At last some mainstream press about the negative impacts of hydro!
From the Spectator this week (1st September):
Why does hydroelectric power have such a friendly image compared to other forms of renewable energy? In this week’s magazine cover, our first ever Matt Ridley Prize winner Pippa Cuckson examines why hydroelectricity is not just bad for the taxpayer, but also bad for the environment. In our View from 22 podcast, Fraser Nelson discusses this hidden scandal:
‘The principle of hydroelectric power, which is great for mountains, does not apply to England’s green and pleasant lakes. But that hasn’t stopped the government subsidising this because they love the idea so much…every week three hydro-plants are being authorized which pretty much have the power of a candle. They require huge amounts of subsidy but most important of all, they harm the environment.’
You'll have to buy the magazine or subscribe on-line to read the article in full but there are more details from the Spectator here and there's a podcast you can download too. Here's a sneaky peek:
'As with wind and solar, so it seems it is with hydro power: a few rich
get richer; everyone else gets poorer; property rights - in this case
riparian rights - are trampled;
time-honoured liberties are infringed; energy prices rise; and the
environment, in the name of being saved, is needlessly damaged. But don't expect to be reading this any time soon on the British Hydropower Association's website.'
(image from The Spectator 1st September 2012, thanks to Glenn for the heads up on the article)
Watch the film, 'Kelham Island Hydro', and ask whether what boils down to be a few kettles' worth of hydro-generated electricity is proportionate to the decimation of our little-understood and very fragile river ecosystems.
If you have problems viewing the film from here, please view on Vimeo or watch on Google where you can also download to your pc.