Difference between revisions of "Ian Fells"

From Powerbase
Jump to: navigation, search
(add navbar)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{NavbarIndividuals}}
 
{{NavbarIndividuals}}
  
'''Ian Fells''' is a paid consultant to the nuclear industry and consistently pro-nuclear. He is the principle consultant to [[Fells Associates]] and also a fellow at [[The Royal Academy of Engineering]]. He was the president of [[The Institute of Energy]] for 1978-79. From 1987 to 1998 he was a science advisor to [[The World Energy Council]]. He is an associate at [[Incoteco]], a company run by [[Hugh Sharman]] who is routinely used by the anti-windfarm organisation [[Country Guardian]]. Since 1975 he has been a Professor of Energy Conversion at the [[University of Newcastle]], which also uses Fells Associates for PR services.
+
'''Ian Fells''' is a paid consultant to the nuclear industry, who has been consistently pro-nuclear. He is the principle consultant to [[Fells Associates]] and also a fellow at [[The Royal Academy of Engineering]]. He was the president of [[The Institute of Energy]] for 1978-79. From 1987 to 1998 he was a science advisor to [[The World Energy Council]]. He is an associate at [[Incoteco]], a company run by [[Hugh Sharman]] who is routinely used by the anti-windfarm organisation [[Country Guardian]]. Since 1975 he has been a Professor of Energy Conversion at the [[University of Newcastle]], which also uses Fells Associates for PR services.
 +
 
 +
From 2003 until September 2005 Fells was the chairman of the New and Renewable Energy Centre (NaREC) in Blyth. [http://www.fellsassociates.com/]
  
 
==Views on Nuclear Energy==  
 
==Views on Nuclear Energy==  
  
A typical quote from Fells’ is: “Nuclear energy is one of the safest, cheapest, cleanest and most reliable ways of generating electricity but it has been demonised by the press," he says. "The Government is phasing it out even though its adoption would allow us to meet our carbon dioxide targets. Frankly, politicians don't think that there are votes in nuclear power -but the public isn't as daft as they think. Sixty per cent of us are perfectly happy to have nuclear power stations ."
+
A typical quote from Fells’ is: “Nuclear energy is one of the safest, cheapest, cleanest and most reliable ways of generating electricity but it has been demonised by the press," he says. "The Government is phasing it out even though its adoption would allow us to meet our carbon dioxide targets. Frankly, politicians don't think that there are votes in nuclear power -but the public isn't as daft as they think. Sixty per cent of us are perfectly happy to have nuclear power stations."
  
 
July Wind conference in Scotland: “There is no doubt that we need all the carbon dioxide free electricity we can get but predicating this almost entirely on wind when there are other, less  obtrusive technologies seems simplistic, stubborn and perverse. The government compounds the confusion over energy policy further by deciding to phase out nuclear power which currently supplies some 23% of carbon dioxide free, electricity. If we are even to approach the 20% reduction in CO2, which the government is dedicated to, and a 60% reduction by 2050, refusing to include nuclear power in the mechanism seems inexplicable unless some sort of political correctness is responsible for this decision. Things may change however, according to a recent statement by the Prime Minister. What is require is “CLEANâ€?, carbon dioxide free, energy and that means as much renewable and nuclear energy as we can muster.
 
July Wind conference in Scotland: “There is no doubt that we need all the carbon dioxide free electricity we can get but predicating this almost entirely on wind when there are other, less  obtrusive technologies seems simplistic, stubborn and perverse. The government compounds the confusion over energy policy further by deciding to phase out nuclear power which currently supplies some 23% of carbon dioxide free, electricity. If we are even to approach the 20% reduction in CO2, which the government is dedicated to, and a 60% reduction by 2050, refusing to include nuclear power in the mechanism seems inexplicable unless some sort of political correctness is responsible for this decision. Things may change however, according to a recent statement by the Prime Minister. What is require is “CLEANâ€?, carbon dioxide free, energy and that means as much renewable and nuclear energy as we can muster.

Revision as of 15:18, 10 February 2006

Individuals

Media
Columnists
Organisations
Companies
PR firms
Web companies
Unions
The City

Ian Fells is a paid consultant to the nuclear industry, who has been consistently pro-nuclear. He is the principle consultant to Fells Associates and also a fellow at The Royal Academy of Engineering. He was the president of The Institute of Energy for 1978-79. From 1987 to 1998 he was a science advisor to The World Energy Council. He is an associate at Incoteco, a company run by Hugh Sharman who is routinely used by the anti-windfarm organisation Country Guardian. Since 1975 he has been a Professor of Energy Conversion at the University of Newcastle, which also uses Fells Associates for PR services.

From 2003 until September 2005 Fells was the chairman of the New and Renewable Energy Centre (NaREC) in Blyth. [1]

Views on Nuclear Energy

A typical quote from Fells’ is: “Nuclear energy is one of the safest, cheapest, cleanest and most reliable ways of generating electricity but it has been demonised by the press," he says. "The Government is phasing it out even though its adoption would allow us to meet our carbon dioxide targets. Frankly, politicians don't think that there are votes in nuclear power -but the public isn't as daft as they think. Sixty per cent of us are perfectly happy to have nuclear power stations."

July Wind conference in Scotland: “There is no doubt that we need all the carbon dioxide free electricity we can get but predicating this almost entirely on wind when there are other, less obtrusive technologies seems simplistic, stubborn and perverse. The government compounds the confusion over energy policy further by deciding to phase out nuclear power which currently supplies some 23% of carbon dioxide free, electricity. If we are even to approach the 20% reduction in CO2, which the government is dedicated to, and a 60% reduction by 2050, refusing to include nuclear power in the mechanism seems inexplicable unless some sort of political correctness is responsible for this decision. Things may change however, according to a recent statement by the Prime Minister. What is require is “CLEAN�, carbon dioxide free, energy and that means as much renewable and nuclear energy as we can muster.

Nuclear Industry Links

Whilst he does not appear to be a member of SONE or BNES, he will go and speak to these groups. He addressed a British Nuclear Industry Forum meeting in 1996/7. He spoke at the Nuclear Congress 2000, and the BNIF fringe meeting at Labour’s party conference in 2001 and finished “by arguing that nuclear energy should be part of Britain’s future energy strategy�. Also that year he spoke to the Western Branch of the British Nuclear Energy Society , and wrote in The Nuclear Engineer - the journal of the Institution of Nuclear Engineers. In 2002 Fells addressed the Special Interest Group on Waste Management & Decommissioning group of British Nuclear Energy Society in a joint meeting with Imech.

In April 2003 he addressed SONE. This was reported in their newsletter: “Worse still, Professor Ian Fells, at a well-attended meeting of members at Sellafield in April, revealed that the DTI had ignored its own market model in reaching the conclusion that nuclear was uneconomic. That model showed that renewables could, in certain circumstances, be 250% more costly than nuclear. At the same meeting, Keith Parker, a member of SONE’s committee, disclosed that the nuclear industry had made a big effort to provide a substantial chapter for the EWP on what needed to be done to preserve the nuclear option but this had been reduced to two paragraphs.

He is obviously a supporter of Bernard Ingham too, with a professional relationship that dates back to 1988. In February 88, the FT reported “Bernard Ingham, who has been Margaret Thatcher's Press Secretary almost since she became Prime Minister, is being tempted to leave and take up a new post as an academic. The offer comes from the University of Newcastle which is seeking to establish a new Centre for Government Communications and has already raised about half the 400,000 Pounds (pds) or so required to finance the first five years. Ingham is one of three candidates, though clearly the preferred one, to direct it. He is understood to have shown considerable enthusiasm and to have discussed the matter with the Prime Minister who says that she wants him to stay. The key figures behind the project are Hugh Berrington and Ian Fells, professors of politics and energy studies respectively�

It does not seem that the venture came off. However since then he has written letters to the Times in support of Ingham in 1999 “It seems to me that the way ahead must lie with "clean energy", which is a mix of renewable and nuclear energy. There is a synergy between them which is becoming apparent� . In 2000: “The recent announcement of the closure of Bradwell nuclear power station in two years' time (report, Business, December 2) highlights the complaint made by Sir Bernard Ingham in his letter (December 21) and presents a dilemma to the Government �

The support from Ingham is reciprocated: In response to Regen SW’s request to come and speak, Bernard Ingham declined due to prior engagements but wrote:

“If you want facts – which you most certainly will not get from Juniper – then Professor Lovelock, who lives near Launceston, would be an admirable speaker. So might Professor Michael Laughton of Imperial College. Professor Ian Fells is another who comes to mind. Alternatively, you might find Professor David Bellamy as [sic] man who would usefully inject some common sense into the renewables debate. If you have any problems with finding a speaker, you might get in touch with Angela Kelly�

Fells also has links to the political right. He wrote a briefing paper for the Adam Smith Institute, called a Cloudy Energy Future in February 2003; in March 2004 the ASI held an International Energy Symposium at which Fells spoke. The previous month Narec and the Adam Smith Institute held a joint conference called The Challenge of Developing the UK’s Offshore Wind

Related Links