This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Germany, Spain Set To Pull The Plug On Green Energy

Tyler Durden's picture


Over ten years ago, when Europe was a bright and shining example of experimental monetarist "brilliance", and when the money was flowing, the continent decided to do the ethical thing and actively promote the pursuit and development of renewable energy through countless government subsidies. As a result, Germany and Spain became the undisputed leaders in the race for a green future, and both created similar laws to encourage the development of renewable energy. There were two problems: i) green energy, while noble in theory, is about the worst idea possible when it comes to profitability and capital self-sustainability and constantly needs governmental subsidies, and ii) it was the end consumers who would pay for the government's generosity, in the form of a surcharge on electric bills. In Germany, for example, as the industry grew (in size, and thus in losses) demand for the subsidy increased, driving the surcharge higher. In January, the surcharge, which amounts to about 14% of electricity prices, nearly doubled to 5.28 euro cents per kilowatt hour.

And, as the WSJ so deftly explains, "that means ordinary consumers shoulder the lion's share of the costs for what the German government calls its "energy revolution." And here is where a third problem comes into play, because while German and Spanish consumers were happy to pay a surcharge in the golden days of a Dr. Jekyll Europe when everything was great, soon Europe become a doomed Mr. Hyde-ian Frankenstein monster, with imploding economies, 60%+ youth unemployment and resurgent neo-nazi powers. In short: the German and Spanish consumers have had it with funding an infinite money drain (even bigger than Greece), when cash flow is scarce and getting worse, and have just said "Basta" and "Nein", respectively.

Which means it is now a political issue in Spain, where the scandal ridden Rajoy has never been more unpopular, and certainly in Germany where Merkel faces an election in September and can't allow the public opinion to shift against her. As a result "with Spain in the grips of recession, the government wants to lower consumers' light bills. In Germany, Chancellor Angela Merkel faces an election in September and hopes to win points with voters by putting a stop to rising electricity bills."  Specifically, "Ms. Merkel's government on Thursday proposed putting a cap on the green-energy surcharge until the end of 2014 and then restricting any rise in the surcharge after that to no more than 2.5% a year. The government also plans to tighten exemptions, which would force more companies to pay, and achieve a cut in green subsidies of €1.8 billion ($2.42 billion). The plan is a quick fix pending comprehensive reform after the election, government officials said."

Spain is not far behind:

The Spanish parliament took a similar step on Thursday, passing a law that aims to curb rising household electricity costs by cutting aid to the renewable-energy industry.


Renewable-energy producers "are going to receive less revenue, but these measures are better for consumers" said Energy Minister José Manuel Soria.


Among the changes in the Spanish system, the new law indexes certain subsidies and compensation to an inflation estimate that strips out the effects of energy, food commodities, and tax changes.

Naturally the response from the subsidized industries has been swift and damning:

Renewable-energy companies said that the government was backing away from previous promises that it would ensure them a reasonable return on their investments.


"Spain's government is trying to smash the renewable-energy sector through legislative modifications," said José Miguel Villarig, chairman of the country´s Association of Renewable-Energy Producers.

Actually all the Spanish government is thing to do is stay in power, and in order to do so, it must stop demanding that its people pay for the development of financial black hole industries.

The immediate result of these steps will be a widespread collapse in the alternative energy space in Europe, which is barely sustainable on an "as is" basis (see Solyndra) with ongoing government funding, and will melt as fast as a snowball in the Iceland thermal when the money is even modestly cut off.

Because like all truly money losing government ventures, one can't mothball a project that by definition has to lose money in hope one day it will be a new money-winning paradigm, especially since the imminent deleveraging wave which will hit the world once Chinese inflation wakes from its slumber, will mean conventional energy costs will once again have no choice but to drop (see: "On This Day In History.... Gas Prices Have Never Been Higher").

Yet all this means is that the government will merely have to find other, more creative ways to lose money now that the alternative energy fad is virtually dead. Luckily, spending money with absolutely nothing to show for it is one thing that every government in the current insolvent global regime, has a peculiar knack for. It also means that thousands of former government workers with no real marketable skills are about to hit the streets demanding more handouts from the nanny state, and lead to yet another wave of European civil unrest just as the 'other people's money' is about to run out.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:14 | 3245183 MrX
MrX's picture

mo monay mo problems

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:19 | 3245194 schoolsout
schoolsout's picture

"green" energy is viable...and profitable.  Unfortunately, because of the insane expansion of credit, people have this idea that they are entitled to driving 50 miles in a day, eating whatever it is they want, doing whatever it is they want to do....when they want to do it.


And before anyone "junks" me, I'm a guy that burns 300 gallons of diesel to fish for a day...

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:28 | 3245213 cynicalskeptic
cynicalskeptic's picture

At least government support for green energy has a positive effective on the planet as a whole - unlike the trillions fed to the financial sector squid.  I've got no problems spending more for electricity that's not dumping thousands of tons more of CO2 into the atmosphere.  I am NOT happy at all providing subsidies to JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs.   And while we're at it, I'm none too happy with funding drone attacks that kill civilians all over the world who are no therea to the US - creating generations of people who hate the US with a passion.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:41 | 3245254 ACP
ACP's picture

It might have had a positive impact on the planet, if the processes were more refined, but at this point in time, the waste dumped into the environment (Edit: during manufacturing) FAR outweighs the positive impact on the environment.

For now, it is simply a cash cow used by cronies all over the world to extract even more tax dollars from the public.

Why do you think it is that Feinstain pushed this so much...hmmm...maybe so her husband could profit from government contracts with URS years ago?

It's all bullshit until it has a NET POSITIVE impact.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:48 | 3245274 Kitler
Kitler's picture

"Germany, Spain Set To Pull The Plug On Green Energy"

 Pull it!

~ Larry Silverstein

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:52 | 3245291 CunnyFunt
CunnyFunt's picture

kW/$ bitches

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:22 | 3245347 toys for tits
toys for tits's picture



That amount of a German subisdy is ridiculous.  It equals to $.07 per kwh, which is more than half of the average US residential KWH rate of 12 cents.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 02:38 | 3245605 SoundMoney45
SoundMoney45's picture

Don't lose sight of the fact that Nuclear is subsidized much much more.  Did you ever see an accrual for future cleanups?  No, cleanup costs will always be socialized. However, as Nuclear is centrallized, it fits very very well with central planning.  That pesky decentralized solar simply doesn't fit with central planning.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 08:22 | 3245801 Freewheelin Franklin
Freewheelin Franklin's picture

The future of nuclear is GenIV reactors. Liquid metal cooled and thorium fueled self-contained systems.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 11:21 | 3246227 Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture

"However, as Nuclear is centralized, it fits very very well with central planning.  That pesky decentralized solar simply doesn't fit with central planning."

Absolutely correct.  Solar and wind power only work when it is decentralized.  Decentralized green energy means getting off of the oil/coal/nuclear merry-go-round and all the bullshit associated with it.  Decentralized green energy would establish a strong upper bound on the prices for oil/coal/nuclear.

And that, my friends, is too much power to the people.  It is way too much democracy for TPTB.  You plebs will remain on the merry-go-round for your own good.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 11:38 | 3246447 daxtonbrown
daxtonbrown's picture

"Did you ever see an accrual for future cleanups?  No, cleanup costs will always be socialized."


That's not true, the Nuclear Waste Fund already exists. It hasn't been spent because of green commies like Harry Reid blocking every rational attempt to finish Yucca Mountain. And yes I said commie.

I wrote not only the only biography off Harryy Reid, (107,000 words) and a 200,000 word history of the radical protest at Yucca Mountain (to be released this spring), so don't give me crap about what I know. Go Nuclear bitchez.

The hidden costs of nuclear are mostly the hidden costs of letting radical greens hobble our ability to improve nuclear technology and move on to cheaper, safer and more efficient designs. Our plants are thirty, forty years old.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 12:10 | 3246566 Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture


Fukushima, baby.  Was there enough money in the trust fund to clean up northern Japan?  The Pacific ocean?  To pay for all the coming cancer deaths?


Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:40 | 3245262 Piranhanoia
Piranhanoia's picture

Oil companies and producing nations speak through the mouth of Germany and Spain.  Germany trades their stuff for a lot of oil, and makes weapons for oily nations.  Spain can't get enough money in their people's hands to buy solar panels on the houses the government is evicting them from any more than the folks here can. Can't buy electric cars with no work, even when they have the weather to power them up.    Solar is still more efficient than gas if you can convert the power, because the source is free and clean.   But you can give a combustion engine a sunburn and it isn't going to go anywhere.   Big Oil likes this story,  the folks that have to breathe, not so much.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:41 | 3245383 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

green energy fails = blame boogeyman

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:53 | 3245294 rupertq
rupertq's picture

And from what source is that electricity generated and delivered to you?

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:45 | 3245391 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

Rainbow color unicorn fecal matter?

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:46 | 3245396 F22
F22's picture

The fantasy that's been foisted upon you and the public is that CO2 is dangerous.... CO2 is the very gas we exhale. Plants and animals have evolved over millenia and have a symbiotic relationship based on this gas.  There is no evidence that CO2 causes any harm to the environment or has anything to do with "global warming".  There are actual pollutants formed by incomplete burning of impure hydrocarbons--sulfer dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide-- that have been shown to cause smog, acid rain or water pollution and those can and should be controlled and have been successfully regulated.....Just compare air quality today to that of LA in the 70s..... CO2 is not a pollutant however.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 00:50 | 3245492 schoolsout
schoolsout's picture

Honest question....


Do you think "man" has had an impact on our environment?


Put it like this...most here bitch about fiat money.  Something that is abused and caused things to get out of balance.  That fiat money and credit expansion has led to an explosion of "growth" leading to using massive amounts of resources.  We live in a finite resource world that seems to find a certain equilibrium point...

Can you honestly say we are at the equilibrium point regarding the resources we use/squander?

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 05:55 | 3245705 Haus-Targaryen
Haus-Targaryen's picture

To be completely frank - the primary reason many people take issue with environmentalism is it requires the "wealthy" to abandon their standard of living and quality of life.  It asks nothing of the poor (the South Americans who strip-clear the rain forest, or African Tribes who destroy thousand year old Oasis' to get water).  If everyone had to suffer equally, it would be a much more appealing argument than the status-quo where only the industrialiyed countries have a duty to save the planet. 

Moreover, the biggest contributor to CO2 emisisons world wide is the ever increasing population.  First world countries' populations are shrinking ... we are already doing our part.  Its the 3rd world that is over-populating the planet.  This is a reason why many of us look at the Green movement is nothing more than a political argument to go after the wealth(ier) establishment.   

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 06:48 | 3245734 Vagabond
Vagabond's picture

"the biggest contributor to CO2 emisisons world wide is the ever increasing population." Wrong.

The biggest contributor to CO2 emissions world wide is volcanos.  Wildfires, and decaying plants and animals cause more emissions than humans breathing as well.  The methane emissions from the massive amount of cattle we raise to eat absurd amounts of meat are doing far more harm than the rising human population.

The reason why we're seeing much higher than normal CO2 in the atmosphere is because we've cut down a large portion of earth's natural carbon filter: forests.  This doesn't imply impending doom doom, but we probably should let some of these cattle farms return to natural forests.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 08:21 | 3245798 theprofromdover
theprofromdover's picture


If every local, state national government planted a couple of trees every 100ft along the roadsides, we could suck up all this 'damaging' CO2, and get some lumber out of it too.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 09:30 | 3245935 thisandthat
thisandthat's picture

Doesn't matter, CO2 isn't dangerous, it's beneficial: the higher concentration, the higher the crop yields are (several fold increases in production, by pumping CO2 into greenhouses). OTOH, low CO2 levels (at levels defended in UN green documents) will just starve/kill plants. In fact, intensive farming fast growing industrial crops can deplete all CO2 in the air up to a meter high, in a matter of hours. On top of that, CO2 levels in the atmosphere follow air temperature, not the other way around, so it can't be a cause for any climate changes, and, at most, could be a consequence. More important, CO2 is not a greenhouse gas, as it's spectrogram shows (unlike water vapor, which (is not a gas, but) blocks infrared light, as you can tell by the huge clear sky variations in day/night temperatures, in deserts, as opposed to when weather is cloudy/dusty/smoky) AND, as was proven scientifically, global scale greenhouse effect, itself, does not exist, nor can it exist.

But, go tell that to the "green" puppets and their financial/ideological master puppeteers behind the curtains (at the World Wilderness Conferences, Club of Rome, etc.), which is who promoted and have an (un)veiled interest in all this humongous mystification.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 10:38 | 3246220 zapdude
zapdude's picture

Ding - Ding - Ding!  We have a winner! 

VOLCANOES are a huge source of CO2 'emissions'.  We could 'green' all of our energy sources back to the Stone Age for the purpose of massively reducing our CO2 footprint, but then a volcanoe could erupt and completely reverse all the CO2 reduction / abatement over a period of many years in a matter of just a few minutes.

So this begs the obvious question -- how does the Kyoto protocol intend to regulate volcanoes?

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 18:00 | 3247905 Parrotile
Parrotile's picture

Don't forget the "invisible" undersea volcanoes too - there are a lot more of these than those we know of on dry land.

Add in the CO2 releases from the mid-oceanic ridges, and there's a lot of recycled CO2 entering the seas. Some of this will be bound as carbonate rocks / minerals (animal shells, skeletons etc), but a fraction will diffuse from the sea surface into the atmosphere, where there exists a balance.

This has been happening from well before our remotest ancestors arrived on the scene, and we're still (mostly) OK (but having a panic!)

First it was Global Cooling (late 1970's) then Global Warming (1990's), now "Climate Change" (one way or the other - not quite sure, so let's cover our bets!).

What's the next "Big Panic"? Global "No Change at all"?? I'm betting on yet another Ice Age (as WILL happen), maybe triggered by a supervolcano event (Yellowstone seems overdue), or failure of the Atlantic Conveyor system (Gulf Stream), again, as has happened in the past, many times.

Once the Big Chill sets in, it'll be most entertaining to observe the reaction of the Global Warmists (and the rushed development of  Gen 4 Nuclear as our only short-term option!)

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 07:32 | 3245757 Element
Element's picture



Something that is abused and caused things to get out of balance.

Get it straight, humans are natural, we are NOT artificial and we are NOT aliens.  We are evolutionarily optimized to do one thing, to live on this planet in this environment. This is why we are so at home on this planet.

We are! We 100% belong as much as any fucking rare spotted possum. There's no reason whatsoever to be goaded into contrived guilt via the deliberately selective language of the parasitic 'green'-lobby propagandists, and their preferred terms and reference points for an ever unattainable imaginary idealistic stable environmentally-balanced 'reality' ... that has never existed.

So before couching such questions in terms of 'abuse' of the 'environment', how about facing the fact that States deliberately fan, and CONTINUE TO FAN, the excessive human behaviors that create the features you think are un-natural or abusive.

Who's the abuser?

Who's the destroyer?

Who's whipping our backs every damn day to keep doing it more and more?

Then comes at us with all this crap about how damaging we are.

Who keeps up the pernicious ENDLESS psychological advertising barrage, to fan more and maaaaawW!!!!!!!!! ... of trivial wasteful shit that no one actually needs ... all that pre-junk.

The State and aligned Corporatism + MSM

It's the Nation-Statist kulture.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 09:55 | 3246012 BigInJapan
BigInJapan's picture

Check out how much CO2 is pumped out by a single major volcanic eruption and get back to me with the point of your questions.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 01:39 | 3245548 steve from virginia
steve from virginia's picture




The fantasy that's been foisted upon you and the public is that CO2 is dangerous....


The dumbest, stupid-est remark on Zero Hedge ... next to von Mises bullshit.



Fri, 02/15/2013 - 01:59 | 3245576 Haus-Targaryen
Haus-Targaryen's picture

No sir, that honor belongs to your anti-freedom of movement rants.


Fri, 02/15/2013 - 05:17 | 3245682 Lore
Lore's picture

Steve doesn't know about Agenda 21.  Switch "Weapons of Mass Destruction" with "Unnatural Global Warming."  Carbon tax is the tribute for good harvest. Get it?  YOU HAVE BEEN PRANKED!

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 05:19 | 3245688 Lore
Lore's picture

Addendum, for those who are still waking up: 

When you tell a lie, tell big lies... In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility... In the primitive simplicity of [the mind of the masses] they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, 1926, p. 472

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 07:08 | 3245751 frenchie
frenchie's picture

methinks he was talking about the jews

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 14:49 | 3247158 Lore
Lore's picture

Big Lies Abound.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:59 | 3245422 fxrxexexdxoxmx
fxrxexexdxoxmx's picture

As long as the Koran is taught, hate filled people will be in great supply. When your g-d says it is fine to kill other people who do not follow your g-d then hate always finds it way to other countries.

When a Sunni Muslim kills a Shia Muslim ... drones have nothing to do with it. But the Koran has everything to do with it.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 02:02 | 3245581 JOYFUL
JOYFUL's picture

and unfortunately nothing at all to do with the topic at hand...

please wait for your cue - that sparkling insight needs be inserted into a thread discussing "hate-filled books" a la old testaments, talmud texts, and other apochrypha of hegemonist religious cults...

hold fire!

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 01:20 | 3245524 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

Why don't you try co-generation with your own methane?

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 02:36 | 3245603 schoolsout
schoolsout's picture

German built electric outboards.....I've had the pleasure of operating one of the smaller ones when they first hit the market and it is pretty neat.  Now, they are offering a fairly high horsepower model.  I'd say it's a step in a better direction.  Is it for everyone?  Nope...but nonetheless, a good move and product.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 13:11 | 3246802 horseman
horseman's picture

Gov't shouldn't be doing either.  Gov't job should be to put meaningful business rules in place to control fraud and other criminal business practices and then enforce the rules.  After that, they should stay out of the game like a good referee.


Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:31 | 3245225 MaxMax
MaxMax's picture

Oh Yah?  Well, I have a 50 foot boat with 3 x 750HP motors that burns a gallon of 91 octane every 45 seconds at 70 MPH.  Sure the gas costs a bit, but the gas bill is the least of the costs.  Try blowing a drive, rebuilding a motor, making new headers or any of the other countless costs.  I wish my only costs for the season were fuel.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:57 | 3245296 schoolsout
schoolsout's picture

I wish only costs for fishing was fuel, too....


Let's see....$550/mo dock fee

                 10 Gallons oil change every 5 or so trips


                 Genset maintenance

                 Bait (easy $100/day)

                 Rods/Reels (one time cost except for low maintenance/new line)  $10,000+ not counting electric gear

                 I can go on, but I think you get it by now. 


By the way, replaced one motor that blew a few years back....$30,000 to do it.  

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:23 | 3245348 Mentaliusanything
Mentaliusanything's picture


B ring

O ut

A nother

T housand

If it flies or floats, has tits or tyres - your going to pay baby

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:39 | 3245379 NoDebt
NoDebt's picture

So you are the only one who burns fuel because you need to?  Everyone else burning fuel is just out joy-riding?

I sympathize with your situation, but please don't fall into the trap of believing your use of fuel is required while others just do it for kicks.

And can I just say, you get to do something WAY more fun than me as your job?  My family used to run the head boat, 2 of them actually, at one point- a full day and a half day boat- out of Indian River, DE for a little while (about 30 years) and several charter boats out to the "canyons" on overnight marlin fishing trips after that.  I was mate on a couple of those boats for a few years when I was younger.  Don't let the bastards drive you out of that, if you can possibly avoid it.  Once you're out it's tough to get back in.  I know the money situation is tight in that world, but if you love being on the water..... just trust me, don't leave it.  You won't be happy being away from the water if you're born to it.


Fri, 02/15/2013 - 00:44 | 3245485 schoolsout
schoolsout's picture

I'm saying that until people, including myself, realize that our way of life, as we know it, needs to "come back down to Earth," green energy won't be viable.

Also, I don't fish for a living, only for fun.  Could never picture myself mating, either...I like to drink beer and pick my calm(er) days.  Had buddies that have traveled the world fishing on some insane boats (one was 130'...started in Charleston and ended up in New Zealand)

Don't go as much these days as I'm spending all free time getting a hobby farm up and running on some family land.  Toning the lifestyle down, so to say.  


You do have it right,'s a great lifestyle if it fits.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 01:15 | 3245521 Freddie
Freddie's picture

You are probably Tricky Dave from Wicked Tuna and you fish on other guys numbers. Freaking Googin.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 02:18 | 3245595 schoolsout
schoolsout's picture

Yep, you got me.  What's funny is very rarely do I drive the boat...or decide where the boat fishes.  After seeing your comment a little lower on this thread, it is apparent you have no idea what it is you are talking about.  I fish the stream mostly....every now and again, I will bottom fish and those do require numbers, but nothing is a secret any longer.  The stream do the pelagic fish.  


If you'd like me to learn you some knowledge in this area, I'd be more than happy to oblige.  Until then, sit on your hands before you decide to type again.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 01:36 | 3245546 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

If it fly's, floats or fucks, rent it...don't own it!

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:32 | 3245228 Urban Roman
Urban Roman's picture

So, umm, all those solar panels in Germany suddenly went dark? 

How did they turn off the Sun? 

The banksters just hate solar, because it does not increase their centralized control. Better to burn coal in gigantic plants, and then make everybody get a meter and pay them. That's the ticket!

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:45 | 3245275 booboo
booboo's picture

Oh horse shit, the bankers love it because they are paid just the same, it's just paid up front. There is no reason why it should cost 45,000 bucks to install solar on the average fucking residential home, unless of course...wait for it, bankers sucking subsidies out of the government. Constructing huge 4 million s.f. buildings, hiring 1 secretary and 10 line guys, having Inaction Jackson do a photo op and looting the fuck out of the company as the dipshit makes his way back to AF1.

Get the fucking government OUT OF IT and it can be an affordable reality everyone could be happy with, as it is now, greenies want my unborn grandchildren to fund their wet dreams. I just want to get off the grid.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 08:00 | 3245782 thisandthat
thisandthat's picture

Exactly, that's what happened in Portugal - banks got all the (subsidized) contracts for solar energy, leaving private citizens out.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:44 | 3245389 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

You must hate solar too. So does 99.9% of the world, because you are on the grid

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 00:39 | 3245473 Oleander
Oleander's picture

I intend to vote NO on Citizens Energy putting a solar farm in town. A non profit company wants to put a 2.4 megawatt energy farm here with a 20 yr lease. I do not think its a bright idea. 

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 02:18 | 3245594 JOYFUL
JOYFUL's picture

Indeed, this is the crux of the matter. The centralization of energy production will always place technology(no matter how efficient) in the wrong hands - leading to economic inefficiencies and market distortions,

When pursued(and paid for!) at the level of the individual, solar, wind, micro-hydro, biogas etc., all are excellent technologies...centralize them, and place them at the mercy of capital rentiers and their state enablers, you have a disaster, like medicare,

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 11:52 | 3246489 Urban Roman
Urban Roman's picture

Exactly so .. Those big solar 'farms' (absent a nuc-style government subsidy) will never make it. 

Rooftop solar is freedom realized. 

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:00 | 3245302 jballz
jballz's picture

Strange I always thought that was called freedom. I won't down arrow you though. I will just say go fuck yourself.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 02:23 | 3245597 schoolsout
schoolsout's picture

You, also, have very little comprehension skills.

I stated in the very post you criticize that I am one of those that enjoy that "freedom."  That said, we have been trained to think that all this energy should be cheap and "easy."  I don't think it should.  I also think it is because of much credit expansion that we have been able to live this fantasy for some time now.

I could care less about an "up" or "down" arrow.  I've been on this site since it's inception...way back when...before there were arrows and people like you with absolutely no clue as to what you speak of.  I will continue to stay here...not giving two fucks of a shit about what you or anyone else thinks.  I'm sure you feel the same way about me.


Take care.



Fri, 02/15/2013 - 03:43 | 3245631 Breaker
Breaker's picture

Where does "should" come into it? It is cheap and easy. Noone has any idea how to set standards about "should" when it comes to market prices. You think it should be more expensive. I think it should be cheaper. You may think cheap energy prices don't discount the cost of global warming. I think global warming "science" is paid for government results that are designed to increase the power and money going to our Ruling Class in America and throughout the world.

Out of 7 billion "shoulds," maybe someone's "should" is right. But we have no way of knowing who that is. 

Until then, I'm comfy with "is" and would let the green subsidies all die. At the point where putting solar panels on my house will be cheaper than being on the grid, I am the greenest person around.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 00:55 | 3245499 Freddie
Freddie's picture

If you burn 300 gallons you either do not know what you are doing or are a long liner destroying the oceans.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 02:13 | 3245591 schoolsout
schoolsout's picture

uh, no, you're a moron.


A boat that burns 40 gal/hour at cruise going (keep in mind, this is a "small" boat...larger boats burn upwards of 60-90+ gal/hour) going out 60+ miles and trolling for 10 or so hours and coming back....


It is apparent you have no clue as to what you are talking about.  I'd suggest you just sit on your hands next time.



Fri, 02/15/2013 - 01:57 | 3245573 Haus-Targaryen
Haus-Targaryen's picture

It's called freedom. If people want to drive 400 miles per day they can -- they just have to pay for it. It's called capitalism and works beautifully. What you want is to restrict people's movements and freedoms so as to "save" the planet.

People who think like you should be euthanized.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 02:15 | 3245593 schoolsout
schoolsout's picture

Capitalism relies more on "capital" than debt/credit...

Don't most of the people here bitch about insane debt levels?  What has that level of debt allowed most humans to do?  Yep, spend and consume beyond their means and, now, they expect things to remain as they are.

Sorry, but you really have no comprehension skills...


Fri, 02/15/2013 - 04:20 | 3245647 Haus-Targaryen
Haus-Targaryen's picture

Clearly there must be a "day or reconing" for the debt sinners, but it is for the reasons that no more credit can be extended to them and not because of some draconian governmental oversight requiring Green Energy, and thus pricing them out of the market.  Surly some of the Green facists can see the difference between the faux Green Energy "revolution" (lol) and the real economy. 


Fri, 02/15/2013 - 07:32 | 3245766 thisandthat
thisandthat's picture

Any subsidized business is viable and profitable... for the subsidized.

Even in sunny Portugal, solar energy is several times more expensive to generate than conventional energy. As for wind energy, most gets exported at zero cost, since it's generated mostly during night time/early morning, when there's surplus offer, both  locally and in export markets.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 10:16 | 3246111 robobbob
robobbob's picture

Solar has its uses, like power to something nowhere near a grid. but after that? waste of money. whos going to pay todays dollars for an incremental return over fifteen years before you see any benefit, for a system that has a lifespan of about twenty years before needing major reconditioning?

the only way alt energy works is when big nanny hands out enough entitlements. unless of course the governments plan B, causing mature energy production prices to skyrocket, comes through, then they will act like heros. who pays? taxpayers either take it upfront through taxes, or through the backdoor by paying more for energy. right now they're getting a little of both ways at the same time! good plan there....... for TPTB.

BTW, feel free to mix bio with your fuel to cut down your costs, but I sure hope you don't expect the rest of us to have to pay for that. oh, and the last batch of fish sticks I ate were a little mushy, is there a gov program I can get to take care of that?

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:47 | 3245280 Joe moneybags
Joe moneybags's picture

This article strays too far from its valid main point, that government subsidies didn't propel green energy into a viable economical alternative from fossil fuel.  Mixing in youth unemployment and government corruption dillutes the message.

Some day soon, we will be harnessing solar and geothermal energy, and we won't be calling it "green", and it won't need subsidies, because it will be the best way to obtain electricity and liquid and gaseous fuels.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 08:17 | 3245796 Haus-Targaryen
Haus-Targaryen's picture

Great, but until that date its "Green" and nothing more than a crappy Left wing political ideology. 

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:15 | 3245185 booboo
booboo's picture


Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:48 | 3245399 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

I c wut ya did thar.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 07:51 | 3245775 Element
Element's picture

How the feck are Chinese solars doing anyway?

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:17 | 3245187 darteaus
darteaus's picture

But not the US!

No sir!  Full speed ahead for us!

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:36 | 3245246 Bad Attitude
Bad Attitude's picture

Dear Leader loves "green" energy. But, I'm confused if he means "green" energy that satisfies the whims of the environmentalist lobby, or "green" energy that launders federal subsidies back into campaign contributions.

In any event, Dear Leader won't be satisfied until he has destroyed US domestic energy production.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:19 | 3245192 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

How am I going to charge up my Chevy Volt?... More importantly ~ can I pay for my coal energy in bitcoins?...

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:14 | 3245333 Joe moneybags
Joe moneybags's picture

Francis, if you are younger than 55, I will pretty much guarantee you that someday you will own an electric car.  And, when somebody tries to tease you about it, you'll say,  "Well, this car is a real improvement over those early golf carts, and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay the premium necessary to drive a gasoline-fueled car!"

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:26 | 3245355 malek
malek's picture

Define "electric car".
If you mean 100% electric, so no gasoline/LPG/hydrogen/methanol/similar tank, I'll take the other side of that guarantee any time.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:49 | 3245404 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture


Fri, 02/15/2013 - 10:24 | 3246156 robobbob
robobbob's picture damned if I'm going to pay the <government mandated surcharge, on top of the environmental restoration charge, the transporting hazardous fuel tax, the "we don't like gasoline" mandated ad campaign, and the protecting orphans and widows of pollution fund, you know, for the children> necessary to drive a gasoline-fueled car!"

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:19 | 3245343 Angus McHugepenis
Angus McHugepenis's picture

Francis: If you had stayed over night in a Holiday Inn Express you would have woken up totally refreshed and able to solve your coal/bitcoin conundrum immediately.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:50 | 3245407 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

Bitumen Coin?

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:29 | 3245218 Bubuzinho
Bubuzinho's picture

Our "Dear Leader" knows better.  During the annual propaganda speech, he told us that China was investing heavily in Green energy.  China mostly invests in new dirty coal plants.  The sheeple are easy to fool.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:36 | 3245241 Banksters
Banksters's picture

Dear Leader has interesting believers. 

Check out this dude:




Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:42 | 3245268 suteibu
suteibu's picture

China invested in plants that build solar panels and wind turbines because they knew the West was going to spend a lot of taxpayer money on "green" energy.  China is the Al Gore of nations.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:30 | 3245222 Bunga Bunga
Bunga Bunga's picture

Let's frack the world.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:38 | 3245249 Angus McHugepenis
Angus McHugepenis's picture

Would the last alternative/renewable energy company to leave the room please turn out the lights.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:38 | 3245255 f16hoser
f16hoser's picture

Sour Kraut

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:46 | 3245276 A Lunatic
A Lunatic's picture

Snake oil.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 22:51 | 3245287 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

this crap reminds of Joe Kernan and his "the worse McDonalds makes their food the better their stock price" bullshit. No wonder that company's stock price is tanking. "Our food is shit" sounds good if don't have any competition...but simply put that's not true and never has been. "Value" is not just a price...although obviously price is the foremost factor. The clowns that wrote this don't even know what "green energy" even is...and yet...if you ride a bicycle...guess what! "you're a green machine"! so spew the worthless tripe...Detroit AND the totality of Europe have GOTTEN the memo...screw the car consumer with nothing but gas guzzlers and he/she doesn't buy anymore.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:08 | 3245322 Joe moneybags
Joe moneybags's picture

Every nation on earth is bathed in solar energy.  Underneath the thin skin of the earth is a near infinity of thermal energy.  As of 2013, harnessing these two energy sources is beyond current technology.  But who (other than a defeatist ZH reader) would be foolish enough to predict that utilizing them economically will never be achieved?

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 18:39 | 3248008 Parrotile
Parrotile's picture

It's simply a case of cost vs. benefit.

If the cost of accessing the energy source is too great, the energy source will be less favoured than a "less costly" source.

There's also the economics and basic physics - Solar PV is not particularly efficient, and I hate to disappoint your thesis, but it doesn't provide a 24/7, 365 days a year reliable supply. This is the major stumbling block - reliability and continuity of supply. Same goes for wind - you have useable energy if and when the wind blows; add in the extra constraints of "not too little, and not too much wind", and the reliability and utility value starts to look a bit suspect.

Geothermal is great in Iceland (with close-to-surface hot rocks), but even there the energy extraction rate is limited (heat transfer within the strata is slow - 'cause rock is a good insulator). Maintenance costs are not exactly insignificant - the hot water is corrosive (owing to dissolved minerals) which in turn leads to higher maintenance / replacement costs on "fluid-side" components.

I'm still living in hope that fusion will be a practical solution sometime - but 50 years on from ZETA, we are still awaiting "Break-even" performance - although the benefit is so very attractive -, and I'm mindful of the Govt. claims in the 1960's that Nuclear Power woud be so cheap to generate that electriciity would be free (except that in the UK at least, it's very far from free!!)

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:09 | 3245323 toys for tits
toys for tits's picture

The US finally allowed the ethanol subsidy of $.45 a gallon to die.  Now if the gov. would eliminate the requirement of ethanol so gas prices would drop.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:25 | 3245352 Charles Nelson ...
Charles Nelson Reilly's picture

Fucking government, what a bunch of cocksuckers.... Except Big Sis.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:28 | 3245360 CheapBastard
CheapBastard's picture

SOTU forgot to mention Solyndra the other night, eh.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:34 | 3245370 Room 101
Room 101's picture

The subsidization of "green energy" is of course stupid, but I wonder if we're throwing out the baby with the bath water.  Peak oil is probably a reality.  So what replaces it?  Some other energy sources I would hope: solar, wind, natural gas, etc. And what of redundancy?  It's not too smart to have all your energy eggs in one basket.

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 23:43 | 3245385 Non Passaran
Non Passaran's picture

Let it peak.
Prices will rise enough to justify research and investment into renewables.
The taxpayer should not sponsor that shit.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 00:10 | 3245437 AU5K
AU5K's picture

Unless its profitable as a stand alone industry, its a complete waste of money.  Even assuming climate change is real and man made (it isnt), we're far better off adapting to change as a species than spending tens of trillions to change the climate by 1 degree in 50 years.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 00:55 | 3245500 Angus McHugepenis
Angus McHugepenis's picture

But... but... how will the banksters make any money unless we subsidize bullshit AT ALL LEVELS against our will?

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 06:38 | 3245731 Moe Howard
Moe Howard's picture

If the earth does warm up, we need less fuel to warm up the frozen northern hemisphere in the winter.


Now that's GREEN!!!!!


I'm bullish for global warming.

BTW - BTFD Gold is good!

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 00:12 | 3245439 olto
olto's picture

email to 'a friend':

The lack of hope I have comes from the fact that about 7 to 8 US cents per kwh is something to be happy about; and not a thing to be in the least bit critical over---it is cheap, imo. The hopelessness that I feel comes from the fact that even intelligent humans fail to understand the real issue is not about cost to a 'consumer', but the cost to all species of burning hydrocarbons. That is what depresses me so----after all the work of gathering the evidence, educating the populace, working out the technology, building the infrastructure------ after all of this---that ANYONE could write an article denying with RIDICULE-----You see, Mike---it is indeed hopeless!

All this asshole is doing is completely dishonest and the writer knows this----it is all only about the fucking clicks!

.0528 euros/kwh!!!!!!!!!                I don't get it, Mike----are we at Disneyland, yet"

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 01:30 | 3245540 lickspitler
lickspitler's picture

no increase in global temperature for 16 years , official .  What a crock of Y2K , planet X  bullshit.  Science that is funded says warming , The chick Prime Minister in Australia bought it hook line and sinker   now they got a Carbon Tax $23 a Tonne  Europe trading at <5 euro a tonne.   central planners suck big fat elephant dicks 

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 00:20 | 3245448 Carl LaFong
Carl LaFong's picture

If a company could figure out how to make and sell a solar hot water system that would cost the same or less as current subsidized systems do AFTER the subsidy is taken (in other words, about 30-50% less than the unsubsidized solar thermal hot water systems cost today)....they'd have a big winner.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 01:18 | 3245522 lickspitler
lickspitler's picture

Australians pay 31.7 aussie cents per kwh  thats 33 US cents , and they have  mega coal and gas . Go the left leaning bitchez , till everybody elses money runs out.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 01:40 | 3245536 michael_engineer
michael_engineer's picture

Is this possibly as a result of the low EROEI of green alternatives?

Low EROEI does make it hard to get ROI in these cases, Solyndra, etc.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 01:31 | 3245541 steve from virginia
steve from virginia's picture




The establishment and the wannabe ZH non-establishment in lockstep like two Wile E Coyotes marching together off the steep Acme Brand cliff.


 i) ... green energy, while noble in theory, is about the worst idea possible when it comes to profitability and capital self-sustainability and constantly needs governmental subsidies, and ii) it was the end consumers who would pay for the government's generosity, in the form of a surcharge on electric bills ..."


The forgoing is offered as a state of nature, as if cheap electricity is a natural right. No human power can guarantee cheap electricity. Cheap electricity is not inscribed as God's Law on a tablet on the Holy Mountain.


There is no guarantee of electricity at all regardless of what the tycoons promise! Whether grid power costs 10 cents per kilowatt hour or $5 per kWh, it does not matter, the world still spins. It is only to the industrialists and tycoons, with their  electricity guzzling goods that soak up power does the need for penny-electricity arise. For the humans who have decided to make a choice, living off the grid offers more: the choice by itself represents freedom ... that's a dirty word, freedom from the electric meter altogether.


Freedom from the car, the house, the strip mall, the bank loans, the aptly named 'programs', the video games, the surveillance, the endless spam and propaganda ... freedom from the grid.


The way to separate oneself from the meter is a few solar panels and some batteries. Instead of canned media swill there are friends and activities. Good grief! No advertising? What can possibly come out of this state of affairs? Not going to a store and buying? Horrors!



Fri, 02/15/2013 - 01:39 | 3245549 lickspitler
lickspitler's picture

be careful there's some bad acid out there man.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 06:40 | 3245732 Moe Howard
Moe Howard's picture

It's the bath salts you gotta watch out for now.....

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 02:04 | 3245582 Haus-Targaryen
Haus-Targaryen's picture

You promulgate living on a planet where everyone lives like humanity did pre-industrial revolution.

You. Are. The. Worst. Poster. On. Here.

People pay for energy and gas and cars because they derive utility from them. So to say that people aren't free using these systems is just stupid. It saddens me greatly your vote counts as much as mine does.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 04:55 | 3245671 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

You promulgate living on a planet where everyone lives like humanity did pre-industrial revolution.

And since the industrial revolution is continguous to the 'american' age, well, in other words, that is advocating for living on a planet prior the 'american' age.

And that is sheer treason that even an 'american' indo european should consider as a threat.

There is nothing like utility in 'american' economics. Only brute consumption.

'Americans' consume because they can consume. Not because they derive utility or stuff like that.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 05:45 | 3245698 Haus-Targaryen
Haus-Targaryen's picture

You need a course in history ... badly. 

The Industrial Revolution began in what is now the UK and then migrated to France and at that time Prussia and then to the United States.  While the British had plumbing, heated homes, and trams ... America was still primarily agragian. 

People don't typically purchase things just to drain their bank accounts.  People purchase (consume) because they derive utility from it.  I purchased my v8 BMW as opposed to some tin Prius can because I derive utility in having a car that is fun to drive, and I was willing to pay extra for it.  The same is with people who purchase BigMacs and 12" Long Subway Subs, blenders, lawn mowers, oil for their cars, and power drills.  They have a desire to acquire said product for some reason and are willing to part with their currency to acquire it. 

Depriving people of their ability to acquire anything to save the planet is the worst form of economic slavery that would even put off the Kim Jung family as draconian.  I seriously hope you don't vote. 

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 05:34 | 3245692 Rogue Trooper
Rogue Trooper's picture

+1 Haus... not even amusing which can provide some entertainment value.

Note to Steve, why not trash the computer or whatever you use.  Make the full transition... Form your own 'cult' of Viginian Amish Luddites or something like that.

EDIT: wow on the time I was typing who else pops up on da thread but our alltime favourite ChinTard... AnAnoneemoussee !!!

Sorry Steve... you are not at this dudes level.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 08:50 | 3245841 Element
Element's picture

You know where that ends Steve? Freedom from the PC. Obviously you understand solar panels, DC cables, inverters and gell-cells don't grow on trees but are the product of the, er, 'economics', and resulting technical possibilities, and resource-access of the geopolitial balance.

I built every piece of major furniture I have, from discarded timber alone, my own brain designed all of it, I learned the skills I needed to do it (which mostly I did not have prior), over 25 years ago. I did it specifically so that all of it would last my entire lifetime and that i would fine useful and comfortable and attractive that entire time. Not one bit of it has ever failed, or broken, or degraded significantly since, or needed any form of repair or addition. And it looks awesome, every one comments on it but I don't tell them I made it unless they're interested in that stuff. Some people eventually work out that I made it because it all has a certain distinctive look to it.

I've bought maybe 6 commercial office chairs in this same 25 year period and all of them have quickly degraded, fallen apart, and ended up in a landfill. I realise now I should have built an office chair (and just decided that I will). There's no reason whatsoever 'for anyone to buy Ikea furniture, etc. I certainly could afford to buy any furniture I wanted, but I would have had to do that 3 or more times during that 25 years. And if you ever saw what I've made you'll understand why I'd never even consider doing that once.

The point is; there are some things I definitely can do and do very cheaply, and build to last. Plus learn skills and to help others do similar, etc. But I still needed a chemical industry for a top finish that was going to last. I still needed glue, I still needed long baton screws and bolts and putty and sapphire-laced grit paper and a belt-sander, a router, and many other exotic metal and electric tools. It was only possible via still being reliant on this economy to operate, to enable me to do such things. I needed a forest industry, and builders, to provide the marred 'waste'-timber that I revitalised and used.

So there is this technological inhibiting, to the distance I (and you) can actually put between the way things are 'on-grid', and how much we can step out and away from the grid. I think many of the people who claim to be so 'off-grid' are not being completely frank about how much they are still reliant on the industrial monstrosity still being there and continuing to function no matter how much they loath or object to it.

In the end its the way we think, the absurd state-sponsored consumer-suicide-kulture that's so horribly damaged, and so damaging to us and everything, not the basic reality of the technology that it provides. Again it is the case that material sufficiency is impossible if the kulture is so damn sick and in the deepest possible denial about how completely fucked it is. Can that change? I don't know, but it sure won't and can't, if we fail to be completely honest about it, and what's going wrong.

Clearly the flagrant repetitive glossy advertising to incite chronic inner-disturbances in people to want irrationally for the unnecessary, for avarice (what used to be called 'covetousness'), and grand-scale waste, is a genuine Deadly-Sin. Not in a religious sense, but a real-world sense. This behaviour should indeed be deadly, leading to immediate execution. Because in almost any indigenous culture that indeed is what would have happened if you deliberately set about to tell lies to steal and exploit and lead astray people, to destroy the habitat required for all to live, and to have people idolising material things.

It is a clear sign of how un-recoverably sick and far-gone we are that this not only doesn't happen, but would be deemed the actions of a terrorist, and an enemy of the people, and an enemy of the state, and get you a life in a bum-rape room.

So much for our retarded pop-kulture, eh?

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 01:32 | 3245543 jonjon831983
jonjon831983's picture

Expect productivity to increase in Iceland.  First they kicked out the bankers, now they kick off the next source of enslavement: Porn

"Iceland Wants to Ban Internet Porn"


Short tissue paper and vasoline.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 03:12 | 3245621 q99x2
q99x2's picture

Green energy certainly can't compete against Gov't subsidies on oil, natural gas, nuclear and the total cost of these sources of energy. As I see the total cost is total annihilation of the planet as well as the corporations that currently hold a monopoly over the political and monetary systems. Same banksters. Same death and destruction. 

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 03:43 | 3245625 Lord Of Finance
Lord Of Finance's picture

  "Short tissue paper and vasoline"


      Not quite so fast, well maybe just the tissue, because we will need lots of vasoline here in America if the demoncrats have their way with "green energy".


   You see, as Germany and Spain pull the plug on green energy, the demented leftist politicians here in the states

   want to insert that plug right up our. . . . . . . . . ("insert" appropriate direct object noun here)




     and after the insertion of plug, tissue paper will not be enough to clean up the mess afterwords. 


         So along with vasoline, go long paper towels and hemmorhoid relief





Fri, 02/15/2013 - 04:12 | 3245642 dunce
dunce's picture

Solar and wind can be scaled down to one user and in some cases are but in every case the cost is socialized by law requiring the regular utility to purchase some of the power and pass the cost on to others. If they were really economical then the purchase deals and cost shifting would not be needed. By the by, Germany is planning on shutting down their nukes and it is very unclear how base load power will be generated.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 04:36 | 3245655 Joe A
Joe A's picture

As if fossil fuels are not heavily subsidized. That industry gets huge taxbreaks and other advantages. It is just a matter of technological development. If the green industry would receive the amount of funding for technological development that the oil industry gets, things would be different.

Subsidies on green energy are being pulled because the money is needed elsewhere in the economy and green energy would jeopardize the huge amount of tax collected on gasoline in Europe. Cause the car is a big milking cow for the governments.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 06:04 | 3245708 Radical Marijuana
Radical Marijuana's picture

For sure, no other energy technologies come close to being as subsidized as atomic energy! Of course, the reasons for that were the reasons why the people who dominate our civilization wanted to build more atomic bombs!

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 15:36 | 3247367 Joe A
Joe A's picture

You are darn right!

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 04:51 | 3245669 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

'Americans' are not limited by the environment. Repeat after me: 'americans' are not limited by the environment.

That is why 'americans' are such a special breed in humanity and that justifies why they should be trusted with the world's resources.

Only they can overcome bounds that appear to lesser beings as uncrossed limits.

Welcome to an 'american' world: the place that is a temple to truth, justice and freedom.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 05:04 | 3245676 Joe A
Joe A's picture

you forgot your </sarcasm> tag. here is a video to complement your post:

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 06:06 | 3245716 Radical Marijuana
Radical Marijuana's picture

Thanks for that link, Joe A!

I love the macabre humor!


From the previous posts under the name AnAnonymous, I believe that poster is a fanatic that has little sense of humour. Therefore, the sarcasm tag tends to be missing, when it otherwise seems it should be present.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 15:38 | 3247349 Joe A
Joe A's picture

Cheers! Yes I have seen his postings before. Dont know what he is smoking but it is not Marijuana

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 06:18 | 3245699 Radical Marijuana
Radical Marijuana's picture

A little rant about "human energy systems"

... which, of course, nobody has to read ...

A general principle of cybernetic systems is that the most labile component controls the system. So, within the context of human energy systems, what are the most labile components? The answer is both theoretically obvious, IF one thinks about it, as well as confirmed by history. Within human energy systems, the most labile components that control those systems are the people who are the most dishonest and violent, which requires that they also be the best at deceits and backing that up with destruction, because if they are not the best, then they can not continue.

A general principle of energy systems is that energy goes through the path of least resistance, which also tends to be the path of greatest probability.  In human systems, the path of least resistance is the path of least morality, which is another way of pointing out that society was controlled by the people who were the best at being dishonest, and backing that up with violence.

The history of war, for several thousand years, has again and again confirmed that success in war is based on deceits, and that, therefore, spies were the most important soldiers. Warfare was the crucible of civilizations. Success in war made War King.

That is, civilizations were controlled by the people who were the best at deceits and destruction. Civilizations were always organized systems of lies, operating organized robberies, in conflict with each other, to self-select for the human organizations that were the best at doing that.

As information became more important than physical power, what made War King gradually transformed to make Fraud King. The rush of science and technology enabled systems of metal swords, and metal coins, to become gunpowder and paper, which then became a global electronic fiat money fraud, backed by weapons of mass destruction.

The power of sovereign states, i.e. the War Kings, was covertly taken over by the international banksters, the Fraud Kings. What exists today is a fundamentally and thoroughly fraudulent financial accounting system. ALL of our so-called economic decisions are made inside of that context, of the long history of the triumph of deceit and destruction becoming more sophisticated, as it controlled civilization to become more developed systems of organized lies, operating organized robberies.

All of the points above are simply to set up the context for the consideration of alternative energy sources, which are supposed to be "green."  Of course, those tend to mostly be green washed, and full of flagrant contradictions, because they manifest inside of the established social systems, which are run by Fraud Kings, backed by War Kings.

The macabre ironies of political economy calculations, inside of human ecology situations, are based on society ACTUALLY being controlled by systems of legalized lies, backed by legalized violence. However, the success of those systems depend upon them continuing to be the best at misrepresenting themselves.

The awesome ironies of "green" technologies are that they are NOT genuinely based on any valid view of evolutionary ecologies in the actual environment. Instead, they are hyper-complicated elaborations of organized systems of lies, operating organized robberies, manifesting themselves through level after level of deceits.

ALL attempts at "economic" measurements of the valid of different "green" technologies ACTUALLY occur inside fundamentally fraudulent financial accounting systems, where Fraud is King, which exist because they are backed up by deceits and destructions, where War is King.

"Green" technologies could not be developed outside of the biggest bullies' bullshit social stories, that dominate everything else. "Green" is NOT ecology, and NOT environmental, since "green" (as a political slogan) necessarily is completely co-opted into operating within the already established systems of the War & Fraud Kings.

At some point, the sublimely paradoxical nature of these problems should be addressed, BUT, of course, practically never is, and apparently never directly will be, in any foreseeable human futures.  When it comes to assessing all technologies in the past, the issues of how they satisfied the War and Fraud Kings was always the most important factor, which factor was always rigorously defended systems of lies, operating robberies, which required them to attempt to continue to be the best at misrepresenting themselves, while doing that.

IF, IF, IF one actually puts together a system of alternatives, with alternative energy generation systems as the foundation blocks of that system of alternatives (which then requires alternative life styles to go along with those alternative energy systems), THEN the keystone of that arch of alternatives must be alternative death controls.

The alternative murder system become the lynch pin that would hold together all of the rest of the alternatives. The murder system must be the central core of all the rest of the possible alternatives, when those are actually integrated into an overall system, which includes alternative energy generation systems as basic components.

WE ALREADY HAVE THAT, NOW.  What exists today is due to the history of militarism and monetary systems, operating the death controls, and the debt controls, which decided and directed the kinds of energy systems which were developed. The current systems or organized lies, operating organized robberies, went through their own processes, along their path of least morality, to result in what we now consider our established society.

That is the REAL context in which alternative energy systems exist. The so-called "green" technologies, which are mostly propaganda, are NOT genuinely ecological, nor environmental, because they deliberately ignore their actual human ecology, and the actual political economy, and so, generally operate by misrepresenting their actual environment.

The actual environment of all alternative energy technologies necessarily operates within the dominant biggest bullies' bullshit social stories, which are the on-going deceits made and maintained by the War Kings and the Fraud Kings.

IF, IF, IF, one presents a seriously integrated assessment of alternative "green" energy technologies, then the ways that those operate within the murder systems are crucial, especially since those murder systems are what back up the monetary systems, which are then providing the measures upon which are calculated the alleged values of those "green" energy technologies.

The basic problems that society is controlled by those who are the best at deceits have no theoretical solutions. The answer was "nobody" to the question that Plato asked "Who will guard the guardians?" Human problems are extremely difficult due to that! Those were the reasons WHY we ended up with War Kings, and then Fraud Kings, ACTUALLY controlling our civilization. Furthermore, those are the deeper problems and overall context in which the spurious "green" technologies were emerging.

Since the vast majority of people have been brainwashed to believe in the biggest bullies' bullshit view of the world, where the success of those who were the best at deceits made them the most powerful and wealthy people, "Green Parties" do far better in the political contexts of today than any genuinely "Ecology Parties" do.

"Green" energy technologies are green washed bullshit, which therefore were able to operate within the context of the biggest bullies' bullshit world views, and justify themselves in those terms, in obliquely deceitful ways, consistent with the overall greater deceits of the dominant social systems. A genuine Human Ecology necessarily makes the death controls the central feature of the whole system. Every other aspect of those systems are necessarily related to the death controls.

Thus, the scientifically valid ways to assess the values of alternative "green" technologies should be done first and foremost from the perspective of how they would fit into the overal. social death control systems. HAH!!! Of course, that is never done, because those who actually control civilization have been selected by history to be those who were the best at deceits, so that they were the best at lying about the death controls that they actually operated.

Therefore, overall, human economics is a dismal science, and human ecology is a doubly dismal science. There are no ways to avoid the certainties of death and taxes, which have made the War Kings, then become the Fraud Kings.

Absolutely everything our so-called economic systems measure and assess the values for are done through the maximum possible deceits, backed by destruction, in order to operate organized systems of lies, and robbery, which do so through lying about what they are doing, to the best of their ability.

In that context, it is no wonder that "green" energy technologies mostly turn out to be boondoggles. Therefore, it is not surprising that tougher times make those boon doggles more difficult to sustain.

But nevertheless, we continue to be faced with the supremely difficult and dangerous task of muddling our way through the established systems of the War Kings and Fraud Kings, as science and technologies generally advance our understanding of energy systems, BUT, the central truths with respect to basic human energy systems continue to be that they are controlled by those who were the best at deceits.

While I have no easy answers, and indeed, in principle there is NO answer which can fix the basic problem, we are nevertheless manifesting the classic forms of human madnesses when we subsidize "green" energy technologies, and then tend to put them out of business, just as they start to succeed.

IF we were more sane, then we would do more of the "green" things, however, so far, I have never heard anyone who promotes "green" things explain their more "green" murder systems, or more "green" death controls. Given how sublimely amusing this macabre situation is, I like to propose the idea of "New Age Warfare," precisely because those who tend to talk about "New Age" this and that tend to avoid talking about the possible future death controls.

IF we were more sane, then we would pay for recycling materials more, and so on and so forth. However, we are NOT remotely close to being sane, because we have been brainwashed to believe in the biggest bullies' bullshit with respect to the already actually existing money/murder systems.

"Green" energy technologies do NOT fit well within the REALITIES of the WAR KINGS & FRAUD KINGS. Therefore, those "green" energy technologies are going through a crazy roller coaster ride, such as what this little news story above has described, as one of the dips in that path.

At some point, I do not know how to do anything else than hone my macabre sense of humour with respect to the essential problem that the most important feature of human ecology has been its death controls, but those were done by those who were the best at lying about that, and bamboozling everyone else to go along with their lies.

The roller coaster ride of subsidizing "green" energy technologies, but then putting them out of business, to maybe then subsidize them again, and so on, and so on ... is what one expects to happen, since the governments doing that are the elaborated evolutions of War Kings and Fraud Kings, doing their thing, through the specialized abilities to misrepresent what they are doing!

The magnitude of those misrepresentations has built an entire Bizarro Mirror World Fun House, in which we all live! Pretty well everything is proportionately backwards and distorted. Of course, the most profound of those inversions and perversions are to be found in the energy laws themselves!

The assessments of alternative "green" energy technologies are done with fundamentally fraudulent concepts of the basic energy law regarding entropy, and financially accounted for with a fraudulent fiat money system, which violates the most basic conservation of energy law. The ways we understand "power" are profoundly backwards, while the "money" that we pretend to use to measure the value of energy violates the most basic of all energy laws itself.

The long history of War Kings and Fraud Kings has created a civilization which is about as backwards and screwed up as it can possibly be, since those systems depended upon the maximum possible deceits for their own survival and success. Inside that context, of course, "green" energy technologies end up being as manifestly goofy as they could possibly become!

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 06:21 | 3245722 Acet
Acet's picture

If this is a "little rant", I would hate to see what a "big rant" looks like.

I like your stuff and would really appreciate it if you moved away from the verbal diarrea style so that it's more readable.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 07:21 | 3245759 justsayin2u
justsayin2u's picture

Green energy is just another tool for the progressives, politicians, and regulators to rape the public.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 08:31 | 3245812 SmallerGovNow2
SmallerGovNow2's picture

indeed sir, just like the carbon credit/global warming/climate change HOAX....

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 08:25 | 3245803 Lumberjack
Lumberjack's picture

Keep an eye on the Spain payola scandal and possible link(s) to Iberdrola.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 08:35 | 3245818 thisandthat
thisandthat's picture

To put it simple, good ridance! Wish Portugal was next, but it's highly doubtful.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 10:29 | 3246181 css1971
css1971's picture

So what you're suggesting is I should buy a shit load of solar stuff now on a fixed rate low interest load before they cut the subsidy.

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 10:41 | 3246230 thurstjo63
thurstjo63's picture

I wonder what would happen if governments removed ALL subsidies to the energy sector including those going to oil, gas, nuclear power, etc??? 

Fri, 02/15/2013 - 19:10 | 3248078 Parrotile
Parrotile's picture

Right now, the most efficient way of using solar energy is in solar water heating, especially using the evacuated tube technologies. The obvious downside is lack of heating when it's most needed - e.g. first thing in the morning, and in the winter (when solar gain is reduced). These disadvantages may be offset by investment in a larger storage tank (with better insulation), or by investment in wind generation with direct feed to a resistive tank heater.

The immediate, local use of wind power (e.g. for resistive water heating overnight) seems both practical and efficient. Include a boost heater (for those days when it's neither sunny nor windy), and you'd have maximum benefit (= minimum grid energy costs).

Any thoughts or comments folks? The technologies are there (and 12v / 24v water heating elements are certainly there -  and ) and for a 25 year wind turbine lifespan, the ROI would seem pretty reasonable.

Living afloat, we already rely on solar p.v. / wind for most services (though we cheat for the larger demand systems, and use the Marina Laundromat!).

Tue, 02/19/2013 - 04:04 | 3255431 bvrulez
bvrulez's picture

"i) green energy, while noble in theory, is about the worst idea possible when it comes to profitability and capital self-sustainability and constantly needs governmental subsidies, and ii) it was the end consumers who would pay for the government's generosity, in the form of a surcharge on electric bills."

do you have any idea how much subsidies atomic power got in the starting days?!?

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!