Last month the government slashed and axed green energy subsidies because no money was left. But now the government is pushing full steam ahead with £17 BILLION subsidies for untested nuclear reactor at Hinkley. How can there be on rule for green energy and another for nuclear energy? If there is no money for green energy how can there be BILLIONS for nuclear? If there’s no money left why are we committing to subsidising a deal that’s been called as “economically insane” by city analysts and “one of the worst deals ever for British households and British industry” by Lord Howell, the pro-nuclear’ former Tory Energy Secretary. Agree with me that paying billions of pounds for nuclear energy is wrong? Please sign the petition now. There have been safety concerns over Hinkley. Two plants in Finland and France which use the same design, have been plagued with construction delays, spiralling costs and design flaws. Hinkley is under attack from not just from campaigners and community but also from one of our biggest banks. A report from HSBC on 2nd August 2015 warned that the massive cost was the new nuclear power plant was ‘becoming harder to justify.’ HSBC concluded: ‘We see ample reason for the UK Government to delay or cancel the project.’ The Hinkley deal is so outrageous and over-subsidised (£17 Billion), that ten green energy firms from Germany and Austria launched a legal challenge against it last month. Let’s not lavish the nuclear energy with billions of pounds while we’re cutting back from renewable energy because apparently the piggy bank is empty. The chorus of disapproval growing and if 38 Degrees members add our voice we could force the government to bin this bonkers plan.

people are freezing and starving to death due to extortionate costs of essentials

The Dept for Energy and Climate Change has just unveiled sweeping plans to slash subsidies to solar power. They are proposing measures that include cutting aid to small-scale solar power installations, and ending subsidies for roof-top panels earlier than expected. Solar and wind energy installations of less than 5MW are supported by feed-in tariffs - schemes that pay producers a subsidy for the electricity they generate, plus a bonus for any electricity exported back to the national grid. Under the new proposals, the amount to be paid from next year will fall to 1.63p per kilowatt hour from a current level of 12.92p for a new residential solar system. This is a hugely short sighted move by the government and is devastating for Britain's solar sector which employs over 35,000 people. The Secretary of State herself has stated that the total cost this year of the solar RO was just £3 per household on energy bills. Ending support for solar power makes no sense at all. The energy market currently has a wide range of subsidies and tax allowances in place, across all the technologies – renewables, nuclear and gas - and not all of these are transparent when it comes to the consumer. They have made these announcements after the House of Commons has risen for the summer recess so proper scrutiny in Parliament will now not be possible until after the consultation deadline. The Welsh government is already concerned, a spokesperson said the plans have the "potential to put jobs and investment under threat by reducing subsidies to projects already in the pipeline". The government is deliberately over-exaggerating the impact of renewable energy on bills and the timing of this move on solar power could not be worse as it is nearly subsidy free. Greenpeace pointed out that the government's maximum additional spend on green technologies by 2018 would be approximately half of what it spends subsidising the coal industry. Other groups called the changes "absurd". "Of course the feed-in tariff should fall as solar becomes cheaper, but the government clearly plans to remove support entirely," said Alasdair Cameron from Friends of the Earth. "This is politically motivated, and will take away power from people and hand it back to big energy firms." “Cutting the subsidies now will see businesses go bust and investment dry up. Jobs will go and emissions will stay higher at a time when policies and funding should be in place to ensure quite the opposite,” said Daisy Sands, head of the energy campaign at Greenpeace. Ray Noble, owner, Solar BIPV Ltd and Solar Power Portal outstanding achievement award winner has commented: "The decision to stop supporting the fastest deploying energy generation technology seems like madness to me. Especially when you consider that we are short of electricity, that solar has the biggest support of the the population; yet at the same time still giving 2 ROCs to other technologies that are creating the largest drain on the budget. Seems like winners are not liked and losers are preferred! “Combined with the cuts to wind subsidies, it looks like the government is gearing up for a full frontal attack on the renewable energy sector in the autumn while still handing out billion-pound tax breaks for oil and gas industry … It’s no good David Cameron saying how important the climate talks in Paris are, if the chancellor simultaneously weakens any shred of credibility of a claim to the UK’s low carbon leadership.” Please sign the petition now to help save jobs in the UK and support our commitment tackling climate change.

Around 5.9 million people in the UK have a prepayment energy meter. According to citizens advice these customers have overpaid for their electricity and gas by £226 a year! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33369672 Many of the people who prepay their energy are families struggling to make ends meet, or elderly people - while people have had to choose between light or heat companies have racked in massive profits that have not fed back to lower the prices - in fact EDF declared an "operating loss" on their prepayment statement this year! http://www.mirror.co.uk/money/energy-giant-raked-massive-profit-3143336 Customers who have overpaid their energy through prepaid meters have been doing so for a number of years and is an industry wide practise. Customers who prefer to prepay for their gas and electric should not be penalised for doing so. It is not enough to tell customers to switch companies, customers who have been with a provider a period of time and who been overcharged as a matter of routine should receive a refund on any over payment, and tell customers before they sign up if they are being overcharged.

While it may make new homes fractionally cheaper to buy, they will be much more costly to run for both the home owners and the planet. How will we meet our green emissions targets with retrograde steps like this?

Imagine if manufacturers had to say how long they expect their products to last and backed it with a guarantee. For the first time people will be able to make a real choice when they buy something. e.g. "Do I get the £15 kettle that lasts 1 year? or the £30 kettle that lasts 5-6 years?" This makes things simple. We deserve to know what we are buying! "Planned Obsolescence" (where manufacturers purposefully design their products to break or be unfixable) is on the rise. It might bring profits in for shortsighted companies, but it is a growing disaster for the environment and it means that we are stuck buying the same shoddy things again and again. Having your kettle/hoover/dishwasher break is not just annoying, it traps people in a cycle of poverty. But there's something we can do! If people know how long something is expected to last, we can see if the "cheap prices" are really worth it. It's likely that companies will realise that have to do better, and up the durability of their products or risk having to publish some dismal figures. Us consumers have been trapped by these companies strategies for too long and it's time for us to get some power back. The power of choice. Please sign the petition. The planet will thank us all. We can do it! Tara PS. Follow and share the campaign with the hashtag #built2break

It is essential that we decarbonise the UK's electricity generation sector. Onshore wind has made a very significant contribution to delivering decarbonisation to date and had been moving towards a position of being independent of subsidies. Brutally cutting subsidies now will effectively destroy the onshore sector at a critical time in its development. This makes no environmental or economic sense, just as decarbonisation targets are about to be missed and we are approaching the Paris Climate Change Summit. The Government's own surveys show that onshore wind commands the support of over two thirds of those asked, far more than fracking. The Govt's destruction of the onshore wind sector will destroy invester confidence in UK renewables and will fly in the face of global moves to protect the climate.

It helps to increase the national % of renewables. It creates new manufacturing jobs. It upscales production of solar panel tiles reducing the price for home owners in existing buildings to buy and install them on their homes.

ONE DOWN, TWO TO GO. Now they are listening, let's continue to shout! This petition was part of a campaign by Scottish communities that resulted in the Scottish Government putting a temporary ban on Underground Coal Gasification on October 8th 2015. This means the first campaign aim above has been achieved, but we are not finished. We need to use your signatures and the power that communities have found to continue to campaign to ensure a complete ban of all forms of Unconventional Gas Extraction in Scotland. Read on for more information on why you should sign and share this petition! But isn’t there already a ban?
 Unconventional Gas extraction in Scotland is currently covered by two separate temporary bans (moratoriums): a moratorium on Fracking for shale Gas and Coal Bed Methane developments was announced in January 2015 and a moratorium on Underground Coal Gasification developments in October 2015. These moratorium Are NOT BANS. They are pauses, allowing time for the Scottish Government to conduct studies into Unconventional Gas and to consult with communities. The moratoriums are likely to last until 2017. Our Forth believe therefore it is imperative that these moratoriums are viewed as a call to action for concerned communities to continue to inform themselves and their neighbours about the potential risks and alternatives to these industries. Why is a complete ban needed? Our Forth believe that the science is clear that the Unconventional Gas Extraction, including Fracking for Shale gas, Coal Bed Menthane Extraction and Underground Coal Gasification, cannot be done safely and is unlikey to bring economic benefits in the form of jobs and increased investment. We believe the more that ordinary people learn and research about these industries and learn of the scale of drilling that will blight their lives, industrialise rural areas, and devalue their homes - the more they will oppose it. We believe that any perceived benefits will come at a major cost to established Scottish industries (such as the tourism and food and drink industries), our natural environment and people's health. We believe that the main beneficiaries will be multi-millionaires and wealthy landowners, not the Scottish communities that will bear the burden of risk. We believe that these activities are entirely incompatible with the Scottish Government’s commitment to climate change targets. Our Forth want Scotland to follow the lead of enlightened countries and areas around the world banning these technologies and investing in the jobs and energy security that renewable energy can bring. Why a 2km Buffer Zone? In 2013 the Scottish Government introduced a requirement for developers to propose buffer zones between unconventional gas developments and communities. Disappointingly there is no minimum limit specified under Scottish Planning Policy. Ineos this summer stated that they would be looking at only 400 m Bufferzones between it’s fracking operations and communities!! Our Forth believe that this is not good enough to protect communities, and support Friends of the Earth call for a 2km buffer zone as is the case in New South Wales, Australia since February 2013, immediately and irrespective of the current moratorium. Our Forth believe that implementing 2km Buffer zones in Scotland would also have the effect of ruling out Unconventional Gas development in our densely populated areas, as it would effectively make it uneconomical for the companies involved. Watch this beautiful 10 minute video to find out more about our campaign: Our Forth from Waltzer Films on Vimeo.

The global demand for electricity is projected to grow by nearly 80 percent between now and 2030. The over-reliance on fossil fuels and its environmental cost combined with wind energy becoming increasingly cost competitive rests the case firmly with wind. A modern wind turbine produces 180 times more electricity at less than half the cost per kWh than the most efficient turbine 20 years ago. This staggering statistic points to wind energy’s coming of age and its onward journey of promise into a reliable and cost competitive, renewable energy source. The maturing of the wind industry has led to more efficient value chains and growing economies of scale, and can already compete with coal and gas in certain circumstances. As the price of emitting Co2 rises, the relative cost of wind power has improved even more. Neath needs to be in a position whereby it produces its own energy - both from sustainable sources and with an ability to sell it to the National Grid when there is a surplus. Drummau Mountain is the ideal location for wind turbines, as are most hills and mountains within the locale, like Mynydd Marchywel, for example. We call on Neath Port Talbot Council to continue to explore and build renewable energy projects across the county borough, without prejudice, and for the common good.

For over 100 years the Tate gallery has displayed contemporary and traditional British, and contemporary international artists. It has become a cultural cornerstone in Britain's art scene and has a responsibility to defend the interests of the people to whom it represents and receives funding from. As we face the greatest moral dilemma of our age, private and public institutions alike must take responsible actions on behalf of billions of people worldwide, present and future generations. The production and consumption of oil, coal and gas is not sustainable and will have devastating effects if left at its current monstrous rate: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2015/apr/10/how-much-fossil-fuel-are-we-using-right-now As shown by The Guardian's 'Keep it in the Ground' campaign, dubbed 'the biggest story in the world' an estimated 1/3 of known oil reserves, 4/5 of coal reserves and 1/2 of gas reserves must be left untouched if we are to remain below an already dangerous 2 degree rise in global temperature. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2015/mar/16/the-biggest-story-in-the-world The time to act is now. We must divest from these archaic, destructive institutions, and we must begin by showing them that they no longer have a place in this world if it is to remain habitable. BP is still demanding that fines that are yet to be issued are cut due to a proposed lack of finances, and must be made to take responsibility for their actions. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12124830 http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/03/us-bp-trial-idUSKBN0L724420150203 Oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico and Azerbaijan are devastating symptoms of a greater, catastrophic disease, condemning the inhabitants of our planet to agricultural and financial collapse, fracturing an already fragile ecosystem on the brink of collapse. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/gallery/2015/apr/18/bp-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-five-years-on-gallery http://content.time.com/time/video/player/0,32068,83190883001_1987392,00.html It is an industry that you subsidize, an industry at the forefront of corporate lobbying, an industry that supports undemocratic trade 'agreements'. It is time to take a stand. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/04/business/04bptax.html?_r=0 http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/press/speeches/energy-for-europe-time-to-reflect.html This is just one small step to the greatest of victories. Your comments, suggestions and actions are welcome. Thank you for visiting.

The government has already issued Petroleum Exploration and Development Licenses to fracking companies. These licenses cover the whole area surrounding Chew Magna and the reservoirs which provide Bristol’s water supply and they extend as far as Parson Street in Bedminster ! At present fracking companies need to lease land (or seek agreements to drill) from public or private landowners and they need to obtain planning permission from the local council. However, the coalition government has already drafted an energy bill which proposes abolishing the requirement for planning permission. UK Methane has put on hold its plans to extract shale gas using fracking close to the Hicks Gate roundabout on the A4 near Keynsham and the company has relinquished the license covering Chew Magna (PEDL 226). However, that work may start again at any time and the license can be renewed or taken up by another fracking company. http://www.frackfreesomerset.org/ Why should we be concerned? Fracking uses huge amounts of the local water supply and toxic chemicals such as Benzene, Toluene, Phenol and Formaldehyde to fracture impermeable rock and release shale gas or to obtain methane from coal seams underground. It involves drilling first vertically and then horizontally for up to one kilometre or more in both directions. Numerous wells are drilled to ensure continuing production, and this not only disfigures the landscape but also carries the risk of long-term contamination of water sources because all wells leak and degrade over time. Toxic slurry stored in holding ponds also causes air pollution and contaminates the land, especially during heavy rain or flooding. A report for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency states that exposure to chemicals used in fracking may result in headaches, nausea, insomnia, gastric disturbances, blurred vision and blindness in humans; may affect the brain / nervous system, the kidneys and the immune and cardiovascular systems, and may cause cancer (Colborn, T., Kwiatkowski, C., Schultz, K, and Bachran, M. 2011. Natural gas operations from a public health perspective. Human and Ecological Rick Assessment, 17: 1039-1056. In the UK, Medact has described fracking as an “inherently risky” practice, and 18 leading health professionals state: “The arguments against fracking on public health and ecological grounds are overwhelming. There are clear grounds for adopting the precautionary principle and prohibiting fracking” (British Medical Journal (1st April 2015) Health Professionals call for urgent halt to fracking because of public health concerns). Fracking can also cause subsidence and has been associated with earthquakes in Lancashire. Moreover, it makes climate change worse by increasing greenhouse gas emissions. To understand what fracking could mean for individual households, look at the film Gasland on YouTube. You could also take a look at The Truth Behind the Dash for Gas, a DVD produced by Frack Free Somerset.