Skip to content

No CfD For Isle of Wight Tidal Power

February 1, 2017

By Paul Homewood


Reader Patsy Lacey has been closely following the Perpetuus Energy Tidal Centre (PTEC) project on the Isle of Wight where she lives.

It is a tiny tidal power project which has yet to get off the ground, and has been beset by financial problems and scandal.

She has written to Greg Clark, Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, asking whether any more subsidies would be provided for the project.

She received this reply:



ScreenHunter_251 Feb. 01 18.33



To summarise, the government has set no minimum allocation in the next contract round for tidal or other technologies. Instead contracts will be awarded on the basis of price.

Therefore, unless PTEC can undercut the cost of offshore wind and other rival technologies, it won’t get given a CfD.

What makes this decision significant however is what it tells us about Swansea Bay. If the same rules are applied, this won’t get the go ahead either, certainly not on the strike prices they are asking for.

Of course, the government may decide to award a contract outside of the normal allocation process, as they have done with Hinkley Point.

Nevertheless, Hinkley was cheaper than offshore wind, and there is limited funding for subsidies under the Levy Control Framework. Any contract awarded to Swansea Bay would mean other cheaper low carbon projects would lose out.

This may turn into a battle between proponents of tidal power and the wind power lobby.

  1. Harry Passfield permalink
    February 1, 2017 7:30 pm

    This is weird. The second paragraph of that letter (‘transition to a low carbon economy…’) from the MP’s ‘assistant’ (GP, anyone?) was pretty much word for word the same as the reply I got from my MP, the Attorney General when I complained about electricity prices and subsidies. I guess MP’s SpAds have a set of stock phrases they can copy ‘n’ paste into letters.

    • February 1, 2017 7:34 pm

      Almost all replies from DECC and now BEIS use the same meaningless basic words and platitudes.

      • Mike Jackson permalink
        February 1, 2017 10:04 pm

        There is a rumour that ministers and permanent secretaries are still human beings.

        However anyone charged previously with communicating with the public has been replaced by a badly-programmed ‘I Speak Your Weight’ machine.

        Does it never occur to any of these people that robotically repeating robotic language makes it look as if government is staffed by ….?

  2. February 1, 2017 7:45 pm

    I’m not sure that the bureaucrat who wrote the letter is fully aware of Government policy. The Green Paper ‘Building our Industrial Strategy’ (the consultation for which I shall be responding) says the Government “can fund basic energy research which is too long-term for the market to deliver, and in promoting the early stage commercialisation of new discoveries that might otherwise be lost to competitors. Such research investment will be crucial to seizing the opportunities that the global shift towards a low carbon economy will present over the coming decades”. Of course it is always difficult to translate from the language of Sir Humphrey to normal English, so maybe the letter and the Green Paper are open to whatever interpretation you want to put on them.

  3. Athelstan permalink
    February 1, 2017 8:30 pm

    It’s a great laugh, it had me rolling, sides aching! and the best bit?……………….



    Boom boom!

    But you know what they say, patronize and treat people like sh*7 and all you get is a black silent anger then, built up over so many, many years will come the eruption and like a volcano with pent up explosivity will be increased to mega colossal – ever so reciprocated sh*7.

    In the end it will come down to it, that, someone needs to remind them in no uncertain terms, that, they [Westminster and the administration]…………… work for us – not the other way around.

  4. CheshireRed permalink
    February 1, 2017 9:06 pm

    Notice how Greg Clark’s letter is platitude and cliché rich – ‘consumer led, competition-focussed market for renewables generation, with energy security at its heart’ – while in reality their policies deliver absolutely NO SUCH THING. Sorry to shout. ‘Renewables’ are not consumer-driven, not competitive and offer NO f*cking energy security! If that’s not political gobbledegook masquerading as efficient policy what is it?

    • Athelstan permalink
      February 1, 2017 9:24 pm

      “If that’s not political gobbledegook masquerading as efficient policy what is it?”

      Platitudinous bollocks is the best I could say about it.

      Follow the money.

      In he first place EDF, British Gas et al are making a financial killing – the goverment is no help whatso effin ever.

      Then the Banksters ala investment sharks – Goldman Sachs love green energy policy and enforced taxpayer investment screwing you and me and the commission and kickbacks galore, wet dreams and Ferraris are made of this.

      Halfwit politicians; see them in Parliament virtue signalling to the heavens on Syria, on rapefugees, on threatening to shoot Donald Trump – whatev!…………… love to pretend to be ‘saving the planet’!
      Stuffing the domestic consumer with vastly, totally unnecessary costs wasted on gewgaws and boondoggles……………….and basing it all on a demonstrably false premise [man made CO2 induced warming], Which is, all about par for a professional chalatan, a managerial class of political pigs who care not a fuck about the people.

      I could go on, my contempt for the likes of Rudd, Huhne, Benn, potatoED, is abyssal, and blacker than Obsidian.

      • Derek Buxton permalink
        February 2, 2017 10:50 am

        And a plague on all their houses!

    • Mike Jackson permalink
      February 1, 2017 10:08 pm

      Ebell made an excellent point in his interview today.

      If and when renewables are as efficient and profitable as fossil fuels, private industry will be in there developing them and making a profit. There will be no need for subsidies or “energy policies”.

      I paraphrase, but I’m sure get the gist!

      • Athelstan permalink
        February 2, 2017 12:46 am

        Mr. Myron Ebell, speaking in London, claimed that the motivation for climate action was protecting a special interest: “The climate-industrial complex is a gigantic special interest that involves everyone from the producers of higher priced energy to the academics that benefit from advancement in their careers and larger government grants.”

        As clear as a bell Mike.

  5. BLACK PEARL permalink
    February 2, 2017 12:39 am

    Just another Sir Humphrey letter
    I’ve had similar from Ed Davy’s & Amber Ruddy minions … waste of time
    Just waiting for the Trump effect to catch on now

    • Athelstan permalink
      February 2, 2017 8:15 am

      “waste of time

      Just waiting for the Trump effect to catch on now”

      I don’t know if it is at all possible [with these numpties – Greg Clark is a vacuous and empty headed clown, so no change there then] but HMG needs to wise up and smartly, otherwise, we will be left behind by the American revitalisation.

  6. roger permalink
    February 2, 2017 9:27 am

    The fences are rapidly being repositioned and those sitting on them risk being abruptly caught on the wrong side if history

  7. February 2, 2017 10:17 am

    So it’s cost vs. ideology at Swansea Bay. Which way will UK Gov. jump?

  8. roger permalink
    February 2, 2017 10:52 am

    Theresa May
    Sitting on the blocks of the Bay
    Watching her legacy rolling away.
    According to the promoters,the Swansea Bay installation will be a testament to her for more than a century.
    That did not work out well for Lord Palmerston as all Portsmuthians still remember.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: