Latest news with #Nimby
Spectator
11-07-2025
- Business
- Spectator
We're all going to pay for Ed Miliband's zonal pricing folly
Philosophers have debated the concept of 'fairness' for centuries. Intellectual heavyweights like Immanuel Kant, Karl Marx, and Aristotle have all had their say. They need not have bothered. The world finally has a definitive answer and it has come from the most unlikely of places: the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero's 'Review of Electricity Market Arrangements: 2025 Summer Update'. Even if you have an unshakeable faith in Ed Miliband's ability to plan a huge chunk of the economy from his desk in Whitehall, you must admit this is sub-optimal It just so happens history's most influential thinkers were miles off the mark. Fairness, it turns out, is when everyone in the country sees their bills go up so we can pay wind farms in Scotland to switch off when it is, er, windy in Scotland. The most intense debate in British energy policy is over. Ed Miliband has rejected proposals to break up Britain's electricity market into 12 regional zones that better reflect the actual physics of the energy system. The idea behind the zonal pricing Miliband has rejected is simple. Prices should reflect what things actually cost and are worth. At the moment for electricity they don't. In essence, we pretend that it doesn't matter whether a watt is produced in the Shetland Islands or in South-East England. It's all one price. In reality, location matters. Short-sighted regulators, Nimby campaigners, and National Grid penny pinching mean we haven't built anywhere near as many pylons and transmission towers as we need. That's a big problem when grid bottlenecks mean that Scotland's wind farms regularly produce more power than Scots can consume or send to England. Electricity isn't like other markets. When the EU's Common Agricultural Policy guaranteed high prices for butter and wine, we ended up with butter mountains and wine lakes. Wasteful? Yes. Absurd? Entirely. But an excess of these products didn't cause any other problems. When you have too much electricity though you end up with Spanish-style blackouts. Put simply, our grid needs to balance. Put too much power in it and bad things happen. The lights go off. Expensive equipment blows up. So when supply is on course to outstrip demand, urgent intervention is needed. At the moment this means wind farms in Scotland that have been paid an artificially high price to produce electricity are then paid again – at the last minute – to switch off. This, to be clear, isn't a hypothetical scenario. In 2024 billpayers handed companies such as SSE Renewables a collective £393 million in 'constraint payments' to stop their blades spinning. They then paid gas plants near where the demand actually was £1.23 billion to fire up at uncompetitive rates. National Grid warns these combined payouts could hit £8 billion a year by 2030. Off the coast of Angus, sits Scotland's largest offshore wind farm Seagreen. Since it came fully online in 2023, almost two-thirds of its potential output has been dumped. You start to see why the CEOs of renewable developers can barely contain their delight at the news zonal pricing is off the table. For the rest of though it's a missed opportunity. Texas uses an extreme form of locational pricing, with thousands of individual price nodes (well over 4,000). This has created a battery boom in the windy west. These batteries charge up when energy is cheap and power the grid when prices are high. Britain's batteries, by contrast, go where land is cheap and grid connections are available. In other words, not where batteries are most needed. Even if you think the downsides of a zonal system outweigh the benefits, it is impossible to deny the status quo creates big (and expensive) problems that need to be solved. Hence the government's new slogan: a 'reformed national market'. As the Guardian reports, the department's 'brainpower' is now focused on getting the benefits of zonal pricing without doing zonal pricing. Their inevitable answer? Central planning (and subsidies). Want data centres to move north, where wind is plentiful? Without price signals you can only bribe them or order them to go there. Want more batteries in Scotland? Ditto. Even if you have an unshakeable faith in Ed Miliband's ability to plan a huge chunk of the economy from his desk in Whitehall, you must admit this is sub-optimal. All of this should infuriate greens. Almost half of Britain's emissions come from two things: petrol cars and gas boilers – just one tenth comes from electricity. When it comes to decarbonisation, electrification is the only game in town. What matters most is not making electricity greener, it's making electricity cheaper. Bogus fears of a 'postcode lottery' and aggressive lobbying from wind farm owners have locked us into a policy that will do the opposite.
Daily Mail
06-07-2025
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE NIMBY residents threw street party after blocking 250- home development next to their village... but a decision months later would leave them stunned
Nimbys fighting against a 250-home development on the edge of a small Kent town have sensationally lost their campaign - after previously celebrating their 'victory' with a street party. Residents living near the proposed Ham Farm Development were 'devastated' when the Planning Inspectorate finally passed controversial plans to build 250 homes. It seemingly put an end to their two year 'David and Goliath' battle against the house building scheme, after Gladman Developments won an appeal first lodged in January this year. But, as one campaigner said, in the end 'David did win'. People living near the proposed homes, which will be built on nature-filled farmland in the sleepy town of Faversham, Kent, say they are poorly thought through and 'just about the money.' Residents say they can see all the way to Sheerness on the Isle of Sheppey on the other side of The Swale on a clear day. One resident described the effect the new houses will have on the quiet area - saying it will create a so called 'car ghetto' due to the lack of public transport and the narrowness of the already busy roads. Gladman Developments earmarked 162 private and 88 affordable homes on a plot of land off Ham Road, which it said could provide housing for first-time buyers. The plans, submitted in March last year, sparked outrage from locals who set up a protest group called Save Ham Farm to fight the application. Planning officers from Swale Borough Council rejected the project leading to residents to hold a street party to celebrate their victory. But the developers appealed the decision and have now had the case ruled in their favour. Locals claim there is leftover explosive guncotton produced in a local factory - which is used as a propellant for shells as a replacement for gunpowder - is buried under the soil, along with refuse from a landfill site. They say a 600 page survey of the land revealed a terrible explosion took place next to the field, which killed at least 18 staff, with bodies and leftover material thought to be buried in old clay pits on the site. Frances Beaumont, 81, who is Chair of the Save Ham Farm campaign, said: 'It has always been a fight of the small people against the big people with lots of money. 'We're very concerned that we're going to lose an established green corridor along the edge of the field, which is about 20 meters wide and has something like 200 trees. 'It's got masses of birds. We spent a whole year monitoring all the wildlife out there - there are tonnes of bats, and that will all be destroyed.' 'Losing a green corridor is very bad news for wildlife, and the trees guard against flooding, so if those go there will be an increased risk. 'There is also a path that's been there since around 1890 that lots of people rely on - that will go. 'People's back gardens open onto the path, so they are going to lose access to their back gardens. 'We are disappointed with the decision because there are far more problems with the plans.'It has very poor road access, very narrow roads - add another 250 homes to that and it's going to make things really difficult. 'You can't widen the roads because people's houses are there. 'They keep talking about amelioration, but that money will not be used to solve these problems, it will go on to other things. 'Access to sewers is also a big problem. We only have one already overused sewage system - which already discharges into the creek nearby quite often. As part of their campaign, the Save Ham Farm group contributed to the Faversham Neighbourhood Plan where they identified a number of brownfield sites more suited for the much-needed homes. Frances said: 'Local experts have taken six or seven years to produce a Faversham Neighbourhood Plan, which is against building there. 'It is a plan that proposed the building of over 200 houses on brownfield sites, they pointed to areas on the map where these sites could be developed. 'We are really disappointed that the power of this plan has not succeeded. 'The reason is that our local council, Swale Borough Council, had a shortfall in their five year house building plan so now the government says you have to pass any plans to make up that number. 'It's really a blow for local democracy - and they're going to get to a stage where people say, what's the point in fighting things like this? But, there is a chance it may not go ahead, Frances said: 'There is one slight chink of light in that there is a condition called a Grampian Condition - something they have to do before they build. 'The condition states that the surface water from the roads and drains and houses has to be pumped onto the marshes. 'The marshes are a Site of Special Scientific Interest and have not been surveyed as part of this plan. 'The developers just assumed they would put the water on the marshes - but they don't belong to them and the farmer who owns them is currently saying they don't want the water on their land as they use it to graze cattle. 'So we'll have to see, there is some hope.' Jo Humphrey, 71, whose home backs onto the proposed development, said: 'I don't agree with it at all, with all the lovely nature we have out there. 'It's terrible, if we were younger we might have considered moving - it's just a shame, we had a lovely outlook.'And, the roads aren't big enough to take everything, and the dentists and doctors - I can barely get an appointment now, before all the houses. 'The schools are all full too - I just don't agree with it at all.' Elizabeth Arnolt, 79, who moved to the area three years ago, got involved in politics for the first time in her life after learning about the development. She said: 'It's devastating, the whole thing is devastating. 'I've never been a political animal, I just about vote because of the suffragettes, but after I discovered this and met Frances I just knew I had to do something. 'I started a petition, I've never done anything like that in my life, and I got totally immersed in the thing. We took a stall in the market to get signatures and we were absolutely flooded by people who were so angry - people are very, very angry. 'After the Faversham Neighbourhood Plan was passed which suggested brownfield sites for housing we assumed it would be okay - but this news is devastating. She added: 'There is a housing shortage, but this isn't going to solve that because the people who buy the houses will be people with money who could buy anywhere. 'It's all to do with money, with profit, and the little people like us are just trying to stand up to this form of power. 'But, we are not giving up - we had a meeting on Tuesday night and there are reasons why it still might not happen, so we are not giving up.' Nick Mengham, 69, a retired beekeeper who has been very involved in the Save Ham Farm campaign, said: 'I am very disappointed, obviously.' We have not given up, there are still some things which haven't been decided - there's some stuff about surface water drainage which they want to pump into an SSSI which is also next to a Ramsar site which hosts migrating birds. 'It's also disappointing because we got the Faversham Neighbourhood Plan approved and it doesn't seem like any of what we asked for is being taken into consideration. 'We found locations for all the houses, we said that site is not suitable, and frankly I think the project undeliverable. 'It's a very difficult site to build on and there is going to be a lot of difficulty joining the dots in order to get houses built there - drainage, sewers. 'The transport is a very big problem - it's approached by a very restricted road and they want to build 250 houses. 'It really is David fighting Goliath - but David did win.' He added: 'I think the plan is to get the planning permission and then sell the land as development land - so it is all about the money. 'It is the way of the world, money talks, builders don't build houses to give them away, they build them to sell them. 'I know we need housing - but it has to be built in the right places.' David Cox, 81, a retired academic and engineering expert, said: 'It is a very complicated site - a really bad site. 'There was a big explosion around 1850 or thereabouts which killed lots of people - it was featured in the London Illustrated News at the time. 'It was a really serious explosion, and when they cleared it up the only place they could have put the explosive material that was left and the bodies of the victims was in the old clay pits which form this site. 'It is also filled with refuse brought here on barges from London - which produces methane, an explosive gas. 'There have been cases of sites like this where the houses built on top get filled with methane from the ground.' 'As part of my work I consulted on Chernobyl, and if you asked me to choose between that site and Chernobyl, I would choose Chernobyl. 'All of the details about the site can be found in a 600 page survey produced by Landmark Surveys. 'These homes also sit on a flood plane, and with the poisonous material below, the methane and the explosive material they will be uninsurable. 'Within 20 years the people living in the houses would be facing all sorts of issues and would be completely stuck in their properties. 'It has the makings of a total disaster.'
Metro
10-06-2025
- Politics
- Metro
Locals against a solar farm being built say calling them Nimbys is 'hate speech'
People opposing the building of one of Europe's largest solar farms have said the term 'Nimby' is hate speech. Botley West Solar Farm could cover about 2,470 acres of countryside in west Oxfordshire and power 330,000 homes if approved. But Save Botley West says this would affect 15 villages as well as water meadows and heritage sites across Botley, Woodstock and Kidlington. The anti-solar farm campaign group's chairman, Professor Alex Rogers, has said calling them Nimbys 'alienates' them. Nimbys – 'not in my backyard' – are people who oppose new, sometimes badly needed housing or infrastructure being built near their homes. Sir Keir Starmer wrote in the Metro in January that his government is 'taking on the Nimbys' who 'clog up our system so things can't get built'. Prof Rogers said: 'We've heard the term Nimby bandied about by the Labour government in particular, effectively that is pejorative language deliberately used to alienate and isolate ordinary people who are legitimately concerned about the really serious impacts of what is, in effect, a non-sustainable project. 'I would view a sustainable project as one which obviously benefits the climate, which this does, but also benefits people who live in the region and benefits wider aspects of the environment – and this scheme certainly does not do that.' A website appearing to poke fun at Rogers' group, 'Botley West NIMBYS', was made in 2023, according to internet archives seen by Metro. It says: 'Look, our place is much more special than yours, so you should have all the stuff we don't like near YOU.' Rogers added: 'I do have a message, particularly for the Labour Party, in respect of the use of 'Nimbys' or 'Nimbyism'. 'If you look at the UN definition of hate speech, the use of that term falls within that UN definition, and I think Labour would be appalled if people were using these sorts of terms to alienate other sections of society.' The UN defines hate speech as discriminatory and offensive forms of expression, often targeting people's race, gender, sexuality or class. Save Botley West joined a nationwide walk to protest the farm on Sunday, walking from Blenheim gates to Churchill's grave in Bladon. They wrote to King Charles last month, asking him to intervene on the grounds of an 18th-century law that says the Crown must be consulted to use the land. The King has yet to reply. Developers Photovolt Development Partners say the two million solar panels are vital to meet the government's climate goals amid ever-worsening climate change. The past 10 years have been the 10 hottest in nearly 200 years, with 2024 the hottest on record, fuelling climate-related disasters worldwide. Burning fossil fuels is the main driver of climate change, which is intensifying storms, flooding, heatwaves, wildfires and droughts in the UK. Rogers, a marine biologist at the National Oceanography Centre in Southampton, says he sees the impact of this in the ocean 'every day'. But he said the solar farm, roughly the size of Heathrow Airport, would impact the area's view. He said: 'Because of the nature of the landscape that this has been put into, which essentially comprises river valleys and hills, it's very, very difficult to conceal this solar farm in the landscape.' Council officials said in an impact report last week that the solar farm would likely have a 'negative' impact on local tourism. The plans are at the examination stage, where representations are being submitted, with Energy Secretary Ed Miliband to make the final decision. Three-quarters of Britons would support a solar farm being built in their local area, a YouGov poll found. There are around 1,3000 operational solar farms in the UK, with solar providing 6% of Britain's energy in the past year, according to the National Grid. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page.
Telegraph
10-06-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Calling us Nimbys is ‘hate speech', anti-solar campaigner tells Government
The term 'Nimby' is hate speech, the leader of a campaign trying to block Britain's biggest solar farm has said. Prof Alex Rogers, the chair of the Save Botley West community group, is organising efforts to prevent the construction of a £800 million solar farm covering almost 3,500 acres in the Oxfordshire countryside. If approved, it would become the largest in Europe – and equivalent in size to Heathrow Airport. Save Botley West called on the King to intervene on the grounds of an obscure law from the early 18th century. But the 57-year-old marine biologist has hit out against the Government by describing Labour's use of the term 'Nimby' as a form of 'hate speech'. Nimby, which stands for 'not in my backyard', is used to describe people who oppose new housing developments because they live near them. The term has been used by prominent figures in the Government including Sir Keir Starmer, who in January vowed to end a 'challenge culture' against new developments by 'taking on the Nimbys'. Prof Rogers said: 'We've heard the term Nimby bandied about by the Labour Government in particular, effectively that is pejorative language deliberately used to alienate and isolate ordinary people who are legitimately concerned about the really serious impacts of what is, in effect, a non-sustainable project. 'I would view a sustainable project as one which obviously benefits the climate, which this does, but also benefits people who live in the region and benefits wider aspects of the environment - and this scheme certainly does not do that.' He added: 'I do have a message, particularly for the Labour Party, in respect of the use of 'Nimbys' or 'Nimbyism'. 'If you look at the UN definition of hate speech, the use of that term falls within that UN definition, and I think Labour would be appalled if people were using these sorts of terms to alienate other sections of society.' The UN defines hate speech as: 'any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor.' On Sunday, activists opposed to the solar farm are walking from the gates of Blenheim palace to Winston Churchill's grave in Bladon – both of which will be affected by the proposal – in protest. Prof Rogers said although he recognises the severity of climate change, the plans were 'too big' and in 'the wrong place' – and worries about the impact it will have on the local landscape. The proposal is currently at the examination stage where representations are being submitted. The final decision will be made by Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, because Botley West is classified as a nationally significant infrastructure project. The King is yet to respond to the group's letter.
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Energy minister pledges to put solar panels on ‘every possible rooftop'
An energy minister has pledged to put solar panels on 'every possible rooftop right across the country'. 'If there is a rooftop that we can put solar panels on, we are keen to do so,' Michael Shanks told the Commons, as he claimed the public are in support of solar. The Government announced plans to create 'solar carports' earlier this month, with supermarkets, offices and shopping centres required to install solar panels over their car parks. Housebuilders will also be forced to fit solar panels to all new properties by 2027, under Government plans. Speaking during the debate on solar panels, Mr Shanks told the Commons: 'Rooftop solar, as many members have raised, is important. This isn't an either or, we do see a real opportunity to put solar on every possible rooftop right across the country. 'We have announced that in terms of new homes, we have announced their ambition in terms of industrial buildings, and just recently, we launched a consultation or a call for evidence on car parks as well. 'If there is a rooftop that we can put solar panels on, we are keen to do so. But there will, of course, also be a role to play for ground-mounted solar as well. 'I finally on this point want to say that the public, of course, also support this. 'And many members opposite have said that they have done their own surveys where, funnily enough, it gets the result that they are hoping to get. But 88% in the most recent poll of people said that they support solar, and that figure has never dipped below 80%. 'So there is a question here about balance, which I have said in this House on a number of occasions, and I will say again: we want to build a clean power system that brings communities with us, that requires a balance of different technologies in different parts of the country. 'But it is not credible to come to here and say, we support the building of infrastructure, but please don't build it in my constituency.' Earlier in the debate, Labour MP Terry Jermy denied being a Nimby as he expressed opposition to a solar farm being built in his constituency. The MP for former prime minister Liz Truss' constituency of South West Norfolk, said: 'We have seen a sudden influx of solar farm applications, and it has become one of the most contentious and spoken about issues locally. 'To be clear at the outset, I am not a Nimby, or even a rural Nimby, as I have been referred to of late. 'I support the Government's growth agenda. I very much welcome the much needed growth in my constituency, and I am not anti-solar or indeed anti-solar farm. 'I recognise the need for energy security, and I support net-zero ambitions, but we must approach these challenges and the solutions pragmatically and with due regard for local communities and recognise the implications.' He added: 'Solar farms are being disproportionately sited on better quality farmland rather than on poorer quality land. 'There is three times more grade five agricultural land in the UK than grade one. Five being the lowest quality land as referred to earlier, one being the best, yet solar installations occupy 20 times more grade one than grade five. 'That cannot be desirable or indeed acceptable. I firmly believe that grade two agricultural land and above should be protected and prioritised for food production. 'The National Planning Policy Framework considers one, two and grade three as the best and most versatile, and prioritises their protection. But that prioritisation is clearly not influencing the proposals.' Conservative former minister Sir David Davis said a solar farm in his constituency of Goole and Pocklington was approved 'on the nod'. He said: 'Last Monday the East Yorkshire solar farm in my constituency of 3,150 acres was approved. Not many policies make me angry in this place, but this one did for my constituents. Why? Because the decision rode roughshod over the desires and wishes and expressed complaints of my constituents. 'It will cover an area the size of Durham. Imagine if we were applying to build a town the size of Durham. How long the planning would take. This went through effectively on the nod. The so-called consultation process was little more than a rubber stamping operation.' Responding to the debate, Mr Shanks said: 'There is a robust planning system in place.' He added that communities are 'frequently consulted on, and that plays a critical part in the decisions that are made about these projects'.
