How can the Green Deal be called a ‘success’? – Telegraph
The Telegraph report on the news that the Govt’s Green Deal has been closed for at least a year, because the money has run out.
Ed Davey claims this as a success.
To recap, the original Green Deal scheme was set up to lend households money to pay for energy saving schemes. Unfortunately this did not prove very popular, as folks did not want to be lumbered with thousands of pounds of debt, just on the offchance they might save enough on their energy bills to offset repayments.
So, thanks to the unfathomable logic of our leaders, the deal was changed to one of outright grants. As the Telegraph report, these grants often paid for the WHOLE cost of improvements, such as cavity insulation and double glazing.
Unsurprisingly, people have been queuing up to claim this free money, leaving the pot empty after just a couple of months. Unfortunately though, money does not grow on trees, and instead has to be paid for by the rest of us taxpayers.
The Telegraph comment:
Meanwhile, households lucky enough to get their vouchers approved will be waiting to claim the cashback. Those hoping to benefit from the scheme will be disappointed – especially if they have already paid for an assessment. Companies who have spent months preparing to market and deliver this scheme have suddenly lost their customers. And our houses are not getting any better at keeping the heat in.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Yet, it is indeed a fair success: Wasting money faster than burning banknotes
Exactly what happened in Australia a few years ago with the ‘pink batts’ fiasco. As soon as the Govt changed to straight-out payments to the companies, the ‘cowboys’ came out, the scheme became discredited and the Govt temporarily shelved the scheme.
Companies were told the scheme was to start up again and were instructed to train their workers. Most did, ordered supplies, etc – then were told that the scheme was to be abandoned altogether, leaving those companies in the red with customers withdrawing in droves.
Off Topic but!
From
A letter has been sent to the president elect of the EU by Sense about Science, urging him to reject the call of anti-scientific NGO’s such as Greenpeace to abolish the post of Chief Scientific Advisor. You can add your name by clicking on the link at the bottom.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.senseaboutscience.org/pages/add-your-support.html
Interesting link Tomomason. However I suspect it will prove a fruitless exercise. As far as solar and other nooable energy I came across this:
http://www.businessinsider.com/free-exchange-sun-wind-and-drain-2014-7
Interesting link Paul but it inaccurately paints wind and solar as having some worth, it doesn’t.
Very inaccurately it imply that wind and solar can replace coal, it never can as it has zero reliability. Essentially wind and solar are good as a hobby power source but it can never be serious contender for major power generation as it is overall a negative drain and dispite all the advertizing hype is futureless. Solar and wind are big boys toys for ripping-off the public, and the public will be ripped off.
Nuclear is expensive initially but it does actually give a cheap and reliable source of very, very clean electricity in the long term. This is the best option for our future but the green-blob will lobby against it. Politician seeking the best crowd pleasing short term outcome will see the green-blob and run from nuclear. Modern politicians have no ball or brains so relying on them to do the best thing is foolish.
Where is coal power? Easily the best for generating electricity, both in value for money and reliability – is completely undervalued. The oil/gas industry propaganda has got through. I believe that no matter how clean coal power was to become the oil/gas industry, and their green-blob sheeple, would campaign against it. Still the rest of Europe is going with the power of coal because it is the only practicle option – the future is bright, the future is coal.
Overall the writer is confused and does not understand the technicalities of electricity power generation and distribution, to users big and small. If he got some advice from the EU’s Chief Scientific Advisor he may understand better.
Well said.
Twitter spat. Bob Ward pwned by Andrew Neil: