The government in the UK promised to reduce the country's carbon emissions by eighty percent by 2020 compared to 1990 levels. In recent weeks, however, the UK public opinion started to question the dedication of the government.
An influential website, Wallstreetpit.com, said in a recent article that BP, a large energy company with headquarters in the UK, is closing down its Chinese, Turkish, Indian and British projects and focusing their attention on the United States. The same article implies that approximately thirty percent of the energy supply for the UK is supposed to come from windfarms. There were calls from opinion leaders in the UK asking the government why it has allowed BP to focus on the US when it (the government) says the future of British energy is green.
The Guardian website included an article that touted Great Britain as one of the world's premier locations for the development of wind technology. Great Britain's wind technology popularity comes from its long coastline and the winds that have become famous around the globe.
The article on the Guardian's site claims that the new partnership between Vattenfall and Iberdola Renovables has chosen the UK as the host for its latest wind farm project. The project is expected to put out 300MW of wind energy and will cost roughly 780M pounds Sterling to construct. Was this joint venture allowed because BP has moved its focus? If so - why is the government letting private business ventures shoulder the responsibility for wind technology?
Still more criticism accompanies the complicated planning rules and the amount of money that it will take to construct all of the wind farms that the UK will need to build if the government truly wants to dedicate a third of its energy consumption to energy produced by wind farms. An independent entity, The Carbon Trust, has estimated that in order to speed up the process to move to renewable energy, about sixteen billion pounds will need to be cut from the originally proposed budget. An article by redgreenandblue.org points out that by the 2020 target originally quoted by the UK government, only a quarter of the offshore wind farms Britain needs will have actually been built.
Not only experts, but also most public opinions in the United Kingdom agree that renewable energy and not the current power grid is the future of energy production for the country. Green energy costs less money in the long run and is better for the globe than the current power grid system. Unfortunately, because of the shortfalls, British people should ask how committed the UK government really is to green energy. If the government truly wants to implement wind energy, why is the project budget being reduced? What is keeping the 2020 goal from happening? - 16069
An influential website, Wallstreetpit.com, said in a recent article that BP, a large energy company with headquarters in the UK, is closing down its Chinese, Turkish, Indian and British projects and focusing their attention on the United States. The same article implies that approximately thirty percent of the energy supply for the UK is supposed to come from windfarms. There were calls from opinion leaders in the UK asking the government why it has allowed BP to focus on the US when it (the government) says the future of British energy is green.
The Guardian website included an article that touted Great Britain as one of the world's premier locations for the development of wind technology. Great Britain's wind technology popularity comes from its long coastline and the winds that have become famous around the globe.
The article on the Guardian's site claims that the new partnership between Vattenfall and Iberdola Renovables has chosen the UK as the host for its latest wind farm project. The project is expected to put out 300MW of wind energy and will cost roughly 780M pounds Sterling to construct. Was this joint venture allowed because BP has moved its focus? If so - why is the government letting private business ventures shoulder the responsibility for wind technology?
Still more criticism accompanies the complicated planning rules and the amount of money that it will take to construct all of the wind farms that the UK will need to build if the government truly wants to dedicate a third of its energy consumption to energy produced by wind farms. An independent entity, The Carbon Trust, has estimated that in order to speed up the process to move to renewable energy, about sixteen billion pounds will need to be cut from the originally proposed budget. An article by redgreenandblue.org points out that by the 2020 target originally quoted by the UK government, only a quarter of the offshore wind farms Britain needs will have actually been built.
Not only experts, but also most public opinions in the United Kingdom agree that renewable energy and not the current power grid is the future of energy production for the country. Green energy costs less money in the long run and is better for the globe than the current power grid system. Unfortunately, because of the shortfalls, British people should ask how committed the UK government really is to green energy. If the government truly wants to implement wind energy, why is the project budget being reduced? What is keeping the 2020 goal from happening? - 16069
About the Author:
Tal Potishman, editor of Heating Central, writes articles about efficient heating, boilers, Brighton boiler, underfloor heating and solar thermal. He specializes in helping save money by advising on efficient heating.
