After posting the article on Greg Barker, the UK’s Energy and Climate Change Minister inspiring statement I sent an email to people I know who are well known, speakers at conferences or have a keen interest in energy matters on his statement and conferences. I am only using first names and will post their comments bellow. Just a reminder of Greg Barkers speech
“I want to unleash a completely new model of competition and enterprise. I want to encourage a vast new army of disruptive new energy players to challenge the Big Six,” Barker said. From individual consumers to community groups, entrepreneurs, SMEs and FTSE giants, I want them all to consider generating their own energy at real scale, as well as starting to sell their excess energy on a commercial basis. A decentralized power to the people energy revolution – not just a few exemplars but tens of thousands of them. The Big Six need to become the Big 60,000.”
” The government needs to do more to “cut red tape” and eradicate over-complicated policy to drive further growth of the green economy. We must also look to do far more to integrate our new policies that help families produce their own renewable electricity with our new incentives to help families generate renewable heat, and make sure they work hand in glove with the range of new
Chris (Scientist and Lab Manager)
Tad (Property developer using sustainable energy and economic systems)
My 2 cents are that more and more people are waking up to the centralized power structure
and are now pushing back. Perhaps we are not the easy pushover Lemmings
the elite think we are.
This appears to be a new awakening.
Robert (Leading industry innovator in electronics)
First off, I abhor the phony conferences that are always saying the technology is here we need to help get it out there. That is just BS, if its real it should be known and it should be finding a way to participate in he market. People make a living off saying this stuff, without ever really saying anything.
There are companies that are formed that do nothing but study the power issues, they make charts and lists and attend conferences, typically payed for by the government. These companies add no value and waste government funds. The government always quotes how much they are spending on green, much of it wasted on these “research companies”. The government appears to be wanting to help in the energy, but if you look at their funding you quickly realize they may not want to change much. They are totally incompetent in how they give out money and what they fund, or they have money reasons for what they do.
The government dumps big dollars into Fusion research, over 50 billion so far, yet they won’t do anything for cold fusion that has produced more energy than Hot Fusion. The government has been very good at funding Solar, but I think they viewed it as a non threat and have been surprised. They now are looking at taxing solar. I think government talks green, but when it comes down to cutting into oil the dollar strings kick in and the policies don’t change much. One or two people in government saying the right words, does not a policy make. Look how they vote, not what they say. Sadly there are only a few Greg Barkers in government.
The LFTR (Thorium) reactors have been proven and offer an incredible safety path with cheap energy. Instead of embracing it, they promise to formulate some policies within the next 30 years. Try and sustain that effort. The bottom line for me is that Government hinders energy more than it helps, but it can not stop technology. If its a viable energy source it can find a market. The breakthroughs will come from individuals and investors that believe in them, like it always has.
If a breakthrough is being suppressed, publish it and let the world know, you have nothing more to lose.
Bill (Inventor, entrepreneur and inspiration to many of us)
Actually this type of thinking will lead no ware. Any large group of people pursing this type of progress on an individual basis will have little to no effect. What is needed is a macro solution not a micro solution.
Like you and many other people who are interested in alternative energy I have myself become very aware that most of it is complete nonsense and will never go anywhere.
There are good solid technologies that are out there that could if really expanded solve most of the world energy problems. By far the best is solar. What we need is a Manhattan type project to solve the problems of energy storage generated by ever increasing efficient solar cells as well as an efficient way of transporting that energy to where it is needed. These problems are well within our capability to solve only if the will is there to complete the task.
Also increasingly improved batteries will compel the world auto industry from using fossil fuels and the age of the electric car will becoming a reality.
Look at Tesla they are leading the way. I would bet that within 5 years (or less) we will :
a. Have a fully electric automobile that will have a 300 + mile range.
b. Be able to be charged in minutes.
c. At a price that the “average” person will be able to afford.
Market forces are at play to make this happen!
The people out there who talk of suppression and conspiracies who believe that 911 was an inside job, that big foot does exist really have no effect on anything , they are simply playing to a very small and irrelevant audience.
Market forces have always been the dominating component in the advance of humanity and it will continue to be so. In reality it is the only
component that has much meaning.
On a side note the technology regarding the Hydra Light ,though innovative, will in reality have very little influence on “the world condition” other than if it was being done right would make us a hell of a lot of money. This sentence if for your eyes only of course.
Solar and batteries are the answer, everything else is simply mental masturbation.
Mark (Inventor, researcher in exotic energy field )
All I can say is this takes on the “appearance” of righteousness and I hope his words are sincere. It COULD indeed be a game changer. However, it COULD also be a ploy to flush out people hiding in the shadows to squash their efforts. I want to believe he has the best intent but I just don’t know. I guess that makes me jaded. So be it. History has proven me correct so far. If he is sincere I believe he too will also be squashed.
Mark (Engineer and Energy researcher)
I think that this is a very positive development. The fact is that while there is no silver bullet we have the means in current technologies to make huge improvements in pollution and sustainability. There is nothing wrong with hoping for a silver bullet. But there is no good reason to stall action waiting for one.
Zig (Electronic Industry developer and Inventor agent)
“You are what you eat” UK government supports the printed electronics industry with grants and
other funding. So now the UK printed electronics industry is more
interested in how to get more grants/funding from their government than
creating end products that make economic sense.
Governments need to do more about what make economic sense vs political
sense. Unfortunately this means you have to fight the moneyed “status quo”. The
existing bureaucratic system will oppose new tech with their “red tape”.
Perhaps that’s the reason why some third world countries with be the first
to adopt a new technology and be the “end round”
Simon (Engineer, Scientist and Inventor)
My partner in the UK (long story) has just had around 3kW of solar
panels installed on her roof. To get the feed-in tariff, there was a
complex sequence of documentation she had to get and a confusing set of
documentation she had to sign, one of which had two declarations (of
which she had to sign only one) regarding whether she had multiple
installations or not. It was somewhat difficult to make sense of the
legal language and the two declarations differed by adding the single
word “not” into the second one. Although the PV installers started by
helping people with that documentation, they said that for legal reasons
they no longer did that – the customer had to understand it and get the
documentation correct. The helpline on British Gas (her electricity
supplier) told her that most people got the documentation wrong, and
that the feed-in tariff would only start once all the documentation was
to their satisfaction. At this moment, over 2 months have gone by
without confirmation that the documentation she sent was indeed correct,
so she’s not yet getting the feed-in tariff.
The point I’m trying to make is that it’s not yet a simple matter to
just install the solar panels and get cheap energy, and that this needs
to be simplified – people should not need to get legal advice on how to
set their systems up.
With the current arrangements roof-top PVs will feed into the grid when
the sun shines and the customer will draw from the grid when the sun
isn’t sufficient, and it looks to me that there will be both financial
and engineering problems. The financial problems are that the grid will
still need the same maintenance of the cables and infrastructure, yet
the profit from it will plummet. That looks unsustainable to me unless
the standing charge for connection to the grid goes up by a lot. The
engineering problem is that few of our power-generation facilities can
be turned up and down quickly as the load changes. Currently the only
generation type that can cope with fast load changes is hydroelectric,
with gas-fired being the next fastest to react. Coal-fired and nuclear
need to have a steady base-load to work efficiently. To cope with rapid
load-changes, as will be needed in future, we will need to have some
form of energy-storage built-in to the grid as it currently is set up.
This energy storage needs to be fast-reacting, efficient and very large,
and again it will put up the cost of running the grid and thus the
standing charge to be connected to it.
Given the price-regulation that is threatened, to me it looks like the
energy companies might look at the figures and decide that they can no
longer make a profit from it, and thus they’ll de-emphasise power
generation and will not invest – just run their current systems until
they fail. We can therefore look forward to grid failures and blackouts,
and when you can get electricity it will be much more expensive than
Anyone who can, therefore, should install their own generating system
and energy-storage if they can, and get the size right so that they can
disconnect from the grid altogether. Of course as more people do that,
the grid itself will also become less viable as a business and will also
become more expensive as fewer people use it – the cost of running it
will rise and there will be fewer people paying for it, so the cost per
user will spiral. Because of this we may see the demise of the grid in a
decade or so – it may be viable in cities but the small towns and
country areas will need to generate their own off-grid power since it
will be a lot cheaper for them.
We have become used to being able to plug any device into the
wall-socket and to use what we need when we need it, and it’s been
Somebody Else’s Problem how that energy gets generated. In future we
will have a limited ceiling of power available, depending on what we set
up personally and can afford, and will need to adjust our use of that
energy to fit what we have.
Jeroen (Conference Director)
“… even if all subsidies and privileges for nuclear and fossil energy were immediately done away with, there would still be no equality of opportunity for renewable energy.”— Hermann Scheer
“… renewable energy, by definition, cannot be consumed.”– Hermann Scheer
“…ultimately no one is spared the wildfires of the global crises caused by energy.”– Hermann Scheer
“The assertion that it is not possible to arrive at a comprehensive energy supply using renewable energy is an insult to the creativity of physicists, chemists and engineers.”– Hermann Scheer
“Since we do not live in a world of mythological sagas, we need to rely on social forces to put the nuclear and fossil fireplace on ice.”– Hermann Scheer
“… 10.000 years of civilized history in which human beings satisfied their energy needs almost exclusively with renewable energy.”– Hermann Scheer
“Even if the climate problem did not exist, there would still be a mass of ecological reasons speaking on behalf of an energy shift.”– Hermann Scheer
“It is only a question of political will, nothing else!”– Hermann Scheer
“In the long run, economies that rely on depletable resources are doomed to fail,” says Zittel. “The coal peak makes it even more urgent to switch to renewable energy without delay.”
“With the looming threat of more pain at the pumps – as well as inflation concerns – investors have turned their focus to the alternative energy sector as a possible panacea to these growing woes.”—Jocelynn Drake (Option Advisor voor Forbes.com)
“… if there were no subsidies for any type of energy, renewables would win the competition.”
“Finding sufficient supplies of clean energy for the future is one of society’s most daunting challenges.”—Basic Energy Sciences Workshop on Solar Energy Utilization