Urban explorers highlight the decay of the highest voltage lab in the world

A group of urban explorers broke into the disused National Renewable Energy Centre, near Newcastle.

Initially opened in 1970, the Clothier Electrical Testing Laboratory was taken over by the New and Renewable Energy Centre – Narec – in 2004.

The organization primarily continued with much of the onshore grid infrastructure technology development and validation work the high voltage lab was originally built for. They also tested the robustness of networks taking power from offshore locations to onshore sites, and was the only facility of its kind in the UK - developing smart grids and new network developments including integrating offshore wind turbines.

One of several Narec centres, Clothier Lab focused on electrical grid aspects of independent research projects and was a test facility for the development of offshore renewable energies including wind, wave, tidal.

However, when the Coalition came into power their pledge to close all regional development agencies meant that One NorthEast had to shut down, which left Narec to review their capacities and maintenance required by the large facility. Narec opted to relocate to a government-supported laboratory on their main campus in Blythe, Northumberland - leaving the Clothier facility, located in Hebburn, abandoned. The building has not been bought by anyone since its closure in 2011. The site remains the property of Siemens, an industrial engineering company.

Green activists have made the claim that the facility's closure was "a massive loss for UK research and development, and shows the real level of the support the government has for green technology research." Narec, however, calls the move beneficial and maintains that they have invested £150m in new facilities which position the UK as "a world-leader in the development of offshore renewable energy technologies" - citing their new Offshore Demonstration Project as evidence.

Last month, a group of urban explorers decided to visit the old factory. These are the pictures they took:

 

Pictures from 28 Days Later (2)

Editor's Note: This article was amended on 11th February 2013 to correct inaccuracies pertaining to the relocation and the work undertaken at the Clothier Testing Laboratory.

The Clothier Electrical Testing Laboratory has been cabandoned since 2011.

Marie le Conte is a freelance journalist.

Show Hide image

Will Euroscepticism prove an unbeatable advantage in the Conservative leadership race?

Conservative members who are eager for Brexit are still searching for a heavyweight champion - and they could yet inherit the earth.

Put your money on Liam Fox? The former Defence Secretary has been given a boost by the news that ConservativeHome’s rolling survey of party members preferences for the next Conservative leader. Jeremy Wilson at BusinessInsider and James Millar at the Sunday Post have both tipped Fox for the top job.

Are they right? The expectation among Conservative MPs is that there will be several candidates from the Tory right: Dominic Raab, Priti Patel and potentially Owen Paterson could all be candidates, while Boris Johnson, in the words of one: “rides both horses – is he the candidate of the left, of the right, or both?”

MPs will whittle down the field of candidates to a top two, who will then be voted on by the membership.  (As Graham Brady, chair of the 1922 Committee, notes in his interview with my colleague George Eaton, Conservative MPs could choose to offer a wider field if they so desired, but would be unlikely to surrender more power to party activists.)

The extreme likelihood is that that contest will be between two candidates: George Osborne and not-George Osborne.  “We know that the Chancellor has a bye to the final,” one minister observes, “But once you’re in the final – well, then it’s anyone’s game.”

Could “not-George Osborne” be Liam Fox? Well, the difficulty, as one MP observes, is we don’t really know what the Conservative leadership election is about:

“We don’t even know what the questions are to which the candidates will attempt to present themselves as the answer. Usually, that question would be: who can win us the election? But now that Labour have Corbyn, that question is taken care of.”

So what’s the question that MPs will be asking? We simply don’t know – and it may be that they come to a very different conclusion to their members, just as in 2001, when Ken Clarke won among MPs – before being defeated in a landslide by Conservative activists.

Much depends not only on the outcome of the European referendum, but also on its conduct. If the contest is particularly bruising, it may be that MPs are looking for a candidate who will “heal and settle”, in the words of one. That would disadvantage Fox, who will likely be a combative presence in the European referendum, and could benefit Boris Johnson, who, as one MP put it, “rides both horses” and will be less intimately linked with the referendum and its outcome than Osborne.

But equally, it could be that Euroscepticism proves to be a less powerful card than we currently expect. Ignoring the not inconsiderable organisational hurdles that have to be cleared to beat Theresa May, Boris Johnson, and potentially any or all of the “next generation” of Sajid Javid, Nicky Morgan or Stephen Crabb, we simply don’t know what the reaction of Conservative members to the In-Out referendum will be.

Firstly, there’s a non-trivial possibility that Leave could still win, despite its difficulties at centre-forward. The incentive to “reward” an Outer will be smaller. But if Britain votes to Remain – and if that vote is seen by Conservative members as the result of “dirty tricks” by the Conservative leadership – it could be that many members, far from sticking around for another three to four years to vote in the election, simply decide to leave. The last time that Cameron went against the dearest instincts of many of his party grassroots, the result was victory for the Prime Minister – and an activist base that, as the result of defections to Ukip and cancelled membership fees, is more socially liberal and more sympathetic to Cameron than it was before. Don’t forget that, for all the worry about “entryism” in the Labour leadership, it was “exitism” – of Labour members who supported David Miliband and liked the New Labour years  - that shifted that party towards Jeremy Corbyn.

It could be that if – as Brady predicts in this week’s New Statesman – the final two is an Inner and an Outer, the Eurosceptic candidate finds that the members who might have backed them are simply no longer around.

It comes back to the biggest known unknown in the race to succeed Cameron: Conservative members. For the first time in British political history, a Prime Minister will be chosen, not by MPs with an electoral mandate of their own or by voters at a general election but by an entirelyself-selecting group: party members. And we simply don't know enough about what they feel - yet. 

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog. He usually writes about politics.