
<br/><br/>
Or the time when a 14 year old Blair attempted to stow away on a flight from Newcastle to the Bahamas? Which would have been tricky given that there were no flights from Newcastle to the Caribbean at the time.
<br/><br/>
And then there's his favourite dish. Is it fresh fettuccine with sun-dried tomatoes, or fish and chips from his local chippie in Sedgefield? Depends on whether you read the NSPCC Islington Cook Book or his local Labour Party news-sheet in Sedgefield.
<br/><br/>
Not bad for a <em>pretty straight kind of guy</em>. If he can't be honest about his own past, how in hell are we expected to believe him when he talks about the major issues.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-34476985563266593482004-03-01T10:48:00.000+00:002013-02-24T22:28:18.579+00:00Happy happy joy joyGood old Clare Short. Not only does <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3520095.stm">she recieve a threatening letter</a> from Cabinet Secretary Sir Andrew Turnbull, warning her not to give interviews regarding the bugging of Kofi Annan, but she went on <a href="http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=496543">ITV's Jonathon Dimbleby programme</a> to publicised the fact.
<br/><br/>
And now it seems that the Ministry of Defence is facing <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3519325.stm">legal action of the deaths of 13 Iraqi civilians</a>. It seems that <a href="http://www.publicinterestlawyers.co.uk/index.htm">Public Interest Lawyers</a> (bit of an oxymoron there methinks) are preparing to sue the MoD for compensation on behalf of the victims' families. So the lawyers will get richer (at our expense), the victims' families will get a modicum of compensation (at our expense), but meanwhile the families of servicemen killed in Iraq will still get bugger all in real terms. And all this for participating in a war of dubious legality.
<br/><br/>
Meanwhile, I wonder if Tony has any regrets about signing the Treaty of Rome which set up the <a href="http://www.icc-cpi.int/php/index.php">International Criminal Court</a>? With all the debate around the legality of the war, it would be ironic were Tony Blair and Geoff Hoon to be hauled up in front of the ICC for waging illegal war in Iraq. After all, if the justification was the location and destruction of WMDs then any military action that did not relate to such activities (e.g. use of cluster bombs, hitting restaurants in Baghdad, etc) could be deemed illegal under the terms of the ICC. Funnier still, that the US didn't ratify the Treaty and thus is not bound by its terms.
<br/><br/>
Part of the problem stems from Tony's desire to be liked by, and have the support of the majority of people. Fully aware that there was no consensus of support for regime change, yet convinced of the moral rightness of his cause to remove Saddam, Tony had to find an issue upon which he could build his support. He settled - in a decision which will stay with him forever - on alleged WMDs. From that point onwards, the die was cast and so the case for war was built from lie upon lie, mis-direction upon mis-direction, until even tony himself was most likely no longer aware of what was truth and what was falsehood. For a <em>pretty straight sort of guy</em>, he now appears incapable of talking in anything but lawyer-speak, full of evasions and meaningless phrases.
<br/><br/>
Until the Attorney General, along with Blair and co, comes clean on, this issue is going to drag on and on. What is needed is not another whitewash - this time headed by Butler - but rather a comprehensive public inquiry into the whole case for war. Until that point, it is the duty of all people to challenge and question the Prime Minister on his actions, and to hold him to account.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-66458470025112757732004-02-27T16:40:00.000+00:002013-01-28T23:13:42.075+00:00Your taxes at work - Public Sector Job for the week #1Each week I will try and find the most pointless, ill-defined or biggest waste of money public sector job. Because although there are many necessary roles in the public sector, there are also those which are in many ways unnecessary. Feel free to add your own suggestions for "tax wasting job
of the week".
<br />
<br />
<b>Employer:</b> Haringey Council<br />
<b>Title:</b> Deputy Democratic Services Manager<br />
<b>Salary:</b>
£31,347 - £35,928<br />
<b>Description:</b> As well as being second in command <em>(of what - ed)
</em>, this key position will be responsible for supporting several high level bodies, assisting with full
Council meetings and supervising a number of support staff.<br />
<br />
Nice salary, but just what are the duties and responsibilities? What skill set is required? Totally vague and ill defined job posting.<br />
<br />
But then <a href="http://www.executivesontheweb.com/uk/job_search/job_details.cfm?id=5241">this job</a> caught my eye. A Benefit Realisation Consultant for the NHS earning between £35,000 and &pound;60,000 + extensive benefits.<br />
<br />
Try reading the job description and work out just what - if any - added value that role brings to the NHS. If you plough through the b*llsh*t and doublespeak in the description, it seems to be a
high level bean counting job. Nice work if you've the stomach for it, but will it really improve the standards of health care in this country? Especially when compared to a 'G' Grade Mental Health nurse with 2 years experience who's upper salary level doesn't even reach the lower level of our Benefit Realisation Consultant.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-46443993040478499532004-02-27T15:44:00.000+00:002013-01-28T23:09:45.285+00:00Enough to make one renounce citizenshipThis country must really hate people who apply for citizenship. Why else
would we subject them to a <a href="http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/story.jsp?
story=495503">brass band playing Phil Collins songs?</a> That constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in
my book. Perhaps that's the real reason why the asylum numbers have decreased, the thought of Easy Lover
blasted out by a brass band. It would certainly make me think twice about sticking around.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-58019848808012574292004-02-27T15:38:00.000+00:002013-01-28T23:09:01.596+00:00Something wrong hereWhether or not you agree with breaking into a military base, surely there is
something wrong with the legal process when a person can <a
href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/3493370.stm">spend more time on remand awaiting trial
than their actual sentence</a>. I bet Susan Brackenbury is more than a bit pissed off at spending 8 months
on remand for criminal damage, to only be sentenced to 6 months when found guilty.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-86445022816429631882004-02-27T15:35:00.000+00:002013-01-28T23:08:08.556+00:00Wierd things diy-ers doWho the hell paints the inside of their airing cupboard? Ours is probably
typical, stuffed with a hot water storage tank, a tangled mass of pipework and shelves loaded with horrible
pink towels and eternal beau bedding given as a wedding present by great aunt Maud. So one has to question
the sanity of <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/3492796.stm">Christine Mulliss who
spent 14 hours trapped in her airing cupboard whilst decorating</a>.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-73803188657854675782004-02-27T15:27:00.000+00:002013-01-28T23:06:50.054+00:00Sour grapesSo <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3492250.stm">Robin
Cook believes Clare Short was wrong</a> to make the UN bugging allegations. Does he truly believe this, is
it more a case of sour grapes that Clare has upstaged him as the voice of opposition to the war from within
the Labour Party.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-30028654668446773312004-02-27T15:26:00.000+00:002013-01-28T23:05:55.008+00:00No end in sightThe legacy of the war in Iraq will probably haunt Tony Blair to his dying day.
Every day <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3492910.stm">something else</a> seems to
emerge from the shadows. Now we have a deputy legal advisor from the Foreign Office who quit her job
because she did not believe the use of force was legal. Does anyone apart from Tony Blair really believe in
the legality of the actions taken by the UK and US in Iraq? I for one would love to know what exactly was the
Attorney General's advice to Tony Blair on the legalities of the war.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-25941501340709540162004-02-27T12:18:00.000+00:002013-01-27T22:21:44.782+00:00Who will rid me of this troublesome womanIs there no end for Bliar's misery over intelligence and Iraq? Hopefully
and in a word, no. Had he been open and honest about the reasons for war right from the beginning, then
more people would have been prepared to believe him now. As it is, there is an air of shabby dishonesty
surrounding all his pronouncements on these matters.
At lot of <a
href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3492250.stm">debate</a> has gone on regarding whether
or not Claire was right to speak out, and most of the <a
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1157325,00.html">papers</a> seem to think that she
should have kept quiet. Certainly as a member of the government, she had a duty as part of collective
responsibility to say nothing. And at this point it should be noted that as a minister she actually voted for
the war. However, on the other side of the coin, she was - like Katharine Gun - a public servant aware of
a potentially illegal act, and therefore almost obliged to speak out. So damned if she did and damned if
she didn't.
And today it comes out that <a
href="http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=495620">Hans Blix had his
mobile phone tapped</a> whenever he was in Iraq. And <a
href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/3492146.stm">Richard Butler's phone was
tapped</a> as well.
So not only did the US and UK undermine the authority of the UN by riding
roughshod over resolutions and ignoring diplomatic efforts, but now they appear to have gone further by
bugging the UN. If diplomats can't hold discussions in confidence within the portals of the UN, then
what hope is there for international trust and cooperation in future.
Whether he likes it or not, Tony Blair
must accept more responsibility for this state of affairs than George Bush. After all, it was Blair who
repeatedly tried to justify the war in terms acceptable to the Labour Party. Had he not raised the profile
of intelligence information (and its misuse) then it may very well be that these issues would not have
been thrust into the spotlight. The only way forward now is to be open and honest. This should fall
under the remit of the Butler Inquiry, but somehow I doubt that it will be anything more than another
sanitised whitewashing exercise.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-2404267627325286442004-02-26T17:57:00.000+00:002013-01-27T22:20:06.456+00:00Not PoliticalSo the decision <a
href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3489254.stm">not to prosecute Katharine Gun</a> was
<em>not political</em>. Well, I'm sorry, but I don't believe it. If she'd broken the OSA then that would
have been grounds for prosecution, and after all she wasn't denying leaking the email. Now I'm no
lawyer, but given that the legality of the war in Iraq remains ambiguous, then surely a defence of
<em>acting to prevent an unlawful war</em> is no real defence at all. Whereas leaking an email in breach
of the OSA was a criminal act. So the reasons for not prosecuting must surely be political.
Now the
actual political reason is open to question. One option is that Blair wanted to draw a line under Iraq and
British Intelligence, and a trial would just have kept a running sore in the public eye. Or perhaps a trial
would have forced discussion of the legality of the war and revelation of any incriminating documents.
But either way, to deny a political motivation is disingeneous at best. Or maybe, just maybe, the
government was concerned that any random selection of 12 good persons of the jury would be almost
guaranteed to be anti-war and thus rule for the defence. If that is the case, then it either shows how little
respect the government has for the public to believe that a jury could not be impartial on such a matter;
or shows just how comprehensively Tony Blair has lost the battle for hearts and minds over war in Iraq.
And Blair's discomfort has been further increased by Clare Short's bugging claims made earlier today.
She is often referred to as the "conscience" of the Labour Party, and perhaps now and again it would do
Blair good to listen to his conscience. He will undoubtedly get revenge via the Labour Party disciplinary
processes, although only a fool would be too bloody minded.
Just as Margaret Thatcher was condemned
to spend her remaining days in power tarred with the brush of the Poll Tax fiasco, so Tony Blair should
resign himself to the fact that he will be perceived by many to be a war monger who acts on weak and
twisted intelligence information. So much for the legacy of <em>Things can only get better.</em>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-23498192477844556172004-02-26T13:38:00.000+00:002013-01-27T22:20:50.300+00:00Political BalanceGot to smile at <a
href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3487340.stm">this story from Wales</a>. Not so much for the
<em>trial by media</em> aspects, but for the fact the each of the 4 main parties in the Welsh Assembly
had an AM involved. It does like one benefit of the Welsh Assembly is the increase in employment, albeit
in non-revenue generating jobs. Can't wait for Prescott's regional assemblies. Then we'll show the Welsh
and Scottish what true waste and inefficiency are.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-1842606046257374102004-02-26T13:31:00.000+00:002013-01-27T22:17:59.729+00:00ErrrI thought hospitals were places where you went to get better. Over the
last 10 years, the risk of getting worse has gone up with the <a
href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3488946.stm">increase in cases involving MRSA</a>. I wonder
whether such an increase would have been seen had the traditional matron still ruled the wards? Instead,
the best we get is a Director of Infection for each hospital, and a raft of statistics and targets.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-73879631936881597032004-02-26T13:26:00.000+00:002013-01-27T22:17:06.349+00:00Bravo BBCAt a time when every media article about the BBC seems to highlight
either past failings or future uncertainties, a bit of good news. <a
href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3517853.stm">The BBC has won the Zayed Prize</a>, an
environmental award worth $0.5million. Whilst some broadcasters would make a big song and dance
about winning such a prize, good old Auntie remains quietly reserved, refusing to crow about exactly the
sort of thing it does best. Could you imagine any commercial broadcaster winning such an award? Of
course, no profit in it.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-41000168559369074322004-02-26T13:19:00.000+00:002013-01-27T11:44:13.902+00:00Nice, but<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3488078.stm">Getting
communities involved in promoting local branch lines</a> is good, and will undoubtedly benefit the
routes in question. At the end of the day though, it is still window dressing which fails to address the
major issues facing Britain's rail network.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3482629300578376069.post-64043926866104730862004-02-26T09:43:00.000+00:002013-01-27T11:43:18.274+00:00Arise CitizensSo today, in Brent Town Hall, the UK will hold its <a
href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3487892.stm">first ceremony</a> for immigrants granted
British citizenship. Seems like a pretty good idea, though it does make one wonder about all the people
previously granted citizenship. Are they any less loyal? Probably not. And what about people born
British citizens? The concern is not with the ceremony itself, but with the way some sections of society
may present it. With hindsight those involved may wish that it had been a more low key event.
And why
suggest that ceremonies in Scotland and Wales would involve singing something more appropriate than
the National Anthem? They are - after all - becoming British citizens, not Welsh or Scottish. What would
they sing anyway? The Scots haven't even settled on a national anthem themselves, though the Welsh
have Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau. Imagine having English as your second language and having then to sing in
Welsh....Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05248641830080088359noreply@blogger.com1