The header image above comes from the blog of the leader of Cardiff City Council, Cllr Phil Bale. Now we're not sure if Cllr Bale actually pens this column himself, but for the record, you can check it out here.
Skipping over the almost inevitable post about "teaching young people to code", almost like it's going to be the magic panacea that "solves all Wales' problems" and the cheeky item about "Youth Innovation Grants", we find ourselves reading about all things green and eco-trendy.
Under the heading "Greener Granegetown" we read a lovely spin rich item about the £2m of public money being spent on a "new approach to managing rainwater" - fair play - but where are the details? Where's the link so we can investigate? No, nothing - just a date on the 10th June, attend a public meeting (which we can't as we work shifts). This blog has linked to other council pages, extending the spin - but how about a link to some documentation on how this £2m of public money is being spent?
We then find out about the £2.7m being spent on energy generation from the River Taff, where we are hit with the factoids "generate enough sustainable electricity to power 550 homes – as well as providing the Council with around £140,000 in income each year." Here at Cerdyn Coch, we wonder how true this statement is or do Cardiff Council suffer from the same syndrome as Welsh Government, namely "convenient statistics syndrome" or CSS from now on. Let's pick that apart.
£2.7m of public money. Power to 550 homes. According to figures from the UK government, the average annual electricity bill, plus standing charge is about £700. Now, if this project costs £2.7m of public money, and once complete, generates energy for 550 homes, charged out at £700 - it will take the project 7 years to recover the cost, before any income is generated for the council. In fairness, the situation will be longer - running and maintenance costs, staffing etc will mean that the project will probably take 10 years to break even. So it will take that long for the council to make any "income".
Cardiff Council - how about presenting statistics:
Skipping over the almost inevitable post about "teaching young people to code", almost like it's going to be the magic panacea that "solves all Wales' problems" and the cheeky item about "Youth Innovation Grants", we find ourselves reading about all things green and eco-trendy.
Under the heading "Greener Granegetown" we read a lovely spin rich item about the £2m of public money being spent on a "new approach to managing rainwater" - fair play - but where are the details? Where's the link so we can investigate? No, nothing - just a date on the 10th June, attend a public meeting (which we can't as we work shifts). This blog has linked to other council pages, extending the spin - but how about a link to some documentation on how this £2m of public money is being spent?
We then find out about the £2.7m being spent on energy generation from the River Taff, where we are hit with the factoids "generate enough sustainable electricity to power 550 homes – as well as providing the Council with around £140,000 in income each year." Here at Cerdyn Coch, we wonder how true this statement is or do Cardiff Council suffer from the same syndrome as Welsh Government, namely "convenient statistics syndrome" or CSS from now on. Let's pick that apart.
£2.7m of public money. Power to 550 homes. According to figures from the UK government, the average annual electricity bill, plus standing charge is about £700. Now, if this project costs £2.7m of public money, and once complete, generates energy for 550 homes, charged out at £700 - it will take the project 7 years to recover the cost, before any income is generated for the council. In fairness, the situation will be longer - running and maintenance costs, staffing etc will mean that the project will probably take 10 years to break even. So it will take that long for the council to make any "income".
Cardiff Council - how about presenting statistics:
- In a manner that everyone can understand
- Without being selective about it
- Without any spin
Here at Coch Towers, we have no problem with that - just the way it's spun in the blog post. It reads like "Taaaaadddaa.... the Council is now earning £140,000" - errr, no. That £2.7m of public money needs to be paid back first.
The blog continues about street lights and worries over the brightness: "You don’t have to be concerned about the amount of light emitted from these lower wattage bulbs, as the ‘Street Wise’ bulbs are actually brighter than the traditional yellow bulbs and far more energy efficient" - are they really brighter? It would be nice to be told the luminance value of the lights, before and after, so that we can see the evidence. We accept that they are more efficient, leading to lower running costs. Interestingly, there is a body of evidence that LED streetlights lead to significantly worse sleeping patterns than the orange sodium lamps. Details here
To be fair, we stopped reading the blog at this point - not because there was anything wrong with it - but because it was so extensive. We commend that (we think). However, we are left wondering how Cllr Bale, who earns £53,000 per year from the public purse, has time to actually blog all this instead of running the council. (See remuneration details here)
I guess politicians can't win either way!
The blog continues about street lights and worries over the brightness: "You don’t have to be concerned about the amount of light emitted from these lower wattage bulbs, as the ‘Street Wise’ bulbs are actually brighter than the traditional yellow bulbs and far more energy efficient" - are they really brighter? It would be nice to be told the luminance value of the lights, before and after, so that we can see the evidence. We accept that they are more efficient, leading to lower running costs. Interestingly, there is a body of evidence that LED streetlights lead to significantly worse sleeping patterns than the orange sodium lamps. Details here
To be fair, we stopped reading the blog at this point - not because there was anything wrong with it - but because it was so extensive. We commend that (we think). However, we are left wondering how Cllr Bale, who earns £53,000 per year from the public purse, has time to actually blog all this instead of running the council. (See remuneration details here)
I guess politicians can't win either way!