Wind or Hot Air

Photovoltaic cells top left at our house 

Read an article in the Financial Times weekend edition about electricity generation from wind power and nuclear subsidies, keeping lights on etc. That offshore wind is horrendously expensive to build and unreliable is well known. Of course our government is allowing our beloved power companies to spend vast amounts on this so it must be worthwhile after all. This article was good at condemning this misuse of resources but also breathtakingly absurd because it called for the construction of nuclear power to be subsidised instead, forgetting that it already would be if any private companies could bother to build any plants. However they will never do so because they realise that no subsidy could ever be high enough for them to make money considering the risks involved and the extremely long time they would last. They would much prefer taxpayers to finance all of this construction, safety, de commissioning etc; all they want is to sell us the electricity at inflated prices. Nuclear energy is safe enough, only as long as no one makes a mistake, there are no floods, earthquakes, terrorists etc.

The author chose to ignore completely that the cheapest and most effective way to keep the lights on etc is not to use energy in the first place. He indignantly announces that electricity in Denmark for example is 4 times more expensive than here because of the proportion of renewable energy in it but forgets conveniently that the average new house in Denmark in 1983 was already as efficient as 2002 new build standards in the UK. Builders here will happily state that it is impossible to build a well insulated efficient home for a reasonable price, preferring to use building methods unchanged since the reign of Victoria. If they took the trouble to look at modern construction techniques they might realise buildings could be made many times as energy efficient for little extra cost. Our energy crisis might be solved almost at a stroke, particularly if government committed enough funding along the lines of a Marshall Plan for energy efficiency. The economy would boom while buildings were retrofitted and people would never again die of cold in badly built houses in our relatively mild winters.

Nor do energy companies rejoice in the fact that people who generate their own electricity or use less of it (or less gas or heating oil etc) are less dependent on them and will not be swelling their subsidy gorged coffers. These big companies do not like this and nor do I suspect do our governing classes who would much prefer to see people depending on their chums in finance, energy etc who in turn donate large sums to their parties. There is more hot air in wind power than meets the eye. I would urge people to free themselves from energy tyranny or vote for governments who would make this happen.

The Fruit in the Wine

This Autumn's Quinces

It fascinates me that so many different fruit aromas and tastes should be present in wine. After all, it is merely grape juice fermented, perhaps with added sugar and a bit of oak flavouring, but there is so much more in the best wines, that is, wines made of grapes grown in the right place by people who take great care of what they do. Fruity aromas in white wines are extremely diverse - citrus, apple, quince, peach, apricot, pineapple, mango, passion fruit, becoming more and more tropical depending on the grape or the degree of exposure to strong sunlight and high temperatures. This is possible because of the complex chemistry of wine, which combines hundreds of different compounds in a myriad ways to give the heady  nose of the very best wines. The grape variety itself contributes a sort of signature but can express itself in a multitude of different ways. Very often the concentration of the compound or compounds producing the effect is only a few microgrammes per litre ! This is why wine is so fascinating. It has potentially the ability to be unique - of its place, of its maker, of its season...It is for this reason that as much as possible one should seek out the original and not the generic.

Of course there is more than fruit in the wine. Other aromas and tastes can evolve just as miraculously and range from the herbal, to the floral, mineral, animal etc, often evolving as the wine matures and ages.  This diversity is not confined to white wines; red and rosé and sweet or botrytised wines have their own flavour and aroma profiles and a myriad of combinations of these. There is simply too much to mention unless you write a book about it - and not to worry these books already exist.

To my mind the best thing is to simply enjoy.

The Great Debasement

It seems that with a lot of things nowadays you get less and less good stuff and more dross which you do not want. Take the BBC for example. The BBC symbolises or used to symbolise all that was good and solid and permanent about the world. Many moons ago it would have been possible to have nearly an hour of viewing for every hour of television. The only interruptions were the credits and between-programme announcements. Pretty good value. Watch any programme now and you will find that it invariably starts late because we are treated to tiresome in-house 'advertising' for other tedious programmes on other Beeb channels with the sound turned up full blast for good measure in case you didn't hear. Once you've got through all this, both at the beginning and end of the programme you want to view, you find you've only had 50 minutes instead of an hour. I am convinced that they are currently working toward 45 minutes so that their actual content matches other 'commercial' channels. The cost of a programme to us is thus increased by about a quarter, for absolutely no extra value.

Everywhere we turn it seems that there is more and more 'content' and less and less meaning. This is one of the disadvantages of instant mass communication by anyone and everyone, including me. Is it a bad thing ? Possibly. We are overwhelmed by so-called 'information' which in fact is simply noise, and loud at that, when we should be seeking out meaning, information that will help us live our lives, be happier, healthier, wiser. James Lovelock proposes that all essential human knowledge should be gathered together in one place - perhaps even in one book, as a repository of wisdom for the remnants of humanity trying to preserve civilisation in the event of catastrophic climate change. What a book this might be. But what to put in it ? Should it be limited to science and technology, or should it also contain all the great works of human literature ? Should it also remind the survivors of how many species their unconscious actions have wiped out, showing them in all their great beauty ?

Difficult questions and no answers. Some would say that the Internet already serves Lovelock's purpose. I suppose it does, up to a point, but it is too dependent on fragile electronics and data storage systems. Better as a Great Book, I think.