Category Archives: Green Energy

Even the Dutch are falling out of love with windmills

Posted on by
2

The Dutch are finding green energy too expensive:

Faced with the need to cut its budget deficit, the Dutch government says offshore wind power is too expensive and that it cannot afford to subsidize the entire cost of 18 cents per kilowatt hour — some 4.5 billion euros last year.

The most amazing thing about the 4.5 billion Euro ($6.13 billion) PER YEAR subsidy, is that it only covers a small portion of the Netherlands overall power usage:

Renewable energy meets just four percent of the Netherlands’ total energy consumption.

All that money thrown down the drain to meet only 4% of their electricity needs.

China has found that there is no chance of profit using wind power and now the Netherlands are finding it is just too expensive.

The good news in all this is people here in the States are starting to figure this out as well.

Its good to be a Political Elite

Posted on by
1

The last quarter century has been a really good time to be a politically connected elite. Both in Europe and here in the United States.

Via STRATFOR:

The Greek elite clearly benefited financially from the European Union. The Greek public, by contrast, had a mixed experience. Certainly, the 20 years of prosperity since the 1990s benefited many — but not all. Economic integration left the Greek economy wide open for other Europeans to enter, putting segments of the Greek economy at a terrific disadvantage. European competitors overwhelmed workers in many industries along with small-business owners in particular. So there always was an argument in Greece for opposing the European Union. The stark choice posed by the current situation strengthened this argument, namely, who would bear the burden of the European system’s dysfunction in Greece? In other words, assuming the European Union was to be saved, who would absorb the cost? The bailouts promised by Germany on behalf of Europe would allow the Greeks to stabilize their financial system and repay at least some of their loans to Europe. This would leave the Greek elite generally intact. The price to Greece would be austerity, but the Greek elite would not pay that price. Members of the broader public — who would lose jobs, pensions, salaries and careers — would.

Essentially, the first question was whether Greece as a nation would deliberately default on its debts — as many corporations do — and force a restructuring on its terms regardless of what the European financial system needed, or whether it would seek to accommodate the European system. The second was whether it would structure an accommodation in Europe such that the burden would not fall on the public but on the Greek elite.

The Greek government chose to seek accommodation with European needs and to allow the major impact of austerity to fall on the public as a consequence of the elite’s interests in Europe — now deep and abiding — and the ideology of Europeanism. Since by its very nature the burden of austerity would fall on the public, it was vital a referendum not be held. Even so, the Greeks undoubtedly would seek to evade the harshest dimensions of austerity.

Save the European political elites at all costs, and don’t let the citizen vote on it. Real nice. (Not letting the people’s voice be heard reminds me a lot of the political maneuvers our political elite performed to get ObamaCare passed).

And closer to home, it literally pays to be a political elite.

Via BigGovernment:

In the new blockbuster tell-all Throw Them All Out, investigative reporter and Breitbart editor Peter Schweizer reveals that on November 18, 2009, Sen. Feinstein and her husband invested $1 million into Amyris Biotechnologies, a “green” company focused on plant-based renewable fuels and chemicals. The Feinsteins’ million-dollar investment was their only stock transaction for the entire year.

Feinstein, however, had good reason to feel that all her investment eggs were secure in the biotech basket, because just weeks after her seven-figure investment in Amyris, the company scored a $24 million grant from the Department of Energy (DOE) to build a pilot plant where altered yeast would turn sugar into hydrocarbons.

The company went public the following year with an IPO that raked in $85 million. Currently, it’s unclear exactly how much money Senator Feinstein and her husband made off their investment, “but it’s safe to assume that they did well,” concludes Schweizer.

With ‘mad stock picking skills’ like that, who needs a diverse portfolio.

Canada posts trade surplus on surge in energy exports while another White House backed green energy company goes bankrupt

Posted on by
8

Imagine if our government actually let us develop our own natural resources. Via Bloomberg:

Canada recorded its first merchandise trade surplus in eight months in September, led by energy exports and a drop in machinery imports.

The country ran a surplus of C$1.25 billion ($1.23 billion) in September, Statistics Canada said today in Ottawa.

While Canada was busily exporting oil and growing their economy, here in the United States our government has been busily growing a list of failed ‘green energy’ companies such as Solyndra and Beacon Power.

Now we can add the recently NASDQ de-listed Ener1 to the growing list:

New York-based Ener1 received a $118.5 million grant to expand its manufacturing operations in Indianapolis, Ind., run by a subsidiary EnerDel, which received a visit from Vice President Joe Biden earlier this year.

But NASDAQ pulled the firm from trading Friday for failing to file its most recent quarterly report on time. Ener1 also let go of its chairman, Charles Gassenheimer, late last month.

Now DOE says it’s watching the company.

“The department is closely monitoring the status of the company,” DOE spokesman Damien LaVera said in an email Monday.

“So far $55 million of the grant has been paid out to EnerDel,” he added. “Any additional funds received from the government would need to be matched dollar for dollar with their own investment.”

Looking at this picture, do you think Biden has any clue about what the people at Ener1 are telling him.

Another Day, Another Tax Payer Backed Green Energy Company Fails

Posted on by
5

Whoever thought this was a good idea (ahem… Dr. Steven Chu Ph.D. in physics from the University of California, Berkeley) needs to lose their job:

An energy company that received a $43 million loan guarantee through the same federal program that backed Solyndra has followed the path of the failed solar firm and filed for bankruptcy.

Beacon Power Corporation filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on Sunday in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Delaware. The company, which develops energy storage systems based on what are known as “flywheels,” had received the federal guarantee for a 20-megawatt energy storage plant in Stephentown, N.Y., back in August 2010.

The loan was expected to cover the lion’s share of the $69 million project, one of several that Beacon was developing across the country.

But the company’s CEO said in a statement to the court that all those projects are “capital intensive,” and the firm is struggling to attract the additional investment needed to keep everything running. The fact that the company faced being de-listed from the NASDAQ didn’t help, he said.

Flywheels? Seriously?

What is it with the eco-fanatics fascination with Victorian era technology? The are in love with electric cars, windmills, solar (photovoltaic cells) panels and now flywheels.

One of the first patents to discuss energy storage using a flywheel dates back to 1894:

click for larger image

Text from patent abstract:

My invention relates to that class of regulators by which energy is stored when the quantity produced by the motor is in excess of that demanded by the load upon it, and restored to the system whenever the demand of the load is greater than the supply. In this respect the action of the device is analogous to that of a flywheel. Flywheels, however, on account of the excessive weight which they necessarily assume if designed to store large quantities of energy, are generally useful only to absorb fluctuations of power extending over comparatively short periods of time, such as occur during the different parts of the revolution or cycle of an engine.

The main purpose of my invention is to produce a regulator applicable to any form of motor, which, without having excessive weight in its moving parts, shall render possible the storing and restoring of any desired quantity of energy, and which may serve to neutralize fluctuations of power enduring for comparatively long periods of time, for example for several minutes, or even hours.

To accomplish this purpose, I employ, as a means of storing energy, any suitable form of electrical storage battery, and as the moving or revolving body, which replaces the flywheel of the older constructions, the armature of a dynamo electric machine, constructed and connected to the storage battery in a manner to be more fully explained hereinafter, so that when revolving with the desired speed in a constant direction it may act either as a generator, absorbing surplus energy from, the motor and charging the battery, or as an auxiliary motor drawing energy from the battery and assisting the engine or prime mover, at times when the load exceeds the average.

Way to be cutting edge… Circa 1894 (if ever) Steven Chu…

Even worse than the flawed technology is the fact that, again, a politically connected donor is at the center of the failed venture:

One of the most controversial aspects of the Solyndra case — aside from the sheer size of the $535 million guarantee — was a decision earlier this year to prioritize private investors over taxpayers in case of bankruptcy. Republicans have accused the administration of giving precedence to investors in the companies who are also Obama backers.

“As with Solyndra, the head of Beacon Power appears to have been a supporter of President Obama’s,” Sessions said in a statement.

“Increasingly, we are moving away from our capitalist heritage and towards a system where most Americans play by the rules while some are able to rig the game in their favor. The real divide is not split along income lines, but between the politically-connected and those—whether businesses or individuals—who just want the freedom to earn a living.“

Oh, and for the $43 million, Beacon power was only planned to create (or save) 14 permanent jobs and 20 construction jobs.

What a deal.

Hope and Change: The Shocking Costs Of Environmentalism

Posted on by
2

Like I’ve been saying all along… 

Via IBD:

Yes, the environmentalists’ bill is now coming due. Some cost hikes are unavoidable. The electrical grid, like other infrastructure, needs to be updated and improved.

But the costs due to “tougher environmental regulations” are avoidable. They are the product of choices, not all of them sound.

Trying to scrub and eliminate carbon dioxide emissions, for instance, is counterproductive. CO2 is not a pollutant. It’s a naturally occurring gas necessary for life on Earth.

But the environmentalists are extreme in their loathing of man-made carbon emissions, and their agenda is supported by many policymakers.

Remember when a 2008 presidential candidate said if he’s elected his cap-and-trade policy would bankrupt anyone who tried to build a coal-fired power plant on his watch?

h/t: Instapundit 

The EPA Giveth and The EPA Taketh Away

Posted on by
2

The EPA giveth:

On one hand the EPA and our government has mandated (and working overtime to push) those crappy, mercury filled CFL bulbs. In the process of capitalism through mandate, the government has created a need for disposal of these nasty CFL bulbs. One company Waste Management, has stepped in to fill this “need.”

Yep, $16.95 to recycle up to 13 13-watt bulbs. What a bargain. And, as an added bonus, you get to store all those mercury filled bulbs in your home until you accumulate a sufficient number of bulbs where it makes sense to ship them for proper disposal.

Of course this ‘buisness’ wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for our government and the EPA interfering in the free market.

And the EPA Taketh away:

Waste Management LampTracker, Inc., to Pay $118,800 Penalty for Hazardous Waste Violations at Kaiser, Mo., Facility.

$118K off the bottom line is a whole lot of recycling kits.

In Canada People Are Catching on That Electric Cars Are Not The Wave Of The Future

Posted on by
2

Via The Globe and Mail:

There’s just one problem. The fantasy that electric cars are right around the corner doesn’t survive even the most cursory reality check. As Dennis DesRosiers, a leading auto consultant, points out, consumers simply won’t pay a $20,000 premium for a vehicle that doesn’t go very far, isn’t very convenient, and runs out of juice as soon as you turn on the air conditioner.

Consider hybrids. After a decade on the market, they’ve captured only 3 per cent of sales. To get to Mr. McGuinty’s 2020 target, green-minded Ontarians would have to buy at least 100,000 electric cars a year every year, starting right now. Total U.S. sales of electric vehicles are about 10,000 a year.

Of course, electric cars aren’t in mass production yet. And the technology is bound to get better and cheaper. Right?

Not so fast, says the University of Manitoba’s Vaclav Smil, who’s among the world’s foremost scholars of energy economics. Electric cars, he says, aren’t microchips, and Moore’s law doesn’t apply. “The myth that the future belongs to electric vehicles is one of the original misconceptions,” he writes in his book Energy Myths and Realities. In an interview, he notes that recent history is filled with energy breakthroughs that turned out be duds. Electric car crazes have come and gone before. Perhaps some people may remember a Canadian company called Ballard, which claimed to have developed a breakthrough fuel-cell technology. Many brainy people swore that Ballard was the future. It wasn’t.

It gets better. If all those electric vehicles are hooked up to our electric grid, with its diminished capacity (due to the adoption of the RES), electricity prices will skyrocket.

The interesting thing is if the issue truly is conservation and being efficient the real teleological winner is direct injection diesel engines. For example look at the 62 mpg Ford Fiesta (that crushes the 51 mpg Prius):

If I were a Ford dealer, I would jump at the chance to park a diesel-powered Fiesta in front of my dealership. I’d light it up with spotlights all night long. No rebates. No zero percent. I’d give every salesperson a pocket-sized job aid with a single sentence on it to counter every conceivable customer objection: “But (insert customer name here) this car gets – 62.5 miles per gallon.” And I’d have my waiting list right out front so customers could sign up.

I guess if the US government started push diesel engines, it would be even more difficult to justify handing millions of our dollars to multinational corporations to construct lithium ion battery factories. 

The EPA: Indoctrinating Our Children Since 1970

Posted on by
4

Remember, government in all forms, is overhead. It is an expense and adds no value (economically speaking) to our economy.

One of the most burdensome overheads of all is the EPA. They impose huge penalties for simple paperwork violations and will look high and low for a violation of some obscure regulation to use as a hammer against a business. Additionally, the EPA is in the business of indoctrinating our children to become eco-warriors. And what is worse, we are paying money for this drivel aimed at our children:

  • Choose and use a wide assortment of products made from recycled products, such as pencils made from old blue jeans; binders made from old shipping boxes; and many types of recycled paper products. You can also reuse items like refillable pens, rechargeable batteries, and scrap paper for notes. Using recycled-content and reusing supplies prevents waste and saves you money.
  • Before starting a new school year, sort through your materials. Many supplies can be reused or recycled. Notebooks, folders, and binders can be reused. Recycle unwanted papers and reuse your old folders and binders. Share your used books with friends, relatives, or younger schoolchildren.
  • Waste from packaging accounts for more than 30 percent of all the waste generated each year. Use school supplies wrapped with minimal packaging; use compact or concentrated products; or buy products that come in bulk sizes. Save packaging, colored paper, egg cartons and other items for arts and crafts projects. Look for other ways you can reduce the amount of packaging you throw away!
  • Many schools reuse text books to save money and reduce waste. Covering your textbooks with cut-up grocery or shopping bags helps reduce waste and keeps your books in good condition. Be creative—use markers or colored pencils to give your covers unique and fun designs. Paper grocery bags are also great for wrapping packages.
  • Use nontoxic products, inks and art supplies, such as batteries with less mercury, vegetable-based inks, and water-based paints.
  • Use and maintain durable products. Sturdy backpacks and notebooks can be reused for many years, which helps reduce the amount of broken items tossed away each year. Put long-lasting, high-quality tires on your car and bicycle. Be sure to keep your tires properly inflated.
  • If you bring your lunch to school, package it in reusable containers instead of disposable ones, and carry them in a reusable plastic or cloth bag, or lunch box. Bring drinks in a thermos instead of disposable bottles or cartons.
  • If you buy lunch, take and use only what you need: One napkin, one ketchup packet, one salt packet, one pepper packet, one set of flatware. And, remember to recycle your cans and bottles.
  • If you drive to school, try carpooling or take public transportation. Get your parents’ permission to try walking, biking, or skating. You can prevent wasted fuel, reduce air pollution, and decrease traffic in your community.
  • Borrow or rent your decorations and supplies for parties, dances, and proms. If you buy these supplies, try adopting a theme that can be used from year-to-year, so that you can reuse your decorations and supplies.
  • Pass it on. Share the message with your friends and schoolmates. Waste less by reducing, reusing, and recycling. Volunteer for, or start , an environmental club or recycling project in your school.
  • Work with your teachers and friends to find ways to encourage everyone in your community to make waste reduction a part of their everyday lives. You can also look for unique ways to make your school more waste-free, such as starting a school composting project.

The EPA; working overtime to create more little radical environmentalists.

Radical environmentalists are fans of no growth economy

Posted on by
3

A house may be large or small; as long as the neighboring houses are likewise small, it satisfies all social requirement for a residence. But let there arise next to the little house a palace, and the little house shrinks to a hut. The little house now makes it clear that its inmate has no social position at all to maintain.

Karl Marx, Wage Labour and Capital (1847)

I’ve been seeing many variations of the “shrinking economy is really a good thing” articles of late. It seems, since the ‘green collar’ economy really isn’t panning out, the hard-core environmentalist are trying a different tack.

Via TreeHugger.com:

While some folks argue that “sustainable growth” doesn’t have to be an oxymoron, others are adamant that it is time to take the notion of a no growth economy seriously. With the dirty fingerprint of consumerism evident on the recent London riots, and even the slightest signs of economic recovery leading to record oil use, we desperately need to seek a balance between economics and community, environment and well-being.

Right…  The only dirty fingerprints evident during the London riots were those of socialism. 

The riots in London continue to shed light on the unraveling of a once-great nation. The U.K.’s Tory government has proposed to terminate the “benefits”–some of them, anyway–of those who are convicted of participating in the riots. This applies to those who are not sentenced to prison, as inmates are cared for by the state and automatically forfeit whatever benefits they may otherwise have received.

This seems like an unobjectionable plan. For one thing, all of the rioters that we saw in photos or on video appear to be perfectly able-bodied. Why are they on “benefits” in the first place? One would think that getting a job is precisely what these yobs, as the British call them, need. But in today’s England, reducing a criminal’s benefits is no easy thing

The TreeHugger continue and cite a book from Professor Tim Jackson that outlines all the supposed negative issues associated with economic growth. Issues ranging from income inequality to a rise in mental heath problems.

These findings lead our intrepid TreeHugger to this:

Tim Jackson’s prognosis for exploring a different path is unlikely to be popular among advocates for smaller government, slashed taxes, or cowboy capitalism. From shifting the balance of spending from private to public, to increasing taxation on resource use and pollution, there are plenty of examples of policies that (on this side of the pond at least) will be decried as nothing short of socialism. But shorter working weeks and more time for family, leisure and community sure sound good right now. And given that business-as-usual is in dire trouble, with few options for traditional economic fixes left, it gets increasingly hard to argue that we need an alternative path.

As pointed out previously here at MCT, economic growth has lead to increases in productivity that have created shorter, not longer, work weeks.

Our TreeHugger finishes his article with this thought:

[T]he notion that growth may no longer be good for us in the West suggests that we should further shift the focus of that plan onto non-monetary means to ensure well-being.

From tool libraries to tiny houses to connected, resilient communities, there are plenty of ways that we can recalibrate our notions of what really makes us happy, safe and in control of our lives.

After reading the above paragraph, re-read the Karl Marx quote at the open of this post.

The Gail Windpower Project in Western Michigan Project Makes No Economic Sense

Posted on by
13

I’ve been on the west side of Michigan for a little R & R for the past week While on vacation, we took a drive up US 31, between Scottsville and Crystal Lake through beautiful rolling hills, picturesque farms and blue lakes.

While driving through the countryside, I noticed giant billboards and hundreds of yard signs for and against the Gail Windpower project.

The Duke energy Gail Windpower project is a wind farm in development that will consist of 108 wind turbines each 538 feet tall. The wind farm will cover 12,000 acres (18.75 square miles) of scenic lake Michigan shoreline. Supporters of the project claim, optimistically, that the wind farm will provide power for 60,000 homes. (When the wind is blowing).

According to Duke Energy:

Duke Energy is currently developing a new commercial wind power project in Benzie and Manistee counties, Michigan. The Gail Windpower Project will consist of wind turbines capable of generating 200 megawatts of clean, renewable electricity – enough to power up to approximately 60,000 homes. The project will encompass approximately 12,000 acres of land.

Duke Energy is working closely with landowners, government officials and other stakeholder groups to make the Gail Windpower Project a reality. As is our standard practice, we are also in contact with all appropriate state, county and local agencies to thoroughly evaluate the potential impacts of construction and windpower operations.

Landowner benefits include steady income from land-lease agreements, wind turbine fees and revenue sharing. In addition, landowners can still use their property for other purposes, including farming, ranching and recreation.

Community benefits include a new source of tax revenue that the community can count on year after year, a large number of construction jobs (and a smaller number of operations jobs), and emissions-free electricity generated locally. Communities with wind energy projects also see an increase in direct and indirect economic activity, particularly during the construction phase, when hotels, restaurants, groceries, pharmacies, parts suppliers, service providers and various other vendors benefit from additional business.

The Gail Windprower project will consume 19.75 square miles of land to provide electricity for 60,000 homes. Compare the Gail Windpower project to a natural gas power plant, such as the Zeeland ‘peaker’ station that occupies a total of 30 acres. Within that 30 acres, the station generates enough electricity to power over 800,000 homes on demand. Rain or shine. Wind or no wind.

Here is a map of the project from Arcadia Wind Study Group:

Advocates for the Gail Windpower project tout the fact that the project will create jobs. Hundreds during the construction phase and 25 permanent turbine maintenance and operation jobs. Advocates also point out that the project will contribute approximately $3.2 million in annual property tax revenue. The Zeeland power station permanently employs 22 people and pays $7.6 million in property taxes to the local government.

There is no comparison between a wind farm and a traditional electric generating facility. A natural gas power-plant (or any traditional generating facility) will generate orders of magnitude more electrical power, more reliably while using a fraction of the real estate while creating the same number of jobs and contributing more to the local tax base.

Continue reading →