A FIVE year carbon management plan which will save Warrington £10 million and achieve a 40 per cent reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been approved by the borough council’s executive board.
But Cllr Mike Biggin, (pictured) executive member for climate change has admitted that a controversial “solar farm” which 
would cost £10 million to build, is “not viable at the moment.”
But it remains a very important aspiration for the future, he said.
No site has been identified for the facility but officers claim it would save an estimated £375,000 annually and cut emissions of greenhouse gases by some 2,040 tonnes.
Cllr Biggin said although climate change was a global problem it had to be tackled at a local level too.
“We have all noticed changes in the weather locally,” he said.
“But even climate change sceptics should welcome this plan because not only does it reduce carbon emissions, it also saves money. In fact it would be worth doing for the saving of money alone.”
The savings achieved would help ease the pressure for budget cuts, he added.
Main focus of the plan will be schools and street lighting, which together make up 60 per cent of the borough council’s emissions.
Cllr Biggin said the difference between taking action and doing nothing would be more than £10 million and there were also clear environmental benefits. But there would also be damage to the council’s reputation if nothing was done.
“Warrington wishes to lead the way in reducing reliance on carbon based energy, showing how communities and businesses can follow its example,” he said.
Cllr Bob Barr said Golden Gates Housing Trust, which had 9,000 homes, could make a contribution to achieving the carbon reduction target of 40 per cent by 2015.
It was important to introduce energy efficiency measures in homes – particularly the homes of the most vulnerable.
Cllr Sheila Woodyatt stressed the importance of educating pupils in school about the benefits of energy saving and carbon reduction so that they could go home and “bully” their parents into measures should as switching the television off instead of leaving it on standby.
Council leader Ian Marks said Warrington had shown an early intention to tackle climate change by signing up to the Nottingham Declaration, committing the council to reduce emissions, in 2007.
Solar farm not viable at the moment
99 Comments
Share.
About Author
Gary Skentelbery
Experienced journalist for more than 40 years. Managing Director of magazine publishing group with three in-house titles and on-line daily newspaper for Warrington. Experienced writer, photographer, PR consultant and media expert having written for local, regional and national newspapers. Specialties: PR, media, social networking, photographer, networking, advertising, sales, media crisis management. Chair of Warrington Healthwatch Director Warrington Chamber of Commerce Patron Tim Parry Johnathan Ball Foundation for Peace. Trustee Warrington Disability Partnership. Former Chairman of Warrington Town FC.
9 Comments
So does that mean that the exec board have approved the 5 year carbon management but it does not include the £10 million “solar farm” ? I’m confused now (as usual)
well if they want to put solar panels on the roof of my house which faces north they can provided I get an appropriate reduction in my council tax.
So if this solar farm actually costs 10 million, in just under 30 years i t will pay for itself. As long as within that timescale there are no repairs or malfuctions or it simply becomes not viable and outdated.
Liked the bit about if nothing is done the councils reputation may be damaged ….. hehehe nice 1
Unfortunately the numbers were even worse than that! The plan was to BORROW the £10 million pound cost. Even at only 6% interest over 30 years (which would be an EXTREMELY low rate for a commercial loan not secured on a property), the monthly repayment would be a shade under £60K per month – or £720,000 per year.
That’s just about TWICE the whole of the projected savings!
Now I can understand yesterday’s article on Warrington Worldwide where Labour was urging the LibDem-Tory coalition running the Council to scrap this idea. The LibDems-Tories are always bleating about the debt of the country… so why borrow an additional £10million on a loss making scheme that has absolutely no direct benefit for Warrington??? At least under the last Government we got some new schools, etc.
Yes – along with a NATIONAL DEFICIT OF £160 Billion pounds – The interest on this Labour legacy grows at £80,000 per minute. Of the 60 Million people in the UK every man, woman and child would have to pay £24,000 each to clear the deficit. Labour left the country at tipping point – Labour locally left a big hole of 10’s of millions for us all to pick. Well done Labour you really screwed us all at the same time!!!!! I wouldn’t truest them to lace my shoes.
So last week they put in their Budget with £10M of borrowing to pay for it… This week they tell us that they aren’t going to do it?????? Now that’s what I call good financial management – I wonder if it had anything to do with all the comments against it in the last week? Roll on May!
The difference is that the Government is reviewing the feed in tarrif. Labour is paralysed by negativity! From what I read the scheme would have made £7.5m over the 25 years but isn’t it better to target vulnerable households to make their bills cheaper? Didn’t Cllr Barr say the GGH were looking at fitting panels to affordable houses and reducing emmisions by 40%. I think the Labour Party should have an idea all by themselves which doesn’t mean getting the country and town in debt
If you put £10million and left it in a building society account with a compound interest rate of just 2.3% per year for 25 years you would get back £17.65million! Tell me again… just how is it in Warrington people’s interest to BORROW yet another £10million of debt when the rate of return is so low and the risks so high????