Low-carbon economy

How are the Germans getting on with green energy? …Not so well it turns out

The German economy is almost on its knees as a result of green energy policies that are failing to deliver.

Germany is in the middle of one of the most audacious and ambitious experiments a major industrial economy has ever attempted: To swear off nuclear power and run Europe’s largest economy essentially on wind and solar power.

There’s just one problem — it’s not really working.

The energy transformation, known as “Energiewende,” was meant to give Germany an energy sector that would be cleaner and more competitive, fueling an export-driven economy and helping to slash greenhouse-gas emissions. On that count, the policy has floundered: German emissions are rising, not falling, because the country is burning increasing amounts of dirty coal. And electricity costs, already high, have kept rising, making life difficult for small and medium-sized businesses that compete against rivals with cheaper energy.  Read more »

Wheels falling off Green’s looney solar power policy

Once again the Green party has been found wanting on critical thought processes and policy design, launching a policy that simply won’t work and requires massive subsidies.

Consumer and EECA both think that the solution won’t work and now industry is lining up to mock the Greens.

The head of New Zealand’s largest renewable energy company is dismissing the economics of home-based solar, saying he “can’t follow” the numbers put forward by proponents.

Last week, ahead of the Green Party announcing a major loan scheme to subsidise solar installation through low-cost loans, Meridian chief executive Mark Binns said he could not understand why people installed them.

“I can’t follow the economics that are put forward by proponents of household solar in terms of returns as an investment,” Binns told Parliament’s commerce select committee.

“On our numbers, in our analysis, it is still probably not viable if you went to an accountant.”  Read more »

David Cameron gets his beans

The other day I blogged about David Cameron and his decision to get rid of all the “green crap”.

James Delingpole excoriates David Cameron for his own green crap.

So how exactly does Cameron’s alleged desire to cut the green crap square with his government’s actual policies? Not very well, as David Rose has damningly revealed in The Spectator.

Here’s a taste:

While they bicker about trimming a few tens of pounds here or there, Parliament has been dealing with the closing stages of the Energy Bill. This, working in concert with its predecessor, the 2008 Climate Change Act, will inflict the biggest fuel bill increases of all. The 2008 measure enforces a legally binding carbon emission target for 2020. But because it’s much harder to cut emissions from transport and heating than electricity generation, this will mean trebling the proportion of power produced by renewables from its current 11 per cent over just six years.

The cost of this swift and radical transformation dwarfs marginal items such as the eco levy. According to the ‘levy control framework’ established by the Energy Bill, it means more than tripling renewable subsidies to £7.6 billion by the end of this decade. The total renewable subsidy which UK consumers will have paid via higher energy bills for the ten years to 2020 will be an almighty £46 billion.   Read more »

Green Energy push backfires on Europe as bills mount

image-1

Europe is in big trouble and they only have themselves to blame for listening to the green taliban and their push for “green energy” projects that simply aren’t delivering and astonishingly expensive.

In the last four years, European electricity costs have spiked 17% for homeowners and 21% for industry, according to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.

The situation is most acute in the UK, where one in six households was spending more than 10% of its income to “maintain adequate warmth” in 2011, according government statistics cited by Reuters’ John Kemp.    Read more »

“Renewables” are fraud, viable only through massive subsidies

The Green Taliban likes to talk about “renewables” like they are some sort of holy grail. Unfortunately they aren’t:

Although renewables remain the power source of choice for greens, they require such massive subsidies that their role in meeting soaring electricity demand will remain incidental. Spain is only one country that has decided that it can no longer afford the subsidies that renewables require, and only Obama’s antipathy to fossil fuels, his war on climate change, and the political clout of some of his donors keep subsidies flowing to uneconomic solar and wind companies.

Renewables are as fraudulent as their insistence that humans are warming the planet.

The Environmental Taliban

Finally the Government in the UK is getting the picture.

Chancellor George Osborne is referring to the climate warmists in Government – rife in the coalition wet Liberal Democrats, and even scattered through his own party – as “the environmental Taliban.

George Osborne has started referring to Parliamentary climate change campaigners as the “environmental Taliban”, it emerged today, as the Treasury fights to water down renewable commitments in the Government’s flagship Energy Bill.

Members of the Coalition’s quad of decision makers including the Chancellor, David Cameron and Nick Clegg met today in attempt to thrash out details of the bill which is due to be published within weeks.

Ed Davey, the Climate Change Secretary, is pushing for the legislation to contain a specific legally binding commitment on the total amount of carbon that can be emitted by powers stations by 2030 to “bind in” the Government to renewable energy.

He is also arguing that the Treasury should be the ultimate guarantor of the loans that renewable energy companies will need to take out to invest in new renewable and nuclear power stations. These so-called “contracts for difference”, it is argued, would give investors the confidence that there will be long-term revenues in renewables and reduce the cost of upfront capital expenditure for new low-carbon projects.

But Mr Osborne and the Treasury have been opposing both measures. Senior Conservative sources said that Mr Osborne’s objections to the plans reflect his growing scepticism about the need to take immediate action to decarbonise the economy during a time of recession.

“I think that George’s position reflects a growing scepticism about current climate change policy across the party,” said one MP.

“It was fine to be talking about spending money on climate change in the good times but when energy bills are going up it doesn’t seem like good politics.”

Another source added: “George has started referring to the green lobby in Government and Tory party as the environmental Taliban. It’s meant as a joke but it shows where he’s coming from.”

Mr Osborne is also pushing for the creation of a ‘levy control framework’ which would, in effect, put a cap on the total subsidy from tax payers and energy consumers going towards green power.

This would allow the Chancellor to claim he is helping keep energy bills down at a time of recession. However critics claim it will result in a “dash for gas” and higher, less green energy in the longer term.

Cameron may be too lily-livered to take a stand on this, but he has shown a bit of spine recently with some sharp attacks on that mega-trough the EU.

Words are good, but what’s the chance of some action?

And will we ever get someone in the NZ government to stand up and state that NZ spending on Warmist Green lunacy, cow-farting cures and Meridian’s hideous eye-sore windmills included, is a waste of time and money foisted upon us by our own environmental taliban?