Yup, that did not make sense did it, although, it is not that far from the truth. It is pretty much on the level of ‘if a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat?’ I know, it sounds lame, but the setting is a bit lame and it is open to debate who is right, I for one am clearly in the mindset that I could be wrong, I freely admit that off the bat.
You see, the UK (aka United Kingdom) has a problem, it is coming up short to a much larger degree with energy and that will go on 3-5 years at the very least. Shale Gas is too dangerous in the UK. You merely have to look at the Netherlands for that example as well as the papers of the Dutch NAM to see that there is a larger problem and the Dutch North is in a terrible state because of it. The Netherlands is however on European main land, the UK is not, as such the dangers to groundwater could be a lot more hazardous. The second option is to add 1-2 nuclear reactors, but that is 5 years away and the UK is a bit empty on the coffer side of things, but it is an option for long term consideration. And then there is the reliable coal, a substance fought over since the Onedin line was a fashionable time (circa 1860). So when I see ‘Government defends Cumbria coal mine green light’ I get the response by BBC writer Roger Harrabin (at https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-55668507), and he is optionally correct, but the UK is dealt a set of cards that do not look prosperous and in the short term consider the power switched off in every house for 2 hours a day for the next three years. The issue is that pressing, so when I see “Environmentalists have reacted with astonishment and disbelief, saying the carbon from burning coal is clearly a global concern. They warned the decision will diminish the UK’s credibility.” I am not entirely sure if the environmentalists understand the situation as it is, yes we can be overly protective in the 11th hour, but that also means that for the next three years all houses will lose power 2 hours a day. No electricity of any kind, that is the setting the UK faces. Elon Musk is sitting on a solution to solve it, but that is also 1-2 years away and that will bring cost to EVERY house in the UK, it is up to you all, but we need to see that governments on a global scale were sitting on their hands whilst the energy shortage was clearly visible, the UK has only 2 direct options and one is 5 years away (it takes time to build a nuclear energy reactor). Now if Paul Miner gets his way (I a not saying he is wrong) and we see the setting “All coal mines should be refused planning permission, according to current government policy. So, it beggars belief why ministers have not stepped in and refused the planning application for this coal mine in Cumbria”, he must also deal with all the complaints when well over 40 million people will have to find a solution living on power 22 out of 24 hours a day, when that shortage is felt by the people in the UK, they need to visit Paul Miner and hand over their complaints to him.
Now, I am not in favour of coal mines and coal based energy systems, but the UK is now in a stage where they might not have a choice, the inactions over 1990-2010 will now be showing. When we get the numbers “Between 1990 and 2018, net imports of electricity increased by 60 percent” (source: Statista), we need to realise that it will get worse, in addition we are given “In 2017 UK Net imports made up 36% of UK energy needs (paraphrased)”, as such 2021 could spell that energy imports could hit the 50% marker.
So why might I be wrong?
I accept I might be wrong, The stage Statista shows is one that causes questions, first off, Statista has always been a reliable source of information, as such I could be wrong, yet I have issues with the setting that power needs between 2009-2019 has gone down from 400 GWh to 345 GWh. That is a decrease of a little over 13%, and when we see how electronics have been either on par and in some cases higher, 15% is large, and I believe it is not entirely accurate, I personally believe that over the next 3 years, power needs will increase well over 10%, The net import of electricity rise of 60% is partial evidence, our changing habits on the internet, streaming and all the devices relying on IoT are a secondary level of evidence and there is more to come, all whilst the UK is coming up short again and again and at some point France and Norway will not be able to provide the energy required. But the Statista curve is also optional evidence that my way of thinking is incorrect and that too needs to be out there.
So we might be on the fence, we might fence with the numbers we see, but it is clear that there is a larger stage and I am willing to bet that some numbers are behind a curtain so that we remain lulled to sleep, until it is too late, and by my personal reckoning it is already too late, because if there was still time there would not be any coal mine in the planning stage, whether it is local or not, whether that stage is global, all whilst I showed on December 10th 2020 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/12/10/uniform-nameless-entitlement-perforation/) in my blog ‘Uniform Nameless Entitlement Perforation’ that 1% of the industries account for 50% of the damages. The chart was clear and as I now see “it further fuels climate and ecological breakdown”, all whilst the actions against the 1% industrials who create the massive pollution damage are nowhere in sight, hypocrisy anyone?
So yes, I am not in favour of this coal mine, but I wonder if the UK has too many options left and when the UK faces brown-outs like California does and it happens in winter, I wonder how many snivelling people will cry for energy relief and that is if the people in the UK can still afford energy bills in 2022, because that too is a question that might not be as easy to answer as we think, especially if all that energy is to be imported. Yet none of that is seen in the article (which is fair), yet ignoring the larger stage is folly, especially in these times.