2011-06-09 18:08:03The slightly schizoid Daily Mail
Paul D

chillcast@googlemail...
82.18.130.183

'Positive' articles about solar energy:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2001030/First-solar-tunnel-Europe-powers-high-speed-trains.html

There are only two comments, one from the US:

jack, scottsdale, usa

OK. Pretty amazing for something at such a high-north latitude which can decrease solar cell efficiency by 60% or more. Now add up all the energy and carbon emissions and toxic chemicals used during the mining, manufacture, transportation and installation of the solar cells and support structure (and of course the same energy and carbon data for creating, handling, and disposing of the toxic chemicals themselves). Then add in the maintenance costs and carbon emissions required to keep the solar cells clean over their useful lifetime. Then tell people how the solar cell energy output substantially declines over time, and tell them when the cells will reach their 50% energy output point, and when the cells will have to be replaced to keep the system viable (whether before or after the 50% point).

And:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1393879/Gemasolar-Power-Plant-The-worlds-solar-power-station-generates-electricity-NIGHT.html


But the main headline today is:

Hidden green tax in fuel bills: How £200 stealth charge is slipped on to your gas and electricity bill

"The call came as the former head of the civil service, Lord Turnbull, demanded that politicians ‘stop frightening us and our children’ about the threat of global warming"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2001181/Hidden-green-tax-fuel-bills-How-200-stealth-charge-slipped-gas-electricity-bill.html

So the Mail takes the Global Warming Policy Foundations campaign to use the current increase in gas prices as a means to campaign against renewable energy. Then the article goes on to make the usual claim that Reneable Obligations are a government subsidy. Even claiming that gas and coal prices are artificially inflated, when in fact it is price of the the units of energy that are changing (inflated). This is a case of bad language or deliberate language manipulation.
The article is so flawed and dishonest that it over shadows the positive articles about solar energy.

Astoundingly, the article eventually critiscises the subsidy of home insulation, which reduces energy bills and reduces the need for building powers stations!

"Bills are pushed up further by the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target – which forces suppliers to subsidise home insulation and new boilers"

BTW, the new boilers referred to are higher efficiency gas central heating boilers. There are a number of schemes, most help the elderly keep warm.

I occasionally read the Daily Mail, just to remind myself why I gave up reading it.

BTW do feel free to 'rate' the comments, you don't need to be registered to do so.
You can artificially rate the comments more than once by deleting the Daily Mail cookies in your browser after each time you 'vote'