electricity

More on the lack of peak oil

Yesterday we explored the lack of peak oil.

I also found an interesting recent article on the topic at Real Clear Politics.

In a chilling 2010 column, Paul Krugman declared: “peak oil has arrived.”

So it’s really not surprising that the national average for a gallon of gas has fallen to $2.77 this week – in 10 states it was under $2.60 – and analysts predict we’re going to dip below the two-dollar mark soon. U.S. oil is down to $75 a barrel, a drop of more than $30 from the 52-week high.

Meanwhile, the Institute for Energy Research estimates that we have enough natural gas in the U.S. to meet electricity needs for around 575 years at current fuel demand and to fuel homes heated by natural gas for 857 years or so – because we have more gas than Russia, Iran, Qatar and Saudi Arabia combined.

With prices returning to ordinary levels and a few centuries’ worth of fossil fuels on tap, this is a good time to remind ourselves that nearly every warning the left has peddled about an impending energy crisis over the past 30 to 40 years has turned out to be wrong. And none of them are more wrong than the Malthusian idea that says we’re running out of oil.

Each time there’s a temporary spike in gas prices, science-centric liberals allow themselves a purely ideological indulgence, claiming – as Krugman, Paul Ehrlich, John Holdren and countless others have – that we’re rapidly approaching a point when producers will hit the maximum rate of extraction of petroleum. Peak oil. With emerging demand, fossil fuels will become prohibitive. And unless we have our in solar panels in order, Armageddon is near.   Read more »

Green energy bludgers put their hand out for more corporate welfare

Ivanpah_Solar_Power_Facility_OnlinePSflat-720x282

As if blinding pilots and frying bird life isn’t enough the corporate bludgers who built the solar plant at Ivanpah with a cheap Federal loan are now trying to line up a Federal grant to pay off the Federal loan.

There is literally nowhere in the world where these green energy projects can survive without running to the government to be bailed out with loans or subsidies or grants.

Worse still the plant is owned by Google…who have more money than a bull can poop…I suggest they cough for their stupid project themselves.

After already receiving a controversial $1.6 billion construction loan from U.S. taxpayers, the wealthy investors of a California solar power plant now want a $539 million federal grant to pay off their federal loan.

“This is an attempt by very large cash generating companies that have billions on their balance sheet to get a federal bailout, i.e. a bailout from us – the taxpayer for their pet project,” said Reason Foundation VP of Research Julian Morris. “It’s actually rather obscene.”

The Ivanpah solar electric generating plant is owned by Google and renewable energy giant NRG, which are responsible for paying off their federal loan. If approved by the U.S. Treasury, the two corporations will not use their own money, but taxpayer cash to pay off 30 percent of the cost of their plant, but taxpayers will receive none of the millions in revenues the plant will generate over the next 30 years.

“They’re already paying less than the market rate,” said Morris, author of a lengthy report detailing alleged cronyism and corruption in the Obama administration’s green energy programs. “Now demanding or asking for a subsidy in the form of a grant directly paying off the loan is an egregious abuse.”

NRG doesn’t see it that way, telling Fox News the money is there for the taking.”NRG believes in a clean and sustainable energy future and therefore participates in available government programs to develop and expand the use of clean energy to accelerate America’s energy independence.” In 2013, the Obama administration handed out $18.5 billion in renewable energy grants, with $4.4 billion going to solar projects.

Ivanpah is the largest concentrated solar power plant in the world. It was unveiled in February with great fanfare. Dr. Ernest Moniz, the U.S. Secretary of Energy, justified taxpayers’ investment at the time, saying, “We want to be technology leaders. It’s good for our economy and it’s also good for helping stimulate the global transition to low carbon.”

Read more »

New study shows believers in global warming use more energy than others

 

Al Gore's California house

Al Gore’s California house

As is becoming usual these days a new study shows up the sanctimony and hypocrisy of those who say they care very much about climate change.

People who claim to worry about climate change use more electricity than those who do not, a Government study has found.

Those who say they are concerned about the prospect of climate change consume more energy than those who say it is “too far into the future to worry about,” the study commissioned by the Department for Energy and Climate Change found.

That is in part due to age, as people over 65 are more frugal with electricity but much less concerned about global warming.

However, even when pensioners are discounted, there is only a “weak trend” to show that people who profess to care about climate change do much to cut their energy use.

The findings were based on the Household Electricity Survey, which closely monitored the electricity use and views of 250 families over a year. The report, by experts from Loughborough University and Cambridge Architectural Research, was commissioned and published by DECC.  Read more »

Map of the Day

000460_Small

Photo Of The Day

“The Kiss Of Life” by Rocco Morabito, 1968 Pulitzer Prize

“The Kiss Of Life” by Rocco Morabito, 1968 Pulitzer Prize

 

“Kiss of Life”

 

Read more »

Nationalisation of power to save us $1.25 a week?

So let me get this straight…the Greens and Labour want to nationalise an industry so they can save us $1.25 a week?

Martin Johnston writes about power prices.

Home electricity bills rose by $63 on average in the 12 months to February, with the biggest increases generally occurring in some smaller cities and their large rural hinterlands.

Dunedin got off lightest, with an increase of $9, and Auckland came second at $13, a rise of just 0.6 per cent in the retail price, weighted by retailers’ market shares.

At the top end of the scale, families and other domestic power users in Nelson/Marlborough suffered the biggest increases, of $133 (6.2 per cent), followed by the East Coast on $128. The figures come from an analysis – done by small retailer Powershop – of survey data published by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.

Powershop shows up in the ministry data as having imposed increases towards the upper end in some of the areas where it operates. In the Auckland area fed by the Vector lines network, for instance, Powershop’s retail price rose by 4.1 per cent in the 12 months, approaching double the 2.3 per cent increase of the area’s biggest retailer, Mercury Energy.  Read more »

More on Labour’s power lies

Yesterday we blogged about how out of whack David Cunliffe’s power graph was. We presented a nother view from the same data.

Another reader has emailed with his thoughts.

Cam

Haven’t really followed the arguments around power prices. But what really grinds my gears is bad data analysis. I have done quite a bit of normalizing of data in my time and although it is a powerful tool, it has to be used with caution because it can really skew the data. As soon as I saw Labours press release I was suspicious about why they chose to normalize to the date they did.

Thanks to previous correspondent who made the raw data easily available, I normalized the data to 1990, as this was the closest data point to the reforms that people complain about. Also have blocked out via color who was in power. Because of the data, I have “logged” the y-axis, so the changes are non-linear wrt this axis.

NZ is in black / bold. Shows that the price rise was not due to the early 90’s reforms. As there was almost no price increase from 1990 to year 2000. Furthermore the price was increasing before the reforms, then had reduced increases post reforms. So it is impossible to blame the reforms for the price increases.  Read more »

Labour’s power scheme lies

The other day David Cunliffe tweeted a misleading chart about power price rises. He was lambasted about the chart because it didn’t show when Labour was in government when the largest rises occurred.

An observant reader decided to look into these claims…and he didn;t think it look right in any case.

This is what he found.

I was a little surprised by the graph on the tweet from Cunners the other day regarding NZ power prices. It looked like an outrageous manipulation.

So I checked for the source: NZ Power policy doc on Labour website. It shows the “change in power prices, base year 1986” even though the graph shows from 1978. So it’s some sort of percentage increase from a base? Way too obscure for me and an obvious obfuscation.

Hmmmm…funny. So I went to the source of their info ( a very large report pdf).

On page 132 is Table 3.7: Electricity prices for households in US dollars/kWh III.56 which I thought was much more illuminating. Here is the reproduced table (most of it anyway)   Read more »

Wrong plan, bad choices, but Labour wants regulation to stop people being stupid

The Mataitonga watching TV

The Mataitonga watching TV

A reader does some research on last nights PR for the Labour party on TVNZ:

Yet more epic Labour fails with another botched PR piece last night.

Remember when Labour rolled out that young property speculator as their poster-boy for the plight of first home buyers?

Then on Friday Cunners scored the own goal with the Twitter chart showing how much power went up in his watch.

Well the Labour Muppets are at it again.

Last night’s One News rolls out in front of the nation a mother of 5 to highlight David Shearer’s latest political stunt on power prices.

In truth it is really about people who make dumb choices.   Read more »

Mainstream media and so called “independent” consultants

unnamed-1

I see that TVNZ have trotted out Molly Melhuish as an “energy analyst”.

“It’s basically the generator retailers trying to raise the prices as high as the market will bear,” says energy analyst Molly Melhuish.

TV3 also interviewed her last month as an “independent energy consultant” to talk about the Green’s solar power policy

 

“But one independent energy consultant, Molly Melhuish, believes solar is the way of the future for New Zealand.”

This is the same “independent energy consultant” that spoke at an Aotearoa Is Not For Sale march against asset sales in April last year, according to this (badly spelt) transcript of her speech:

Greypower now has a policy that says energy leglislation must say [that] all household energy and especially electricity must be provided in a manner that’s fair, sustainable, efficient, and reliable. That was the law in 2001- Labour changed the law to make that. [But] National government took away “fair and sustainable” [from legislation]. That is wrong.

What to do about it? Change the government!

The only way you will get a change is to change the government! Vote for it! Peter Love told you that  in the first speech; vote for change. Greypower sez vote for change. That’s your job – We Greypower can support it but it is your job to vote for change.”  Read more »