You are here: Home / Archives for Energy

Italy Seeks to Scrap Solar Subsidies

June 16, 2010 by Leave a Comment

Last month I wrote about Spanish solar subsidies suddenly shrinking. Now it is Italy’s turn to sever solar subsidies.

Italian utilities are awarded green certificates for megawatt-hours of power generated from renewable energy. If demand isn’t sufficient, the government buys surplus certificates at a guaranteed price. It’s that guarantee the Italian government wants to scrap. It is claimed that the government proposal will threaten $6.8 billion of loans made to wind and solar companies.

As I have written before, the fundamental problem is that without subsidies and mandates, the solar power industry is not economically viable. Unless support is continued almost indefinitely, solar power cannot sustain itself with current technologies.

Ironically it is the established fossil fuel economy that makes possible alternative energy programs.

Filed Under: Energy · Tagged With:

Show Me The Catastrophe

June 7, 2010 by Leave a Comment

Newsweek magazine this week, in writing about the Gulf oil spill, had this to say about oil companies:

And the list above doesn’t even include the fact that what the oil companies sell is one of the major contributors to catastrophic climate change.

There is a very specific error with this sentence. Can you see what it is?

If you said it is “climate change” being substituted for “global warming” you would have a point. If you take the stance that CO2 causes global warming then why alter the name to climate change? CO2 doesn’t cause global cooling so what else is left if the climate is not warming or cooling? So unless you want to hide something, say what you mean and call it global warming.

But that is not the error I speak of. It is the use of one word — catastrophic. There has been no catastrophic global warming. Where is the catastrophe? There is none. But the Newsweek sentence states the fact that oil is the major contributor to this fictional catastrophe.

No wonder The Washington Post wants to sell Newsweek magazine.

Filed Under: Energy, Environment · Tagged With:

Uncertainties over Solar Subsidies

May 20, 2010 by Leave a Comment

Earlier this month I wrote about Spain drastically cutting solar subsidies. Now, because of the Greek economic crisis, Germany has reduced new solar plant subsidies by 16 percent. In June, Italy will likely cut support for new plants by 25 percent. Because of the uncertainties over solar subsidies, it is harder for companies to secure funding for alternative energy projects.

There are very few wind or solar installations that can be profitable without subsidies. Projects that rely on government for funding welfare can expect the lights to go out on the money when budgets are strained.

In most cases it is best to allow alternative energy to proceed on merit. A simple concept but so hard for politicians to grasp.

Filed Under: Economics, Energy ·

Economic Leakage in California

May 19, 2010 by Leave a Comment

A May 13, 2010 report from the California Legislative Analyst’s Office says this:

California’s economy at large will likely be adversely affected in the near term by implementing climate-related policies that are not adopted elsewhere. This is in large part because such policies will tend to raise the state’s relative prices for energy, such as electricity. This, in turn, will adversely impact the state’s economy through such avenues as causing the prices of goods and services to rise; lowering business profits; and reducing production, income, and jobs. These adverse effects will occur in large part through economic leakage, as certain economic activity locates or relocates outside of California where regulatory-related costs are lower. While it is true that there will be both winners and losers under the scoping plan, including gains in so-called “green” jobs, the net economy-wide impact in the near term of implementing the scoping plan in the absence of like policies in place elsewhere will in all likelihood be negative.

It is official. As California is already skilled in chasing jobs out of the state, they intend to continue doing what they know best.

Filed Under: Energy, Environment ·

Spanish Solar Subsidies Suddenly Shrink

May 1, 2010 by Leave a Comment

Spain wanted to be a world leader in solar power and create hundreds of thousands of new jobs. So they implemented generous subsidies and in 2008 Spain installed half the world’s solar-power installations by wattage.

But the Spanish subsidies were unsustainable and were drastically scaled back, contributing to an unemployment rate of 20%. Spain’s jobless rate is the highest in the eurozone and their economy shrank 3.6% in 2009.

The Spanish subsidies are not unlike the U.S. model for alternative energy. The fundamental problem is that, without subsidies and mandates requiring municipalities to buy a percentage of renewable energy, the solar power industry is not economically viable. Unless support is continued almost indefinitely, solar power cannot sustain itself with current technologies.

The Congress of the United States knows this and still opted for solar subsidies, though on not as grand a scale as in Spain. To make up the difference the plan is to cause fossil fuels to be more expensive, thus making solar more attractive economically. This is done by Congress mandating mechanisms like Cap and Trade or a Carbon Tax. To justify these new subsidies and taxes it was necessary to cook up anthropomorphic global warming, or at least pin the blame on climate change.

The real surprise in all of this is that much of the populace actually buys it. Which just leaves me one alternative — start a carbon credit agency.

Filed Under: Energy, Environment · Tagged With: ,

Western States Push For Cap And Trade

April 24, 2010 by Leave a Comment

The Western Climate Initiative (WCI) began in February 2007 when Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oregon, and Washington signed an agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Montana, and Utah have since joined to tackle climate change at a regional level.

While the states mentioned already are classified as “Partners” there are 15 other governmental entities that have signed on as “Observers”. These are Yukon, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, Alaska, Idaho, Nevada, Colorado, Wyoming, Kansas, Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, and Tamaulipas.

The centerpiece of the WCI strategy is a regional cap-and-trade program. When fully implemented in 2015, this program will cover nearly 90 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions in WCI states and provinces. The program design allows for, among other things, emission trading, allowance banking, and inclusion of an offsets component.

The WCI cap-and-trade program will cover emissions of six main greenhouse gases from the following sectors of the economy:

  • Electricity generation, including imported electricity
  • Industrial and commercial fossil fuel combustion
  • Industrial process emissions
  • Gas and diesel consumption for transportation
  • Residential fuel use

No matter where you sit in the economy the decisions made by these western states will affect you by increasing the cost of energy. Governments worldwide see cap-and-trade as a new source of revenue. Instead of direct taxation you will be have to pay more through an indirect carbon tax achieved via cap-and-trade.

There is hope however. In February, Arizona, one of the founding partners, said it wouldn’t take part in the program. And Friday, Utah said that they will not be implementing a cap-and-trade program in 2012.

Until recently I thought that cap-and-trade was being driven at the federal level. It seems, however, that Congress has been emboldened by the states’ acquiescence to the popular fad of anthropomorphic global warming.

Filed Under: Energy ·

Solar Power Use Climbs To 0.1 Percent

April 19, 2010 by Leave a Comment

According to the Solar Energy Industries Association, total U.S. solar electric capacity increased 481 megawatts to 2,108 megawatts in 2009. Depending on location and configuration, 1 megawatt of solar power capacity can provide, on average, 2,000 megawatt hours of electricity per year.

Responsible for this increase was treasury grants, a 30% subsidy for home-owners, manufacturing investment tax credits, Department of Energy funding, state credits, and lower manufacturing costs.

So what did we get for the billions in government subsidies last year?

Answer: Solar electric capacity increased from .079% to .107%.

Here is the math:

2008: 1,627 mw x 2,000 hours / 4,119,388,000 mwh x 100 = 0.079 %
2009: 2,108 mw x 2,000 hours / 3,951,117,000 mwh x 100 = 0.107 %

A real bargain, I must say.

Filed Under: Energy ·

Efficiency versus Conservation

March 28, 2010 by 3 Comments

Efficiency when applied to energy means getting the same service for less cost. Conservation means doing without. However, they are not mutually exclusive. By combining both efficiency and conservation significant savings can result.

For example, I replaced all of my incandescent light bulbs for compact fluorescent lamps for a 75% reduction in electricity costs. When my old air conditioner broke down I had an energy efficient unit installed. I recently had additional insulation placed in the attic which is already reducing my heating bills. By switching to a Natural Gas Vehicle I save $100 for every $1,000 miles driven based on gasoline at $2.56 a gallon.

As for conservation, it helps to think in terms much broader than energy. I cancelled my satellite television subscription for a significant monthly savings. With money in the bank and no debt I found I could do without life insurance and became self-insured. With children married I sent back one garbage can for a reduction of $13 a month. I recently disconnected my telephone service and went to cell phone only.

Efficiency can produce just as dramatic results as conservation. Between 1900 and 1913 the amount of coal per kWh fell from seven pounds to three pounds. Said Samuel Insull in 1916:

I think that while a great many of our well intentioned friends have been shouting about the conservation of natural resources, the steam-turbine inventors and the designing engineers of the great power companies using steam as a prime source of power have probably done more to conserve the natural resources of this country, in so far as fuel is concerned, than has been done by all the agitation that has taken place upon the general subject of conservation.

And today less than one pound of coal is required per kWh in electricity generation. And tomorrow the amount will be even less.

Efficiency is the preferred way of saving energy and other resources because it doesn’t reduce your standard of living. But don’t neglect conservation when there are marginal or overlapping services.

Filed Under: Energy ·

Natural Gas Outshines and Blows Away Wind and Solar

March 11, 2010 by Leave a Comment

Wind and solar power are often touted as the key to energy independence. While these sources are useful they cannot come close to replacing fossil fuels and nuclear. Here is why. In 2007 the United States generated 4,166,507 Gigawatts of electricity. Coal was responsible for 48.5%, natural gas 21.4%, nuclear 19.4%, and oil 1.6%. That is 91% of our power generation. Of the 9% remaining, hydroelectric accounts for two thirds, leaving just 3% from solar, wind and other renewable sources.

Even with massive infusions of federal money, solar and wind are just too expensive. Once one looks at the numbers, a rational mind concludes that fossil fuels are here to stay for the foreseeable future. So what are we to do? Nothing is one of the best options. With 27% of the world’s coal, a 240 year supply, it is plain to see why nearly 50% of our power comes from this sedimentary rock.

Or we could go nuclear and increase the percentage generated closer to the 76% of France, the 56% of Slovakia, and the 59% of Belgium. With the U.S. nuclear contribution at less that 20% there is lots of room for growth.

But the real secret weapon in America’s energy arsenal is natural gas. It is extremely clean and abundant with supplies for at least 100 years. According to Investor’s Business Daily, the United States recently overtook Russia as the world’s No. 1 producer of natural gas. Huge amounts are being produced in Pennsylvania, New York, Texas, Louisiana and other states. Domestic natural gas production is booming to record levels.

Natural gas fits well in many applications including power plants, home heating and cooking, powering cars, trucks and heavy equipment. I actually own a car powered only by natural gas. Because of large increases in supply, natural gas is also inexpensive.

But not for long. The White House wants to add $37 billion in taxes on U.S. oil and natural gas companies as well as excessive regulation. Now that’s a change we can do without.

Filed Under: Energy · Tagged With: ,

Drive CNG to Clean Up the Air

January 30, 2010 by Leave a Comment

Yesterday Governor Gary Herbert called on Utahns to stop using wood-burning stoves, take fewer trips in their cars, and avoid driving on “red air days.” Salt Lake City Mayor Ralph Becker said that walking, biking and taking public transit would help.

But the most practical idea came from Representative Jack Draxler, R-North Logan, in proposing a bill he said would dramatically improve access to compressed natural gas (CNG).

I own a CNG Honda GX I purchased used with the help of a $2,500 Utah tax credit. I fill it with subsidized 93 cents a gallon CNG. Unlike most all-electric cars, I can go 200 miles between fill-ups. It works well for me and I am considering buying another CNG vehicle, perhaps a bi-fuel for more flexibility.

Representative Draxler’s bill should be seriously considered because lack of fueling stations is the biggest hindrance to CNG vehicle adoption. CNG for transportation is a proven technology using home grown fuel right here in Utah.

Filed Under: Energy, Transportation · Tagged With:
« Older Posts