Category: Uncategorized

  • What drives the IndyWales conversation?

    What drives the IndyWales conversation?

    As someone with a strong interest in politics and public affairs, I’ve been following the IndyWales discussion with interest for many years.

    Nothing has the potential to change the nature of our politics, constitution, society and environment as much as becoming an independent nation, and whilst these discussions have taken place as long as my political awareness has been in existence, they have hitherto not been part of mainstream public discourse.

    The meteoric rise of YesCymru membership which now numbers more than 13,000 (from just over 2,000 at the start of 2020) has changed the framework of public debate in Wales. According to some sources, paid-up members now number more than any political party in Wales except for Labour.

    A picture of a tweet of YesCymru's membership reaching 12,000, with the comment that YesCymru is the second largest political force in Wales

    I decided to take a look at mentions of YesCymru on Twitter, from the very first days (August 2014) until now. I was curious about what was driving the discussion. Taking mentions of YesCymru as a proxy for interest in the organisation as a whole (and therefore IndyWales more generally) and I wanted to test the theory that pronouncements made in Westminster have an impact on YesCymru interest.

    The early years

    The first graph shows the frequency of mention of YesCymru over the whole span, from August 2014 until the present day.

    By recent standards, there was very little activity over those early years; the activity tended to be catalysed by events within Wales itself, such as marches for independence.

    However more recently there are clearly defined peaks in activity which correlate more strongly with specific events in Westminster. For example, there was a flurry of activity on the day following the General Election in 2019 in which the Conservatives were returned with a significantly increased majority.

    The next big peak occurred during a period in mid-April when it was revealed that England’s health service had superseded the Welsh Government’s provisional deal for PPE equipment, and that England’s Covid death figures had not included those occurring in care homes.

    The big peak(s)

    Most interesting for me has been the more recent direct correlation between events in Westminster, and mentions of YesCymru on Twitter.

    The furore around Dominic Cummings’ trip to Barnard Castle to test his eyesight resulted in more than 3,000 mentions of YesCymru over three days. And the vote by MPs in Westminster not to extend free school meals for the poorest children in England caused many Twitter users to vent their anger, resulting in much more activity for YesCymru.

    And most telling of all, the ‘big’ peak of more than 4,000 mentions came following the more generous furlough agreement made after Johnson’s decision to lock down England for a month, despite rejecting pleas by Wales and Scotland for more support in the weeks prior to the decision.

    Analysis

    As with many social media movements or campaigns, there was not much in the early years to report on.

    Typically, early activity from any social media account consists of regular engagement to build up ‘brand’ awareness and forge relationships.

    The science of social media demonstrates empirically that large social media accounts grow more quickly and have far greater interaction, so even in the absence of external factors, there would have been an increasing trend of mentions of YesCymru over time.

    However, what we can see from the data is that external factors are playing a huge role in engagement, and that the factors which appear to be playing the biggest role are indeed those performed by UK Government – as highlighted by Plaid Cymru’s Liz Saville Roberts.

    I find it particularly interesting that even where decisions are taken in Westminster that do not directly affect the people of Wales – the decision not to provide free school meals to the poorest children in England as a prime example – this still results in a huge amount of increased discussion around IndyWales.

    This appears to suggest that the institutions of Westminster are becoming increasingly scrutinised by the people of Wales for unfairness, not just to Wales, but to citizens in other parts of the UK.

    It’s still very early days for discussions about independence in Wales, but it’s certain that analysing Twitter will continue to provide a rich seam of data for researchers examining politics and society here.

  • Infrastructure in Wales

    Infrastructure is the Cinderella of modern society. Underpinning every activity we undertake, it is nonetheless largely taken for granted, except when it isn’t there.

    It’s the job of policy-makers and planners in the public sector, and their counterparts and engineering professionals in the private sector, to ensure that infrastructure is robust and accessible round the clock. To their credit, there are very few times when this part of the system fails.

    It’s also the job of those same people to ensure that society’s future demands on infrastructure can be met, which requires direction and investment. The ambit of future scenarios is fascinating, in that it affords both great challenge and great opportunity for our infrastructure — and by extension, for society as a whole.

    But it’s my personal fear that we are failing to meet the challenges and obligations set to us by our future generations.

    Gridlock

    Foremost amongst my areas of concern is our electricity grid. The capacity in Wales, both in distribution and transmission, is completely full. This means that most new renewable generators face punishing costs to upgrade large chunks of the system, leaving many projects unviable.

    An electricity pylon at night with stars in the background

    In mid Wales, the situation is particularly severe. This is where Wales’ most productive and dependable wind resource is literally stranded, pending the development of the mid Wales connection. This 400kV connection would greatly facilitate Wales in meeting its own renewable energy targets, but is itself dependent on the ability of onshore wind — the cheapest form of renewable electricity — to access the market.

    Mid Wales is doubly-penalised; insufficient grid to generate and export renewable energy, and potentially insufficient grid — ‘grid poverty’ — to make use of new technologies such as electric vehicles and heat pumps. As I wrote in 2017, this lack of access to potentially money-saving technologies has the potential to further disadvantage rural dwellers, and could lead to communities becoming increasingly dependent on unaffordable ways of heating and transport.

    However, although the position in mid Wales is particularly acute, the grid is squeezed everywhere. I have been told by the two Distribution Network Operators in Wales that no new thermal generation or battery storage greater than 1MW can be installed until 2026.

    This limitation is crippling our ability to take part in new energy and economic systems, once again condemning Wales to use legacy 20th century infrastructure as our UK neighbours move seamlessly into a more enlightened system of low-carbon generation, storage and smart use.

    Opportunity

    Wales is at a crucial point with respect to a range of infrastructure issues, and rural Wales, in a Brexit landscape, is particularly vulnerable.

    However I believe that within this uncertainty lies opportunity. With Wales’ rural areas replete in notorious ‘not-spots’ for both mobile signal and 4G internet, could we combine new grid infrastructure with 5G mobile networks, leap-frogging old technologies in ways advantageous to rural livelihoods?

    Why shouldn’t Welsh Government — and other public sector organisations — take a stake in the grid infrastructure which would be needed to connect much-needed onshore wind projects, facilitating the development of renewables in Wales and simultaneously providing opportunity to a whole host of modern, low-impact manufacturing and processing clusters across rural Wales?

    A cyclist on a small road in the hills, fading into mist in the distance.

    Could the proposed ‘Lôn Rhiannon’ also incorporate a grid line and future-proofed mobile network infrastructure, alongside a new cycle network, up the spine of Wales?

    With the new National Infrastructure Commission about to sit, there are a range of future opportunities which could change the way in which we view infrastructure. Multi-use, combined infrastructure, paid for in innovative ways and by new participants (crowd-funded grid anyone?) could unleash the creativity and enthusiasm of our citizens, businesses and public sector organisations. I cordially invite the new members of National Infrastructure Commission for Wales to use their imagination to the fullest when considering how best to serve the future interests of our people.

    And if they want some food for thought, my door is always open.

    (This article was first published on the Institute of Welsh Affairs website here.)

  • Powys — where’s your £50 million?

    Evidence

    I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge — Galileo Galilei

    I’m a scientist. To be more precise, I’m a physicist. I’ve had a strong interest in energy conservation since being a small boy — I remember asking my dad why he didn’t take the car out of gear when we were going downhill as it seemed as though we would save petrol. That interest in science continued through my schooling into ‘A’ levels, a physics degree, and eventually a Ph.D. And I’ve always thought that science was a good start for policy; not the whole story of course, but policy-making without evidence is almost certainly a recipe for poor decisions.

    Those of us who work in the renewable energy sector are confronted by irrational opposition on a daily basis. Those who oppose renewable energy — and onshore wind in particular — do not generally take the trouble to provide evidence. On the contrary, they produce fantastical accounts of the terrible harm which results from wind turbines (Including claims as bizarre as disappearing worms and dead goats), severe (but unquantified) impacts on tourism; or the massive costs which burden the population from supporting the technology (just 1% of your electricity bill); or the fact that wind isn’t wanted (it’s very popular) — and, despite the best efforts of the Advertising Standards Authority, these claims continue. (See, for example, a general search for ‘wind’ in the ASA database

    Unfortunately, our elected representatives are sometimes guilty of inflammatory language too — note Glyn Davies’ reported description of Montgomeryshire being turned into ‘hell’ through the installation of grid infrastructure. We also hear repeated allegations of inefficiency and ‘large’ subsidy unfairly levelled at onshore wind.

    Onshore wind turbines — not as evil or ugly as opponents might suggest

    Irrational opposition to onshore wind would not be a problem in and of itself; but the (historical) nature of the debate, characterised by a relentless focus in some sections of the media on opinion, allusion and denunciation, has led to some people with decision-making capacity mistaking the invective for reality.

    For those of us who believe in evidence-based policy and decision-making, this is worrying. It’s worrying because decisions are potentially being made contrary to the evidence — to the detriment of communities in rural Wales, and to the people who make up those communities. Let’s explore some of the issues in a bit more depth.

    Powys

    Powys plays a potentially pivotal role in Wales’ renewable energy ambitions. Blessed with a phenomenal wind resource, and with a low population density, it was one of the main areas of development for onshore wind outlined in the Technical Advice Note on renewable energy published in 2005 known as TAN8.

    TAN8 aimed to concentrate developments of onshore wind in Wales in those areas most suited to them, in terms of wind resource and population density. The conclusion recommends the use of Strategic Search Areas to target onshore wind for “efficiency and environmental reasons”.

    The rational person, armed with the facts — the evidence — would look at Powys, and see a county struggling with GVA lowest-in-class (Powys has the lowest Gross Value Added (GVA) per hour worked, and per job, in the UK — less than half the productivity of Inner London), facing big budget cuts (PCC is struggling to provide its current level of services to its citizens, demonstrated by recent school closures, and a projected £35m shortfall in budget over the next three years), and find a potentially compelling match with massive levels of inward investment from a clean, green industry.

    What they would actually find is a local authority which has objected to a number of large wind farms, such that a public inquiry has been launched into the issue. I’m not blaming anyone for historic decisions here; but I do think it’s worth looking at the example of exemplar local authorities — Neath Port Talbot and Rhondda Cynon Taff — in the way they have engaged with a wind developer (Vattenfall), and the result for the local community of that engagement.

    What might have been

    In May 2012, permission was granted for the development of the Pen y Cymoedd wind farm, which lies within the Neath Port Talbot and Rhondda Cynon Taff local authorities, following their decision not to object to the scheme. The Pen y Cymoedd windfarm at 228MW is the biggest scheme in Wales.

    The fact that local authorities supported the application, meant that the Secretary of State’s decision was more straightforward. It also meant that the decision was made more quickly. Part of the local authority negotiating stance was the requirement to facilitate the involvement of local businesses — and it worked. More than 600 companies signed up with an interest for the development, with 90% coming from Wales, and more than 30% from the local area.

    Vattenfall have explicitly stated their commitment to support local businesses; indeed, they require contractors to maximise their use of local companies, something which is written into tender specifications and scrutinised as part of the project development process.

    But the local business involvement is only part of the story. Pen y Cymoedd will also have a community benefit fund to match its status as a large energy generator; it will benefit the local community to the tune of £1.8m per annum — index linked — over the lifetime of the project. So on top of the benefit to businesses, the community is going to see investment on a scale which is almost certainly unmatched in the experience of the area surrounding the site. They have already started on a new £350,000 mountain-bike trail, which will be completed before 2014.

    An apprentice at Pen y Cymoedd

    The training potential is also starting to be tapped; a group of students from Neath Port Talbot College recently returned from a study tour to the Netherlands to learn about energy generation from the experts. The students teamed up with apprentices from the wind turbine apprenticeship programme, which is being supported by RWE and Vattenfall.

    That’s Pen y Cymoedd; but what does that mean for Powys?

    Comparing South Wales to Powys

    Let’s start with the numbers. The public inquiry, currently underway in mid Wales, comprises five wind energy products, for a total of 480–600MW of capacity.

    The community benefit from these developments would be considerable; I’d go as far as to say transformative. If we use Pen y Cymoedd as the comparator, we can make an assumption on the total annual funds. Using Pen y Cymoedd as an example is helpful because it’s the biggest scheme in Wales, and therefore most closely resembles the impact which might be achieved with a number of large wind developments in Powys.

    Pen y Cymoedd generates a community benefit of £1.8m/yr for a size of 228MW. Using the figure of 480MW (assuming all wind farms in the public enquiry gain consent), the equivalent fund for Powys would be (480/228)X1.8m = £3.8 million.

    That’s £3.8 million annually in community benefits every year, for the next 25 years, or 39% of the total shortfall in Powys County Council’s budget for the next three years.

    That’s the easy stuff — the ‘clean’ money which can be match-funded and spent on things desired and needed by residents in areas in and around wind farm developments. But what about the business benefits from the developments themselves?

    Well, the ‘Economic Opportunities’ report, produced by Cardiff Business School and Regeneris Consulting, suggests that 20% of the economic benefit to Wales from onshore wind development accrues to Mid and South West Wales. Let’s split that 50–50, and agree that mid Wales sees 10% of the total.

    The total GVA to Wales from 2012 to 2050 if an ambitious development approach were taken — compared to historic trends of installation — would be £1.4bn.

    That’s £140m for mid Wales, that will unlikely see the light of day if Powys continues to deny the opportunity for economic diversification that so many are crying out for.