1 in 3 people would object to new UK energy infrastructure being built near their homes
Even if they were offered cash incentives,
The Government's upcoming Planning and Infrastructure Bill includes a proposal to offer electricity bill discounts of up to £2,500 over 10 years to households living within 500 meters of new or upgraded pylons. While 74% of respondents support this idea, research1 indicates that many would still oppose new energy infrastructure even if offered discounts.
Specifically, 78% of those opposed to wind farms and solar panels, and 72% against pylons, would remain opposed despite potential savings. Additionally, a significant portion of these objectors believe that no level of discount would change their stance.
Simon Virley CB from KPMG UK highlighted the importance of moving forward with renewable energy infrastructure while acknowledging that financial incentives may not be effective for all. When asked about preferred benefits for those living near energy projects, 34% favoured reduced energy bills, followed by 16% who supported local infrastructure investments, and 11% who wanted more job opportunities. Interestingly, 9% felt that no benefits should be offered.
The unorganised and lack of design criteria being applied to the expansion of wind and particularly solar is a folly and detrimental to the grid.
This point is rarely, if ever publisised, and the assumption by the public and such as KPMG that it is necessary and desirable is assumed due to this lack of information.
The current government's policy is the result of ideology and an almost total lack of knowledge by the technically illiterate government and civil service. It is extremely expensive and will not make one iota of difference to the climate.
The recent black out in Spain should be a warning that we are reducing dispatchable generation capcity on the grid which is very risky, with the summer months being worse due to reduced demand.
Should a similar occurence happen with the U.K. grid (And it is getting more and more likely) it will take much more than acouple of days to restore power as we are not synchronised to the European grid as Spain is.
This 'survey' reminds me very much of the feedback questionnaires that are put out by windfarm developers during the course of their 'not-a-real-consultation' public consultations.
Having looked at all of the questions that were asked on the YouGov/KPMG survey, it is clear to me that they were all lacking in necessary detail and were based on an assumption that those tasked with answering them had some level of understanding in respect of the subjects they were being questioned on. Similarly, the answers are all variations on 'agree' or 'disagree', with no opportunity to make comments or raise queries.
For example, The first question; 'To what extent, if at all, do you support or oppose the UK transitioning to renewable sources of energy?' This seems straightforward enough at first glance, but what is the question actually asking?
- First - What do they mean by 'renewables'? Does it include all of them, such as hydro, or biodigester/methane generation, ( to mention just a couple of the other types of renewable technology that currently exist)? Looking at the questions that follow reveals the fact that they are only interested in wind and solar.
- Second - Is the question asking if you agree with the current aim towards 100% renewables in the future? - Or is it asking if you agree with a much smaller percentage within the overall generation mix? It is not clear what they are asking, especially as we have done a great deal of 'transitioning' already, so they must be referring to the prospect of our having even more than we already have.
Immediately, based on my own hard-earned levels of understanding of the 'renewables' state-of-play with regard to Net Zero/global warming/climate change crisis/panic scenario that we have all been subjected to for many years, I am unable to work out how I could possibly answer even this first question honestly.
I agree in our using all the different types of renewables appropriately and as part of an overall mix of generation technology, but I can't possibly support the UK transitioning to 100% dependency on large-scale wind and solar. You only have to look at what happened in Spain recently to get some idea of how bad that would be for the reliability and security of our electricity supplies. But this is exactly where Net Zero policy is designed to take us.
I would support genuinely sustainably produced solar panels being put onto the roofs of existing and new buildings wherever possible, but I cannot accept massive solar farms, using Chinese panels that have been manufactured without proper regard for the environment and workers ethics, being located on greenfield sites of any kind. Does this make me 'for' or 'against' solar panels in general? - All I know, is that it is not as simple as just putting a cross in a box as an answer.
And I'm not even going to mention the massive wind farms, BESS storage facilities etc. etc, because literally everything to do with the 'renewables' they are talking about in this survey, -right through from planning policy, to harms to the environment, to undergrounding of cables, to CO2 reduction claims, to community benefits, to man-made CO2 being the main cause of global warming, is fraught with inconsistencies and misinformation.
And that is just the first question!
Whatever the purpose for this survey having been carried out is purported to be, I can only see the 'results' as being indicative of how dismally low the level of understanding about Net Zero, renewables v fossil fuels and global warming/climate change really is within the general population of the UK as a whole.
Too many people are not questioning enough, and they are not doing research of their own - otherwise the results of this survey would have been very different.
As a nation, we desperately need to be having an extensive, thorough, well informed, scientifically unbiased, and truthful period of proper public debate on this whole subject.
This has never happened before and if things continue in the way they have done for so many decades now, it is never going to.