Dredging at Burrowbridge

A rather slow video of some rather slow dredging at Burrowbridge.

One would have thought that a prominent location like this would have been tackled a bit sooner - one has to suppose though - that if the locals hadn't kicked off - it wouldn't have happened at all ...

Local farmer Wheat_Daddy on Twitter

Hydro Produces More Electricity Than Wind - Yet Again

I don't jump on this every time - but there many, many occasions that hydro power produces more electricity in the UK than the 11,000 MW installed capacity of windmills. Wind is presently producing 0.22 GW (0.56% of current generation and which a miserable 2% of installed capacity ) - see Gridwatch 

In terms of bang per buck the comparison is stark - very stark UK hydro capacity at 1649MW is barely 1/6th of wind and regularly produces more power ....  when it's needed.  As longer colder nights draw in the folly of present energy policy are becoming more evident as time passes.  One has to wonder at the lack of support for hydro power from environmental activists since in terms of electricity generation it has very positive attributes for practical utility being both controllable and less prone to short term changes in the weather....

Bradford on Avon local activists have made much of installing solar panels on schools - but next to nothing has actually been said about the two hydro electric schemes which the town could have up and running.

Never mind the windmill on Mason's Lane  - how about a 20MW turbine on Christchurch ?

Meanwhile - winter seems to have arrived early in Canada - when America sneezes etcetera - make sure your heating's up to par...

100 !!

Well, here we are  4 years later... if somebody'd told me in 2009 that I'd write 100+ blog posts (some didn't see the light of day for various reasons) about the EA and Avoncliff over that time - I would have laughed in their face.

But here we are - and it's still a mess.

There are some things that are clear though.

EA managers and lawyers broke the law - several times. And it would seem that they simply do not learn from experience since they have "limitless" public funds to hose around to try and outspend any challenger to their interpretation of their own "authority" - bugger statutory duty, common law and especially The Civil Servants Code of Conduct....

A couple of recent events caught my eye - first there was this one - News International phone hacking  superficially seems unrelated until you get to the actual issue...   I was just thinking about keeping documents vital to a High Court JR case hidden and ummm ...  "hiding criminality". Naughty.

And then... in another case U.S. tech giant Raytheon get a wedge from The Borders Agency because they went along with that "Agency" who didn't know what they were doing and chose to cover up and hide official incompetence... "the tribunal criticised UKBA officials for failing to properly brief the home secretary" - funny that ... of course that'd never happen at the good 'ole EA would it?

With age come usually a bit of perspective.... so in the absence of a telegram from Buckingham Palace for getting to 100 I'll substitute a bit of stolen profundity that got my attention a few weeks back:

"I thought of the difference between virtue and piety, and saw that virtue is the doing of good, whereas piety is the avoidance of ‘wrong’.

In a world dominated by PC orthodoxy, and quota filling, the society will become ever more pious and less virtuous, simply because it is an easier state to achieve, especially if you have a vigorous ego but little talent to match it.

Giving more power to the State will increase malfeasance, as the talentless displace the virtuous, all the new power must be there to direct the cover-up of the ensuing systematic incompetence."(Stolen from here)

I never thought of The Environment Agency as being pious..... not that some officials seem overly bothered even about doing "wrong".

Another New Broom

Us yokels being occasionally behind the curve missed this....  After Liz Truss gets a promotion to Secretary of State at DEFRA - her first appointment ... the EA rather quietly gets a new chairperson.

Did we have a senior moment or was Chris Smith advertised last year to be leaving by June 2014 - and does the extension to September reveal a problem getting a suitable candidate to grasp the poison chalice?

From ENDS Reports  (and h/t Henry)

Dilley confirmed as new Environment Agency chair

By Isabella Kaminski

22 July 2014 13:00 BST

DEFRA has appointed Sir Philip Dilley as the new chair of the Environment Agency.

Dilley, former executive chairman of engineering firm Arup, replaces Lord Chris Smith of Finsbury who is stepping down on 7 September.

DEFRA made the announcement on 22 July following the approval of the House of Commons Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (EFRA) committee.

At a pre-appointment hearing on 15 July Dilley was questioned by the EFRA committee about his ability to take the Environment Agency through a period of significant restructuring and budget cuts.

Although MPs approved the appointment, they questioned DEFRA’s decision to extend the time commitment of the job from two to ‘two-to-three’ days a week, and to raise the salary from £60,632 to £100,000.

He will be the first agency chair from a business background.

The decision to appoint Dilley was one of first made by Liz Truss as new environment secretary.

In a statement she said: “This is a vital role which carries major responsibilities. I am delighted to have confirmed Sir Philip Dilley as chairman of the Environment Agency and I look forward to him bringing his leadership, experience and gravitas to the board.”

Dilley was knighted in the Queen’s birthday honours list in June.

It's likely (O.K. certain...) that files/reports about Avoncliff will be on Sir Philip's desk sooner rather than later .....   (Google Sir Philip Dilley)

It's caused a bit of spluttering at The Guardian  and no doubt when FoE and Greenpeace catch up there'll be a blizzard of ad-hom name calling - then aagain maybe not - he gave £2000 to the Scottish Labour Party.

EDIT From The Role Description: "You will promote a positive and constructive relationship with everyone that works with the Environment Agency including local government and local communities, business and industry, planners and developers, and a wide range of other interest groups. Providing excellent customer service will be core to your role."

Right-oh ...

Understatement

Henry at Inside The EA  has a couple of recent posts up about conflicts of interest, bribes, favouritism and an inconsistent regulatory approach - describing actions known to him when he was actually inside the EA. Whilst it is gratifying to see our prejudices verified - what is not gratifying in any way shape or form is to see criminal behaviour  perpetrated by public officials not being addressed and dealt with.

We are now approaching 5 years down the line, a show-piece project which ticks the "public interest" boxes for green energy, industrial heritage and maintenance of infrastructure - has been obstructed mostly by foul means to indulge the whims of corrupt, arrogant and self indulgent officials - who, in order to spitefully cause harm to the project at North Mill - have connived to award a water licence to somebody that doesn't own the property in question and presently has no legal right, title or covenant in place which allows legitimate work to progress. i.e. they've awarded a paper licence out of - yes....sheer undiluted spite (using your money!).

This was supposed to be a water licence application - but officials have turned it into an expensive circus. The final cost of this mess - to the public purse alone is now likely to exceed  £2 million pounds. 

The EA officials conniving, dishonest actions were unlawful the first time around and that cost the public a pile of money - they did the same thing again and they have twisted every facet of the water licence process this, second time through the process - to impose an arbitrary and very deliberately crippled outcome.

No doubt the departure of Owen Paterson from DEFRA has signalled for some in the EA a return to the good old days of nil oversight and an ever increasing budget.

The EA needs root and branch reform - or a reboot. That dishonesty, cheating, fraud and just breathtaking indolence are easily identifiable in a public body is bad enough - that it is tolerated by management is simply wrong. That the EA are in charge of "waste" is an almost unbearable irony!

There is more woe on the way for EA officials - I hope that instead of "lessons learnt" and back to work  - that the quite astounding carnival of abuses of position and process are addressed robustly.

And the question has to be asked - who's going to replace Chris Smith eh?

I offer a takeaway from this mini rant in the shape of a quote from "Henry" that must for the moment serve as a warning to anybody interacting with this bureaucracy:

"The message I would like to get out is how the power given to the Agency is regularly abused, how personal opinions and biases impact real people and businesses with no benefit to the environmental or human health, and that what the Agency communicates to the outside world is usually a far cry from what is encouraged internally".  - "Henry" July 2014

To the politicians reading this blog - do you think it's acceptable that abuses like those documented here and in other places are allowed to continue? Are self indulgent abuse of power, contempt for the law and wholesale cheating by unelected public officials/servants (?!) acceptable?