Our Magazines Article Archives
 

Renewable Energy Trends 2011: 'Green Gold' Loses Its Glitter

Do you like this magazine?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 

With 26,000 subscribers and a global readership in over 170 countries around the world, Renewable Energy World Magazine is targeted at those who make growth happen in renewable industries. Covering policy, technology, finance, markets and more, Renewable Energy World magazine covers all technologies and all markets. Published six times per year, a special Directory of Suppliers Issue is published in July/August which is distributed year round at key renewable energy events worldwide.

12 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 12
March 19, 2011
What are you doing to go green? http://www.youtube.com/user/ReliantRodeo
Comment
2 of 12
March 20, 2011
RE: "The bottom line for renewables is that it remains a sector underpinned by government tax credits and subsidies."

Revealingly, this article illuminates the core reality renewable energy advocates gloss over: For any electricity-producing product the consumer ultimately asks just one question: "How much electricity will it produce and how much will that cost me?"

Solar Photovoltaic systems, for example, are wonderful in so many ways (they produce net new wealth directly from the sun, with no ongoing pollution cost). But they are still too expensive, so no one wants them at their offered price.

So, Big Solar Corporate Welfare Queens force us to buy them anyway. How? By infecting government and getting it to enact things like Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) legislation (an unfunded mandate on utilities, and thus their rate-payers, to buy energy from green-energy producers who charge more than brown-power producers), or simply mandate inflated Feed-In-Tariffs (when my utility pays a Solar PV array owner an above-market price for power, whose pocket is ultimately picked to cover that extra expense?), not to mention tax credits (taxpayers' pockets) and, in some places, utility rebates (ratepayers' pockets again).

Imagine if PCs were treated like PVs when they first came along: They'd cost a fortune and we'd be even more trillions in debt.

Subsidizing even "good" products is ultimately a fool's errand, as explained here: https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/home

And using RPS and FITS are anti-democratic because they obscure what in any other form is a tax increase without political accountability, without asking citizens to vote on them (like local sales tax referendums).

I thus urge this organization to explore and cover efforts to generate free-market generated green energy, rather than mindlessly perpetuate "green-at-any-cost" propaganda, which ultimately hurts the green movement overall (subsidies foment inflation, bubbles, etc.)
Comment
3 of 12
March 23, 2011
"Free Marketer",

It does not seem that we have a "free" market in energy. The oil, coal and nuclear industries were and are heavily subsidized. (The nuclear industry for one was completely paid for by taxpayers- and is still being paid for by taxpayers).

These big energy players do what "free" people do- they hire lobbyists to give them even more protected status (ie. liability limits, special tax breaks, subsidies).

They also refrain from taking responsibility for the environmental damage (to air, to health, to life). No "free" market advocate can give a free pass to polluters. That is ludicrous. No "free" market advocate should limit liability for upstream polluters.

Of course the "government" is giving protected status to these current industries and giving them "monopoly" status with these perks.

A "free" market solution would be to remove ALL subsidies of the current energy mix (which are numerous and entreanched and allow the "free" market to price those fuels at the appropriate level. Instead we have "subsidized" energy (coal, nuclear, and gas) which never pay their own expernalities-- so of course they are cheap. Cheap in the sense that they are avoiding paying for their own cleanup & liability.

Renewable energy (which have no fuel costs to rise, and relatively few dangerous expernalities) should welcome a level playing field and will most certainly win in that kind of a "free" market.

Sadly we are not currently in a "free" market- so your distaste for subsidies for "clean" energies seems to be only a defense of the current "un-free" status quo: Cheap, subsidized, unhealthy AND dirty.

Of course there is that "cheap"- which dominates most discussions. And renewable energy (compared with all externalities in the open) is cheap, is healthy, and is clean(er).

So do you really want to pull the rug out from under the current energies and create a level playing field? Renewables would welcome that kind of "freedom"

Randy
Comment
4 of 12
March 23, 2011
We will do the right thing, after we have tried everything else.

Solar is more than PV and subsidy, the daylighting and solar thermal markets are doing just fine without them and without much publicity. Multiple benefit solar is coming along as well, past building (facade) integration to structural integration of the building and the business within.

Futura Solar realized that the roof itself is a collector anyway, whether we intend it to be, design it to be, build it to be or equip it to be. So we revived sawtooth roofing and put in the solar benefits that yielded routine utility to the business directly below the roof. Daylighting for the shop floor, process air for heat and air handling, and still found room for PV and/or SWH. Lately, PV/Thermal is improving on that.

For low profile commercial buildings with their large footprint, this is the way forward.
Comment
5 of 12
March 23, 2011
Randy,

RE: "A 'free' market solution would be to remove ALL subsidies of the current energy mix...."

Agreed.

And yes, I really do want to de-subsidize solar. I don't have to bespeak what you know -- that two wrongs don't make a right -- and I commend you to read the "Atlas Shrugged Motors" (Forbes) article that I linked on my Free Market Solar (free web-book) site: https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/

You can find that Forbes article link inside this subpage: https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/home/why-subsidies-ultimately-suck

Bribing consumers to buy overpriced products they otherwise don't want is sheer lunacy, a feel-good ("we must do something!) government band-aid which belies impatience with the pace of free-market forces. Imagine if Reagan declared, at the birth of PC's on the mass-consumer market in 1982, that PCs were a national priority and thus blew billions subsidizing that market sector. Prices would've risen (producers simply raise prices to cop subsidies) and Moore's Law would've been hampered, if not displaced.

Have you ever known of a subsidized market sector that's worked?

Yes, run for office (maybe I will) and Shut It Down (big, fat, arrogant government that drills my pocket and yours for cash to then hand over to Corporate Welfare Queens who lobby -- bribe -- politicians). But DON'T play the green card to perpetuate sick, crony-ized, Welfare State Capitalism. My book explains further, check it out. It's completely free (not even any ads). And I am, by the way, a 10KW Solar PV owner.
Comment
6 of 12
March 23, 2011
James,

Enjoyed the article and have a better understanding of where you are going with the free market direction.

I agree-- Subsidies suck. And I am doing something about that. I sell complete PV kits and I train homeowners to "self install." The kits still cost a fair price, but a motivated homeowner can install and save 50% of the cost of an "installed" system. You can see the kits at:http://simpleenergyworks.com/kits.html

I liked a few of your ideas about retailers offering rebates for kWh produced but do you really want them going through the utility? Are the brown energy producers the best ones to be doling out clean energy incentives? Might be better to have a stand alone non-profit or for profit that tracks energy production and cuts a check (or gives a credit). Like some of the REC broker websites that are hoping up.

Anyway, enjoyed the article on your site. I don't really think that tax credits (soft incentives) are a problem because taxes are subsidies themselves (to the bloated government). I would think that any possible way of avoiding those taxes would not only be morally acceptable, but also praiseworthy (in a truly market driven world).

Agreeing that any subsidies suck.... Do I therefore avoid the available ones? I think not. They will all go away (sooner probably rather than later) as our august rulers have already bankrupted our economy.

Of course lobbying for the subsidies makes no sense. But lobbying for a level playing field, or for "play nice with solar" rules for utilities and municipalities to follow may make sense.

You are correct that it will soon make all kinds of sense to every "Joe."

I as well own a self installed PV system.

Randy
Comment
7 of 12
March 23, 2011
Thanks for your comments. Please read my discussion of these and related points in the comments section here:

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2011/03/u-s-solar-market-bloom-in-2010-but-challenges-remain#readercomments
Comment
8 of 12
March 23, 2011
And I WILL consult your site - http://simpleenergyworks.com/kits.htm - because that's PRECISELY what I did and actively encourage others: "U-DO-IT-SOLAR" would be the moniker to employ if I had the time to set up a local business on that score.
Comment
9 of 12
March 23, 2011
OK, your site is posted on my web-book's subpage, here:

https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/a-look-at/best-known-10kw-grid-package-deals
Comment
10 of 12
March 23, 2011
Randy,

If there are to be incentives, they must be back-ended (get the array up on your dime, make it produce above a certain amount, THEN you get rewarded) not front-ended (here, take this money even if you erect crap and produce nothing), which led to U.K. wind turbines built in non-wind areas (hence, the investors were farming subsidies, not wind).

But "Joe," in spreadsheeting anticipated future array revenues whilst deciding whether to invest, will want the certainty of payment on the reverse-meter-credit supplemental payment. And Solar vendors and interest groups can go out of business/disband, while local utilities do not. Hence, Joe will better appreciate (and be more inclined to invest in reliance upon) pre-paid, utility-streamed credit supplements than a private entity's.

Plus we want utilities (most in Georgia are passively if not actively hostile to solar; Georgia has NO solar power program btw) to be drawn into (and thus encourage) the Solar PV market. My scheme, then, enables them to piggy-back on the goodwill that flows from the supplemental payment scheme I've proposed. They then become more committed to Solar PV (Georgia utilities are brown-power folks, and the electric membership cooperatives are tied up to contractually buy from them; plus they don't see as much value in variable, rather than base-load power).

But I welcome better ideas, so keep them coming, please: freemarketsolar@juno.com
Comment
11 of 12
March 23, 2011
James,

I love it. You get the utilities to become the good guys whether they want to or not!

Might even be better if you could allow the retailers (or manufacturers) to pay the incentives as they occur. For instance, rather than paying in $5000 at the beginning but putting in say $2500 and then spreading out the payments (kind of like a lottery awarding $10 million or $50k per month until you die). It keeps them from having to up front the full amount but can amortize the amount.

It seems that there are REC brokerage companies popping up that track the produced kWh (1000 kWh= 1 REC)and then sell/broker them. I think NC has a system where they get paid yearly per kwh. I am not sure how they track it. Seems technically doable. I guess I just don't trust the utilities. But, making them play nice might actually get them interested. You are always wary of what you do not know-- once they learn how PV stuff works it makes sense that the momentum will move in that direction.

I agree about the front end subsidies. They certainly do subsidize- but they are clearly wealth redistribution (according to some master planners master plan).

Randy
Comment
12 of 12
March 24, 2011
I've yet to see an effective Renewable Energy Credit program available to me in Georgia. Please share any data you may find, I'll do likewise. Here's my prototype home, by the way: https://picasaweb.google.com/StoryBookProperties/55KWHDayANewRecord# (I've since enjoyed a new record of 61.40 KWH, on 3/2/11, and hope to exceed that as the days grow longer). I've also collected your and others' comments here, you might want to check them out: https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/home/comments
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In
ISSUE COVER IMAGE: About Renewable Energy World

With 30,000 subscribers and a global readership in over 170 countries around the world, Renewable Energy World Magazine is targeted at those who make growth happen in renewable industries. Covering policy, technology, finance,... more »

 

Advertise With Us

AEG Power Solutions Endurance Wind Power Renewable Energy World Europe Magnum Energy Inc. AWS Truepower, LLC Renewables Academy AG (RENAC) Texas Solar Energy Society
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine North America Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Photovoltaics World Magazine Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters