Britain pulls the plug on solar subsidies

From the GWPF

Global Warming Policy Foundation

Image via Wikipedia

 At Last: Britain Pulls Plug On Green Energy Boondoggle

The Government Giveth and the Government Taketh Away –-Famous green proverb

Ministers have been accused of destroying 25,000 jobs and “bankrupting a whole industry”, after the Government unveiled plans to slash subsidies for green energy. Hundreds of solar companies are likely to go bust by Christmas after the Department for Energy and Climate Change confirmed it is looking to halve subsidies for new panels. –Rowena Mason, The Daily Telegraph, 1 November 2011

The row over solar subsidies is the latest manifestation of a long and fierce battle within the government between Chris Huhne’s  DECC and George Osborne’s Treasury over the role of green growth in the UK’s economic recovery, made especially pointed by soaring home energy bills. “We may be out of touch with the solar lobby, but we are not out of touch with energy bills,” Barker told parliament on Monday. –Damian Carrington, The Guardian, 31 October 2011

At a time when household savers are struggling to get a 0.5 per cent return on an instant access saving account, some of these renewable energy subsidies – paid in the form of generous payments for the electricity produced, so called feed-in tariffs (FITs) – are guaranteeing annual returns of 10 per cent. It’s one of the biggest wealth transfers – from millions of ordinary hard-working tax payers to a few hundred of the hugely wealthy – in British history. It’s staggeringly unfair and, in the growing opinion of many, totally pointless. –Benny Peiser, Daily Mail, 9 June 2011

The right hon. Lady says that we are out of touch. We may be out of touch with the solar lobby, but we are not out of touch with energy bill payers. She says that they are groaning under a £175 increase, but she wants to put that up. If we did not act now, consumers would face massive increases in energy bills. –-Gregory Barker, Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change, House of Commons, 31 October 2011

Silicon Valley’s green geek scenario, which we can date at around 2005-2009 is now gurgling down the WC pan of history. Its elitist and totally unreal notions of extreme high priced electric cars for Nice People Saving the Planet, and designer Low Energy homes for the same Nice People, and nobody else, has gone down the tube. –Andrew McKillop, The Global Warming Policy Foundation, 31 October 2011

Beacon Power Corp filed for bankruptcy on Sunday, just a year after the energy storage company received a $43 million loan guarantee from a controversial Department of Energy program. The bankruptcy comes about two months after Solyndra — a solar panel maker with a $535 million loan guarantee — also filed for Chapter 11, creating a political embarrassment for the administration of President Barack Obama, which has championed the loans as a way to create “green energy” jobs. –Reuters, 31 October 2011

Here’s the kicker: Market-driven energy choices are cutting more tons of CO2 in the U.S. than have been cut by wind and solar—even with their billions of dollars in subsidies. Natural gas-fired electricity generation has grown from 15.8 percent of America’s power generation in 2000 to 24.1 percent in the most recent 12-month tally from the Energy Information Administration. That 8.3 percent increase is enough to cut 120 million metric tons of CO2 per year compared to coal. Over the same span, wind- and solar-generated power grew to 2.75 percent of total power generation. That would cut CO2 by 108 million metric tons per year compared to coal power. So over the past decade, hugely subsidized wind and solar have done less to cut CO2 emissions than market-driven natural gas production. –-David Kreutzer, The Foundry, 25 October 2011

In Britain, once in the vanguard of action on climate change, the government is scaling back its green energy investment… Nobody expects a UN climate deal in Durban this year — nor next year, nor the year after. But meanwhile the coal keeps burning. Global production is set to rise by 35 percent in the coming decade, according to industry analysts. The cheapest, most abundant and dirtiest of all the fossil fuels is extending its grip on the world’s energy supply system. And nowhere more so than just up the coast from Durban. –Fred Pearce, The Guardian, 31 October 2011

We have to put shale in the context of other energy sources in order to convey a comparative analysis of the environmental impact. People forget the environmental costs of coal mining or oil exploration; nuclear also has its own risks. Natural gas is a form of energy that falls into the low risk category. Can the green lobby win the shale debate over environmental objections? I don’t think it can. Ten or 20 years ago it could have won when governments were willing to burn billions, but the economic climate has changed, we’re facing the biggest crisis in decades. No government in the world would give up this opportunity, not even the British government, which is very green indeed. –Benny Peiser, Natural Gas Europe, 25 October 2011

About these ads
This entry was posted in solar power and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

92 Responses to Britain pulls the plug on solar subsidies

  1. theduke says:

    Good one, Anthony. Anyone who says AGW proponents are not on the run isn’t paying attention.

  2. vboring says:

    This is being blown way out of proportion by everyone involved.

    Solar panel prices have fallen significantly since the subsidies were created, therefore the size of the subsidy should decrease.

    The size of the subsidy should have been tied to some price metric so that it would automatically decrease as the technology became more competitive.

    The same QQing happened in Colorado recently when Xcel decided to reduce solar subsidies.

  3. SandyInDerby says:

    For Android phone users in the UK get the GridCarbon app, and see just how little wind and sun contribute.

    The sooner all FITs are removed completely the better.

  4. Curiousgeorge says:

    Reality sucks, don’t it. The Euro economy is collapsing, with Greece, Italy, and others leading the charge, and the Greenies want to accelerate the process.

  5. George Lawson says:

    If it wasn’t for the coalition I’m sure Mr Cameron would of got rid of the stupid Mr Huhn a long time ago. Mr. Cameron should bite the bullet and get rid of him now. An action which could lead to an immediate saving of £billions of wasted expenditure.

  6. Mark M says:

    Down in LA, they have had to increase the FIT to get folks to buy solar panels as noted below. It’s very hard to get a payback with any alternative energy self generation option when it only costs $.07 kwh (winter rates) for power…………….. hence to meet the state mandated goals of %RE they-LADWP- needed to up the incentives………….. How cost effective is this FIT approach to reducing CO2……………….. say vs providing incentives to obtain a more fuel efficient mode of transportation……….

    https://www.piersystem.com/go/doc/1475/1153343/LADWP-to-Relaunch-Solar-Incentive-Program-with-Revised-Incentive-Levels-and-Streamlined-Customer-Service

    “As we re-launch the Solar Incentive Program in September, it is extremely important that we leverage the incentives to achieve the most solar power and encourage as much customer participation as possible. We also want to grow solar at a steady and sustainable pace while being prudent about the cost to all customers who pay for this program through their rates,” said LADWP General Manager Ronald O. Nichols.

    Mr. Nichols has also asked staff to investigate more options for making solar affordable to low income customers. “We need to do more to make solar accessible to customers of all income levels. In the next few months we will come back with more leasing options and other proposals for lower income households,” he said.

    Under SB 1, the state’s “Million Solar Roofs” legislation established a goal of 280 megawatts and mandated that LADWP spend $313 million through the end of 2016 for solar photovoltaic incentives. “We are committed to spending the full $313 million for customer incentives and achieving as much solar as possible with that level of funding,” Mr. Nichols said.

    “One of the biggest dilemmas we have faced in this program is setting the incentive level to make the program more attractive to customers since our power rates were, and continue to be, much lower than those of the state’s other major utilities,” notes Aram Benyamin, Senior Assistant General Manager – Power. The paradox is that offering higher incentive levels made less money available for more customers to install solar systems…….

    “Under the guidelines approved Tuesday, the incentive levels were revised to be consistent with the California Solar Initiative, which is better aligned with existing solar markets and achieves a reasonable payback period for customers. LADWP will continue to offer the option of assigning the “REC” (Renewable Energy Credit) to LADWP and receiving an additional $0.40 per watt—which makes the incentive significantly higher than the state minimum.”

  7. AnonyMoose says:

    If an industry will be wiped out by removal of government funds, then it was a government program and not an industry.

  8. Shevva says:

    The Orwell meters ain’t lookin to good either.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/01/smart_meter_debate/

  9. Ed Mertin says:

    43 million, 535 million … Iraq: 3.4 trillion and we just hand it over to Iran

  10. Zac says:

    Huhne is a luxury that Britain can not afford,

    The Government and the BBC keep banging on aboutt how green technology will create jobs for Britain and that Britain is also world the leader in renewable offshore energy.

    So why in this “How to build a windfarm” production by the BBC are the Windmills made in Sweden and their erection offshore done by the Dutch? It seems to me the only British input is to pay the bills.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14412189

  11. Enneagram says:

    Solar panels need a connection to “ground” :-)

  12. Bruce Cobb says:

    “Ministers have been accused of destroying 25,000 jobs and “bankrupting a whole industry”, after the Government unveiled plans to slash subsidies for green energy.”
    If jobs are the only metric, not what is actually being produced and the benefit to society, then I’d suggest they immediately get to work producing an “industry” whose sole purpose is the digging of holes, and filling them in.

  13. Mike says:

    Is it just me, or does it seem strange that push for solar panels seems to come from the side that says its not the sun but rather that magic trace gas – seaoh2

  14. And not before time. Fuel Poverty in the UK will be a real killer this winter. Visit http://www.fuelpovertymap.org.uk and get involved.

  15. Robert L says:

    I looked at this last year with a friend, we figured that we could get pretty close to a 20% Government guaranteed ROI for doing solar, which is frankly ridiculous for a subsidy scheme. You didn’t even need to hook up to the grid – just run it all into a pool heater or something.

    We also figured out that the subsidy on micro hydroelectricity meant that we could install a small hydro plant and use a natural gas engine to pump the water back up to the top of the hill to go through the hydro generator again and again, thereby making an absolute killing even if you had no running water. Same thing could be done on a wind turbine using a natural gas engine driven fan (though energy coupling is worse).

  16. jrwakefield says:

    Unfortunately that won’t happen with our government in Ontario. It’s full solar ahead for them, and the huge costs to us. Worse is these solar panels don’t really do anything. Example, two pillars of 235 panels over the course of the year will not provide enough power to run the home it is installed on. The the NET production of the panels, minus what the home owner consumes, is negative. Yet we pay that person $20,000 a year for the power, while they consume $1500 of power. Thus the rate payers of Ontario are paying these solar ownes $18,500 a year to be off the grid. It’s a recipe for collapse.

  17. Mike says:

    speaking of solar panels, I have yet to see any interest by the sticky fingers of this country to steal any of the governments casually unguarded solar arrays littering the landscape. Until that starts happening, I give this technology low marks as just some yuppie extravagance sorta like a Prius.

  18. hell_is_like_newark says:

    Please let NJ be next to kill subsidies (even though it would hurt my employer). Cost of electricity went from $0.12 per kW to $0.18 per kWh in order to subsidies solar and other green insanity.

    My tenants are getting their power shut off at times because they ran the A/C and found out they couldn’t pay the outrageous electric bills. I upgraded the insulation in every single building… I can’t reduce the heating / cooling loads anymore than they already are.

  19. G. Karst says:

    Curiousgeorge says:
    November 1, 2011 at 7:54 am

    Reality sucks, don’t it. The Euro economy is collapsing, with Greece, Italy, and others leading the charge, and the Greenies want to accelerate the process.

    Check your history. Collapsing economies is the fertile soil, from which socialism, communism and fascism springs. These people are doing everything possible to initiate and accelerate such processes. It matters not, who suffers, as we will all reap the benefits of a brave new world. Well, the elite will anyway. Life as a troglodyte will not be too bad… Will it?? GK

  20. Gail Combs says:

    Mark M says:
    November 1, 2011 at 8:00 am

    Down in LA, they have had to increase the FIT to get folks to buy solar panels as noted below. ….

    https://www.piersystem.com/go/doc/1475/1153343/LADWP-to-Relaunch-Solar-Incentive-Program-with-Revised-Incentive-Levels-and-Streamlined-Customer-Service

    “As we re-launch the Solar Incentive Program in September, it is extremely important that we leverage the incentives to achieve the most solar power and encourage as much customer participation as possible. We also want to grow solar at a steady and sustainable pace while being prudent about the cost to all customers who pay for this program through their rates,” said LADWP General Manager Ronald O. Nichols…..”
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Well “Growing Solar” explains it. No doubt Al Gore or one of his buddies wants to set up a solar panel farm and does not want to bother to pay full price for the land o rentice people to sell it….

    Battle for the California Desert: Driving Folks off Their Land

    The Antelope Valley is a vast patch of desert on the outskirts of Los Angeles County, and a segment of the few rugged individualists who live out there increasingly are finding themselves the targets of armed raids from local code enforcement agents, who’ve assembled into task forces called Nuisance Abatement Teams

    Ain’t dirty politics great? And it is all done in the name of “saving the environment” of “saving the children” or “saving the poor”….

    The sage of Baltimore, H.L. Mencken, had it right, “The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it.” He forgot to add and rip them off while at it.

  21. Moira says:

    “The most massive energy programme ever proposed anywhere in the world outside wartime conditions.” That’s how energy analyst Andrew McKillop, the author of today’s new publication on European Energy Review, describes current EU energy and climate policy:
    http://www.europeanenergyreview.eu/site/pagina.php?id=3318

  22. About time too. But this feed-in tariff, which is being paid for by higher energy bills (disproportionately affecting the poor), needs to be scrapped altogether. Not only do the poor not have the capital to invest in solar power but they often live in rented accommodation, where the landlord would not permit such an installation, or they live in tower blocks which have nowhere to site solar panels. They have no opportunity to get the subsidies, but they have no choice but to pay through the nose for ever more inefficient production because of government coercion.

    It is economic madness and immoral to be paying the wealthy householders and landowners subsidies to make a killing at the expense of the poor, all for producing electricity (a basic commodity) at a cost of between 20 and 40 times the cost of production from traditional means.

    It’s just like saying that, when there is no shortage of water, the government will slap a levy on consumer water bills to pay wealthy landowners 40 times the market price of water for collecting in their own back yards, and guaranteeing to purchase all rainwater collected from domestic back yards, but not allowing water companies to get in on the subsidy. Guess who will get rich (those with very large roofs and large back yards), and guess who will get poorer (those without roofs or back yards). It’s a manipulation of the market that re-distributes wealth in a coercive and immoral way.

  23. DocMartyn says:

    Do not forget the opposition to ‘fracking’ which would make the UK independent of imported natural gas for at least a 100 years.

    Cuadrilla announced this week that its tests showed there could be as much as 5.6 trillion cubic metres (200tn cubic ft) of gas in the Bowland shale under Lancashire; 60 years supply. This is just one of the shale gas deposits.

    UK gas consumption is 95 billion cubic metres a year.

  24. Stephen Richards says:

    vboring says:

    November 1, 2011 at 7:48 am

    I don’t know where you are buying your solar panels but in europe the price remains the same as a recent quote I received demonstrated. ~ 3500€ / Kwh of PV.

  25. Jon says:

    This is the best news I’ve heard all year. That a government somewhere is willing to cut some expenditure give me hope that cutting government spending can actually happen, making jobs available again to those who are suffering.

  26. More Soylent Green! says:

    These green power subsidizes are corporate welfare and a transfer of wealth to the well-off. The better they are ended, the better for all.

    In the USA, we need to move forward with ending our disastrous policies for ethanol. Phase out the mandates, the subsidies and the tariffs on imported ethanol. Let farmers focus on growing food, not fuel.

  27. Curiousgeorge says:

    G. Karst says:
    November 1, 2011 at 8:47 am

    Curiousgeorge says:
    November 1, 2011 at 7:54 am

    Reality sucks, don’t it. The Euro economy is collapsing, with Greece, Italy, and others leading the charge, and the Greenies want to accelerate the process.

    Check your history. Collapsing economies is the fertile soil, from which socialism, communism and fascism springs. These people are doing everything possible to initiate and accelerate such processes. It matters not, who suffers, as we will all reap the benefits of a brave new world. Well, the elite will anyway. Life as a troglodyte will not be too bad… Will it?? GK
    ==================================================================

    True. I recall somebody saying recently that one should never let a good crises go to waste. Even better is to invent one that you have planned for.

    The ‘savior’ is right thru that curtain folks: Step right up.

  28. Mydogsgotnonose says:

    The UK government is, at last, withdrawing the privileges the Midlands’ Mafia which paid for Brown, later Balls to get to power.

  29. Steeptown says:

    Although the UK Gov’t is halving the subsidies for solar, there will still remain huge subsidies. And there are still huge subsidies for onshore and offshore wind.

  30. higley7 says:

    Nuclear is safer than any other energy production. Coal, wind, and gas are all more dangerous. Why? Nuclear is well managed. Our new generation of plants are vastly improved. Pebble bed technology can reuse all already spent fuel and get as much energy again as was produced the first time through. And the truly spent fuel will then be good for other purposes. And then there’s liquid thorium reactors which do not pander to nuclear proliferation and being already liquid cannot melt down. The fuel requires little processing before use and we have loads of it.

    Nuclear power can meet all of our electricity needs and has the smallest footprint and is the least environmentally intrusive of all.

  31. Brian Johnson uk says:

    The subsidies for wind will not drop as the Prime Minister’s Father-in-Law has invested heavily in wind power and the Queen gets massive amounts from ‘owning’ the UK seabed out to 12 miles.
    “They will net up to £37.5 million extra income every year from the drive for green energy because the seabed within Britain’s ter­ritorial waters is owned by the Crown Estate.”
    As for solar power, why on earth subsidise a system that relies on the sun when we see so little of that year on year!

  32. DCC says:

    vboring said: “This is being blown way out of proportion by everyone involved. Solar panel prices have fallen significantly since the subsidies were created, therefore the size of the subsidy should decrease.”

    Whoa, take off your blinders. Subsidized panel manufacture still is not competitive with imported panels and subsidized electricity generators using the imported panels aren’t competitive with gas or coal. That means that all the subsidies accomplished nothing beyond wasting money. The entire mess should be canceled immediately and an invoice rendered for repayment.

  33. AndrewR says:

    I live in the north of england, Heres a little snippet from our local newspaper,

    Quote “A PLAN to slash subsidies for household solar power has been slammed as “nonsensical” by a Kirklees councillor./unquote

    Clr Andrew Cooper, who leads the four-strong Green group on Kirklees Council, said a Government plan to reduce subsidies for household solar electricity could threaten up to 25,000 jobs.”

    Well you have to ask yourself Mr councilor, “is it ok to subsidise green energy when 2700 people in the UK die of Fuel poverty ?”.

  34. Fred from Canuckistan says:

    The government that bankrolls can also, it seems, bankrupt.

  35. Olen says:

    Under the circumstances why is there a fierce battle within the government? The headline could be politicians attempt to force the use of new energy failed.

    What caused the change, the prospect of their fellow citizens dying from heat or cold stress in their homes while their country is in financial free fall supporting green energy or was it the image of pitchforks and torches reminiscent of a Frankenstein movie? Frankenstein used natural energy in lightening and look how that turned out. The whole town was mad at him. OK Frankenstein was fiction but so is green energy.

  36. DesertYote says:

    And who buys all those solar panels? Large corporations getting tax breaks. They do it to increase there green cred. One company in Oregon put in panelss ate one facility with the classic solar panel tilt, but facing East. AT one of their other facilities, just down the street, the panels are tilted towards the West!!! Not only did they get it wrong, but they got it wrong in two different ways.

  37. Matthew W says:

    “Market-driven energy choices are cutting more tons of CO2 in the U.S. than have been cut by wind and solar—even with their billions of dollars in subsidies. Natural gas-fired electricity generation has grown from 15.8 percent of America’s power generation in 2000 to 24.1 percent in the most recent 12-month tally from the Energy Information Administration.”

    Won’t the percentage of gas generation very quickly increase mostly due to the EPA regulations that will shutdown coal powered plants (with a net lose of production for consumers)???

  38. Widget says:

    You don’t need an Android app to check on the miserable contribution that the windmills make. It’s all here for the UK: http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
    As of now, wind is generating a mere 0.723gw against a Grid demand of 49gw (1.48%)

    All that effort & despoilation of the environment for so little return. (Unless you’re a landowner or windfarm developer!)

  39. Gail Combs says:

    Curiousgeorge says:
    November 1, 2011 at 7:54 am

    Reality sucks, don’t it. The Euro economy is collapsing, with Greece, Italy, and others leading the charge, and the Greenies want to accelerate the process.
    ——————————————————————————
    G. Karst says:
    November 1, 2011 at 8:47 am
    Check your history. Collapsing economies is the fertile soil, from which socialism, communism and fascism springs. These people are doing everything possible to initiate and accelerate such processes. It matters not, who suffers, as we will all reap the benefits of a brave new world. Well, the elite will anyway. Life as a troglodyte will not be too bad… Will it?? GK
    ——————————————————————————-
    EXACTLY! That is what all this collapsing world economy has been about along with the spiking cost of food, the loss of third world farmers, the land grab by the wealthy and the riots.

    I do not think it was a coincidence that a FABIAN SOCIETY PHAMPHLET: “From Dictator to Democracy” was spotted several times in Egypt.:

    As journalists have sought to untangle the disparate threads that unite these uprisings, one of the most interesting revelations has been a common reference to a dusty — but still relevant — book, “From Dictatorship to Democracy.”

    Earlier this month, the New York Times proclaimed its author, Gene Sharp, a “shy intellectual” who had created “the playbook for revolution” — noting that his work was posted on the Muslim Brotherhood website during the Egyptian uprising, and was cited equally among Tunisians, Bosnians and Estonians in their quest for freedom. So far, it has been translated into 41 languages….

    http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/02/25/after-egypt-and-libya-whats-next-for-those-still-under-dictato/

    Who has free e-books including Gene Sharp’s “From Dictatorship to Democracy?”
    Fabian Essays In Socialism: http://www.bestebooksworld.com/ebook/16953/

    Former UK PM, Tony Blair a UK Fabian Society leader is appointed Middle East envoy working on behalf of the US, Russia, the UN and the EU…. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6244358.stm

    Blair is also in the pay of the bankers:
    “Jan 28, 2008 … Tony Blair will be paid £2.5m a year for his post at US investment bank JP Morgan, it was revealed today.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-508157/Tony-Blairs-time-bank-job-make-times-expected.html

    The Fabien Society article New World Encyclopedia – Organizing knowledge for happiness, prosperity and world peace.

    Alternate view from Fabian Socialist George Bernard Shaw: http://www.sovereignindependent.com/?p=7948

    had the industrial revolution and the rise of the middle class now we have a drive right back into Neo-fuedalism hiding under the name of “Socialism” All you have to do is look at the determined drive to kill off the middle class.

    QUOTES from United Nations Leader and World Bank Senior Advisor Maurice Strong:

    “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring about?”

    “It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption pattern of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning and suburban housing – are not sustainable. A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally damaging consumption patterns.”

    The current economic collapse was not by chance it was an orchestrated move.
    Look at just one US President , Bill Clinton. In the USA there is the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Organization Treaties and then getting the China admitted to the WTO all done under Clinton. These moves were key to the exporting of US industry and jobs.

    Clinton also signed into law many of the “new improved” Banking Laws that lead to the Economic meltdown. SEE Quick list of Banking laws

    After the Great Depression, several laws were put in place to prevent another depression. The 1933 and 1934 Security and Exchange laws, The McFadden Act of 1927, The Glass-Steagall Act or Banking Act of 1933. Also the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956.

    Clinton signed into laws bills negating the above. They are the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999

    Also:
    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991: Allowed big banks to gobble up smaller banks more easily.

    Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 and RTC Completion Act – Housing and business loans to minorities. (Unqualified buyers)

    Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 – left CDSs unregulated and set up AIG bailout and Foreclosuregate. CDSs are “insurance” betting that the mortgage will be foreclosed.

    Any number of CDSs can be bought for one mortgage so not only is the land confiscated but there is a big cash pay-off, in some cases several times the amount of the mortgage. This was a big incentive for banks to trick homeowners into a foreclosure situation. The “Obama Loan Modification Program” was tailor made to give marginal loans a big push into the foreclosure bucket. No wonder the program was a major failure!

    The big cash pay-offs to the banks of course were footed by American tax payers thanks to the AIG bailouts, while individual homeowners lost their homes. Big win for the banks Big lose for the middle class.

    And do not forget all this money except for 3% was created out of nothing by the banks but it was paid back with the labor of the tax payer.

    A PRIMER ON MONEY: by US House Committee on Banking and Currency: http://www.famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanking/Money/patman-primer-on-money.pdf

    US Banks Operating Without Reserve Requirements: http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/03/us-banks-operate-without-reserve.html

  40. More Soylent Green! says:

    Matthew W says:
    November 1, 2011 at 10:14 am
    “Market-driven energy choices are cutting more tons of CO2 in the U.S. than have been cut by wind and solar—even with their billions of dollars in subsidies. Natural gas-fired electricity generation has grown from 15.8 percent of America’s power generation in 2000 to 24.1 percent in the most recent 12-month tally from the Energy Information Administration.”

    Won’t the percentage of gas generation very quickly increase mostly due to the EPA regulations that will shutdown coal powered plants (with a net lose of production for consumers)???

    The regulators and would-be regulators have a meme that environmental regulations, a carbon tax or cap-and-trade are all market forces, an idea that doesn’t even rise to the level of specious.

    As for whether gas plants can replace coal plants, that depends upon multiple federal, state and local regulatory agencies. It’s doubtful new plants can be brought online quickly enough to replace those which would be taken offline. So where’s the power for our iPods, smart phones, notebooks, BD players, LCD TVs and electric cars going to come from?

  41. More Soylent Green! says:

    @Gail Combs says:
    November 1, 2011 at 10:18 am

    Gail, I recognized the Fabian Society as a British Fascist (or Fascist-sympathetic) group from the 1930′s. I had no idea it existed still existed. Wow!

    It still appears to be a(n ecomomic) Fascist group.

  42. timg56 says:

    I clicked on the Fred Pearce / Guardian link. Read most of the original article (until even my stomach couldn’t take it any longer). Loved the irony of him talking about the Germans shutting down their nuke plants. And of course the continued use of coal is completely the result of the coal and energy companies brainwashing the masses through better PR.

    What is interesting is to read some of the comments. Didn’t take long for the “over population” argument to come out. 7 billion people are simply too much and many of them have to go. Of course the devil is in the details. Just who among the 7 billion goes and who stays? I’m pretty sure those calling for a reduction in population expect to be among those still around after it is accomplished.

    I prefer to look at the positive side. Whenever I start worrying if I am failing to live in accordance to God’s plan for me, I can at least console myself with the probability that he’s going to busy with all the twits who think government controlled population control is not morally bankrupt. I might look ok by comparison.

  43. Gail Combs says:

    Richard111 says:
    November 1, 2011 at 10:18 am

    I am surprised this report has not had a mention yet.
    http://www.suite101.com/news/new-satellite-data-contradicts-carbon-dioxide-climate-theory-a394975
    __________________________________

    Great!

    I want Climate Justice!

    The The Maldives OWE the USA and EU Climate Reparation.

  44. RS says:

    I am uncomfortable linking Beacon with Solyndra.

    Phase control of the grid by instantly accessible power and load is a very useful technology with real value. It’s not a green creation out of whole cloth.

    Beacon had business problems of too much leverage and too late cash flow, not a fundamentally useless product.

  45. SandyInDerby says:

    Widget says:
    November 1, 2011 at 10:17 am

    True you can always go to neta as well

    http://www.bmreports.com/bsp/bsp_home.htm

    But the android app can’t be trumped in a dicussion down the pub or the works canteen. Very good for winning a bet (wind contribution never gets close to 10%).

  46. Ralph says:

    There were never any Green jobs in this make-work project. The panels are made in the Far East and China, so the only Green jobs made in the UK will be for a few Polish builders fixing them onto roofs.

    The Green jobs are a complete illusion. Britian has no industry that can profit from such lavish spending.

    .

  47. Ralph says:

    >>George Lawson says: November 1, 2011 at 7:58 am
    >>If it wasn’t for the coalition I’m sure Mr Cameron would of got rid of the
    >>stupid Mr Huhn a long time ago.

    Are you sure about that?

    Remember that Ca-moron’s first actions as prime minister were to stick a windelec on the roof of his house, and then jet off to thebArctic to pat a few huskys and say he would lead the world’s Greenest government.

    Ca-moron is up to his neck in this Green nonsense, and cannot see the struggles of ordinary people – let alone the many ghettos that have been established in the UK.

    .

  48. Spector says:

    On a related issue, here is a video of a House of Lords session where, in response to a question presented by Baroness Angela Smith of Basildon, the Government explains why they must put the development of Thorium Nuclear Energy in the background as they restart their Nuclear Energy program after a 25-year pause.

    “Thorium Discussion in the House of Lords”
    5 likes, 0 dislikes; 252 views; 7:37 min
    Uploaded by hallezb on Jul 8, 2011

  49. Widget says:

    Cameron’s forte is PR — he’ll jump on any bandwagon that makes the ‘right’ impression.

    Green’s on the slide a bit now, so he’s on a different tack.

  50. More Soylent Green! says:

    Ralph says:
    November 1, 2011 at 11:35 am
    There were never any Green jobs in this make-work project. The panels are made in the Far East and China, so the only Green jobs made in the UK will be for a few Polish builders fixing them onto roofs.

    The Green jobs are a complete illusion. Britian has no industry that can profit from such lavish spending.

    If you get a green government grant to buy a new LNG or electric bus (at 2 or 3 x the cost of the diesel), the bus driver’s job counts as a green job.

  51. It use to be scientists were trying to find ways to detect “black holes” – stars so dense that no light could escape.

    There’s a new fear – the “green hole”. An energy scheme so bad tht no gov’t money can escape.

    If they could find a way to harness the energy of billions of dollars being sucked into a “green hole”, the world’s energy problems would be solved.

    You could compare a black hole’s “gravitational singularity” to the issuance of a federal loan guarantee…

  52. _Jim says:

    Gail Combs says on November 1, 2011 at 10:18 am

    Unreadable post; an attempt to cover broad subjects and solve the worlds ills in one sitting …

    (If you don’t mind some criticism.)

    .

  53. _Jim says:

    RS says on November 1, 2011 at 10:56 am

    Phase control of the grid by instantly accessible power and load is a very useful technology with real value. It’s not a green creation out of whole cloth.

    MIT says ‘control’ this may actually result in an UNSTABLE grid, article excerpt:

    MIT: Smart meters could cause grid instability
    by Steve Bush
    Thursday 04 August 2011 11:53

    Psychological research at MIT suggest human nature plus smart meters could equal grid oscillation if behavioural calming mechanisms are not added.

    Smart meters are supposed to alter use behaviour: the price of electricity is displayed to the consumer so they move use from expensive peaks to cheaper troughs.

    However, in an agile system where actual price based on actual grid load is frequently updated, the researchers found that price variations well within the normal range can cause oscillations in demand.

    “For the system to work, supply and demand must match almost perfectly at each instant of time,” said scientist Mardavij Roozbehani. “The generators have ramp constraints: They cannot ramp up their production arbitrarily fast, and they cannot ramp it down arbitrarily fast. If these oscillations become very wild, they’ll have a hard time keeping track of the demand.”

    .

  54. Erik says:

    George Monbiot 2010:

    Are we really going to let ourselves be duped into this solar panel rip-off?
    “Plans for the grid feed-in tariff suggest we live in southern California. And at £8.6bn, this is a pricey conceit with little benefit”
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/01/solar-panel-feed-in-tariff

    A Great Green Rip-Off
    “The feed-in tariffs about to be introduced here are extortionate, useless and deeply regressive.”
    http://www.monbiot.com/2010/03/01/a-great-green-rip-off/

  55. Roger Longstaff says:

    All of this lunacy is predicated on the disgraceful UK Climate Change Act, that mandates idiotic reductions in CO2 emissions. UK readers – please sign the epetition to repeal it, and send a clear message to the government:

    http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/2035

    And please – anybody who knows how to get this into the UK MSM please do so!

  56. Patrick says:

    Hi

    I live in a village in Hampshire, UK, where recently an estate of council owned old people’s bungalows have suddenly recently all been treated to solar pv panels. I wonder if the council had a tip off that the FIT was going to be cut?

    After I had driven by the estate several times, something niggled me about the installations. All the bungalows next to the road have a north south roof ridge line and the installers had sited the pv panels on the East facing slope, also shaded by overhanging trees. By 11.00am the roofs were in shadow! The installer must be laughing all the way to his holiday home in the Bahamas

    What a waste of my council tax! and also what an indictment of a government that pays a 25 year index linked subsidy raised out of my taxes!:-

    * Generation tariff – your energy supplier will pay you a set rate for each unit (or kWh) of electricity you generate. Once your system has been registered, the tariff levels are guaranteed for the period of the tariff (up to 25 years) and are index-linked . For a full list of generation tariffs, see FIT payment rates published by the Government
    * Export tariff – you will get a further 3.1p/kWh from your energy supplier for each unit you export back to the electricity grid, so you can sell any electricity you generate but don’t use yourself. This rate is the same for all technologies. At some stage smart meters will be installed to measure what you export, but until then it is estimated as being 50% of the electricity you generate.

    Patrick (grumpy old man)

  57. Zac says:

    There is a photovoltaic solar park near me and what seems to be quite logical is that all the panels are facing south and inclined at the same angle. Yet all the trees around here have leaves equally spaced throughout 360 degrees that are not inclined to face the sun.

    Are we missing a trick?

  58. Ellie V says:

    I do take issue with the continued reference to the installation of solar panels by only the “hugely wealthy”. Our family are not wealthy, my husband has no pension and mine is near worthless due to the recent decline of the stock market. So when the Government offer a return on any savings that far outstrips any currently available I would be a fool not to take it and guarantee at least some income well into my retirement. I will be installing Solar Panels prior to the December cut-off.. If successive Governments are hell bent on destroying the economy on which my pension is dependent then I most certainly will take advantage of every stupid thoughtless policy of theirs. The installation would pay for itself within 4 years. I have no intention of being unable to pay my energy bills when I am retired.

  59. Myrrh says:

    Gail Combs says:
    November 1, 2011 at 10:52 am
    Richard111 says:
    November 1, 2011 at 10:18 am

    I am surprised this report has not had a mention yet.
    http://www.suite101.com/news/new-satellite-data-contradicts-carbon-dioxide-climate-theory-a394975
    __________________________________

    Great!

    ———————————-

    It’s disappeared. It immediately switches to front page and the site search brings one general article on satellites.

  60. Leslie says:

    Green contagion in the making. How long before Al Gore files for bankruptcy?

  61. Myrrh says:

    P.S. to my post November 1, 2011 at 1:14 pm

    Skullduggery at work here too:

    http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=8573

    John O’Sullivan: New Satellite Data Contradicts Carbon Dioxide Climate Theory
    Monday, October 31st 2011

    John Sullivan captured the original map from the tv screen, but this has now been changed at source which discovered when someone else went to look for it. Seems three of the maps no longer available and the colours which have been changed on the map now ‘official’.

    All in a day’s work for the those re-writing history..

  62. Curiousgeorge says:

    Spector says:
    November 1, 2011 at 11:52 am

    On a related issue, here is a video of a House of Lords session where, in response to a question presented by Baroness Angela Smith of Basildon, the Government explains why they must put the development of Thorium Nuclear Energy in the background as they restart their Nuclear Energy program after a 25-year pause.

    ====================================================================

    The problem with Thorium is the “ium”. As in “Uranium”, “Plutonium”, etc. If it ends in “ium” it’s patently dangerous according to the anti-ium’s. ; )

  63. Latitude says:

    Myrrh says:
    November 1, 2011 at 1:29 pm

    http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=8573

    ==========================================

    Myrrh, is that for real??

  64. Richard111 says:

    “”Myrrh says:
    November 1, 2011 at 1:14 pm””

    Myrrh, you are right! The article I linked to has gone! If you Google IBUKU satellite you will get a lot of hits mentioning it. GREENIE WATCH has a copy but points to the same missing link.
    http://antigreen.blogspot.com/2011/10/new-satellite-data-contradicts-carbon.html
    I wonder what on earth is going on?

  65. Richard says:

    “Too close for comfort?”
    “Energy firm NextEra — led by Lewis Hay, a member of the president’s jobs council — has a stake in projects that have reaped nearly $2 billion in loan guarantees from Washington, in a case that raises conflict-of-interest concerns as the same jobs council pushes for more ‘government-backed’ investment in renewable energy.”
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/01/jobs-panel-member-whose-solar-firm-won-2b-loan-raises-conflict-interest/

  66. James Fosser says:

    I read in the UK newspapers that opportunists are travelling the country dismantling monuments to the fallen in order to sell the metal as scrap. They would make a bigger killing going around stealing solar panels off houses and would not antagonise the population so much (Only the homeowners and the local constabulary).

  67. peter_dtm says:

    Brian Johnson uk says:
    November 1, 2011 at 9:36 am

    The subsidies for wind will not drop as the Prime Minister’s Father-in-Law has invested heavily in wind power and the Queen gets massive amounts from ‘owning’ the UK seabed out to 12 miles.
    “They will net up to £37.5 million extra income every year from the drive for green energy because the seabed within Britain’s territorial waters is owned by the Crown Estate.”

    Actually; the income from the Crown Estates goes into the Exchequer (Government money in other words) – the Civil List (which funds the entire Royal Family and assorted hangers on etc) amounts to around 15% of the Crown Estate Income. SO the Royal Family actually cost us NOTHING (bet you lot over the pond are jealous – our head of state not only pays for herself and her entire entourage but then kicks in over 5 times MORE to the cost of Government … )

    So it’s the GOVERNMENT that gets the income – and it doesn’t show up as Tax income either.

  68. Philip Bradley says:

    There was a recent Bloomberg article that said in the last 4 years investors have poured $560 billion into ‘clean’ energy tech start ups, without producing a single ‘winner’.

    That kind of track record makes the dotcom bubble look prudent.

  69. J Martin says:

    It was inevitable that reality would bite sooner or later. A most welcome development.

    As for those whingeing about it, I have no sympathy. They were ridiculously naive to think that an unsustainable and ultimately increasingly unaffordable subsidy could last indefinitely or that it was somehow set in stone.

    Such a ridiculous subsidy can only cause long, or a least medium term harm to an economy and it’s people by hindering he development of more appropriate technologies.

  70. J Martin says:

    @ Myrrh, Gail Combs

    I assume you are referring to the JAXA satellite showing that the developed World is not after all a co2 baddy.

    http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=8573&linkbox=true&position=1

  71. Latitude says:

    Richard111 says:
    November 1, 2011 at 2:29 pm
    Myrrh, you are right! The article I linked to has gone! If you Google IBUKU satellite you will get a lot of hits mentioning it. GREENIE WATCH has a copy but points to the same missing link.
    http://antigreen.blogspot.com/2011/10/new-satellite-data-contradicts-carbon.html
    I wonder what on earth is going on?
    ======================================

    Richard, chiefio has it…..along with more charts

    If this it true, it’s a deal breaker…..doesn’t matter if you believe in global warming or not

    http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2011/10/31/japanese-satellites-say-3rd-world-owes-co2-reparations-to-the-west/

  72. Gary Hladik says:

    RS says (November 1, 2011 at 10:56 am): “Beacon had business problems of too much leverage and too late cash flow, not a fundamentally useless product.”

    Whatever the merits of Beacon’s product, I think we can both agree that government has no business picking winners or (in this case) losers. For some strange reason, taxpayer money usually goes to firms with the best political connections, not the best business plans. Go figure.

  73. Gail Combs says:

    Richard111 says:
    November 1, 2011 at 10:18 am

    I am surprised this report has not had a mention yet.
    http://www.suite101.com/news/new-satellite-data-contradicts-carbon-dioxide-climate-theory-a394975
    __________________________________
    Myrrh says:
    November 1, 2011 at 1:14 pm
    It’s disappeared. It immediately switches to front page and the site search brings one general article on satellites.
    __________________________
    Well if any one wondered whether the CAGW censors keep track of the discussion on WUWT we now have the answer!

    Alternate source: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=025_1320063001

    Unfortunately it does not have the map but it does have the name of the paper.

  74. Wellington says:

    The U.K. pulls out just as the progressive citizenry of the City of Boulder has voted to create a municipal electric utility so that it can meet its Kyoto targets.

    http://www.dailycamera.com/energy/ci_19242177

    Next, Boulder leaders will begin a Great Leap Forward campaign and require that the residents cover their electricity consumption by building thousands of green backyard furnaces.

  75. rbateman says:

    The EPA, under the guidance of Lisa Jackson, is also circling the drain, due in no small part to the toxic spill of overzealous regulation.
    If we are going to spend money on the environment, Superfund cleanup should be job #1.
    Swab the deck.

  76. J Martin says:

    Gail,

    In the light of the JAXA satellite results the statement quoted below clearly needs to be reversed.

    QUOTES from United Nations Leader and World Bank Senior Advisor Maurice Strong:

    “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring about?”

    “It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption pattern of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning and suburban housing – are not sustainable. A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally damaging consumption patterns.”

    Clearly Maurice Strong has got this the wrong way round, instead;
    We now know that – The only hope for the planet is to bring industrial civilisation to the whole World. It is the Third World that lives unsustainably and in perpetual poverty via slash and burn, etc.

    It is possible for the World to have it’s cake and eat it. Ever improving technology and efficiency improvements, and improving standards of insulation, are making that so.

    I think that few people would have thought that left wing tree huggers, Green Peace and the World Wildlife Foundation would be anything but a benefit to society, instead their blinkered Teletubby simplistic assumptions about lifestyles and about energy in particular have turned them into a suicidal danger for society and mankind at large.

    But perhaps there is hope. The next 20 years of the current minimum, predicted by Landscheidt some 20+ years ago, may bring some enlightenment to their blinkered brain cells.

  77. EternalOptimist says:

    In Britain, people die of cold every year. Many of these will die because they cannot afford the fuel bills which are made higher in order to stop the country getting warmer

  78. richard verney says:

    It is good news, but even more needs to be done. The subsidies should be completely scrapped not just halved.

    It is difficult to understand how anyone could have considered investing in solar given the UK’s northern latitude. It is quite obvious that at such northern latitudes Solar is unviable. The UK is not so warm that there is need for aircon in the summer when there is some prospect of sun (although due to its island nature the UK is notoriously cloudy). In winter when it is cold and dark (days are short) and when electricity demand is at its highest, there is all but no power from the sun. Solar no doubt has its place but it is not in Northern climes and this should be obvious to anyone with the slightest degree of commonsense.

    Now if the UK can only scrap wind farms and get on with shale gas and nuclear it may have a viable future. If not, it is back to the dark ages in more ways than one.

  79. David says:

    No-one seems to be mentioning the most fundamental of all flaws in the solar energy argument..
    For twelve hours a day – EVERY DAY – solar panels do not produce a single watt….!

  80. Latitude says:

    David says:
    November 2, 2011 at 6:28 am

    No-one seems to be mentioning the most fundamental of all flaws in the solar energy argument..
    For twelve hours a day – EVERY DAY – solar panels do not produce a single watt….!
    =============================================
    They do in Spain David………………….

  81. Chloe says:

    I agree with Vboring to be honest. The government haven’t dealt with this consulation very well at all but the comments surrounding this announcement will only cause further damage to the industry as it will start to destroy consumer confidence and discourage those still looking to train within this industry.

    There’s not enough space to list our feelings in detail but if you’re interested – http://www.tradeskills4u.co.uk/posts/fits-changes

  82. dave ward says:

    Last nights front page headline in the Norwich local paper was about the city councils plan to cover their housing stock with solar panels now being at risk.

    http://tinyurl.com/3z5tonp

    I’ve had 2 letters published this year pointing out that the FIT is just a get rich quick scam, and I sent another one last night. Then this morning the regional paper had an article about a large scale PV array, and says that the owner Richard Atkins, of PV Farms, has been “racing against the clock to complete the scheme following a government review of subsidy arrangements for solar-energy projects.”

    http://tinyurl.com/3poq6ay

    I’m sure he has….. we can’t have the tariff reductions getting in the way of a nice little earner now, can we???

    “The life-span of the farm is estimated at 25 years.” – I wouldn’t bet on it! Pierre Gosselin had a story earlier this year of a German PV farm that is already falling into disrepair after a couple of years…

  83. Keith says:

    Richard111 says:
    November 1, 2011 at 2:29 pm

    “”Myrrh says:
    November 1, 2011 at 1:14 pm””

    Myrrh, you are right! The article I linked to has gone! If you Google IBUKU satellite you will get a lot of hits mentioning it. GREENIE WATCH has a copy but points to the same missing link.
    http://antigreen.blogspot.com/2011/10/new-satellite-data-contradicts-carbon.html
    I wonder what on earth is going on?

    What’s going on is that the writer of the article, John O’Sullivan, has been fired, and all articles writtenby him for his employer in the last two years have been removed from the Internet (or so his employers reckon – never heard of Google Cache or the Wayback Machine then…)

    Scandalous.

    Anthony/mods, I reckon there’s a full post in the offing around this if you have the time.

    http://climaterealists.com/?id=8588

  84. Gail Combs says:

    J Martin says:
    November 2, 2011 at 12:00 am

    Gail,

    In the light of the JAXA satellite results the statement quoted below clearly needs to be reversed.

    QUOTES from United Nations Leader and World Bank Senior Advisor Maurice Strong:…..

    I think that few people would have thought that left wing tree huggers, Green Peace and the World Wildlife Foundation would be anything but a benefit to society, instead their blinkered Teletubby simplistic assumptions about lifestyles and about energy in particular have turned them into a suicidal danger for society and mankind at large.

    But perhaps there is hope. The next 20 years of the current minimum, predicted by Landscheidt some 20+ years ago, may bring some enlightenment to their blinkered brain cells.
    ________________________________________________

    Like everything else – MODERATION. I sure hope we see the CO2 dragon killed dead!

    The biggest problem with the tree huggers is they never went through the Great Depression or anything else that would wake them up to the fact the real world is nasty and cruel.

    I still remember the idiot in the Towers (9/11) who fought the rescuers because it was “Important” to complete the program he was creating on the computer!

    He had absolutely NO connection with reality!

  85. Pete H says:

    Now for the bloody windmills! Oh! I keep forgetting the Prime Minister’s Father in Law owns a bunch of them.

  86. richard verney says:

    Latitude says:
    November 2, 2011 at 7:15 am
    David says:
    November 2, 2011 at 6:28 am

    No-one seems to be mentioning the most fundamental of all flaws in the solar energy argument..
    For twelve hours a day – EVERY DAY – solar panels do not produce a single watt….!
    =============================================
    They do in Spain David………………….

    ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
    YES. In Spain they hook up diesel generators so that they can benefit from the feed in tariffs during the night!!!

    One question arises is whether they run the same diesel generators during the day so as to get even more feed in tariff during the hours of sun light. Research has not answered that question but human nature being what it is suggests that there is a high probability of the system being milked whenever opportunity arises.

    Crazy subsidy when you can fuel a diesel generator and still make money from it.

  87. David says:

    Latitude and richard verney – thank you – yes, I was aware of the Spanish scam using diesel generators…! Couldn’t make it up, could you..?
    As a slight aside – the media is SOOOO much to blame for swallowing so many of the headlines about ‘capacity’ and ‘output’ of solar farms; windmills etc… A few weeks ago (before the current panic in the industry) our local (East Anglia) tv sent a reporter to stand in front of a new solar array, in the rain, interviewing the despondent-looking developer – and came out with the mantra ‘could power 1200 homes’.. At NO POINT did the reporter say: ‘How much is being generated as we speak..?’ A simple matter, surely, of walking to the recording meter at the back of the array, to discover no doubt that output would just about boil a kettle….

  88. Brian H says:

    hell_is_like_newark says:
    I can’t reduce the heating / cooling loads anymore than they already are.

    There’s an architectural trick you might like to adapt. A hollow column in the corner of the largest room, openings top and bottom, with a small fan inside shifting air up (or down). It can be emulated well enough with just a small floor fan with air stream bounced/angled up the corner. Supposedly can reduce heating/cooling load by as much as 40%. I’ve used it for years. Substantial increases in room comfort, as a bonus.

  89. It’s long over due.

    Solar PV has an EROEI of only 0.48,

    It is unsustainable.

    Good riddence.

Comments are closed.