Daily Archives: June 23, 2011

Power generators (a.k.a. “polluters”) exploit stupid system and consumers resist higher prices (who saw that coming?)

Analysis: Polluters winners from carbon scheme

A European plan to raise funds for clean energy has backfired spectacularly, helping trigger a rout on its carbon trading scheme, and so cutting available green funds and benefiting polluting coal plants. (Reuters)

Britain’s Carbon Targets In Doubt
Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:01 Tim Webb, The Times

BRITAIN will have to abandon its carbon emission reduction targets if the public continues to resist higher bills, according to the chief executive of the British Gas owner, Centrica.

Continue reading

Energy report, IEA interferes in world markets and Poland rushes in where others fear to frac

Highlights of BP’s 2011 Statistical Review of World Energy
By Robert Rapier

Ed. note: This piece was first published on Robert Rapier’s R-Squared Energy Blog.

BP recently released their highly respected annual Statistical Review of World Energy for 2011. Most of the news stories on the report have focused on the exceptionally strong growth in global energy consumption. While that is without a doubt a major story that I will discuss here, I also want to highlight some lesser known facts from the report. (Energy Tribune)

The IEA opens the taps

Continue reading

Exactly what they were told would happen…

California Bunker Fuel Regulations Spur Shift in Shipping Routes

I’ve previously reported (see here and here) on the environmental industry’s movement’s war on bunker fuel, the heavy fuel used by large ships around the world. The modus operandi of the enviros is to pursue and convince regulators, such as the United Nations’ International Maritime Organization (IMO) or California’s Air Resources Board (CARB), to push for a targeted patchwork of prohibitions and/or mandating low-sulfur fuel-switching, enacting stricter speed limits in near-shore shipping lanes, restricting on-ship power generation when in port, and imposing emissions taxes.

A couple of years ago, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was toying with the idea of calling for strict and extremely costly regulations or a federal ban on bunker fuel -carrying or -using ships within U.S. waters, only to be shouted down by politicians and citizens from states with large maritime sectors. But California, a state not known to back down from adopting stupid environmental regulations, moved forward in the war on bunker fuel and international trade and set its own regulations on fuel use and petroleum conveyance in the maritime industry operating within the state’s waters. (Cooler Heads)

This could be trouble for a previously favored niche technology

Blow for wind farms as senators push probe into noise and health fears
Graham Lloyd

URGENT research should be undertaken into the potentially damaging health effects of wind farms on nearby residents, says a landmark Senate report released yesterday.

In a dramatic win for residents’ groups who have raised widespread concerns about the impact of wind farms on rural communities, the committee recommended that noise measurements be expanded to include low-frequency noise, or infrasound.

Campaigners welcomed the report and said there should be an immediate halt to wind farm developments until the potential health impacts were better understood. (The Australian)

Think crashes and burns… again

Another one bites the dust
Posted by Richard Thursday, June 23, 2011

Norwegian electric car maker Think has filed for bankruptcy again, according to the Financial Times, after failing to find long-term financial backing for its business. It is the third time the niche car maker has fallen into receivership over the past decade, having last exited court protection back in August 2009 when American lithium battery firm, Ener1, Valmet Automotive from Finland and Investinor, the Norwegian Government-backed investment fund, all backed the company.

The news is a blow to the embryonic electric car market, says this report, and will support the views of those sceptical that electric cars can achieve a viable market presence. Ain’t that the truth, Boris. And how much are you going to waste on your 1,150 charging points? (EU Referendum)

Consumers won’t or can’t pay for pointless and frankly idiotic “low carbon” schemes

Government Should Face Reality On Green Energy Cost
Thursday, 23 June 2011 13:48 UPI & WSJ

There is a huge disconnect between what London wants in terms of clean energy and what British consumers are willing to pay, a utility official said. Sam Laidlaw, chief executive at the country’s top energy supplier Centrica, said British consumers might not be willing to pay the money to back London’s efforts to spur a low-carbon economy and increase energy security. (UPI)

Wide Gap Between UK Energy Policy, Consumer Support

LONDON (Dow Jones)–The chief executive of the U.K.’s largest retail energy supplier, Centrica PLC, said there is a wide gap between the government’s policies on energy security and a low carbon future and what British citizens are willing to pay to realize those policies. (GWPF)

Mandated impossibilities don’t work? Better throw more taxpayers’ money at it…

More on the Cellulosic Ethanol “Mandate”
by BRIAN MCGRAW on JUNE 23, 2011

We recently posted about the EPA’s decision to reduce the cellulosic ethanol blending requirement from 500 million gallons in 2012 to somewhere between 3.45-12.9 million gallons, which is 0.69- 2.5 percent of the original “mandate.”

Via Greenwire ($ubscription required), we see that refiners are still required to purchase “credits” from EPA indicating that they are complying with the mandate, despite its impossibility: (Cooler Heads)

Problems with ethanol and a less-than-compelling defense from Wired

10 Problems with Ethanol
Source: BestCollegesonline

The ongoing turmoil in the Middle East has resulted in higher gas prices, inconveniencing Americans who are already attempting to pick up the pieces following the recent economic downturn. In recent years, ethanol has become a popular alternative to gasoline because of its low cost and ability to burn cleanly. However, with the government’s quest to increase ethanol production and reduce our dependence on oil, the latter of which is a necessary goal, many of ethanol’s flaws have been overlooked. Whether you’re concerned for the environment or just a college kid on a budget, you should first consider the following 10 reasons to steer away from the corn-based fuel before making it a regular purchase. (SPPI)

Five Ethanol Myths, Busted (Their title, not ours)
By Forrest Jehlik, Argonne National Laboratory

The United States consumes nearly one-quarter of the world’s petroleum production, yet contains a small fraction of its reserves. As other countries’ economies grow, the appetite for this finite energy source increases, placing greater pressure on the resource itself and the environment at large. With inflation and higher energy costs consuming an ever-larger portion of our budget, the need for additional energy sources grows. (Wired)

Things more worrisome…

Things More Worrisome than AGW: “Spooky Dude” Soros — Again
Source: WSJ

Unreported Soros Event Aims to Remake Entire Global Economy – WSJ.com

Two years ago, George Soros said he wanted to reorganize the entire global economic system. In two short weeks, he is going to start – and no one seems to have noticed.

Continue reading

Green cons and plunder of the poor

A Dark Shade of Green
by Ben Pile

Conservation is too often taken at face value. Criticise it, and you may find yourself accused of wanting to concrete over the entire countryside, and to have all the creatures that live within in slaughtered for fun.

Continue reading

Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, June 23rd 2011

Scientists demand respect, Texans see the light and even other hippies are worried about the IPCC’s geoengineering plans. (Daily Bayonet)

Rightly Monckton has apologized for that unnecessary and unwise lapse into swastika association

Monckton stirs the pot with a cheap shot, and the media obediently perform

By now every person in the climate debate knows that Monckton used a swastika on a slide in LA.

UPDATE: By the time I wrote this, Monckton had already been roundly condemned for hisunnecessary hyperbole, and unreservedly apologized. I couldn’t see much point in joining in the chorus. Yes, I agree,  he did the wrong thing. The ends doesn’t justify the means. We can hardly complain about namecalling, if we do it too. I’m just trying to add perspective on the magnitude of the crime. People are suggesting we exile the man for  — as far as I can tell — one clumsy joke and one very poor choice of slide.

None of this would be necessary if the media had reported information from both sides of the story.

I groaned when I saw it. The fascist comment has been used many times before (and Garnaut isadvocating ad hoc extensive government control over business). The Nazi swastika, though, is a new low in rhetorical excess. Definitely not one any skeptic should have used, and I’m glad Monckton has apologized so quickly, and won’t be using it again — it’s a cheap shot.

Continue reading

BRICS vs PIGS – the Myth that Green Energy will promote Prosperity

BRICS vs PIGS – the Myth that Green Energy will promote Prosperity

We are told that we must embrace “green” renewable energy and impose a carbon tax if we are not to be left behind in the world. Exactly why or how this tax will promote economic growth is a mystery that Garnaut and the Australian government are having difficulty articulating.

But the real world provides some clues to one secret of economic strength.

Looking around the world today it appears there is a direct relationship between the economic decline of those embracing climate alarmism and green technologies and the economic rise of those who do not – the PIGS are failing and the BRICS are rising.

Full article: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/brics-vs-pigs.pdf [PDF, 269 KB] (Carbon Sense Coalition)