Do claims in a recent IPPR report that 100 UK wind turbines are receiving unfair subsidies at a cost of £400m to consumers add up? Fiona Harvey investigates.
A row has broken out within the wind power industry over the future of small wind farm installations in the UK, and the subsidies that should be paid to them.
According to a report from the IPPR thinktank, widely reported in the media (in the FT, Times, Mail and Channel 4 News), about 100 wind turbines are receiving an unfair level of subsidy by exploiting a provision in the subsidy regime. The thinktank has estimated that each of the turbines in question could be receiving £100,000 a year in “excess” subsidies as a result, amounting to about £10m.
But the government, the regulator Ofgem and the wind industry have rejected the claims. A spokeswoman for the Department of Energy and Climate Change said: “This report is based on incorrect and second-hand information – the numbers just don’t add up.”
The IPPR report was co-authored by Charles Ogilvie, a former adviser to ex-energy minister Greg Barker and currently an associate at Bellenden, a PR company. Bellenden’s clients include Vergnet, a manufacturer of small wind turbines that is mentioned in the report, and which could stand to benefit from less competition in its core market if the government implements IPPR’s advice to ban larger models from feed-in tariffs.
<aside class=”element element-pullquote”> IPPR, which did not pay Ogilvie for his work, told the Guardian there was no conflict of interest. Prefacing the report, IPPR listed Ogilvie’s position at Bellenden but did not mention its clients. A spokesman for the thinktank said: “IPPR has no conflict of interest and we have been completely transparent about the authors and who they work for. No-one has been able to find any inaccuracy with the report and we stand by our findings.
More on: www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/13/truth-behind-wind-turbines-subsidies-power-row
