Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprint R

[confounded]

You could not make this stuff up, we do indeed live in interesting times.

"He is the climate change minister who pledged to ‘lead by example’ in the fight against global warming.

But Charles Hendry is facing accusations of hypocrisy after buying himself a 20-bedroom castle – with a potentially massive carbon footprint – as a second home.
Blair Castle in Ayrshire, which went on the market for £2.5million, has three storeys, 16 bathrooms and a heated outdoor swimming pool set in 260 acres of beautiful countryside."

Read more: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprint | Mail Online
​

 

[moggy1968]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

Do as we say, not as we do.
see David Camerons solar installer has been speaking out, so the PM made sure he got in when the tariffs were good!!!

 

[powervan]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

listen lads (IM ALL RIGHT JACK) ?

 

[Deleted member 9648]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

So are you guys saying all country piles should be knocked down because they are not environmentally friendly?.....Maybe Charles Hendry has plans to make the house more energy efficient than it is now,if he hadnt bought it someone else would.....I can also assure you that there will be a lot of work which will go to local contractors....as in his constituancy pad in Sussex he uses local people.......cant see what the fuss is about.

 

[moggy1968]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

because he is preaching a mantra to us all that he doesn't follow. it's pure hypocrisy.
yes, he can live where he likes, but don't then preach to us all about how energy inefficient our homes are.
It makes no difference what he does to this property (and he will be limited in what he is allowed to do under the planning regs). it is still going to consume vastly more energy than a 3 bed semi!!!
One of my main complaints against the proposed changes is that it discriminates against older homes that can't meet the required energy efficiency and are therefore effectively barred from trying to reduce their carbon footprint because PV is made uneconomic. These older buildings should be preserved, and should be made more energy efficient where it can be done without substantially altering their character.
What shouldn't be happening is some Tory Toff preaching to us all about our lack of environmental effort when he is buying a place like this, and to add insult to injury it's a SECOND HOME, so it's consuming energy even though he won't be there the majority of the time.
personally I think it's incompatable with his job and he should resign.

 

[BruceB]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

Someone has got to own it or it will go to rack and ruin and I do not want to see all big old properties fall into disuse or be knocked down. I would prefer to judge him on how he behaves once he owns it. Does he install arrays of gas burning patio heaters or arrays of pv cells etc?

 

[Marvo]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

I agree, somebody has got to own it or it will end up as rubble. I would also judge him on what he does with the building rather than the fact he purchased it. I don't see why people are calling for him to step down.

 

[malcolmsanford]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

Strange I didn't think having a lower band energy efficient home were effectively barring you from installing PV on the roof, I must have missed that.

It just means your not going to make a fortune out of the rest of the energy bill paying customers because they will get a vastly reduced rate of FITs

 

[moggy1968]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

yes, someone has to purchase it and I don't want to see buildings like this go to ruin aither, but him purchasing it is gross hypocrisy.
so do you really think a 9p FiTS will encourage people to install PV? get a grip!
It's not about making a frotune, it's about it being viable. no one is arguing people should make a fortune from FiTS. The suggestion is that people should be encouraged to get into renewables by making it financially viable. The requirement for energy rating C or better, as has been agreed on here by numerous posters will make PV untenable for most people. many older homes could never achieve that efficiency rating so PV becomes an uneconomic prospect for them.
We have also proved that the impact on other p[eoples energy bills is negligable so lets forget that old chestnut as an excuse eh malcolm

 

[malcolmsanford]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

Moggy whether negligible or not, why should anyone have to subsidize someone else??

If it was only a penny a year why should I have to pay someone to get a return that in many cases on the new install prices could have seen over 10% in 7 to 8 yrs, it is as morally corrupt as a pyramid scheme.

Good luck to anybody getting returns on their money, but not at my expense or anyone else's for that matter.

I have absolutely no problem in subsidizing something that has a chance of working, and I have championed on here, and still will that PV in it's present state in the domestic market is not viable, and unless technology improves it dramatically it never will

Tidal may be a better option, not sure wind is as I have a horrible feeling these farms can do worse for the environment than the good. We have to face facts the only viable alternative at this time is nuclear, but because of the tree hugging scaremongers among us that thinlk it is the deveil incarnate, we have not developed it as we should

Moggy we hear that it could be 25k plus job lost, which is a shame and a tragedy, but I fought a year long battle to keep subsidized coal and in the end we lost 5 times that number in the industry alone, governments have been doing this in the UK for 300 years to the working man, and it will never change.

 

[SolarCity]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

I have absolutely no problem in subsidizing something that has a chance of working, and I have championed on here, and still will that PV in it's present state in the domestic market is not viable, and unless technology improves it dramatically it never will

Sorry Malcolm, but I disagree with you on this one. Exactly how is it not viable? If every roof in Britain had solar panels fitted to them then we'd produce more energy than we need.

So it is certainly viable in theory. Obviously, however, this would cost a ludicrous amount of money at the present time. What would be required would be a dramatic reduction in the cost of solar PV - imagine if the cost could be brough down to the point where it was no more expensive than fitting roof tiles. This could happen but it certainly won't happen without a good boost to get the market going.

Obviously green energy is going to cost more than energy from fossil fuels but it is diabolically wreckless to keep building these power stations when there is so much at stake from an environmental point of view.

 

[Des 56]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

Well said Malcolm.I have to agree entirely

Nuclear power is the obvious and only energy resource that makes sense both economically and regard climate concerns

Its weaknesses in the past have been used as a justification for uneconomic and primitive renewable alternatives, which are not ready to fill the gap left by not sticking with nuclear and in fact expanding its use greatly

 

[malcolmsanford]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

Biggs I have great respect for you, and of course your a victim of the ludicrous situation and I feel for you.

As I said in my post I have no trouble with subsidizing a technology but no way can I or do I want to subside it by this way.

When coal was subsidized it was the energy medium for I would say 80% (sic) of domestic homes and so even though tax payers subsidized this, 80% of the population was using it, and no individual person was making money on it, perhaps except the people delivering it.

PV you have the situation of where the original concept was lost, and organisations were going to make vast profits out of the FITs, it is bad enough in my eyes that an individual could do this, on subsidies, but organisation no way.

Yes the timing was perhaps not the best, and yes I understand that a lot of you guys have invested time and money into the industry and for that i'm sorry, but the bubble was just waiting to burst it really was, once the rent-a-roofers got involved.

 

[The Solar King]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

There has to be balance. PV is not the answer but an important part of the total answer. As far as subsidies are concerned those for PV are piddling. Remember we have all paid £75bn plus and counting in subsidies to decommission the existing nuclear power stations. The Big 6 are holding out for further subsidies to build new ones.

Yes there are problems with the current FITs program, no one has said there is not. We all want a sensible path of digression to the point of grid parity. What is needed is a level of subsidy that incentivises but does not lead to the position the scheme found itself in. Government policy very often has unforseen outcomes. The inclusion of social housing could quite possibly be better and more cost effectively addressed than through the invested route. This was no bubble.

As a non participant you are entitled to your views, even if in my opinion they are ill informed and incorrect.

 

[SolarCity]

Re: Climate Minister buys a castle with 16 bathrooms... and a massive carbon footprin

It is clear that a lot of people were making too much money from the FIT scheme and it definitely needed cutting - it was blindingly obvious 6 months ago.

However, you still have to give an incentive for people to invest their money in a new technology or you punish those that don't. The FIT is a great little system that does both. The biggest energy users will be the ones that pay the most.

The only problem with the FIT in its current state is that it is just too generous.