Slowly but surely, more and more questions are being asked about the true cost of green energy schemes like the RHI subsidies for biomethane …….and more particularly their transparency.
This is something we are only too well aware of with the Crouchlands fiasco . Crouchlands have received over £5m of taxpayer subsidies and that’s completely on top of the selling price of the biomethane they produce. When you look at the energy they say they produce and you work out the cost ...per household of that, it is nothing less than crazy. We have always maintained that the rush to be green has more to do with making large sums from government subsidies than it has to do with solving green issues. Would a “green” business set up in a location so far from where it has to send its biomethane that it necessitates thousands of HGV miles; continue to use energy crops when the government experts have recognised their carbon benefit are not that great; build an industrial plant next to Ancient Woodland without planning permission and have such poor environmental controls that it polluted our waterways not once but 3 times? We don’t think so.
Ofgem are the regulators of the RHI scheme but ask them if they keep records of what Crouchland input to their plant in order to get subsidies and the answer is no; ask them if the lack of planning permission should prevent £5m of taxpayer money being given to Crouchland and the answer is no. The scheme is an uncontrolled subsidies bunfest and we’re all paying for it - Npower has announced one of the largest energy price increases for years and one of the reasons they give is the government policies on green energy susbsidies which they are looking to recoup.
Obviously finding alternative energy sources is important, but as too often happens the government rushes in with unworkable solutions with the only effect of costing ordinary taxpayers more, with little benefit.