Green Energy Can NOT Sustain Itself

Another example of Green Energy NEEDING Propping up by YOU.

Hey folks.

Happy Tuesday to ya. Hope you all had a GREAT Christmas and ARE having a GREAT Hanukkah. We are now counting down to the end of 2011 and heading to 2012 at Warp Speed. Are you ready? But it IS Tuesday, and back to Life and to Reality for most. Well, for a couple of days anyway. There WILL be a Big Sunday Edition this week complete with the Idiot of the Year and Display of Logic Award for the Year this Sunday. The very FIRST day of 2012.

But it IS Tuesday, December 26th 2011, so lets check in at the Energy Front. We have been talking about the Free Market. The fact that the Free Market WORKS. We have been talking a LOT about the Keystone Pipeline and the fact we have a President that would rather NOT increase American Security, DECREASE Energy Costs, and CREATE Tens if not HUNDREDS of Thousands of NEW and long lasting JOBS, in the name of Politics and pushing a FAILED agenda.

No, he and others would rather continue to Push the Green Dream, even know the Green Dream is NOT Sustainable WITHOUT using YOUR Tax Money to prop them up. Well, it not just here. According to the UK Guardian - Bright future for solar dims after feed-in tariff cut guardian.co.uk, Sunday 25 December 2011 16.00 EST

It can come as no surprise that the Department of Energy and Climate Change lost the feed-in-tariffs case (Report, 22 December). No matter what the motivation, you cannot make changes prior to the close of a consultation period. However, after the celebrations or commiserations, ministers will hopefully take the opportunity to address the two fundamental problems that still exist: lack of a sufficient budget to support this growing industry, and a proposed structure that disadvantages smaller companies.

OK so basically, all these people were attempting to get Solar Panels installed, not because they wanted to GO GREEN, but because there is a pretty good PAYOUT by the Government to do so. The ONLY reason that most of these people applied and were going to actually BUY the Industry's Product, was because they were going to GET Money from the Government to Pay for them. No money from the Government, or a CUT in the Money from the Government, means that they would NOT want to foot the Expense themselves, therefore no one would buy the Product, {Solar Panels} meaning that the Companies would shut down. So even though there is no money to support this, they Government has been told by this Judge that they CAN'T cut the funding. They are using a Legal Maneuver to keep the Gravy Train going.

The decision to decrease the percentage return on solar photovoltaic to single figures is sensible and expected. However, to base these rates on budget levels calculated as part of the comprehensive spending review, set in November 2010, is out of line with the current economic picture. Since the decision was taken last year to create a fixed budget for the tariff, the government has changed its overall strategy and now recognises the need to inject funds into the economy to stimulate business and create jobs. The emerging renewable energy industry is showing sustained growth, with companies investing millions to satisfy the growing demand for solar microgeneration, creating thousands of new jobs. This is now in jeopardy.

But see this is all nonsense. It really is. IF there IS a "growing demand for solar microgeneration" then funding for it would EXIST. The Free Market WORKS. Look at the I Phone 4S. It isn't cheap. Yet, the Growing Demand for it is insane. People are PAYING full price and lining up to do so. Apple is happy. They can't make them fast enough. No Subsidises needed. No Tax money going out to reimburse people for buying it. The more people buy it, the CHEAPER it will become. THAT is a Demand. That is the Free Market. NOT Government funded PROP.

Second, one of the fastest-expanding industry sectors – small businesses installing solar PV – will be squeezed out of the market if the government's plans on linking feed-in tariffs to energy efficiency measures goes ahead. Most SMEs are specialist installers not geared up to install energy-efficient measures such as cavity or solid-wall insulation. Only larger companies who can invest in the infrastructure necessary to offer a total installed solution would be able to cost-effectively operate in the marketplace.

So what? Apple can afford to make the I Phone 4S. They are reaping the rewards. Smaller companies CAN'T, so they make OTHER things. Not get the Government to give them money to make up the Difference. This is all completely ridiculous. If I build homes and I have the money to invest in building Million Dollar Homes, Marble, Gold Faucets, ETC, then I reap the rewards by people BUYING my Homes. If you CAN'T invest in these things, then you build Modular Homes and sell them. If you can not invest in THAT then you should get out of the building business all together. The Free Market WORKS folks. And YES, those that take chances and INVEST in their Passion and Field of endeavour, sometimes reap the Rewards of their Investments. Sometimes they fail and have to reevaluate.

If the model set out in the consultation goes ahead, the industry will no longer be one dominated by SMEs. It will unfairly favour large organisations which can offer a far more diverse package of products. The sustainable energy industry is one of the few success stories where performance is going in the right direction. With a little care and foresight, it will gather momentum and stimulate economic growth, while contributing to energy security.

Paul Roche
Director of renewables and sustainability, Grafton Group

So what Mr. Roche is saying here is simple. Another example of Green Energy NEEDING Propping up by YOU. There is NO REAL GROWING DEMAND. It is FALSE. Phony. It is a SHOW. It is people being PROPPED UP by Government, funded by YOU, and sustained with handouts. It is NOT Supply and Demand. It is NOT the Free Market. And it IS, just that simple.
Peter

Sources:
UK Guardian - Bright future for solar dims after feed-in tariff cut

Another Real Life Example, Reality Vs Dream

Solar can NOT stand on it's own.

Hey folks,

Happy Tuesday to ya. Since it is Tuesday, time to check in at the Energy Front. Last week I posted this. OPNTalk - Solar Can NOT Stand On It's Own We talked about how some in the Solar Industry are crying because the see themselves going out of business, unless the Government steps in and gives them more money. I talked about how if it was so good and effective, they would not need Government, the Free Market would make them Millionaires and would put Big Oil out of business. I used the OCAN analogy.

Last week, we were talking about the Business end of it. Well, what about the consumer? What about the people who actually buy into it? They go out and spend the big Chunk of Money to get it going. What about them? According to Philly.com - Cloudy day for solar homes Incentives that got some Pennsylvanians to commit to alternative energy are quickly disappearing. By Hal Marcovitz

When I converted my Bucks County home to solar power in 2009, I was delighted to learn that utilities in Pennsylvania and elsewhere would pay me for the right to claim the energy produced on my roof as their own. Last year, I earned more than $1,600 selling what are known as alternative-energy credits.

Pennsylvania and other states require utilities to generate a portion of their energy from renewable resources such as sun and wind. Since utilities in the Northeast generally don't maintain large solar or wind farms - as their counterparts in places like Arizona and New Mexico do - they satisfy the requirements by claiming ownership of power produced by rooftop systems.

For home and business owners who shoulder the significant up-front costs of converting to solar power, alternative-energy credits are crucial to making the expense worthwhile.

In other words folks, it is too cost prohibitive for most to even consider, without some kind of benefit given to them by Government, which means YOU. Your Tax Money. You are paying them to TRY this new Alternative Energy Experiment.

But clouds have gathered over the rooftops of Pennsylvania's solar-powered homes and businesses. The state's alternative-energy credit law, adopted in 2004, has fallen woefully out of date. As a result, credits here are selling for a small fraction of what they earn elsewhere.

The state's law set the renewables threshold - the amount of power utilities must generate from sun and wind - very low. The current solar requirement is a paltry 44 megawatts a year. Since the state's solar-system owners are producing more than 80 megawatts a year, it's easy to see why the bottom has fallen out of the market.

Last year, I earned $275 for every 1,000 kilowatt-hours my system produced. But the agent who sells my credits on the market recently told me that he expects to receive no more than $90 or $100 per 1,000 kilowatt-hours.

When the 2004 law was passed, there were only about 200 homes and businesses powered by solar in Pennsylvania. Now there are more than 3,300. Those of us who have converted have done so out of a commitment to clean energy, to be sure, but the economic incentives matter.

"We did it because we care, but, uh, WE WANT MONEY!! {Laughing} This is not worth our wild if we are not getting top dollar for saving the Earth." Is this NOT what they are saying? They want to make more money for being "Green?" Other area's are paying more. They just want their fair share. Right?

Pennsylvania lags

Congress has provided some generous tax credits for those who convert to solar, and the state provides grants under the Pennsylvania Sunshine Program. Together, they can cover nearly two-thirds of the cost of a system. Still, since the typical conversion can cost $30,000 or more, sales of credits remain important.

You read that correctly. The "typical conversion can cost $30,000 or more." Do you have $30,000 laying around to pay to convert your home to Solar? Hey if you make $1600. a Year, it will only take you 18.75 years to break even. But then after that is pure Profit. If it works. Not including Panel Replacements. Storage? ETC. It goes on to talk about how "ridiculously low" Pennsylvania's solar thresholds are, and how many other States are taking more of YOUR money to fund that of which can not stand on it's own. Of course, who is to blame for this? Yup. Big Oil and Coal.

That's right. Pennsylvania doesn't care about the Greenies, that care more about that "Dirty Energy" than those that have made a commitment to Dream Green. The VERY last Sentence says it all.

Only a vigorous alternative-energy market can keep the state's homeowners and businesses investing in solar power.

I want you to think of two things here. First, if we were all going to die because of Global Warming, NOTHING ELSE WOULD MATTER. The WORLD would come together to fight it. To find a solution. To stop it. As I used in the past, an ASTIRIOD is coming. It will hit us. We will all die. NOTHING ELSE WOULD MATTER. Money? It would be spent by EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE to do what ever we could to stop it. Nothing else would matter. Not Jobs, the Economy, not discussions of who will play a bigger part. Not discussion on who to divide all the money. Not projections of 10 to 20 years in the Future. Not agreements to "Talk" more about it in the future. NOTHING would matter more than stopping the Asteroid.

Since we already know Global Warming is a Scam. They even had to change the Name to Climate Change because we are COOLING now. You have to ask yourself WHY. Why is it so predominate. Why are other Countries going along with it? Now think about this.

$30,000 to convert to Solar. {If you are in an area that Solar will work}
$20,000 to convert to Wind. {If you are in an area where Wind will work}
$30,000 to $50,000 to buy an Alternative Vehicle.
$20,000 to replace the batteries in some Solar, and AVs in like 4 to 5 years.

Carbon Credits = Money taken from Individuals and Businesses to Claim Green, Given to others as PURE Profit.

Allowance of Governments to Create Laws restricting Daily Activities of it's Citizens and fines and penalties {Money} going to Governments for non-compliance.

PURELY about Power, control, and all that Money.

Now, solution? There is no Man-Made Global Warming, therefore no reason for ANY of this. There is however, and World that runs on and is OK with Oil and Natural Gas. No one needs incentives to go to the Gas Station. No one needs Incentives to pay their Electric Bill {Some would love them} generated from Coal, Nuclear, and Oil.

So why is it, with more and more Scientists coming out and calling Climate Change what it is, nothing more than natural cycles, taking so long for the SCAM to die? Human Nature. With all that Power, Control, and of course MONEY, floating around out there for people to take, what they feel is there fair share, it is going to take a long time for Reality to overtake the Dream.
Peter

Sources:
OPNTalk - Solar Can NOT Stand On It's Own
Philly.com - Cloudy day for solar homes

Solar Can NOT Stand On It's Own

If it worked so well, it would.

Hey folks,

Happy Tuesday to ya. I know, I know, you are use to stories like these. The Headline indicates how GREAT Solar is. But then you actually READ the Article and you find that this is NOT really the case. According to Philly.com - Pennsylvania's solar-energy industry suffering from success By Andrew Maykuth Inquirer Staff Writer

The Pennsylvania solar-energy industry is collapsing under the weight of its own good fortune.

But IS it? Seriously? What "good fortune" is it that they are discussing? It is that EVERYONE wants it. It works so well it's about to put Oil and Natural Gas out of business? How well IS it working?

OR? It the "good fortune" Government Mandates, and YOUR Tax Money propping them up?

Spurred by hundreds of millions of dollars in federal and state incentives, solar developers have built so many projects in recent years that they have created an oversupply of solar-energy credits, the market instruments that provide the developers with a critical income stream.

Which MEANS, that without YOUR tax money, they will go bust. YOU are their "critical income stream." NOT what they are actually producing. NOT the Energy that they produce to supply the demand. NOT that they are saving the planet. Oh, more on Saving the Planet and Global Warming Tomorrow. But NO. Not the FREE MARKET. Government.

The price of solar credits in the state has plummeted as much as 75 percent in the last year, dramatically shrinking the income-producing potential of new and existing solar projects.

OK. I knew I would not get through this without stopping every five seconds to comment. Folks, YOU go out and create a NEW Paint. OCAN. OCAN stands for One Coat All Needed. You go out to the market and you convince people that if they buy this paint from you, they will never again have to paint, whatever it is they paint. Be it a house, or a Car. A Deck, or a Toy. OCAN is also "Environmentally Safe." One Coat. Less Garbage. Yeah it coasts a bit more, but you will never again have to worry about whatever it is you are painting. Do it ONCE, never again.

So? Some people buy it. If it works, they tell others. Others buy it. Companies buy it. It takes off. YOU get Rich. Thompson and Thompson come along and offers to buy the rights. Other, older and out dated Paints become a thing of the past. Other VERSIONS of OCAN hit the Market. Before you know it. Standard Paints are history. Stories that Dads tell their Sons. "You know Son, when I was growing up, there was no OCAN. You had to Paint two of three Coats, Every other year or so." Son to Dad. "Dad, come on." THAT is the Free Market. Not Government Mandating then PAYING you for it, if it works or not.

"We're in some ways a victim of our own success," said Maureen Mulligan, a spokeswoman for the Pennsylvania Solar Energy Industries Association, which is predicting a crash.

"Anybody who's talking about putting up a new project now is thinking, 'Wow, there's no support anymore,' " said State Rep. Chris Ross (R., Chester County).

The SUPPORT should come from those receiving the product. It WOULD if it was actually WORKING. The DEMAND would be there and people would be WILLING to pay a little more.

On Tuesday, Ross plans to introduce a legislative rescue for the industry that would increase the amount of solar energy that utilities must buy through 2015, propping up the price of solar credits.

Artificially increasing the Price. Is that NOT what we are told Oil Speculators do?

The bill also would close Pennsylvania's solar markets to out-of-state producers. Developers here say cross-border imports of solar power are driving down prices in Pennsylvania.

"Everybody who knew anything about the market knew this was going to happen," said John F. Curtis III, chief executive of Green Energy Capital Partners L.L.C., a Whitemarsh developer. "Now, there's a big panic to do something about it."

Of course, there is a Devil to overcome. No not convincing YOU to take more of YOUR Money. No. Not that it is NOT working well enough to stand on it's own. No. No. No. It's Big Oil.

The legislative rescue is likely to encounter resistance from traditional utilities and competing fossil-fuel power suppliers, which argue that renewable-energy mandates drive up consumer costs.

Uh they DO. Then YOU pay more in Taxes to MAKE the Mandates happen. So YEAH. Twice.

"The reality is, this is kind of what happens when you flood the market with solar," said Eugene Barr, spokesman for the Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry.

Although they can legally recover the cost of renewable power by passing it on to customers, the utilities say they are worried that higher costs will tap out consumers and deprive the utilities of funding for improvements to the distribution system.

"Didn't the developers of these solar projects make a business decision and take a risk when they decided to build these projects?" asked Terrence J. Fitzpatrick, head of the Energy Association of Pennsylvania. "At what point do you just let market forces deal with it?"

There is NO Risk involved when it comes to Liberal Ideas, and Government Programs. They just throw more money at it. It's not their money, so they do not care. They lost NOTHING. YOU pay the price.

The solar lobby, which failed for two years to persuade the legislature to increase the mandate for photovoltaic solar systems, characterized the Ross bill as a scaled-back effort to save a nascent green industry.

"People will lose jobs, and the market will stall," said Mulligan. Some solar-installation businesses will not survive, she added.

Prove it. How many Jobs? Where? How many Jobs have we lost during Obama Moratorium, and De facto Moratorium on Drilling? How many Jobs will we GAIN if he was, which he wasn't, but if he WAS Serious about INCREASING our Domestic Oil Exploration, Drilling, and Usage. We KNOW those numbers. This next Paragraph says it all. It tells you all you need to know about this.

Solar power is dependent on subsidies to compete in electrical markets, where prices have been depressed since 2008 by a combination of the economic slowdown and low natural gas prices.

It goes on to talk about how Pennsylvania and several other States have MANDATED Solar Usage and the fact that it is not really working. It wraps things up with this.

Curtis said his firm may cancel four planned utility-scale solar farms.

"We're seriously considering moving operations to California because they have a more generous program," he said.

We can get more free money in Cal. So California, here we come. Do not be mislead folks. There is no new Permits, Leases, or an increase in Domestic Exploration or Drilling. Obama doesn't mean anything he just said last week. It's getting into the 2012 Election Cycle and he wants to be re-elected. We already know that $4.00 a gallon is the tipping point in this country. People are Hurting, and they are getting angry. The answer is right here in front of us. Or under us, if you will. It is NOT Government Mandates and Tax Payer subsidies on things that show little consistent promise. Yes, it really IS, just that simple.
Peter

Sources:
Philly.com - Pennsylvania's solar-energy industry suffering from success

Alternative Energy Farce

I keep trying to caution you. WAIT and SEE.

Hey folks,

Yes, I'm talking about Energy again. Why? We NEED it. There is starting to be more and more talk about the higher Gas Prices. We have already discussed this in depth. Now more and more Liberals are starting to call for investigations once again. We already KNOW one of the BIGGEST contributing factors. Obama.

Him and his Ilk, LOVE this. They WANT people out there talking about speeding up the switch to Alternative Energy as a way to combat the Higher Gas and Heating Costs. The higher Electric Bills. The higher Food Costs. But as we have also discussed in depth, it is THEIR Policies that are driving the cost of EVERYTHING up.

But here we are again, Alternatives. Lets look at three. Solar, Wind, and Ethanol.

First up, Solar. Remember this? OPNTalk - First Ever US Hybrid Solar Energy Center

11 Thousand Homes, out of a Population of around 18,537,969 at a cost of about $340 Million dollars. So that's about $30,900 a home.

Maybe a good start, but only 11,000 homes in one County, in one State.

However, my Brain tells me that even though this may work in Florida, it will not in Washington. They do not have enough Sunshine there. So they will have to come up with something else. So Solar will NEVER be Universal. What works here, may not work elsewhere. FPL spent $688 Million the these three Projects. like I said, for this one, a cost of about $30,900 a home. Where is that money coming from? Of whom are they going to pass the cost onto? What will Seattle do? Will it work? We should know in about 5 years. So what are we going to do in the meantime? What about the other around 18,526,969?

So what about Wind? For a Windmill to be efficient, the Wind must be blowing at a content 30 miles an hour. However, it makes so much noise, the residents that live near them, SUED. So now they will turn them OFF when the Wind hits 23 MPH. I'm not kidding. According to Human Events Online - Painful Lessons for Wind Power by Brian Sussman 03/24/2011

Wind energy took another blow—this time in Massachusetts.

Wind One is the 400-foot-tall wind turbine owned by the town of Falmouth, on the southwestern tip of Cape Cod. The residents of Falmouth initially welcomed Wind One as a symbol of green energy and a handy way to keep local taxes down. Electricity generated by the turbine would be used to power the municipality’s infrastructure, thus shaving about $400,000 a year off its utility costs.

Installed in the spring of 2010 at a cost of $5.1 million (with some $3 million derived through grants, government kickbacks, and credits), the huge turbine cranks out 1.65 megawatts of electricity during optimum conditions.

The topography of Falmouth is stunningly beautiful. Small ponds, creeks, pines, and oaks rest adjacent to the rocky beachfront. What’s totally out of place is a monstrous pillar of white steel rising from the countryside, topped with its whirling three-bladed rotor. However, proving that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, one local told a Public Radio reporter the turbine is “quite majestic.”

But as soon as her majesty was switched on, residents began to complain—Wind One was as loud as an old Soviet helicopter.

Neil Anderson lives a quarter of a mile from the turbine. He’s an avid supporter of alternative energy, having owned and operated a passive solar company on Cape Cod for the past 25 years. “It is dangerous,” he told WGBH in Boston. “Headaches. Loss of sleep. And the ringing in my ears never goes away. I could look at it all day, and it does not bother me … but it’s way too close.”

Tired of the constant chopping sound, pained residents decided to lawyer up. This month a deal was struck with the town to disengage the turbine when winds exceed 23 miles an hour. This is problematic because giant windmills such as Wind One operate at optimum efficiency at about 30 miles an hour.

So now Falmouth’s investment has taken a hit. According to Gerald Potamis, who runs the wastewater facility, shutting off the turbine during higher winds will cost the town $173,000 in annual revenue, because now they’ll have to rely more on natural gas.

Truth is, wind turbines have always suffered from the NIMBY—not in my backyard—syndrome. Look no further than the largest concentration of wind turbines in the world, constructed in the 1970s just east of the San Francisco Bay. Some 4,500 windmills are ensconced atop 50,000 acres of grassy hills, generating a modest 576 megawatts of power. Officially known as the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, one would suppose the wind farm is an icon of greenness. But instead, Altamont Pass is the poster girl of eco-infighting.

Ever since the multitude of windmills was installed, a significant increase in the numbers of dead birds has been reported. Activists immediately went ballistic, demanding action. Over the decades, lawsuits have been filed and millions of dollars spent procuring studies to track the bird body count in an effort to determine how to address the problem.

In 2008, a two-year, taxpayer-funded examination of the problem was conducted by the Altamont Pass Avian Monitoring Team. During the study period, the monitoring team determined that 8,247 birds were wacked dead by the turbine blades.

In 2010, a settlement was finally reached between the Audubon Society, Californians for Renewable Energy, and the company running the wind farm, NextEra Energy. Nearly half of the smaller turbines will now be replaced by newer, more bird-friendly models. The project is expected to be complete by 2015 and includes $2.5 million for raptor habitat restoration, all of which is expected to increase the price of energy being supplied to the grid by this portrait of green power.

Painful to the ears, and especially painful to the birds, the painful lesson environmentalists need to learn is that the answer to America’s growing energy needs is not blowing in the wind.

Be right back with Part Two.
Peter

Sources:
OPNTalk - First Ever US Hybrid Solar Energy Center
Human Events Online - Painful Lessons for Wind Power
Ecopolitology - Cornfields vs. Oilfields (Infographic)

Alternative Energy Farce Part Two

Solar, Wind, Ethanol

Hey folks.

We're back.

OK. So we just got done talking about Solar and Wind. Remember also, when done Drilling, the Platforms go away and there is no real evidence that they were even there. Windmills? Well, they are just left in place. Cost too much to remove them. Just a bit of a side not there.

So what about Ethanol? As we have already discussed in the past:

Not tested.
Not Cheaper.
Causing Food Riots.
And some want to INCREASE the usage.

So is it a great Alternative? I just got this last week in the Emails.

Hello Peter!

Kate here, and we've created an interesting infographic that I think you might enjoy. With today's ever increasing gas prices, it's a wonder why we don't push harder for alternative sources of fuel. But at the same time, these alternative sources aren't as amazing as you would think. We've highlighted the pros and cons regarding corn ethanol, and presented information about just how effective an energy source it really is.

Now this was put together by Timothy Hurst over at Ecopolitology. Although this guy IS a Environmentalist, I would not call him an Environut. He is a guy that is concerned about the Environment and takes the time to really study things like this. Here is the Chart of the Pros and Cons of Ethanol.



So what is more important to you? Food, or taking even more land away to grow "energy." Now I appreciate that there may be some positives. Just like there are positives with Solar and Wind, IN THEORY. But the problem is, bringing the THEORY into Reality. To wake up from the "Green Dream" and realize that this is DECADES out in the future, and we have $4.00 a gallon Gas Prices NOW. And going up as we speak. There is no magic switch to switch to. There are no Alternatives on a mass and affordable scale.

As I keep saying folks, lets do it. Lets keep taking these baby steps toward a "Greener" future. But in the meantime, lets use what we have, and get more of it. Lets USE OUR OWN RESOURCES. Lets increase supply, American Security, and lets lower prices. The answer is right here, in front of our faces.
Peter

Sources:
OPNTalk - First Ever US Hybrid Solar Energy Center
Human Events Online - Painful Lessons for Wind Power
Ecopolitology - Cornfields vs. Oilfields (Infographic)

DLA For Sunday 032711

Nothing much to add to this.

Hey folks,

Our winner of the Display of Logic Award this Week, speaks for himself. I have nothing to add to this. It's by Bjorn Lomborg, and it appeared in the USA Today, Thursday 032411 - 'Earth Hour' won't change the world. Just read and absorb the WEALTH of information in this one Article.

Copenhagen's central square hardly competes with New York's Times Square for glitz, but it is prime commercial space in my home of Denmark. Now there's a new advertiser among the neon signs: a brightly lit billboard exhorts everyone to participate in "Earth Hour," the 60 minutes on Saturday night in which the whole world is urged to dim the lights to cut greenhouse emissions.

There is a certain irony in renting brightly lit advertising space to exhort us to save electricity for one hour — but this is apparently lost on the organizers. Dimming the lights is promoted online as a "vote for mother Earth" that will reveal "the impact we have on the environment."Actually, the only real result will be to make it harder to see. The environmental effect of the past three annual lights-out hours has been negligible. If everyone in the world participated in this year's Earth Hour, the result would be the same as turning off China's carbon emissions for roughly 45 seconds.

When we switch off the electricity, many of us turn to candlelight. This seems natural and environmentally friendly, but unfortunately candles are almost 100 times less efficient than incandescent light bulbs, and more than 300 times less efficient than fluorescent lights. Using one candle for each extinguished bulb cancels the CO2 reduction; two candles emit more CO2.

Millions of well-intentioned people will take part in Earth Hour. I commend the efforts by organizers to encourage participants to continue engaging in environmentally friendly choices such as recycling or saving energy after the hour has actually ended. But I fear that the campaign is symptomatic of an environmental movement that has become too focused on hollow, feel-good actions that at best only inch us in the right direction.

In a bid to cut carbon emissions, the environmental movement has pushed for "green" alternative energy to be used around the world. Many countries now provide financial support to solar panels and wind turbines. But this technology is still inefficient, so the environmental results are negligible.

Solar subsidies

Germany is a good example. Despite being a fairly cloudy country, it has led the world in solar panel subsidies, spending $75 billion putting inefficient, uncompetitive solar technology on rooftops. This delivers a trivial 0.1% of Germany's total energy supply, and will postpone the effects of global warming by just seven hours in 2100. With the financial crisis, Germany and others have to rein in lavish subsidies. It is easy to forget that while sunlight is renewable, subsidies certainly aren't.

Similarly, many environmentalists enthusiastically endorsed government financial support for biofuel as a silver bullet to cut carbon emissions. The subsidies are now massive and entrenched, and one-sixth of the world's corn supply is burned just to help fuel America's cars, contributing to the highest-ever food prices and increasing starvation.

As other countries race to create more food, forests are being razed for agriculture, causing more emissions than will be saved from biofuels over the next hundred years.

It's easy to feel as if we're helping the planet if we have a government-funded solar panel on the roof, or fill our car with fuel from a tank adorned with green slogans — but the reality is that we're doing no such thing.

'Feel good' policies

It is time to look to a smarter solution to global warming that would do more than just make us feel good about ourselves. We will not make a sustainable shift away from dependence on fossil fuels so long as the alternatives remain so expensive. Solar panels are still about 10 times more costly than fossil fuels in terms of cost per unit of energy output. That's the reason only well-heeled Westerners (being paid significant subsidies by their governments) can afford to install them.

Consider how this would change if our innovation made solar cells or other green energy technology cheaper than fossil fuels. Everyone would shift to the cheaper and cleaner alternatives, including the world's developing nations, who cannot afford to engage in today's hollow, "feel good" policies.

Much more investment in research and development is needed to bring about game-changing breakthroughs for alternative-energy technologies — something in the order of 0.2% of global gross domestic product, or $100 billion annually.

The harsh reality is that the shift away from fossil fuels will not be easy. Reducing carbon emissions is a lot more difficult than dimming the lights for an hour. It requires genuine willpower and investment. Instead of just dimming our lights, we need to get much brighter about solving global warming.

Bjorn Lomborg is the subject of the film COOL IT, out on DVD March 29. He is also the author of The Skeptical Environmentalist and Cool It, and director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center at Copenhagen Business School.

Be right back.
Peter

Alternative Energy Still Needs Assistance

People like Thomas Friedman, and Obama LIKE you paying $4.00 plus a gallon.

Hey folks,

I know, I know, that sounds absurd. Right? But it's not. Obama said under his Cap and Tax Plan, Energy Costs would "Necessarily Skyrocket." He said he LIKED the $4.00 a gallon price the last time we got here. He said he would have preferred a more gradual increase, but he likes it. People like Thomas Friedman, agree.

So who is that? Well, he is a Lib Golden Boy. He is so loved by the Left, and they think him so smart, that he won the Pulitzer Prize THREE times. 1983, 1988, and 2002. He now even sits on the Pulitzer Prize Board. So someone asked him what he thought of using Oil from the Strategic Reserve, which IS a bad idea, but to use it in order to bring down the price of Gas. He said this.

"That would rank in my top-five worst ideas of 2011 so far. I think that there's one thing we should finally be doing is using this opportunity to have a credible energy policy that begins to reduce our addiction to oil. Gasoline's almost $4 a gallon. We know that's a red line where people really start to change their behavior. At a minimum, I'd be talking about a tax that basically says, "We're gonna keep it at $4 a gallon."

We are going to KEEP it at $4.00 a gallon. So we can Dream Green. Idiot. Just like Obama, and the rest of the Environuts out there. "Kill Oil, Go Green." "Make it so no one can afford it." "Bankrupt the Industry." "That will FORCE people to go Green." But there is NOTHING TO SWITCH TO!

Now just this past Sunday, I posted this on the Big Sunday Edition of the OPNTalk Blog.First Ever US Hybrid Solar Energy Center I said this.

This SOUNDS like good news. I'm excited about it. I really am. I will be watching this one closely. Lets see what happens long term. Can we build on this? What can this accomplish in the future? ETC. This is actually right up the Street from me. FPL Unveils World's First Hybrid Solar Energy Center

I then said this.

OK. I know it sounds like I'm throwing a bunch of cold water on this. I'm really not. I'm going to forget the FACTS about this, and go with feelings. I hope it works in the long term. Start small. A Town. In this case, Solar, and 11000 Homes. If in the long run this works out, then go Bigger. Say a City. Businesses included. If this goes well, and all the bugs get out, then go Bigger, say Statewide.

However, my Brain tells me that even though this may work in Florida, it will not in Washington. They do not have enough Sunshine there. So they will have to come up with something else. So Solar will NEVER be Universal. What works here, may not work elsewhere. FPL spent $688 Million the these three Projects. like I said, for this one, a cost of about $30,900 a home. Where is that money coming from? Of whom are they going to pass the cost onto? What will Seattle do? Will it work? We should know in about 5 years. So what are we going to do in the meantime? What about the other around 18,526,969?

So we are trying to go Green. But we are YEARS away. Then I saw this yesterday at Boston.com - Home / Business The Green Blog A way to help wind energy March 7, 2011

You can build your own backyard turbine. Or you could, more easily, buy green power.

Utilities sometimes offer customers the opportunity to purchase renewable energy, almost always at a higher cost, reflecting the reality that clean energy still costs more than traditional forms such as coal or natural gas.

But the New England Wind Fund is offering those who care about the environment a way to help build wind farms — at rates cheaper than utilities.

Here is how it works: Customers donate money — usually to offset electricity use one time or monthly, or for a special event such as a wedding — to the New England Wind Fund. The fund uses the money to buy renewable energy certificates from new small-scale wind farms in New England, preferably in Massachusetts or Rhode Island.

The money helps wind farms get built because it guarantees that developers have buyers for their power. New England Wind Fund will then retire the renewable energy credits, promising not to sell them again.

The wind fund, which started in 2006, originally promised supporters that at least 1,000 megawatt hours of green power would be put onto the New England power grid for every $50 they contributed. But now Mass Energy is offering at least 1,000 kilowatt hours of wind for every $40 (4 cents per kilowatt hour) contributed.

The fund has contracts for renewable energy credits from the town of Portsmouth, R.I. (at the high school since 2009); Princeton Municipal Light Department (two turbines running since 2009); and Scituate Wind LLC, a private project in partnership with the town of Scituate that is expected to start producing energy later this year or next.

OK so, they have come up with a scheme to fund it. Why? No one either wants it, or can afford it. So just like Carbon Credits, where companies need not change a thing to protect the Environment, just pay someone to SAY they are "Carbon Neutral," they have come up with a way to Donate to Wind Power. Some of these have been around since 2006, yet they are not due to start producing anything until the end of this year, and or next.

Then the Author of this piece, talks about Carbon Offsets. She writes this.

Cash boost to clean power

The vast amount of money raised by the nation’s first mandatory carbon cap-and-trade system is going back into clean energy, a new report by the program shows.

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative began 2 1/2 years ago to reduce heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by 10 percent by 2018 in 10 Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic States — including all of New England.

Power plants buy emission allowances based on the tons of carbon dioxide they emit, so plants that emit larger amounts must buy more allowances.

The allowances are auctioned off by states and can be traded.

The number of available allowances will decrease as the overall cap is lowered, raising their price and, many hope, encouraging plants to invest in clean technologies to avoid the higher cost of polluting.

The report found that the 10 states are investing 52 percent of a total $789.2 million raised so far by the auction into energy efficiency, 11 percent into renewable energy, 14 percent in energy bill payment assistance, and 1 percent for other greenhouse gas reduction programs.

“All of the Massachusetts revenue has gone into clean energy,’’ said Phil Giudice, undersecretary for energy at the Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs and a vice chairman of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative Inc. board of directors.

Massachusetts has raised $123.2 million from the auctions.

Giudice said some of the money goes into grants for communities to invest in clean energy, furthering amplifying its benefits.

“RGGI has been a great success story for . . . reinvesting in a clean energy future,’’ said Giudice. “We can have a thriving economy and much better energy future.’’

Beth Daley

So again, even with all this money raised, by the SCAM of Carbon Credits, no one is actually getting GREEN ENERGY. Companies are charged X amount of dollars. They do not change anything but the PRICE of their services. They just pass this increase along to their Customers. They need not change anything. So although people are raising and passing along $123.2 million, no one is actually seeing any benefit from it. Except the money.

So when I said I was happy about the FPL, first ever, US Hybrid Solar Energy Center, yet I wanted to wait to see what happens in the long run, this is the type of thing I was talking about. These Wind Farms and Concepts have been around for a LONG time, yet, to this day, they have produced NOTHING more that a Money Scheme. No real Green Energy to speak of.

Look folks, People like Friedman, Obama, and the Liberals in Congress, DO NOT CARE WHAT THE PRICE OF GAS IS. The People in Congress, and Obama, they do not even pay for their own Gas. YOU do. But even if they did, they are Millionaires. They couldn't care less that it may cost them $100.00 to fill their vehicles. What's $100.00 when you have Millions? So it's REALLY easy for them to say, hey, maybe the $5.00 a gallon Gas is good. It's speed up the process of going Green.

Meanwhile, people on fixed incomes, the Retired, Unemployed, and the Poor, have to decide what to give up, just to buy gas to go to work, heat their homes, power their homes. Those that work, go where they work all day, and get paid $8 to $9 bucks an hour. $50 bucks to put 10 gallons of gas in your car, twice a week, IS a problem, when you only MAKE $400, to $500, a week. REAL People can not afford to Dream Green for the Next 10 years, while waiting for the Dream to produce something. THAT is Reality.
Peter

Sources:
NewsBusters - NY Times Columnist Tom Friedman Calls for Tax to Keep Gas at $4 a Gallon
OPNTalk - First Ever US Hybrid Solar Energy Center
Boston.com - A way to help wind energy

First Ever US Hybrid Solar Energy Center

Here is something I will be watching CLOSELY.

Hey folks,

This SOUNDS like good news. I'm excited about it. I really am. I will be watching this one closely. Lets see what happens long term. Can we build on this? What can this accomplish in the future? ETC. This is actually right up the Street from me. FPL Unveils World's First Hybrid Solar Energy Center

INDIANTOWN, Fla., March 5, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Florida Power & Light Company, along with Florida Gov. Rick Scott, Florida Senate President Mike Haridopolos, local public officials, construction workers, engineers, environmental experts and business leaders, today celebrated the first hybrid solar power plant in the world – FPL's Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center.

Spanning approximately 500 acres in western Martin County, Fla., this one-of-a-kind hybrid facility connects a field of more than 190,000 solar thermal mirrors with an existing combined-cycle natural gas power plant. Innovative technology enables the mirrors to track the sun over the course of a day to harness free fuel from the sun's rays to create electricity and directly offset the use of fossil fuels.

"From job creation to cleaner air to energy security, this project demonstrates the many benefits of investing in large-scale renewable energy, especially in Florida," said FPL President and CEO Armando J. Olivera. "Leadership by the Florida Legislature in 2008 made this project and its myriad benefits possible. We're hopeful that today's leaders will take action to enable more cost-effective investments like this so we can continue taking dramatic steps forward to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and get more Floridians back to work quickly."

Construction of FPL's Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center over the past two years provided more than 1,000 direct jobs, the majority of which were filled by Floridians. In addition, the project utilized more than 150 businesses from across the state, helping support the employment of thousands of additional Floridians during difficult economic times.

Now of course one can easily argue the numbers and how many REAL, LONG TERM Jobs were created with this Project, but I won't. I DO actually see this as a good thing and I am MORE than curious on how this will evolve long term.

FPL's 75-megawatt Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center is designed to harness free fuel from the sun's rays to power about 11,000 homes. This technology is expected to reduce fossil fuel consumption by approximately 41 billion cubic feet of natural gas and more than 600,000 barrels of oil – which would prevent the release of more than 2.75 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions and save FPL customers approximately $178 million in fuel costs over the facility's estimated 30-year lifetime.

{Sigh} I'll even leave out the fact that this only effects 11 Thousand Homes, out of a Population of around 18,537,969 at a cost of about $340 Million dollars. So that's about $30,900 a home.

"Diversifying our state's energy sources is not only good energy policy, it can be good for the economy as well. This project demonstrated that when Florida facilitates significant private investment, we can plan for our future and get Floridians back to work at the same time," said Florida Senate President Mike Haridopolos.

"Energy security is critical to our national security. FPL's new hybrid solar facility is an important piece of an all-of-the-above energy solution, and I'm glad to see our state is once again leading the way toward a more secure energy future for Florida and America," said U.S. Rep. Tom Rooney (FL-16).

FPL's Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center was officially declared in-service in November 2010 and is the third of three large-scale solar projects that the company has completed over the past two years, creating more than 5,000 direct and indirect jobs. These three plants combined are now delivering a total of 110 megawatts of clean, solar energy to Floridians.

"Today we are creating Florida's future as the clean energy state. By investing in emissions-free solar power, FPL is creating a brighter future and reducing the risk to our citizens from the environmental and economic risks of fossil fuels," said Eric Draper, executive director of Audubon of Florida.

In addition, the plant is expected to generate more than $5 million in new local tax revenue in its first full year of operation, enabling Martin County to devote considerable resources toward long-term economic development.

"The positive impact this project has had on our community and will continue to have on Martin County in the coming decades is extraordinary," said Ed Ciampi, chairman of the Board of County Commissioners. "This innovative project showcases Martin County and Florida to the world as a dynamic leader in solar energy, and we couldn't be more proud."

FPL has already secured and permitted sites where more than 500 megawatts of new solar power could be built and is ready to launch several projects right away that would employ thousands of Floridians during construction, support local businesses and benefit customers.

"With a strong commitment from the state, large-scale renewable energy projects could attract new research and development, manufacturing and more to Florida, laying the foundation for a lasting industry to support the state's long-term economic growth," Olivera said.

Florida Power & Light Company

Florida Power & Light Company is the largest electric utility in Florida and one of the largest rate-regulated utilities in the United States. FPL serves 4.5 million customer accounts in Florida and is a leading employer in the state with approximately 10,000 employees. The company consistently outperforms national averages for service reliability while customer bills are below the national average. A clean energy leader, FPL has one of the lowest emissions profiles and one of the leading energy efficiency programs among utilities nationwide. FPL is a subsidiary of Juno Beach, Fla.-based NextEra Energy, Inc. (NYSE: NEE). For more information, visit www.FPL.com.

SOURCE Florida Power & Light Company

OK. I know it sounds like I'm throwing a bunch of cold water on this. I'm really not. I'm going to forget the FACTS about this, and go with feelings. I hope it works in the long term. Start small. A Town. In this case, Solar, and 11000 Homes. If in the long run this works out, then go Bigger. Say a City. Businesses included. If this goes well, and all the bugs get out, then go Bigger, say Statewide.

However, my Brain tells me that even though this may work in Florida, it will not in Washington. They do not have enough Sunshine there. So they will have to come up with something else. So Solar will NEVER be Universal. What works here, may not work elsewhere. FPL spent $688 Million the these three Projects. like I said, for this one, a cost of about $30,900 a home. Where is that money coming from? Of whom are they going to pass the cost onto? What will Seattle do? Will it work? We should know in about 5 years. So what are we going to do in the meantime? What about the other around 18,526,969?

This is a good start. Lets see what happens. But in the meantime, we need to Drill Here. We need to Drill Now. We need to use our OWN resources. I'm glad that FPL and Florida are trying this EXPERIMENT into the Energy of the Future. But lets deal in REALITY at the same time.
Peter