Republicanism

A few years back during the Golden Jubilee, a lad in my village asked if our chimney could be used as an anchor point for some street party bunting. The source of the request allowed me to inveigh against monarchist feeling in much the same way that my elderly aunt would fret about homosexuality:  I wasn’t biased but it was sad to see it among younger people. I seemed to be a lone voice as the village was taken over by royalist fervour. It’s something of a relief therefore to be in Lewes for the Royal Wedding.  Here the heirs of Tom Paine are mustering just a single street party. Republican kudos for a town of 16,000. A quick look at the papers suggests though that this may not be the national mood. What, one wonders, is the trouble with republicanism?

It isn’t that we British necessarily have a tradition of deference. Quite the contrary; we’ve been overthrowing kings since the Battle of Lewes in 1264 (an extra republican feather in the town’s cap, though the victory was short-lived). Another near miss was the Peasants Revolt of 1381. If Wat Tyler’s mob had not arranged to negotiate with the teenaged Richard II at Smithfield (as opposed to, say, killing him) the history of Britain might have been rather different.  Regicides had better luck in 1649 with the beheading of Charles I. However, 11 years later a monarch was back: the hedonistic Charles II no doubt a welcome antidote to the Taliban-style government of the Puritans. The Brits got rid of James II in 1688 because they didn’t like the cut of his Roman Catholic jib. He was replaced by his daughter Mary (with William of Orange) and ultimately by the current dynasty leaping over 50 or so more eligible, but Roman Catholic, candidates. We’ve also been curtailing the  powers of the Sovereign since Magna Carta leading to the current “Constitutional” (all the trappings but little of the power) arrangement. The popularity of individual monarchs has yoyo-ed wildly (there were even assassination attempts on Queen Victoria) up to the last significant dip in the late 1990’s.

Despite all this we never quite seem to get rid of the monarchy itself. Perhaps the trouble is that most of our anti-royal feeling has not been about republicanism at all but rather about disliking the Sovereign's beliefs (James II, Prince Charles), behaviour (Charles I, Prince Charles) or personality (Henry III, Prince Charles). Rather oddly it’s still treasonable to advocate certain forms of republicanism. Perhaps more significantly anti-royalists continue to be marginalised as young (The Sex Pistols – at least they were once), cranks (Tony Benn) or troublemakers (Benjamin Zephaniah). Opinion polls suggest we’re still keener on the institution than a presidency (i.e. a retirement scheme for seedy political hacks). Politicians too find the royals useful and have been reluctant to act on proposals to reduce their religious and political roles further. 

Another displaced royal, King Farouk of Egypt is alleged to have said, "Soon there will be only five Kings left... Spades, Clubs, Hearts, Diamonds and England.” And who would bet against him. Though handsome young Wills hasn’t turned out quite as many would have wished, commoner Kate is looking like helping the Firm well into the post-Diana era. It seems that storming the Bastille may have to wait once again.

100 monkeys: solar so good

Last weeks sceptical assessment of the prospects for solar power led to a few responses and some further discussion. Probably only for the hardcore though...

100 monkeys: solar so good: "It was odd last week to have tow Viva Lewes columns with opposing views about solar pv, with me singing its praises and The Trouble With fe..."

Solar Power

Solar power is flavour of the month around town. With the proposed community owned power station and the Rooks thinking about getting panels, it sounds as if Lewes is leading the way into a low emissions future. In the face of environmental catastrophe, free energy from the sky certainly sounds like a tempting option. Lately I’ve been wondering though if the optimism around solar power is justified. What, one is tempted to ask, could be the trouble with energy from the sun?

Looking more closely at solar, the primary trouble is something familiar to Brits: the weather. Blighty is not a sunny climate and we use the brunt of our electricity in winter when the supply of sunshine is at its least abundant. There is also cost of installing panels. Photovoltaic panels (that’s the kind which generate electricity) for a typical house are likely be somewhere between 7 and 15 grand.  When you stick these factors together the figures don’t look encouraging, either from an individual point of view or from the wider social angle.

For individuals even the most promising scenarios suggest that if you install such panels, you might get electricity worth about 25% of the installation costs over the life of your system. While money isn’t everything, this picture would leave solar unlikely to catch on except among people who have spare cash and enjoy the warmth generated by their own piety rather than the small amount of energy they’ll get in the British winter. The last government recognised this and set up an incentive called the feed-in-tariff to encourage take-up. This involves buying any unused electricity householders generate from solar panels they’ve hooked into the National Grid (presumably mostly in the summer). The rates of payment for spare lecky are generous to put it mildly: often several times the cost of electricity generated by other sources. The question is open as to how many people this will encourage but it’s undoubtedly a nice investment opportunity for those who can afford it. The social perspective comes in when you realise that the people paying this enormous subsidy are the rest of us. Clearly this isn’t sustainable and a rather hot debate among environmental commentators right now is about whether this money would be better spent on the development of other alternatives to fossil fuels. The feed-in-tariff represents a big bet (with our money) that the price of the technology will ultimately come down and that of other energy sources will rise, to the point where solar is cost-effective.

Solar isn’t a significant energy source at the moment and there are plenty (including many earlier advocates) who doubt it ever will be, for the UK at least. You might want to consider this if you were thinking of taking a shareholding in the local power station. Is it a good bet? Or is it as big a leap of faith over sense as the Lewes Pound? For now it is worth remembering that, for something free, solar sure is expensive.