Let's Make it a Date Then!
















Finally! After a year and a half of delays, a date has been sketched in for the commissioning of South Hook LNG. Funnily enough, this date pretty much co-incides with the commissioning of a number of other LNG terminals, too. One of them is called Adriatic LNG, in the Mediterranean, and the other is Golden Pass LNG on the other side of the Atlantic in the US.

So do they have anything else in common?

Well, as it happens they do, and they go by the name of Exxonmobil and Qatargas. These two companies have majority interests in all three terminals. So here goes my theory...

Our brand spanking new supersized Q-Max tanker loads up in Qatar, and makes it's way up the Suez canal. Once in the Mediterrannean, it has a choice. It can either make it's way to the Adriatic Terminal, or head out the straits of Gibraltar towards either South Hook, or Golden Pass on the other side of the Atlantic. It all depends on where it can get the best return. If it can get a good price in the UK, it'll go to the UK. If the prospects are better in the US, it'll go there, and ignore the UK, until wholesale gas prices rise enough to justify bothering with us. In the industry, they call it "Arbitrage".

The date sketched in for South Hook is early 2009. Golden Pass is mid 2009. Then we're back into Winter 2009, when Gas prices tend to rise, and Exxon and pals can take their pick while we freeze...

Welcome to the brave new world of LNG!

Irish Unification - Electrically.

On the 22nd of August, a small but significant step occurred on the road to Irish Unification. EirGrid, the Irish Republic's state-owned electricity transmission system operator, bought SONI - the company that runs the electricity transmission system for Northern Ireland.

The operation (but not ownership) of the North's electricity system will now be effectively the responsibility of an arm of the Irish State. EirGrid falls under the jurisdiction of the Irish Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources.

The move has been widely welcomed across the board and touted as an important step towards the creation of a Single Electricity Market for the whole of the Island. Eirgrid and it's counterpart in the 6 counties, Northern Ireland Electricity, have also been co-operating to create an integrated North-South interconnector from County Tyrone to County Cavan.

While the move should I think be welcomed it also provides a sad contrast to us here in Cymru, where the National Grid grid not only treats North and South Wales as two separate entities, but doesn't even acknowledge a coherent welsh identity at all.

In any case, it may come as no surprise to learn that Sinn Fein have welcomed EirGrid's move. But does Ian Paisley know about it? If he did, he'd probably blow a fuse...

The South Wales valleys: a new Gas Klondike?

Amid all the hoo-haa over the massive price hikes announced by Centrica and co. this summer, what was less publicised in the media was the fact that companies like Centrica have been quietly buying up drilling licenses for a massive gas resource that is sitting, quite literally, under our feet. This resource, known as Coal Bed Methane, is deeply intertwined with the history of coal in areas like South Wales, but has never been a large scale commercial prospect. Until now.

Coal Bed Methane is basically gas that became "locked" into coal seams as they were laid down millions of years ago. It's tapped by punching into these virgin seams with drilling rigs, and drawing off the released gas. As North Sea gas reserves have begun to decline, and global prices for gas have risen in lock-step with Oil, "niche" prospects like CBM have become increasingly attractive. In the US, for example, it now accounts for around 10% of production. And south Wales, as any ex-miner will tell you, has some of the gassiest coal in Europe.

If CBM is going to take off anywhere, it's going to be here.

Over the last few months the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform has been selling off "licensing blocs" to prospect for this resource, including large areas of south Wales like the Rhondda and Caerffili. The Welsh Assembly has no formal input into this process, and the amount that BERR is raking in for selling these licenses is not a matter for public record. BERR's own figures show that South Wales is sitting on an onshore gas resource of around 13 trillion cubic feet, comparable in quantity to Norway's massive Ormen Lange field, one of the largest gas fields in Western Europe.

Unlike South Wales, however, Norway is not a privatised paradise, and the Norwegian State has taken steps to ensure that the benefits of Norways' significant energy resources are felt by all it's citizens. To this end - while the Tories in Britland were busy privatising anything that wasn't bolted down - in 1990 it established the Petroleum Fund of Norway. This fund, via the Norwegian Government, is owned by the people of Norway, and it's value now stands at around $300 billion dollars. Profits are used to fund social welfare programmes.

Not bad for a small nation of 4.7 million souls...

Of course, if Labour in Wales was a genuine Socialist party it would argue that the significant gas resource now being eyed up by the big energy firms should be taken into collective ownership on behalf of the people of Wales. It could either be used to provide cheap, locally available gas to the local population, or sold onto the wider market, and the profits used to provide support and subsidy to poorer sections of our society. Or both.

But Labour in Wales is in hock to a government in London that is dogmatically wedded to what Andrew Davies AM likes to refer to as "market-based" solutions. As escalating gas prices hammer low income families even before winter kicks in this year, the big energy companies are preparing to open up a new "gas frontier" across some of the poorest areas of the United Kingdom. Given that the Valleys derived little benefit from the exploitation of it's coal resources the first time round, what reason is there to expect that they will benefit any more this time?

If ever an opportunity presented itself to wrongfoot Labour on a socialist issue, in their core constituency, exposing all their talk of "clear red water" as little more than empty rhetoric, this is it.

At the end of the day, if a small independent nation like Norway can utilise it's significant energy resources for the benefit of it's people, why can't we?

Friend or FoE?



















A BBC news item on Friday casts a revealing light on the extent to which the so-called "Green" movement has drifted from its roots. Powys county council, besieged by multiple applications for wind farms, has put it's foot down and decided to put the whole thing on hold. It's main objection revolves around road access to some of the wildest and most remote sites in Wales. Councillor Wynne Jones, the Cabinet member for Regeneration and Development said;

"Unless there are major improvements to the roads where the construction traffic would have to travel, then we would have no choice but to recommend refusal of these developments."

In response, Friends of the Earth have called for Assembly ministers to ""intervene and to discuss with them how we can overcome this as soon as possible".

But wouldn't FoE do the Welsh environment a better service by questioning the thinking behind the whole crazy scheme in the first place? Whatever happened to the slogan "Small is Beautiful" that inspired groups like FoE in the first place?

After all, in the 1970s, in the early days of the green movement, thinkers like E F Schumacher questioned the entire rationale behind large scale "mega projects" and decried the tendency towards "bigness" in modern thinking. Schumacher, a pioneer who cared passionately about people as much as the environment, coined a term which has clearly been forgotten by groups like FoE. "Appropriate technology" - small-scale, decentralised projects which were relevant to the needs of the communities they served, "as if people mattered".

Can anyone say that about these projects?

Everything about them is top-down, driven by little more than an abstract, bureaucratic target which is effectively part of little more than a marketing exercise by the Welsh Assembly.
Meanwhile, in it's zeal to impose these targets on local authorities, it seems the Assembly has grossly underestimated the cumulative impact of a series of projects, which, taken together, will transform the landscape of mid-Wales forever.

Isn't it always the way with such top-heavy exercises?

Wind technology started in Wales around 30 years ago as little more than a number of small, innovative projects pioneered by ventures like the Centre for Alternative Technology in Machynlleth. They were grassroots, local projects, which generally attracted little opposition. As the corporate world has taken an increasing interest in wind technology, however, the tendency has been for the size of the turbines to grow, and the numbers to multiply. It's no surprise, therefore, that local opposition has tended to multiply in direct proportion, as their impact on the landscape has become ever more intrusive.

So are Friends of the Earth now going to call on the Assembly to build bigger roads to make this ever expanding project happen? And could they do such a thing with a straight face?

The mind boggles. But one thing's for sure - If E F Schumacher was alive to see the slick, corporate monster the movement he inspired has mutated into, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be turning in his grave, he'd be spinning.

It's Deja Vu all over again...



It's all here. LNG terminals, a high pressure gas pipeline shipping gas to a wealthier neighbour, eminent domain (compulsory purchase in this country), protected areas at risk, peoples safety compromised, communities united in opposition.

South Wales? Nope. Oregon, USA. But the parallels are uncanny nonetheless.

Where were you Ms. Wood?

Leanne Wood puts a strong and forthright case on her blog for a controversial subject - wind. In principle, I agree with much of what she says, but as with many things in politics, there's a catch. You just have to spot it. I have a lot of respect for Ms Wood as one of the more principled AMs in the Assembly, but on this subject I think she may be a little naive.

Ms Wood's claim that "doing nothing and waiting for London to form our energy policy for us is a dereliction of duty" is a noble sentiment, but ignores the reality of our situation. It's too late - London has already decided on Welsh energy policy, and the core of that policy is based not on renewables, but on gas.

The time to take a strong stand over the issue of climate change was when the LNG Terminals and pipeline were planned and under construction.

But where were you Ms Wood?

It needs to be understood that the Terminals and pipeline are essentially the platform for a massive ramp-up in fossil fuel generation across Wales between now and 2020. Most of this generation will be gas. A fact that the previous Labour administration is well aware of, and has actively worked to facilitate. In this respect, Labour is continuing the "Dash for Gas", initiated by Thatcher in the late 1980s.

It's a Thatcherite, or as Andrew Davies AM likes to call it, "Market-based" energy policy.

As a result of this ramp-up, in absolute terms renewables will form a declining, not growing share of this mix. Knowing this, Labour have cynically set the Assembly's renewables target in Terrawatt Hours, rather than as a simple percentage of the overall energy mix (i.e. 10%). They know full well that if their target was a percentage figure, it will not be met.

Just one of the new gas-fired stations earmarked for the Milford Haven area - Pembroke 1 - will be the biggest power station built in the UK since Drax in the mid 1980s. It will be supplied with regassified LNG. Friends of the Earth have already - rightly - pointed out that these installations will waste an amount of heat equating to half the entire energy usage of Wales, and turn Pembrokeshire into our "Climate Change capital".

These stations will also lead to a massive jump in Wales' electricity production, despite the fact that we are already a net exporter. As a consequence, ANY new generation - renewable or fossil fuel - will not be needed in Wales. At a time when families are already struggling under the cosh of ever-rising fuel bills, the costs of any new infrastructure will be passed by utilities onto the consumer, and that includes the Welsh consumer.

The sad fact is that the Labour Assembly has sat back and allowed the UK government to lock Wales into a structural dependence on a resource, the price of which is now escalating rapidly. As a Socialist, this is something that Ms Wood might want to consider when gas prices rise again by 40% in August, delivering yet another hammer blow to low income earners in her own constituency and across the rest of Wales.

By not openly challenging the UK government's policy, Leanne's Labour partners have effectively skewed the whole energy equation in Wales. Despite the fact that no less an authority than Jonathan Stern pointed out in his report that Gas Transmission alone is one of the most carbon intensive sectors of the economy. A report commissioned, of course, by our current PM, Gordon Brown.

As a Republican committed to Welsh independence Ms Wood also needs to consider the implications of any new transmission infrastructure - pipelines or powerlines - which will only serve to bind us ever more tightly to the over-centralised energy system of the British State.

Admitting that the Assembly's renewables strategy is fundamentally flawed need not be an admission of failure in the face of climate change. But the public - many of whom are affected by these projects - have a right to know that the Assembly is fighting the good fight with one arm tied behind it's back.

Because without the power to stop the UK government imposing large gas stations like Pembroke 1 on us, the Assembly's renewables strategy as currently constituted is little more than spin.

The Strawman Project























Gordon Brown announced a massive expansion in wind power today as part of an overall drive to switch the UK over to renewable generation.

Claiming that it would not be "business as usual" and pointing out that "The North Sea has now passed its peak of oil and gas supply", the PM called for a "National Debate" on reaching a target of 15% of UK electricity from renewable sources by 2020.

Brown said "Increasing our renewable energy sources in these ways, on this scale, will require a national purpose and a shared national endeavour".

So let's take a closer look at exactly what this "shared national endeavour" involves...

In Wales, our contribution to this grand plan was unveiled back in February by "Methane Jane" Davidson, our Minister for Sustainability. This "Renewable Energy Routemap underlines the Assembly's commitment to meeting it's target of 4 Twh of renewable energy generation by 2010, and 7Twh by 2020.

Wind forms a key part of this commitment, and the Assembly's wind energy policy is enshrined in the controversial TAN 8 document, which allocates the siting of large-scale wind farm development in Strategic Search Areas (SSAs). In Mid-Wales there are 3 such areas, known as Carno North (B), Newtown South (C), and Nant y Moch (D).

Together these areas account for up to 500 Megawatts of new generation. But there is a problem, and that problem is the grid. Developers are hungrily eyeing up the area, but without the ability to export this massive amount of electricity into the grid, it's just not worth the risk.

Not to worry though, because National Grid have the answer, and Jane Davidson, in her capacity as National Grid's mouthpiece, spells it out in her Routemap. A "new 400kv grid link into England."

Substitute "Powerline" for "Pipeline", and you'll see where this is going...

A National Grid document, accessible here, outlines exactly what this "link" means. A 55km overhead line from their Legacy substation - just outside Wrecsam - to the Cambrian Mountains.

The map above outlines a possible route (in green), given the concentration of proposed farms here.

National Grid made "Connection Offers" to developers using what they call the "Strawman Co-ordinated application Window" on October 31st, 2007. By pure coincidence, this is a mere 6 days after Rhodri Morgan announced "a new era" for wind farms - built on Forestry Commission Land.

Now I'm all for wind, but given that Wales is already a net exporter of electricity, where is the need for this kind of project? As far as I know, 13 separate projects so far have been signed up for connection to this line. But given that this line is designed to facilitate a massive expansion of wind in this region, you can guarantee it won't stop there.

A landscape that already bears the scars of an earlier period of exploitation - for our water - has now been earmarked for exploitation of another key Welsh resource - our wind.

Is this what our Assembly was set up for?

Power to the People






















All credit to Dr. Dai Lloyd on his strong stance over devolution of energy consents for large (over 50 MW ) power stations. His Freedom of Information request for information regarding the exact nature of negotiations between London and Cardiff is a welcome attempt to bring transparency into the process.

On the other hand, the Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform's contemptuous response shows that little has changed really since Tryweryn in the 1960s. It's just incredible, really, that an elected AM has to undertake such a measure to extract information from civil servants answerable to his own peers in the One Wales Government.

So why the secrecy?

Negotiations between the Assembly and BERR (formerly the DTI) have been underway since 2003. On the face of it, they were prompted by proposals for the massive Cefn Croes wind-power project near Aberystwyth. These negotiations prompted an earlier FoI request by Nick Bourne AM back in 2005, similarly stonewalled by Assembly officials on the grounds that the would "prejudice relations between administrations in the United Kingdom."

Of course, Cefn Croes is now up and running. It's amazing what stalling for time can do. A classic tactic employed by the Sir Humphreys of this world...

Negotiations have been ongoing for at least 5 years and have gone nowhere. In that intervening timescale a number of new power projects have materialised, including the world's biggest LNG terminal and connecting pipeline, a new gas-fired power station at Uskmouth, and approval last year for the world's biggest Biomass plant - the Prenergy plant in Port Talbot. Many of these projects are effectively geared for export to England.

Many have been unsuccessfully challenged locally and in the courts, even while in the past year alone, no less than 4 major energy projects have been thrown out in England, including a key installation along the pipeline itself.

So what's the answer? It seems that while devolution has given us a measure of democratic accountability here in Wales, it has also allowed the UK government to "outsource" energy projects that have been rejected by our good neighbours in England. And while our civil service here in Cardiff pleads impotence, it's been quite happily working behind the scenes to push through many of these projects, including routing pipelines and siting wind turbines over Assembly controlled land, sidestepping the concerns of affected communities.

Who are they accountable to - the Assembly or London? It's quite clear that the current devolutionary setup - at least in energy terms - is unsustainable. But if BERR refuses to devolve these powers, what are we to do? We need accountability, and at present we do not have it.

The only answer is a full Welsh Parliament, and to get that we need a referendum. The Assembly was created by a broad-based popular campaign, and a similar campaign needs to be initiated, sooner rather than later, in order to create unstoppable momentum behind the need for a full Parliament. With so many energy projects now underway across Wales, the argument for more powers needs to be put across to affected communities and residents.

For people who live in the shadow of these developments, these arguments should have powerful resonance. If we do not make them, we run the risk that these developments will turn people against more powers, as the ambiguity of the current setup may alienate people against an Assembly they see as "useless" and "powerless".

With the world in the midst of a full-blown oil crisis, energy is becoming a matter of political survival, and for a British Establishment wrestling with a rapidly growing energy gap, you can bet that means that Wales will come off second best. If we don't fight our corner - no one else is going to.

The longer we wait for a proper Parliament, the more large power projects will be imposed on us, more of our protected landscapes will be ripped up, and the health and safety of more of our communities will be sacrificed to meet England's electricity needs. As it stands, Wales is rapidly becoming an "energy colony", and our Assembly the rubberstamp.

We need a full Parliament with law-making powers, and we need to start campaigning for one now.

Pushing Tin

















Amid all the ideological spleen flying about over the unveiling of a tinplate image of Maggie Thatcher in the Senedd, it pays to take a closer look at the legacy that Thatcher has bequeathed on us here in Wales, particularly in terms of government policy.

Traditionally associated with privatisation, deregulation and the wholesale dismantling of the welfare state, Thatcherism is seen by many in Wales as something that was "imposed" on us by zealous conservative ideologues in the 1980s and much of the 1990s. But behind the rhetorical posturing of the respective political parties, things are not quite so clear-cut.

Welsh Labour, in particular, perhaps dimly aware that more than a little of Thatcher's zeal for privatisation had rubbed off onto Tony Blair and his cronies, were eager to put "clear red water" between themselves and their counterparts up the other end of the M4.

Behind this rhetoric, however, it's quite clear that for the past 5 years the Assembly government and it's London handlers has been quietly supporting a thoroughly Thatcherite experiment in energy deregulation.

This process of deregulation began in the 1980s with the privatisation of state utilities such as British Gas (1986) and the break-up of the Central Electricity Generation Board (CEGB) at the end of the decade. From the ashes of this breakup rose privatised utilities such as the National Grid and National Power. The Tories fervently believed that this deregulation would lead to greater efficiency, lower prices and greater freedom of choice for the consumer.

This ideology has largely been inherited by the Labour Party, and this shift began with the binning of Labour's historical commitment to Nationalisation - Clause IV. Over the course of the 1990s, Labour's 1992 election manifesto commitment to
renationalising National Grid was quietly dropped.

Another key Labour commitment quickly dropped when Labour got into power was a moratorium on the building of gas-fired power stations. Labour was concerned to be seen to be reversing the Tories "Dash for Gas" in the early 1990s. By the end of 1998 this ban was watered down due to the intervention of a key player in the energy industry in the late 1990s - Enron, who splashed out £15,000 on a reception at Labour's '98 conference that year.

But Labour's love affair with gas was just warming up. Companies like Enron soon found many bedfellows in "New" Labour, willing to cwtsch up. Not least of whom was the Rt. Hon. Peter Hain. M.P.

And Peter really meant it. In his capacity as Minister for Energy and Competitiveness in Europe, Hain was given a key job. To help crack open recalcitrant European energy markets and spread the gospel of liberalisation and "competitive markets" across the continent. And a key plank in Labour's strategy of cracking the European nut was LNG.

LNG which would help to lesson Europe's dependence on the resurgent Russian bear.

But it wasn't all roses for Peter. He got his share of the bread, too. In 2007 he got a nice bung from the Cuddy Group, one of the many contractors employed on the construction of a pipeline which doesn't run too far from his house.

A pipeline which thanks to Labour's deregulation agenda is missing a significant number of safety valves, and hasn't been properly assessed by the Health and Safety Executive.

So not too close, either. Eh, Pete?

Greenwash!

The establishment continues to trip over itself in it's desperation to paint the LNG pipeline project as being of some benefit to the rest of us.

So after ripping up half the Welsh countryside, damaging an internationally recognized Geopark, polluting an SAC in Milford Haven waterway, and, oh, by the way, locking us into a mode of energy generation that is destabilising our climate, it was almost inevitable that National Grid's pet project would receive some kind of green award.

Presenting this award, the Chair of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport, Martin Evans, gushed; "To me, the important part was the installation of the pipeline so that none of the LNG that’s being imported had to be transported by road."

I mean, the fact that the Stern report points out that gas transmission is one of the most carbon intensive sectors of the economy, and the fact that the gas has to be be liquified and transported halfway across the world in giant ships is really just nitpicking isn't it?

"Having the capacity does not mean the molecules are going to arrive."















You heard it here first. After telling us for the last three years that the Terminals and pipeline were going to supply up to 20% of the UK's gas requrements, now they're telling us that most of the gas is headed for Japan and South Korea.

Three years of pressuring planning authorities with "National Need" arguments, three years of bullying land owners, three years of ripping up the Welsh countryside and causing long-term damage to some of our most precious and ecologically important landscapes.

What a load of bollocks.

Of course, National Grid have been aware of the phenomenon known as "Spot LNG" for some time. After all, it's been happening at their Isle of Grain terminal since 2005 and points to the escalating failure of what European commentators refer to as "Anglo Capitalism". A neoliberal model which is gradually locking us into a growing dependency on gas supplies that are now being traded on a worldwide market, courtesy of LNG.

In light of this you've got to laugh at the statement from Centrica blaming "dysfuntional European markets sitting next to our highly competitive British one". If we're so competitive - how come the Japs and South Koreans are out-competing us?

The only way we're going to be able to compete with the far east is by offering a higher rate for the gas - and that inevitably means higher bills down the line for the consumer.

Has Carwyn Bottled It?

I'm gutted. I was really looking forward to taking part in Thursday's "Pawb a'i Farn" programme on S4C. Of the two AMs pipped to appear, one of them was Carwyn Jones, former Minister for the Environment in the Assembly, and now Counsel General. In his previous administrative incarnation, I and many others addressed a letter to his department to "Call In" the LNG importation project.

Many of us, myself included, never recieved a reply.

The Assembly have a statutory duty to respond to letters from the public within 17 working days. After submitting a letter - publicly, with dozens of other people, at a demo outside the Assembly - I recieved a holding response 3 months later, in August.

And that was it.

Luckily for me, however, I am a Welsh speaker, and an invitation to participate in a special electoral edition of Y Byd Ar Bedwar before last years' Assembly elections gave me an opportunity to raise the issue again. Carwyn was one of the participating AMs, and after tussling briefly over the LNG issue, he promised to look into the mysterious issue of the disappearing letters.

Of course, what I didn't take into acount (and Carwyn probably did) was the fact that it was 1 month before an election, and Mr. Jones would probably be shifted to a new department. So I'm still waiting for a reply. I've been waiting for around 2 years now...

So here we are. I've got a place in Thursday's audience, I'm all revved up and rearing to go...I still want to know about my letter, and whether Carwyn deserves his 8.3% pay rise, backdated to the point last May when I last asked about the letter, and he promised to look into it.

And then I get a call from the Beeb to confirm my place in the audience, and by the way, Carwyn's dropped out, to be replaced by Dai Lloyd, who has taken a much more assertive and principled stand over the LNG project, and along with 5 other Plaid AMs has refused to accept the 8.3% pay rise.

For this reason I get the feeling Dai will have an easier time of it on Thursday, or maybe it's just that he's got a hell of lot more backbone than his Labour counterpart...

Methane Jane - Spinning Again...

"Sustainability" Minister Jane Davidson launched the Welsh Assembly's new renewable energy strategy today, but when all the noble sentiments are stripped away, seems to me that the document that has been put out for public "consultation" is essentially the same dog's dinner that was fed to the hapless Welsh public with the Assembly's "Routemap" back in 2005.

The core of the Assembly's strategy revolves around the it's target for renewable electricity generation: 4 Terrawatt Hours by 2010, and 7 Terrawatt Hours by 2020. But this figure is curious enough in itself.

In other parts of the UK, and indeed on the Continent, targets for renewable energy generation are set as a simple percentage. For example, the UK government's figure is 10%, while the Scottish figure is a more ambitious 20% of electricity to come from renewable sources by 2010. By implication, in Scotland, or elsewhere, the other 80 - 90% of electricity will still come from non-renewable sources i.e. fossil fuels such as gas or coal, or nuclear.

But it's a start.

So why not a percentage figure for Wales? Why Terrawatt hours? Let's imagine for a minute that the target IS a simple percentage, and see what happens.

To hit a percentage target figure of, say 10%, implies that the amount of electricity generated from non-renewable sources is static, or declining. But what happens if the amount of electricity generated from, say, gas, is ramped up dramatically. Surely that will mean that a simple 10% target would be far harder to hit, if not impossible.

So let's say that we put a huge gas pipeline across Wales, and then we connect up a few gas-fired power stations to it, for good measure. We'll put a 2000 mw CCGT station in Pembrokeshire, an 800 mw CCGT station in Usk, and maybe another 2000mw CCGT station in Pembroke again, just for good measure. What happens to the target then?

Maybe the Assembly government had this in mind when they put together their renewable strategy, as they know that a simple "Terrawatt Hours" target is not a percentage of anything, and therefore masks the massive ramp-up in fossil fuel generation taking place across Wales, while simultaneously disguising the fact that the Assembly's target is basically nothing more than pissing in the wind.

Given the carbon-intensive nature of these industries, it will be interesting to see how the Assembly fiddles the figures for Wales' carbon emissions...

An Open Letter to Malcolm Wicks - UK Minister for Energy.

















Photo taken at the Compressor site (Late December, 2007)

A letter from a concerned Swansea resident now sits on the desk of the UK Energy Minister...

Dear Mr. Wicks,

I am writing to you as a resident in the Swansea area with grave concerns about a gas compressor station currently under construction at Llangyfelach, just outside Swansea. I am concerned about the proximity of this installation to residential properties, a proposed Strategic Business Park, and a regional hospital at Morriston.

I am sure you will recall that you opened a key valve on this site on November 27th, 2007, in your capacity as UK Minister for Energy. The Felindre Compressor station was approved by the City and County of Swansea Council at the end of 2006. I was concerned at the time that safety at this proposed installation did not receive the careful attention that I and many others felt that it merited.

These concerns were re-ignited when a National Grid public information factsheet came into my possession. This factsheet makes clear that a Hazardous Substances Consent is required for thissite. It is referred to in the leaflet as "standard practice". I enclose a copy of this leaflet for your reference. The planning case file for Felindre, held at the planning offices of City and County ofSwansea Council, makes no reference to any such application for consent ever being lodged.

I addressed my concerns about this situation to the Head of the Planning Department of Swansea Council, a Mr. Bryan Graham, at the start of December of last year. To date I have received no reply. I have also lodged a Freedom of Information Request with theHealth and Safety Executive, who, as you will know, are Statutory consultees on Hazardous Substance Consent applications.

Upon receiving the HSE's reply to my request, I was alarmed to learn that the HSE have"no record of risk assessments or site inspections", and further, that they have no record of any correspondence between themselves and City and County of Swansea in relation to this site.Were you aware, when you were on this site, that you were opening a valve on a site that has no Hazardous Substances Consent?

Given that we the public rely on the HSE's expertise to reassure us that safety has been given due care and attention - which does not appear to be the case here - can you as the Minister for Energy, assure the public in this area that safety is, indeed, paramount, in relation to this site, as the risks it poses to the surrounding area appear at this point to be totally unquantified.

If you as Minister agree that the issue of safety has not been adequately assessed by the HSE, would you support a call for both a moratorium on all construction, and a full public inquiry into this apparent breakdown of the standard process, and can you give assurances that legitimate public concernsabout safety will not disappear down a regulatory black hole?

And if you would not, why not?

Given the gravity of this situation, I await your reply with some urgency.

Yours Sincerely,


Jim Dunckley.

Just Blame it on the Weatherman...

News coming out of the Brecon Beacons about the damage caused to key protected areas in the Park will come as no surprise to those of us elsewhere along the pipeline route already well acquainted with National Grid's desperate rush to "complete" the pipeline at all costs.

Nor will it surprise people in parts of Scotland either.

In 2003, Transco's contractor Nacap Lawrence was fined £30,000 by SEPA - the Scottish Environment Agency - for silt pollution caused in the River Ythan in North-East Scotland during another pipeline project to connect a gas terminal at Aberdeen.

Seems like Nacap have acquired a very bad habit of doing this kind of thing...

Indeed, in Brecon the problem has become so bad that large areas of topsoil along the pipeline route are quite literally washing away into important rivers like the Towy, Crai and Usk - some of which are protected under the EU Habitats Directive.

The Park's fundamental concern has always revolved around the fact that the construction timetable for the pipeline was far too tight, and the routing flawed, and that this would ultimately compromise both aftercare and safety in large areas of the Park. And as it turns out, the Park Authority was right.

National Grid, meanwhile, have taken to blaming the crap weather for this huge cock-up. But they were warned...

Back in 2005, when the Grid sensitively decided to route their huge pipe through a newly designated Geopark, concerns were raised by various bodies about the viability of routing a pipeline of this size through a sensitive landscape riddled with fragile habitats, steep slopes and unstable landslips.

This little nugget from the HSE in particular makes clear that dodgy weather was a pressing concern for them too;-

Health and Safety Executive Hazardous Installations Directorate

"Pipeline Integrity

Route 12 would involve substantial hill sections to negotiate, and we agree with the description of the difficulties in constructing and testing a pipeline over sloping / rising ground. We would be somewhat concerned that a pipeline laid in sloping ground in one of the wettest areas of the country could be at risk of failure during operation, as a result of ground movement. The UKOPA Pipeline Loss Database (1962 -2004) reports a total of 172 product loss incidents. Of these, five were caused by ground movement withone of these (an 18-inch diameter pipeline) failing as a full-bore rupture with ignition of gas. This is a significant failure given that only nine of the 172 product loss incidents resulted in ignition."

Route 12 was discarded, but given that route 13 (the route chosen) is fundamentally a very similar route, that may not make a lot of difference.

National Grid have buggered up, and they know it. Not only have they routed the pipeline through a sensitive landscape which has been irreperably damaged, but they have also routed the pipeline through a landscape which is so unstable that it poses an ever-present risk to the integrity of the pipe itself.

Maybe this dim realisation that the routing of the pipeline is fundamentally flawed prompted Project Manager David Mercer to tell Welsh Assembly members at a meeting recently that it was actually Exxon that decided the ultimate route in any case - by deciding to site the Terminals in Milford Haven....