Anyone wondering what happened to Chris Huhne?

[Osem]

Biomass subsidies implemented by Chris Huhne are costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds and his favoured “carbon neutral” wood pellets are more damaging to the environment than coal, a damning study reveals today. But wait for it… The highly critical review of the disgraced former Energy Secretary’s policy was authored by his own former special adviser Duncan Brack. He now says the £450 million spent on biomass subsidies was a mistake:

https://order-order.com/page/2/

Anyway, what is Huhne up to these days now he’s out of the clink? He’s European Chairman of US firm Zilkha Biomass, who supply the very same wood pellets it turns out are so damaging to the environment.

Sure it's not his wife?...

[Taf]

An old guy near me gets jumbo sacks of wood pellets for a wood burning stove delivered regularly.

He was told he pays less VAT (5% instead of 20%) if he says they are for his "rabbits".

He just won't accept that it's actually the other way around!

[Ramrod]

"Green" policies would seem to responsible for a lot of environmental damage:
link

Beside the Great Diesel Car Disaster you have: forests cut down to create ‘biomass’ for power stations such as Drax; primary rainforest replaced by palm-oil plantations for biofuels; upland landscapes ravaged and millions of birds and bats killed by wind turbines; birds frazzled by solar arrays; forests in America’s Pacific north-west rendered sterile by legislation designed to protect the spotted owl.

Then, of course, there’s the human cost: the malnutrition and high mortality caused by the greens’ war on GM produce such as golden rice; food shortages and poverty caused by the diversion of agricultural land to biofuels; lower living standards created by the enforced rejection of cheap fossil fuel in favour of ‘renewable’ energy; fuel poverty deaths caused by artificially inflated ‘clean’ energy prices.

A few years ago I wrote a book called Watermelons with the subtitle ‘How Environmentalists Are Killing The Planet, Destroying The Economy and Stealing Your Children’s Future’. It wasn’t a provocation. It was no more than the truth. The greens and their useful idiots in politics, business and the media have got away with doing far too much damage for far too long. They are not the good guys. What they have done is evil. It is time the guilty parties made amends.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

"Green" policies would seem to responsible for a lot of environmental damage:
link

Well bandwagons are in demand, especially by those who make their living jumping on them or encouraging others to do so.

The thing is wood is a renewable.Coal is not.

To answer the question.

Who ? and No.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Paul M

To answer the question.

Who ? and No.

A rhetorical question which only makes sense if you know who he is and what he did.

Just to let those who really don't know and may wish to employ his vast array of skills.

http://www.chrishuhne.org.uk/

Oddly there's no mention of:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21737627

But there we are.

Originally Posted by Maggy J

The thing is wood is a renewable.Coal is not.

The complaint about wood pellets is that the carbon cycle is too slow to be of immediate benefit, which arguably is what the environment currently needs.

When the industry was very young in the U.K., a good proportion of wood pellets were manufactured from waste wood. Most of it is now virgin softwood from commercial plantations, but even if every single felled tree is immediately re-planted, it is decades before the new tree has soaked up the carbon dioxide released by burning the old one.

The report argues that we shouldn't therefore be seeing biomass as a replacement for coal, enabling old fossil fuel power stations to keep going.

I have an interest in this as my home is biomass heated, but as I have had my system in for nearly 10 years, it was funded under a grant scheme, not the continuing subsidy scheme that is available now. So if they start cutting subsidies on domestic biomass (and I suspect they will, eventually), it won't affect me. I pay about £250 per tonne, and use 4-5 tonnes a year.

---------- Post added at 10:56 ---------- Previous post was at 10:47 ----------

Originally Posted by Taf

An old guy near me gets jumbo sacks of wood pellets for a wood burning stove delivered regularly.

He was told he pays less VAT (5% instead of 20%) if he says they are for his "rabbits".

He just won't accept that it's actually the other way around!

Assuming his supplier sells animal bedding as well as heating fuel (and most don't), that supplier is asking for a world of trouble from HMRC if they can't show, when required, that they have taken reasonable steps to apply the correct rate of VAT to a product. I'd be amazed if such a retailer would supply a one tonne tote bag for "rabbits" unless the delivery address was a commercial breeder.

I doubt it makes any difference what your neighbour is saying to his supplier. They are most likely set up primarily (or exclusively) as a heating fuel supplier and will apply VAT at 5% in all cases. I expect he says "rabbits" on his order, then sees 5% VAT on his invoice, and thinks he's got away with it again.

Muppet.

Originally Posted by Maggy J

The thing is wood is a renewable.Coal is not.

Coal is renewable, it just takes a bit longer ...