Thursday May 06, @02:40PM
eldavojohn writes "A Swedish startup has acquired funding for beginning scale model trials of underwater kites, which would be secured to a turbine to harness tidal energy for power. The company reports that the kite device allows the attached turbine to harvest energy at 10 times the speed of the actual tidal current. With a 12-meter wingspan on the kite, the company says they could harvest 500 kilowatts while it's operational. This novel new design is one of many in which a startup or university hope to turn the ocean into a renewable energy source."
Friday, 7 May 2010
Gulf of Mexico oil spill: fears over impact of 'untested' dispersant
A US environmental group has raised concerns over the use of a dispersant being used to tackle the oil leak threatening disaster along the Gulf Coast, saying its impact on marine life was unclear.
Published: 7:00AM BST 07 May 2010
Larry Schweiger, National Wildlife Federation head, said the method of using underwater dispersant at the source of the leak was untested and could have devastating effects.
"The problem with putting the underwater dispersant where they're putting them is that they've never done that before," said Mr Schweiger.
He said concerns included how the chemical would migrate after being deployed and whether it would severely harm marine life since it was already deep underwater, unlike when it is deployed on the surface.
"The increasing use of dispersant has left a number of questions about where this material is moving to," said Mr Schweiger.
The US Environmental Protection Agency acknowledged in a statement that the ramifications of the underwater dispersant were unclear and said it had only authorized two tests of the method for that reason.
"The tests were done to determine if the dispersant would be effective in breaking up the oil and helping to control the leaks," the EPA said.
"No further use of dispersants underwater is planned until BP provides the results of these tests for our review."
The agency said "the effects of underwater dispersant use on the environment are still widely unknown, which is why we are testing to determine its effectiveness first and foremost."
It noted that BP remains authorised to use the dispersant on the water's surface.
An organisation representing Gulf Coast shrimp fishermen has also raised concerns about the use of dispersants.
An official from US oceans and weather agency NOAA, Doug Helton, said dispersant was one tool to fight the oil leak and "any response technique is a tradeoff."
He stressed the importance of fighting the slick offshore, before it enters fragile wetlands on the Gulf Coast.
The leak from a British Petroleum well in the Gulf is spewing out oil at a rate of some 5,000 barrels, or 210,000 gallons, a day.
Published: 7:00AM BST 07 May 2010
Larry Schweiger, National Wildlife Federation head, said the method of using underwater dispersant at the source of the leak was untested and could have devastating effects.
"The problem with putting the underwater dispersant where they're putting them is that they've never done that before," said Mr Schweiger.
He said concerns included how the chemical would migrate after being deployed and whether it would severely harm marine life since it was already deep underwater, unlike when it is deployed on the surface.
"The increasing use of dispersant has left a number of questions about where this material is moving to," said Mr Schweiger.
The US Environmental Protection Agency acknowledged in a statement that the ramifications of the underwater dispersant were unclear and said it had only authorized two tests of the method for that reason.
"The tests were done to determine if the dispersant would be effective in breaking up the oil and helping to control the leaks," the EPA said.
"No further use of dispersants underwater is planned until BP provides the results of these tests for our review."
The agency said "the effects of underwater dispersant use on the environment are still widely unknown, which is why we are testing to determine its effectiveness first and foremost."
It noted that BP remains authorised to use the dispersant on the water's surface.
An organisation representing Gulf Coast shrimp fishermen has also raised concerns about the use of dispersants.
An official from US oceans and weather agency NOAA, Doug Helton, said dispersant was one tool to fight the oil leak and "any response technique is a tradeoff."
He stressed the importance of fighting the slick offshore, before it enters fragile wetlands on the Gulf Coast.
The leak from a British Petroleum well in the Gulf is spewing out oil at a rate of some 5,000 barrels, or 210,000 gallons, a day.
Gulf of Mexico oil slick: Sarah Palin fuels anti-British sentiment
Sarah Palin has fuelled growing anti-British sentiment over the Gulf of Mexico oil rig disaster by saying "foreign" oil companies like BP were not to be trusted.
Nick Allen in Louisiana Published: 5:37PM BST 06 May 2010
Visitors fear that oil may wash up on their holiday beaches Photo: AP
The former Alaska governor and potential 2012 presidential candidate attacked the British oil giant over the recent Deepwater Horizon spill and a previous one in her state in 2006.
Her comments came despite the fact her husband Todd Palin worked for BP for 18 years, as a production supervisor, and only left the company last year to spend more time with his family.
Mrs Palin urged those in the Gulf of Mexico to "learn from Alaska's lesson with foreign oil companies." She added: "Don't naively trust – verify." As an oil slick the size of Luxembourg loomed off the US coast her intervention added to growing anger at BP among environmentalists and those who face losing their livelihoods.
Kristina Johnson, of the Sierra Club, America's largest grassroots environmental group, said: "They're the ones who have profited from oil and from our oceans. They're the ones who put the Gulf Coast at risk so that they could rake in record profits."
Captain Damon McKnight, a fishing boat captain in Venice, Louisiana, said: "If I was to go and cause a problem I would be expected to clean it up. My biggest beef is BP is really falling behind in the clean up process.
"There's all this oil out there and virtually nobody cleaning it. It's not getting done."
A 100-ton "containment dome" has arrived at the spot where the Deepwater Horizon rig sank 50 miles (80km) off the Louisiana coast on April 22.
BP hopes that by lowering the 40ft high concrete and steel contraption over the leaks, nearly a mile down, it will be able to capture 200,000 gallons of oil a day which is spewing out. The tactic has never been tried before at such a depth.
Mrs Palin, who promoted the slogan "Drill, baby, drill," said she continues to support offshore drilling but the US should not rely on foreign countries for oil.
In 2006, shortly before she became governor, a BP pipeline in Alaska spilt 200,000 gallons of oil at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska.
Investigators blamed the spill on corrosion and BP was eventually ordered to pay $20 million (£12 million) in fines and restitution.
Months before the Deepwater Horizon spill two congressmen raised concerns about BP's operations in Alaska. They said there had been four "significant" incidents in two years and warned proposed budget cuts might compromise safety.
Nick Allen in Louisiana Published: 5:37PM BST 06 May 2010
Visitors fear that oil may wash up on their holiday beaches Photo: AP
The former Alaska governor and potential 2012 presidential candidate attacked the British oil giant over the recent Deepwater Horizon spill and a previous one in her state in 2006.
Her comments came despite the fact her husband Todd Palin worked for BP for 18 years, as a production supervisor, and only left the company last year to spend more time with his family.
Mrs Palin urged those in the Gulf of Mexico to "learn from Alaska's lesson with foreign oil companies." She added: "Don't naively trust – verify." As an oil slick the size of Luxembourg loomed off the US coast her intervention added to growing anger at BP among environmentalists and those who face losing their livelihoods.
Kristina Johnson, of the Sierra Club, America's largest grassroots environmental group, said: "They're the ones who have profited from oil and from our oceans. They're the ones who put the Gulf Coast at risk so that they could rake in record profits."
Captain Damon McKnight, a fishing boat captain in Venice, Louisiana, said: "If I was to go and cause a problem I would be expected to clean it up. My biggest beef is BP is really falling behind in the clean up process.
"There's all this oil out there and virtually nobody cleaning it. It's not getting done."
A 100-ton "containment dome" has arrived at the spot where the Deepwater Horizon rig sank 50 miles (80km) off the Louisiana coast on April 22.
BP hopes that by lowering the 40ft high concrete and steel contraption over the leaks, nearly a mile down, it will be able to capture 200,000 gallons of oil a day which is spewing out. The tactic has never been tried before at such a depth.
Mrs Palin, who promoted the slogan "Drill, baby, drill," said she continues to support offshore drilling but the US should not rely on foreign countries for oil.
In 2006, shortly before she became governor, a BP pipeline in Alaska spilt 200,000 gallons of oil at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska.
Investigators blamed the spill on corrosion and BP was eventually ordered to pay $20 million (£12 million) in fines and restitution.
Months before the Deepwater Horizon spill two congressmen raised concerns about BP's operations in Alaska. They said there had been four "significant" incidents in two years and warned proposed budget cuts might compromise safety.
Global IT brands urged to be more accountable for pollution in China supply chain
Investigation by coalition of Chinese environmental groups accuses global IT brands of supply chain links to heavy metal poisoning cases in China
Jonathan Watts, Asia environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 6 May 2010 16.03 BST
Vodafone, BT and 27 other leading technology companies must do more to come clean about the potentially dirty and dangerous side of their manufacturing operations in China, according to a new investigation into heavy metal poisoning in the supply chains of global IT brands.
The investigation – carried out by a coalition of 34 Chinese environmental groups – traced a link between lead and cadmium contamination cases and the production of materials for mobile phone batteries and computer circuit boards for foreign companies.
Their findings suggest corporate promises at home of clean production, transparency and accountability can be lost overseas in the complex myriad of supply chains.
More than 4,000 people – mostly children – have been found to have unsafe levels of lead in their blood over the past year in a widening heavy metal poisoning case across several Chinese provinces.
Several of the cases have been widely reported but, until now, the focus of coverage has been on the Chinese factories involved and the weak oversight of environmental authorities. The new report adds a global context by highlighting the responsibility of the big IT firms higher up the supply chain to provide more information to the public and to ensure that low-cost production is not carried out at the expense of local people's health.
Following the supply trail, the investigators found that Shanghang Huaqiang Battery – which was implicated in the lead poisoning of 121 children in Fujian province last year – was a key equipment manufacturer for Narada Power Source. A screen grab of the latter's website claims it is a supplier for Vodafone, BT, and other leading global mobile telecoms brands. They also discovered several other violations, including the discharge of pollution into a Dongguan sewer by a Hong Kong-listed supplier of two multinational computer manufacturers.
The coalition of Chinese NGOs, which include Friends of Nature, the Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs and Green Earth Volunteers, have contacted the named firms to ask for clarification, but the response has been mixed.
They say they have received prompt replies from some. But other firms, such as Vodafone and BT have not returned their calls and messages.
The NGOs have called on the foreign firms to be more accountable to the public.
"If a brand calls itself environmentally friendly and in favour of sustainable development, they should be concerned if their supply chains violate environment regulations," said Zhang Boju of Friends of Nature. "The least they should do is to reply to our request for information."
BT said it would reply after an internal investigation into the allegations. "To the best of our knowledge and belief, BT isn't procuring Shanghang Huaqiang Battery Company products via third-party suppliers. However, as part of our ethical and sustainable procurement policy, we are now reviewing this with supply chain partners to ensure that this is the case on a 100% basis," a spokesman wrote in an email reply to the Guardian.
Vodafone said it was unaware of the approach by the NGOs, but that it had a stringent code for ethical purchasing.
In an email response by the press office, the UK company said it had not been aware of the environment problems until last September, when its supplier - Narada - stopped all business with Shanghang after the lead poisoning came to light. Vodafone continues to source batteries from Narada, which it says "has extensive environmental, health and safety, and labour standard management systems in place."
But in a reflection of the problems that have emerged, the UK firm said it had updated its ethical purchasing code this year and was in the process of publishing a set of environmental principles for suppliers of mobile devices.
"These include a clause to reduce overall environmental impacts and hazardous materials in batteries," the company said.
The authors of the report expressed disappointment at the lack of a direct reply from the two UK companies and warned of complacency, particularly on the part of Vodafone.
"Their statement suggests everything is now in place. How can they say that after such a serious case in their supply chain?" said Ma Jun, the founder of the Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs and a key figure in the NGO's study. "They demonstrated not a slim sense of sympathy or regret that the product it sourced was made by a factory that contributed to such a serious damage to the health of local communities."
It was not good enough, he said, for the firm to simply switch away from a supplier after it was found to have caused an environmental problem.
"I hope British companies like Vodafone and BT, known for their environmental commitment, could take the lead in greening the globalised manufacturing and sourcing. Not only is it essential in fulfilling their own environmental commitment, but it will be the single biggest help they could make in pollution control efforts in China and other developing countries."
Jonathan Watts, Asia environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 6 May 2010 16.03 BST
Vodafone, BT and 27 other leading technology companies must do more to come clean about the potentially dirty and dangerous side of their manufacturing operations in China, according to a new investigation into heavy metal poisoning in the supply chains of global IT brands.
The investigation – carried out by a coalition of 34 Chinese environmental groups – traced a link between lead and cadmium contamination cases and the production of materials for mobile phone batteries and computer circuit boards for foreign companies.
Their findings suggest corporate promises at home of clean production, transparency and accountability can be lost overseas in the complex myriad of supply chains.
More than 4,000 people – mostly children – have been found to have unsafe levels of lead in their blood over the past year in a widening heavy metal poisoning case across several Chinese provinces.
Several of the cases have been widely reported but, until now, the focus of coverage has been on the Chinese factories involved and the weak oversight of environmental authorities. The new report adds a global context by highlighting the responsibility of the big IT firms higher up the supply chain to provide more information to the public and to ensure that low-cost production is not carried out at the expense of local people's health.
Following the supply trail, the investigators found that Shanghang Huaqiang Battery – which was implicated in the lead poisoning of 121 children in Fujian province last year – was a key equipment manufacturer for Narada Power Source. A screen grab of the latter's website claims it is a supplier for Vodafone, BT, and other leading global mobile telecoms brands. They also discovered several other violations, including the discharge of pollution into a Dongguan sewer by a Hong Kong-listed supplier of two multinational computer manufacturers.
The coalition of Chinese NGOs, which include Friends of Nature, the Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs and Green Earth Volunteers, have contacted the named firms to ask for clarification, but the response has been mixed.
They say they have received prompt replies from some. But other firms, such as Vodafone and BT have not returned their calls and messages.
The NGOs have called on the foreign firms to be more accountable to the public.
"If a brand calls itself environmentally friendly and in favour of sustainable development, they should be concerned if their supply chains violate environment regulations," said Zhang Boju of Friends of Nature. "The least they should do is to reply to our request for information."
BT said it would reply after an internal investigation into the allegations. "To the best of our knowledge and belief, BT isn't procuring Shanghang Huaqiang Battery Company products via third-party suppliers. However, as part of our ethical and sustainable procurement policy, we are now reviewing this with supply chain partners to ensure that this is the case on a 100% basis," a spokesman wrote in an email reply to the Guardian.
Vodafone said it was unaware of the approach by the NGOs, but that it had a stringent code for ethical purchasing.
In an email response by the press office, the UK company said it had not been aware of the environment problems until last September, when its supplier - Narada - stopped all business with Shanghang after the lead poisoning came to light. Vodafone continues to source batteries from Narada, which it says "has extensive environmental, health and safety, and labour standard management systems in place."
But in a reflection of the problems that have emerged, the UK firm said it had updated its ethical purchasing code this year and was in the process of publishing a set of environmental principles for suppliers of mobile devices.
"These include a clause to reduce overall environmental impacts and hazardous materials in batteries," the company said.
The authors of the report expressed disappointment at the lack of a direct reply from the two UK companies and warned of complacency, particularly on the part of Vodafone.
"Their statement suggests everything is now in place. How can they say that after such a serious case in their supply chain?" said Ma Jun, the founder of the Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs and a key figure in the NGO's study. "They demonstrated not a slim sense of sympathy or regret that the product it sourced was made by a factory that contributed to such a serious damage to the health of local communities."
It was not good enough, he said, for the firm to simply switch away from a supplier after it was found to have caused an environmental problem.
"I hope British companies like Vodafone and BT, known for their environmental commitment, could take the lead in greening the globalised manufacturing and sourcing. Not only is it essential in fulfilling their own environmental commitment, but it will be the single biggest help they could make in pollution control efforts in China and other developing countries."
South African tourism minister favourite to replace Yvo de Boer
Marthinus van Schalkwyk tipped as likely successor as UN looks to developing country with rising influence in UN climate talks
Reuters
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 6 May 2010 16.00 BST
South Africa's minister of tourism Marthinus van Schalkwyk is front-runner to replace Yvo de Boer as UN climate chief, sources familiar with the selection process told Reuters on Thursday.
The run-off is between developing country candidates, reflecting their rising status in stalled UN climate talks to agree a successor to the existing Kyoto protocol. De Boer, of the Netherlands, steps down on July 1 after almost four years.
An interview panel had selected a final shortlist of van Schalkwyk and Costa Rica's Christiana Figueres, one source said, adding van Schalkwyk had the support of key countries. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon would make the final decision.
A western diplomat based in New York agreed those two were the favoured candidates.
"The front runner is Marthinus," said a third source, also on condition of anonymity.
"The positive arguments are that he is a minister and so can talk to ministers, and has been a governor of a state so knows how to manage. You need a politician to deal with politicians."
Van Schalkwyk was premier of Western Cape Province from 2002 to 2004. Figueres has been a member of the Costa Rican climate negotiating team since 1995. Her father, Jose Figueres Ferrer, was president of Costa Rica three times.
Norwegian environment minister Erik Solheim praised van Schalkwyk. "He is a very strong candidate, as he was the South African minister of the environment (before taking his present post), but there are other strong candidates," he told Reuters.
"It's very likely that Secretary-General Ban will appoint someone from a developing nation. That would mean a move from Europe to the developing nations and I think that's very sound."
South Africa has proposed some of the most ambitious curbs on carbon emissions among developing countries. However, it recently courted criticism from environmentalists by pushing ahead with plans for one of the world's largest coal power plants.
De Boer announced in February he would step down, saying a new era of diplomacy was starting after the Copenhagen climate summit last December fell short of agreeing a new treaty to replace the Kyoto protocol which comes to an end after 2012.
Reuters
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 6 May 2010 16.00 BST
South Africa's minister of tourism Marthinus van Schalkwyk is front-runner to replace Yvo de Boer as UN climate chief, sources familiar with the selection process told Reuters on Thursday.
The run-off is between developing country candidates, reflecting their rising status in stalled UN climate talks to agree a successor to the existing Kyoto protocol. De Boer, of the Netherlands, steps down on July 1 after almost four years.
An interview panel had selected a final shortlist of van Schalkwyk and Costa Rica's Christiana Figueres, one source said, adding van Schalkwyk had the support of key countries. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon would make the final decision.
A western diplomat based in New York agreed those two were the favoured candidates.
"The front runner is Marthinus," said a third source, also on condition of anonymity.
"The positive arguments are that he is a minister and so can talk to ministers, and has been a governor of a state so knows how to manage. You need a politician to deal with politicians."
Van Schalkwyk was premier of Western Cape Province from 2002 to 2004. Figueres has been a member of the Costa Rican climate negotiating team since 1995. Her father, Jose Figueres Ferrer, was president of Costa Rica three times.
Norwegian environment minister Erik Solheim praised van Schalkwyk. "He is a very strong candidate, as he was the South African minister of the environment (before taking his present post), but there are other strong candidates," he told Reuters.
"It's very likely that Secretary-General Ban will appoint someone from a developing nation. That would mean a move from Europe to the developing nations and I think that's very sound."
South Africa has proposed some of the most ambitious curbs on carbon emissions among developing countries. However, it recently courted criticism from environmentalists by pushing ahead with plans for one of the world's largest coal power plants.
De Boer announced in February he would step down, saying a new era of diplomacy was starting after the Copenhagen climate summit last December fell short of agreeing a new treaty to replace the Kyoto protocol which comes to an end after 2012.
Leading scientists condemn 'political assaults' on climate researchers
Open letter defends the integrity of climate science and hits out at recent attacks driven by 'special interests or dogma' •
Celia Cole
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 6 May 2010 19.00 BST
A group of 255 of the world's top scientists today written an open letter aimed at restoring public faith in the integrity of climate science.
In a strongly worded reproof of the recent escalation of political assaults on climatologists, the letter, published in the US Journal Science and signed by 11 Nobel laureates, attacks critics driven by "special interests or dogma" and "McCarthy-like" threats against researchers. It also attempts to set the record straight on the process of rigorous scientific research.
The letter is a response to negative publicity following the release of thousands of hacked emails from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia (UEA) and two mistakes makes by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN climate body.
The letter sets out some basic features of the scientific method. "Like all human beings, scientists make mistakes, but the scientific process is designed to find and correct them. But when some conclusions have been thoroughly and deeply tested, questioned, and examined, they gain the status of 'well-established theories' and are often spoken of as 'facts'," it says.
The document, citing theories including the age and origin of the Earth, the Big Bang and Darwin's evolution by natural selection, says that anthropogenic climate change is now so well-supported by evidence that it has achieved the same status. It adds that owing to science's adversarial nature, "fame" awaits any scientists who can prove the theory wrong.
"There is nothing remotely identified in the recent events that changes the fundamental conclusions about climate change," the letter says.
The authors – who are all members of the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the country's premier scientific institution – include some of the academic community's most distinguished climate researchers. But the list also includes top anthropologists, biochemistists and physicists who have felt the need to defend climate science in the wake of what they regard as politically motivated attacks. Three senior scientists from the Universities of Cambridge, Oxford and Manchester have also added their endorsement. All of the scientists signed up in a personal capacity, not on behalf of the National Academy or on behalf of their institution.
"Many recent assaults on climate science and, more disturbingly, on climate scientists by climate change deniers, are typically driven by special interests or dogma, not by an honest effort to provide an alternative theory that credibly satisfies the evidence," the letter says.
Its call for an end to "McCarthy-like threats of criminal prosecution against our colleagues based on innuendo and guilt by association" appears to be jibe at Republican senator, James Inhofe, who has called for a criminal investigation into US and British climatologists whose email exchanges were stolen from UEA. The letter also condemns the "harassment of scientists by politicians seeking distractions to avoid taking action, and the outright lies being spread about them."
The letter's co-ordinator, Peter Gleick, of the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment and Security in Oakland, California, said: "[It] originated with a number of NAS members who were frustrated at the misinformation being spread by climate deniers and the assaults on scientists by some policy-makers who hope to delay or avoid making policy decisions and are hiding behind the recent controversy around emails and minor errors in the IPCC."
Celia Cole
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 6 May 2010 19.00 BST
A group of 255 of the world's top scientists today written an open letter aimed at restoring public faith in the integrity of climate science.
In a strongly worded reproof of the recent escalation of political assaults on climatologists, the letter, published in the US Journal Science and signed by 11 Nobel laureates, attacks critics driven by "special interests or dogma" and "McCarthy-like" threats against researchers. It also attempts to set the record straight on the process of rigorous scientific research.
The letter is a response to negative publicity following the release of thousands of hacked emails from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia (UEA) and two mistakes makes by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN climate body.
The letter sets out some basic features of the scientific method. "Like all human beings, scientists make mistakes, but the scientific process is designed to find and correct them. But when some conclusions have been thoroughly and deeply tested, questioned, and examined, they gain the status of 'well-established theories' and are often spoken of as 'facts'," it says.
The document, citing theories including the age and origin of the Earth, the Big Bang and Darwin's evolution by natural selection, says that anthropogenic climate change is now so well-supported by evidence that it has achieved the same status. It adds that owing to science's adversarial nature, "fame" awaits any scientists who can prove the theory wrong.
"There is nothing remotely identified in the recent events that changes the fundamental conclusions about climate change," the letter says.
The authors – who are all members of the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the country's premier scientific institution – include some of the academic community's most distinguished climate researchers. But the list also includes top anthropologists, biochemistists and physicists who have felt the need to defend climate science in the wake of what they regard as politically motivated attacks. Three senior scientists from the Universities of Cambridge, Oxford and Manchester have also added their endorsement. All of the scientists signed up in a personal capacity, not on behalf of the National Academy or on behalf of their institution.
"Many recent assaults on climate science and, more disturbingly, on climate scientists by climate change deniers, are typically driven by special interests or dogma, not by an honest effort to provide an alternative theory that credibly satisfies the evidence," the letter says.
Its call for an end to "McCarthy-like threats of criminal prosecution against our colleagues based on innuendo and guilt by association" appears to be jibe at Republican senator, James Inhofe, who has called for a criminal investigation into US and British climatologists whose email exchanges were stolen from UEA. The letter also condemns the "harassment of scientists by politicians seeking distractions to avoid taking action, and the outright lies being spread about them."
The letter's co-ordinator, Peter Gleick, of the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment and Security in Oakland, California, said: "[It] originated with a number of NAS members who were frustrated at the misinformation being spread by climate deniers and the assaults on scientists by some policy-makers who hope to delay or avoid making policy decisions and are hiding behind the recent controversy around emails and minor errors in the IPCC."
First zero-carbon super-yacht to ease conscience of world's billionaires
British designer says £40m solar-powered vessel will appeal to clients searching for eco-luxury•
Robert Booth
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 6 May 2010 15.16 BST
It is the super-yacht for the carbon-conscious billionaire. Instead of polluting the Caribbean and Mediterranean with clouds of diesel smoke, oligarchs and sheikhs are being offered the chance to sail zero-carbon, with everything from their on-board plasma televisions and champagne fridges to the main propellor being powered by the sun.
A 24-year-old British boat designer has drawn up plans for what is thought to be the world's first carbon-neutral super-yacht, and has received inquiries from wealthy potential clients after unveiling the designs at recent yacht shows in Monaco and Abu Dhabi.
Alistair Callender, from Chichester in West Sussex, is promoting the idea of "eco-luxury" with plans for Soliloquy, an electricity-powered craft covered in photovoltaic film that harnesses the power of the sun. Fixed sails will double as solar panels to produce enough energy to propel the 58-metre-long boat at a cruising speed of eight knots, and even the hull will be made of sustainable timber instead of the usual more energy-intensive aluminium.
According to Hein Velema, one of the most prominent yacht brokers based in Monaco, his richest clients are intrigued by the idea of that their next floating mansion could be zero-carbon.
"I was sceptical at first, but I have spoken to a few clients who are willing to spend a serious amount extra to go green," he said. "In the current climate we are unlikely to see as many yachts as large as the Eclipse, but people will want to be first in other ways, such as being the first with a green yacht."
Last June, the world's largest private yacht, the 163-metre Eclipse, owned by Roman Abramovich, was launched complete with a military-grade missile defence system and an escape submarine. Callender said he intends his £40m vessel to appeal to the super-rich who until the global economic crisis competed to own ever larger, and often more polluting, yachts.
The global craze peaked in 2008 when 260 yachts longer than 30 metres were launched. The royal families of the UAE and Oman have spent hundreds of millions of pounds on yachts that look more like cruise ships and burn thousands of litres of diesel an hour.
A conventional yacht of the same size as Soliloquy powered on the usual marine diesel can burn up to 2,000 litres an hour travelling at 35 knots, according to Yacht Carbon Offset, a company that provides carbon offsetting for clients including Sir Philip Green, the retail magnate. A two-hour journey at that speed creates 12 tonnes of carbon dioxide. Such a craft can use a further 1,000 litres a day just to power the air-conditioning and electrical systems.
"These giant gin palaces use a huge amount of fuel and produce so much pollution, I wanted to prove the point that eco-luxury no longer needs to be an oxymoron," Callender said. "Even if billionaires don't want to be green, they can save money. There are at least 100 families around the world worth £200m or more who have invested in green technologies and businesses or made hefty financial commitments to the environment." That list includes the likes of Sir Richard Branson and Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin.
Soliloquy will feature three fixed sails rising up to 17 metres. They have been designed with solar panels built in by Solar Sailor, which has built solar-powered ferries operating in Sydney and Hong Kong and is currently helping the US navy develop unmanned solar-powered boats. The sails will be able to power the boat in winds up to 40 knots.
The superstructure of the boat above the waterline will be clad in energy-gathering photovoltaic cells, giving it a sleek, black appearance. Together with the sails, the solar panels will fuel four cells that will work in conjunction with diesel engines beneath deck when there is not enough solar power. Callender predicts the engines will only need to be fired on rare occasions, because super-yachts are mostly used in sunny climes.
The interior is likely to feature recycled leather, natural fibre upholstery and wood only from sustainable forests.
Robert Booth
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 6 May 2010 15.16 BST
It is the super-yacht for the carbon-conscious billionaire. Instead of polluting the Caribbean and Mediterranean with clouds of diesel smoke, oligarchs and sheikhs are being offered the chance to sail zero-carbon, with everything from their on-board plasma televisions and champagne fridges to the main propellor being powered by the sun.
A 24-year-old British boat designer has drawn up plans for what is thought to be the world's first carbon-neutral super-yacht, and has received inquiries from wealthy potential clients after unveiling the designs at recent yacht shows in Monaco and Abu Dhabi.
Alistair Callender, from Chichester in West Sussex, is promoting the idea of "eco-luxury" with plans for Soliloquy, an electricity-powered craft covered in photovoltaic film that harnesses the power of the sun. Fixed sails will double as solar panels to produce enough energy to propel the 58-metre-long boat at a cruising speed of eight knots, and even the hull will be made of sustainable timber instead of the usual more energy-intensive aluminium.
According to Hein Velema, one of the most prominent yacht brokers based in Monaco, his richest clients are intrigued by the idea of that their next floating mansion could be zero-carbon.
"I was sceptical at first, but I have spoken to a few clients who are willing to spend a serious amount extra to go green," he said. "In the current climate we are unlikely to see as many yachts as large as the Eclipse, but people will want to be first in other ways, such as being the first with a green yacht."
Last June, the world's largest private yacht, the 163-metre Eclipse, owned by Roman Abramovich, was launched complete with a military-grade missile defence system and an escape submarine. Callender said he intends his £40m vessel to appeal to the super-rich who until the global economic crisis competed to own ever larger, and often more polluting, yachts.
The global craze peaked in 2008 when 260 yachts longer than 30 metres were launched. The royal families of the UAE and Oman have spent hundreds of millions of pounds on yachts that look more like cruise ships and burn thousands of litres of diesel an hour.
A conventional yacht of the same size as Soliloquy powered on the usual marine diesel can burn up to 2,000 litres an hour travelling at 35 knots, according to Yacht Carbon Offset, a company that provides carbon offsetting for clients including Sir Philip Green, the retail magnate. A two-hour journey at that speed creates 12 tonnes of carbon dioxide. Such a craft can use a further 1,000 litres a day just to power the air-conditioning and electrical systems.
"These giant gin palaces use a huge amount of fuel and produce so much pollution, I wanted to prove the point that eco-luxury no longer needs to be an oxymoron," Callender said. "Even if billionaires don't want to be green, they can save money. There are at least 100 families around the world worth £200m or more who have invested in green technologies and businesses or made hefty financial commitments to the environment." That list includes the likes of Sir Richard Branson and Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin.
Soliloquy will feature three fixed sails rising up to 17 metres. They have been designed with solar panels built in by Solar Sailor, which has built solar-powered ferries operating in Sydney and Hong Kong and is currently helping the US navy develop unmanned solar-powered boats. The sails will be able to power the boat in winds up to 40 knots.
The superstructure of the boat above the waterline will be clad in energy-gathering photovoltaic cells, giving it a sleek, black appearance. Together with the sails, the solar panels will fuel four cells that will work in conjunction with diesel engines beneath deck when there is not enough solar power. Callender predicts the engines will only need to be fired on rare occasions, because super-yachts are mostly used in sunny climes.
The interior is likely to feature recycled leather, natural fibre upholstery and wood only from sustainable forests.
Thursday, 6 May 2010
Bluechip Energy To Provide 25kW Solar Photovoltaic System For Abio Corporation
Expected To Be One Of The Largest Private Commercial Solar Energy Installations In Central Florida
By Lawrence Hefler
Lake Mary, FL
BlueChip Energy™, a provider of complete solar energy solutions for residential, commercial, and utility applications, today announced that it has started the installation of a 25kW solar generator system to provide renewable energy for Abio Corporation in Orlando.
"Abio Corporation now has a solar electric system that will help reduce their long term energy costs. Should electricity rates increase in the coming years, the dollar value of the energy produced by the system will increase proportionately"
The system is ideally suited for a small business and is expected to help offset the electric bills of the company by over $7000 per year. The Fusion™ 25kW Solar Generator was developed specifically for commercial applications. The system will produce 25,000 watts of electricity from Florida sunlight. 25,000 watts of electricity can power light commercial office buildings and warehouses with 100% green energy that does not create any carbon emissions. It’s the equivalent of preventing 18 metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) from being released.
Abio Corporation invents products and manufactures them in the United States. Their goal is to make the best innovative products that will help people live a better life. “We chose alternative energy because we want to reduce our manufacturing costs and remain competitive in the new and ever changing international business community. We selected BlueChip because they are a local company that helps with local employment and advances technical skills for its employees”, said Phillip Mark, Owner and President of Abio Corporation.
The Fusion 25kW Solar Generator System will consist of 110 mono-crystalline solar modules rated at 230 watts, and five 5kW inverters. BlueChip Energy will provide the design and installation. Monocrystalline solar modules are the most efficient available, minimizing the footprint of the system. The system will be mounted on the rooftop of the Abio location on Kingspointe Parkway in Orlando. The solar modules carry a 25 year limited power warranty guaranteeing energy production for 25 years.
“Abio Corporation now has a solar electric system that will help reduce their long term energy costs. Should electricity rates increase in the coming years, the dollar value of the energy produced by the system will increase proportionately” said Tom Cernera, Vice President, Commercial Sales for BlueChip Energy.
With the Federal Tax Credit and the State of Florida solar energy rebate, the cost of the Fusion 25kW system has been dramatically reduced for small companies like Abio Corporation. The Florida solar rebate expires on June 30th, 2010.
By Lawrence Hefler
Lake Mary, FL
BlueChip Energy™, a provider of complete solar energy solutions for residential, commercial, and utility applications, today announced that it has started the installation of a 25kW solar generator system to provide renewable energy for Abio Corporation in Orlando.
"Abio Corporation now has a solar electric system that will help reduce their long term energy costs. Should electricity rates increase in the coming years, the dollar value of the energy produced by the system will increase proportionately"
The system is ideally suited for a small business and is expected to help offset the electric bills of the company by over $7000 per year. The Fusion™ 25kW Solar Generator was developed specifically for commercial applications. The system will produce 25,000 watts of electricity from Florida sunlight. 25,000 watts of electricity can power light commercial office buildings and warehouses with 100% green energy that does not create any carbon emissions. It’s the equivalent of preventing 18 metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) from being released.
Abio Corporation invents products and manufactures them in the United States. Their goal is to make the best innovative products that will help people live a better life. “We chose alternative energy because we want to reduce our manufacturing costs and remain competitive in the new and ever changing international business community. We selected BlueChip because they are a local company that helps with local employment and advances technical skills for its employees”, said Phillip Mark, Owner and President of Abio Corporation.
The Fusion 25kW Solar Generator System will consist of 110 mono-crystalline solar modules rated at 230 watts, and five 5kW inverters. BlueChip Energy will provide the design and installation. Monocrystalline solar modules are the most efficient available, minimizing the footprint of the system. The system will be mounted on the rooftop of the Abio location on Kingspointe Parkway in Orlando. The solar modules carry a 25 year limited power warranty guaranteeing energy production for 25 years.
“Abio Corporation now has a solar electric system that will help reduce their long term energy costs. Should electricity rates increase in the coming years, the dollar value of the energy produced by the system will increase proportionately” said Tom Cernera, Vice President, Commercial Sales for BlueChip Energy.
With the Federal Tax Credit and the State of Florida solar energy rebate, the cost of the Fusion 25kW system has been dramatically reduced for small companies like Abio Corporation. The Florida solar rebate expires on June 30th, 2010.
On the Radar: Evergreen Solar, Solarfun Power, and Suntech Power
5/5/2010 12:30 PM
So, it seems that the concept of the solar-stock trifecta is a recurring theme this week. Thanks to a total dud of an earnings report and the work of one very industrious equities analyst, a trio of solar stocks appeared on my radar bright and early today. Read on to find out what's happening with Evergreen Solar, Inc. (ESLR), Solarfun Power Holdings Co., Ltd. (SOLF), and Suntech Power Holdings Co., Ltd. (STP).
Evergreen Solar, Inc. (ESLR) has backpedaled nearly 3% this afternoon as traders react to the company's earnings report. ESLR swung to a wider-than-expected first-quarter loss, and warned that it expects price declines during the second half of the year. As a result, the shares are now testing short-term technical support at the $1.10 level.
On the heels of this news, call volume on ESLR has surged to 17 times the norm, with more than 5,000 contracts changing hands. The stock's June 1 call has seen 5,010 contracts trade on open interest of 2,314, revealing that new positions are being added at this strike today.
Meanwhile, Solarfun Power Holdings Co., Ltd. (SOLF) has battled back from an early dip to gain 1.4% this afternoon. Wells Fargo started coverage of the stock with an "outperform" rating, with analyst Sam Dubinsky observing that SOLF is "leaving the penalty box" due to management changes and an improved cost structure. (The prolific Dubinsky initiated coverage of no fewer than six solar stocks today.)
The bullish note could be prompting short sellers to hit the exits, as 10.3% of the equity's float is dedicated to short interest. At SOLF's average daily trading volume, this translates to about 2.4 days' worth of pent-up buying pressure.
Finally, Suntech Power Holdings Co., Ltd. (STP) is off 2.8% as we enter the second half of the session, as traders seem none too impressed by the stock's new "market perform" rating from Wells Fargo. The stock has now gapped below short-term resistance from its 10-day and 20-day moving average, and it's testing support in the $12.50 region.
In today's session, the most active STP option is the June 15 put, with 873 contracts crossing the tape. About 79% of these contracts have traded at the ask price, and implied volatility is up 4.1% at last check. In other words, it looks as though traders are adding new bearish bets at this strike today.-posted by Elizabeth Harrow (eharrow@sir-inc.com)5/5/2010 12:30 PM
So, it seems that the concept of the solar-stock trifecta is a recurring theme this week. Thanks to a total dud of an earnings report and the work of one very industrious equities analyst, a trio of solar stocks appeared on my radar bright and early today. Read on to find out what's happening with Evergreen Solar, Inc. (ESLR), Solarfun Power Holdings Co., Ltd. (SOLF), and Suntech Power Holdings Co., Ltd. (STP).
Evergreen Solar, Inc. (ESLR) has backpedaled nearly 3% this afternoon as traders react to the company's earnings report. ESLR swung to a wider-than-expected first-quarter loss, and warned that it expects price declines during the second half of the year. As a result, the shares are now testing short-term technical support at the $1.10 level.
On the heels of this news, call volume on ESLR has surged to 17 times the norm, with more than 5,000 contracts changing hands. The stock's June 1 call has seen 5,010 contracts trade on open interest of 2,314, revealing that new positions are being added at this strike today.
Meanwhile, Solarfun Power Holdings Co., Ltd. (SOLF) has battled back from an early dip to gain 1.4% this afternoon. Wells Fargo started coverage of the stock with an "outperform" rating, with analyst Sam Dubinsky observing that SOLF is "leaving the penalty box" due to management changes and an improved cost structure. (The prolific Dubinsky initiated coverage of no fewer than six solar stocks today.)
The bullish note could be prompting short sellers to hit the exits, as 10.3% of the equity's float is dedicated to short interest. At SOLF's average daily trading volume, this translates to about 2.4 days' worth of pent-up buying pressure.
Finally, Suntech Power Holdings Co., Ltd. (STP) is off 2.8% as we enter the second half of the session, as traders seem none too impressed by the stock's new "market perform" rating from Wells Fargo. The stock has now gapped below short-term resistance from its 10-day and 20-day moving average, and it's testing support in the $12.50 region.
In today's session, the most active STP option is the June 15 put, with 873 contracts crossing the tape. About 79% of these contracts have traded at the ask price, and implied volatility is up 4.1% at last check. In other words, it looks as though traders are adding new bearish bets at this strike today.-posted by Elizabeth Harrow (eharrow@sir-inc.com)5/5/2010 12:30 PM
Solar panels: a tax-free return of 10pc pa
A tax-free, index-linked return of 10 per cent a year, guaranteed for 25 years may sound too good to be true.
By John GreenwoodPublished: 7:59AM BST 06 May 2010
A tax-free, index-linked return of 10pc a year, guaranteed for 25 years may sound too good to be true. But this is the level of return the Government claims you could receive by investing in a solar panel system for your home.
If you think installing solar panels is only for those committed to ecological issues, a new government scheme designed to increase uptake of renewable energy may make you think again.
The Department for Energy and Climate Change's (DECC) Clean Energy Cashback Scheme is offering big financial incentives to anyone installing solar panels in a bid to make doing so stack up as an investment to even committed climate-sceptics.
The cashback scheme, also known as the Feed-in tariff, has been going since April. Grants for solar panels have been abolished and replaced with a system where people who install them are rewarded for every unit of energy generated by their system. Energy companies are also required by law to buy back any excess they generate.
To qualify for the scheme you have to install solar photovoltaic panels, known as solar PV.
This type of panel generates electricity from sunlight. The scheme currently does not cover the other main type of solar panel, solar thermal, which warms the water in your boiler system, although the DECC aims to bring thermal systems on board from April 2011, albeit with lower cash rebates.
Wind-generated electricity is now covered under the scheme, however.
The scheme promises to reward investors in three ways. Firstly, you are paid the ''generation tariff'', which is a direct payment from your energy supplier for each unit of electricity you generate.
This starts at 41.3p per kilowatt/hour (kWh), and is fixed by statute to increase in line with the retail price index for the next 25 years. The second saving is under the ''export tariff'', which is a payment made for energy you export back into the electricity grid rather than use on site.
This pays an extra 3p per kWh. Finally, you also make savings on your electricity bills, now saving you about 13p per kWh.
"The biggest financial savings through solar go to those who use all or most of the electricity they generate. This means the retired or those who work from home get the best return on investment because they get the saving on their electricity bill as well as the feed-in payment," says Charlotte Webster, public relations manager at Solar Century, a solar panel provider.
Systems cost between £8,000 and £14,000, but the Energy Saving Trust says a 2kWp panel will supply about 40pc of the energy used each year by the average gas-heated home.
This would typically give a total saving of about £830 a year, and could also reduce your carbon footprint to the tune of almost one tonne of CO2.
The Government says systems should pay for themselves within about 12 years and should give real returns of 5 to 8pc or 7 to 10pc when allowing for inflation. These returns are based on electricity inflation continuing at 6pc a year, its average level for the past 10 years.
If energy costs rise higher, savings will be greater, but they will be less if they fall. The scheme is being funded by a levy on the bills of everybody else, with British households each paying on average £6.50 a year more to subsidise the Feed-in tariff payments.
Some environmentalists have criticised the scheme as a cash giveaway to wealthier people who have the money to invest and who own the property in which a system is installed.
But not everybody is convinced that solar panels are a one-way financial bet. Mark Dampier, head of investment at Hargreaves Lansdown, an IFA, points out that while Feed-in tariff payments are tax-free now, there is nothing to stop a future chancellor changing this.
Nor is it impossible for future ministers to cut tariffs.
"A return of 8pc a year sounds fantastic, but I am suspicious of anything backed by the Government," says Mr Dampier. "The idea of politicians guaranteeing anything for 25 years seems fanciful to me – you have just got to look at what they have done to pensions.
"What's more, the technology is still in its infancy. You could spend a lot of money putting a system on your roof that in a few years time will seem dated and inefficient."
Ken Rumph, a financial analyst at Nomura Code, a subsidiary of the Japanese bank, is, however, positive about solar panels as an investment.
He has written a report on the viability of solar generation for the bank, which concluded that the investment opportunity currently on offer will prove so favourable that the scheme will achieve its target of signing up 12,000 home owners faster than predicted.
Mr Rumph has spent £14,000 installing a system on his house in Berwick-upon-Tweed and believes it is money well invested: "I am expecting a 10pc return and although my capital is now tied up, I am getting income from a reliable source that is index-linked and tax-free.
"I expect the cost of electricity to go up, and I also anticipate that in five or 10 years, people will regard the system as an asset on the house. It has been an exceptionally sunny April, and I made £100 in the first two weeks of the month, having generated 240 kWhs."
A further concern, however, is the reliability of the claims made about the returns on the systems. Last month The Telegraph reported that consumer group Which? had found 10 out of 14 salesmen offering solar thermal systems were exaggerating the benefits and pressuring people into sales.
Solar Century said that report covered thermal and not PV panels, and that to get hooked up to the cashback system your panels must be installed by an operator who is an approved member of the Microgeneration Certification Scheme (MCS) watchdog. You can find an MCS installer through the organisation's website.
Mr Rumph also suggests using common sense. "When looking to take on an installer, treat it as you would any building project – get several quotes and look for personal recommendations."
Which? also suggests that because solar technology is a new industry, companies come and go, so it is worth paying with a credit card if possible to ensure protection under the Consumer Credit Act, provided, that is, you clear the debt immediately to avoid high interest payments.
By John GreenwoodPublished: 7:59AM BST 06 May 2010
A tax-free, index-linked return of 10pc a year, guaranteed for 25 years may sound too good to be true. But this is the level of return the Government claims you could receive by investing in a solar panel system for your home.
If you think installing solar panels is only for those committed to ecological issues, a new government scheme designed to increase uptake of renewable energy may make you think again.
The Department for Energy and Climate Change's (DECC) Clean Energy Cashback Scheme is offering big financial incentives to anyone installing solar panels in a bid to make doing so stack up as an investment to even committed climate-sceptics.
The cashback scheme, also known as the Feed-in tariff, has been going since April. Grants for solar panels have been abolished and replaced with a system where people who install them are rewarded for every unit of energy generated by their system. Energy companies are also required by law to buy back any excess they generate.
To qualify for the scheme you have to install solar photovoltaic panels, known as solar PV.
This type of panel generates electricity from sunlight. The scheme currently does not cover the other main type of solar panel, solar thermal, which warms the water in your boiler system, although the DECC aims to bring thermal systems on board from April 2011, albeit with lower cash rebates.
Wind-generated electricity is now covered under the scheme, however.
The scheme promises to reward investors in three ways. Firstly, you are paid the ''generation tariff'', which is a direct payment from your energy supplier for each unit of electricity you generate.
This starts at 41.3p per kilowatt/hour (kWh), and is fixed by statute to increase in line with the retail price index for the next 25 years. The second saving is under the ''export tariff'', which is a payment made for energy you export back into the electricity grid rather than use on site.
This pays an extra 3p per kWh. Finally, you also make savings on your electricity bills, now saving you about 13p per kWh.
"The biggest financial savings through solar go to those who use all or most of the electricity they generate. This means the retired or those who work from home get the best return on investment because they get the saving on their electricity bill as well as the feed-in payment," says Charlotte Webster, public relations manager at Solar Century, a solar panel provider.
Systems cost between £8,000 and £14,000, but the Energy Saving Trust says a 2kWp panel will supply about 40pc of the energy used each year by the average gas-heated home.
This would typically give a total saving of about £830 a year, and could also reduce your carbon footprint to the tune of almost one tonne of CO2.
The Government says systems should pay for themselves within about 12 years and should give real returns of 5 to 8pc or 7 to 10pc when allowing for inflation. These returns are based on electricity inflation continuing at 6pc a year, its average level for the past 10 years.
If energy costs rise higher, savings will be greater, but they will be less if they fall. The scheme is being funded by a levy on the bills of everybody else, with British households each paying on average £6.50 a year more to subsidise the Feed-in tariff payments.
Some environmentalists have criticised the scheme as a cash giveaway to wealthier people who have the money to invest and who own the property in which a system is installed.
But not everybody is convinced that solar panels are a one-way financial bet. Mark Dampier, head of investment at Hargreaves Lansdown, an IFA, points out that while Feed-in tariff payments are tax-free now, there is nothing to stop a future chancellor changing this.
Nor is it impossible for future ministers to cut tariffs.
"A return of 8pc a year sounds fantastic, but I am suspicious of anything backed by the Government," says Mr Dampier. "The idea of politicians guaranteeing anything for 25 years seems fanciful to me – you have just got to look at what they have done to pensions.
"What's more, the technology is still in its infancy. You could spend a lot of money putting a system on your roof that in a few years time will seem dated and inefficient."
Ken Rumph, a financial analyst at Nomura Code, a subsidiary of the Japanese bank, is, however, positive about solar panels as an investment.
He has written a report on the viability of solar generation for the bank, which concluded that the investment opportunity currently on offer will prove so favourable that the scheme will achieve its target of signing up 12,000 home owners faster than predicted.
Mr Rumph has spent £14,000 installing a system on his house in Berwick-upon-Tweed and believes it is money well invested: "I am expecting a 10pc return and although my capital is now tied up, I am getting income from a reliable source that is index-linked and tax-free.
"I expect the cost of electricity to go up, and I also anticipate that in five or 10 years, people will regard the system as an asset on the house. It has been an exceptionally sunny April, and I made £100 in the first two weeks of the month, having generated 240 kWhs."
A further concern, however, is the reliability of the claims made about the returns on the systems. Last month The Telegraph reported that consumer group Which? had found 10 out of 14 salesmen offering solar thermal systems were exaggerating the benefits and pressuring people into sales.
Solar Century said that report covered thermal and not PV panels, and that to get hooked up to the cashback system your panels must be installed by an operator who is an approved member of the Microgeneration Certification Scheme (MCS) watchdog. You can find an MCS installer through the organisation's website.
Mr Rumph also suggests using common sense. "When looking to take on an installer, treat it as you would any building project – get several quotes and look for personal recommendations."
Which? also suggests that because solar technology is a new industry, companies come and go, so it is worth paying with a credit card if possible to ensure protection under the Consumer Credit Act, provided, that is, you clear the debt immediately to avoid high interest payments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
