Germany’s support for renewable energy is “breaking” the nation’s ability to pay for power and threatens the competitiveness of electricity producers, Handelsblatt cited a former [green] industry group leader as saying.
Guaranteed prices for solar and wind power, paid for by consumers, are threatening the renewable-energy industry’s ability to compete, the report said, citing Johannes Lackmann, the former head of Germany’s BEE renewable-energy lobby group.
Installations of solar panels may more than double this year to 9,000 megawatts, Handelsblatt said. That may help to boost the total cost of installed solar capacity in Germany to 85.4 billion euros ($106 billion) from 2000 to 2010, according to a study by the RWI economic institute, Handelsblatt said.
I will gladly make a comment as have others on the naming of subsidies for oil. These are not subsidies. They are tax deductible business expenses. Labor and material is deductible. Business expenses ae deductible before calculating net taxable profit.
This is a comment loaded with distortion. Mining, forreststry and oil production have depletion allowances. These are from generallly accepted accounting principles. I do see this distortion in big city newspapers and on liberal blogs.
A subsidy is where cash is given to the company or individual. Tax inducements can take the form of accelerated depreciation. Actually many other countries don’t even levy income taxes on companies.
Why is it oil is always contrasted with solar and wind?
Electrical for homes is different from fuels for vehicles no?
shouldn’t that be coal and nuclear vs. solar and wind?
thus far there is no true “alternative” in the vehicle world if I understand things correctly…current crop of biofuels have worse impact than dinosaur oil…all electric cars are on the horizon…but the electricity has to come from somewhere…battery technology sucks…which affects consumer solar amongst other things
as for “oil subsidies” you’re talking reduction in taxes on the companies (then the federal, state, local governemnts add taxes back in for the consumers on every gallon)
Socialists never met a tax they didn’t like…so long as THEY don’t have to pay their fair share (read equal)
“Michael says:
June 22, 2010 at 11:29 am
Perhaps the Germans can reduce their mandatory 6 week vacation/spa leisure time to two weeks/year just like in the USA. That way the Europeans prols can pay their overlords the tithings they deserve.”
24 workdays is the mandated minimum yearly vacation. 30 days is the standard in most companies. The people hit the hardest by our fantastic energy prizes are the long time unemployed (Hartz IV recipients, rent plus about 350 Euro per month). Their energy bill they must pay from the 350 Euro so that’s substantial. Typical energy bill for one person is 50 Euro i would say.
So no, the ones hit by energy prize hikes cannot just make less vacation… they already have vacation all year long. By US standards, it’s funemployment, i know. The average Hans is better off than the average Joe, socialism, yadda yadda…
Germany represents half of the worlds end consumer market for solar cells because there’s no cap on new installations. The only way it’s regulated is by reducing the feed in tariff once or twice a year. Next reduction is on 1st July, about 15% down for new installations; old installations get the tariff that was in force when they were installed for 20 years.
It’s getting pretty expensive …. A yearly rise of 6 to 10% in consumer electricity rates is projected by various think tanks; industry and universities.
“mjk says:
[…]
“etc… in the mean time? You and the rest of the “conservative neandrethals” (your descrption not mine) should take pause next time you shout that feel good chant –Drill baby drill.”
And later, “what are your thoughts on the countless people that have lost their jobs and businesses, ..”
I’ll address your question first, the job and business loss in the gulf is infinitesimal compared to the economic damage already done by the CAGW scheme. CAGW and “renewables” have wrecked entire industries and nearly collapsed a nations economy. Just do a search on Spain. The faux concern for businesses and jobs from someone that proposed wind and solar as a replacement to fossil fuel would be laughable if one doesn’t consider the food riots, poverty and disease caused by the 3rd world nations being denied dependable and cheap energy. Talk about something one should feel good about.
As far as the gulf spill: yes, it is unfortunate, but if you’d weigh the value of oil and good it has done for the progress of mankind in the last century, you know that this is temporary and events like these are necessarily inevitable.(mostly because of man’s interaction.) The fact of the matter is, the U.S. and any other developed nation requires oil for commerce. Obviously, wind and solar are only ever going to be an addendum to, not a replacement for traditional energy sources. We haven’t found a proper replacement, yet. I hope we do soon. The actions of the CAGW crowd has probably set back the hunt for a replacement energy source by decades. So, yes, IN THE MEAN TIME, and in a large part thanks to the CAGW pinhead crowd, in order for society to continue forward we’ll have to “drill, baby, drill.” You can go live in a cave with out fossil fuel for energy, but don’t try to impose that Orwellian world on me or anyone else. Mankind has progressed to far to take the step backwards that you are proposing.
MikeD says:
June 22, 2010 at 12:05 pm
“Why is it oil is always contrasted with solar and wind?
Electrical for homes is different from fuels for vehicles no?
shouldn’t that be coal and nuclear vs. solar and wind?”
Yes, but then when compared to coal and nuclear, solar and wind don’t contrast well. Obviously, they’re not as reliable and much more expensive. Oil, for some reason is easier to hate for the alarmist crowd and they’re better at “apples to oranges” comparisons than rational people.
Unfortately, the original Handelsblatt article is behind a paywall. Just checked.
Unfortunately, that is.
In my opinion, subsidies to overcome short-term barriers to entry (eg. risk, infrastructure, marketing, etc…) in order to speed up long-term adoption of clearly superior technologies are perfectly reasonable and will provide a clear long-term benefit to society.
The problem in the current case is that the technologies are not clearly superior and thus will require significant prolonged subsidization. In this case, rather than enhancing and benefiting society, the subsidies become a long-term drag.
On a small-scale, a long-term drag is just fine, since the total cost is small and a subsidized pilot facility could lead to significant technological advances and ultimately a big economical return on the investment. However, it really doesn’t make sense on the large scale that Germany is pursuing, since the huge costs limit the possibility that a breakthrough could ever justify the huge investment.
mjk said at 9:21 am
….Far better for the economy to go for cheap oil -once you factor out the cost of destroying the odd Gulf here or there……
mjk says:
and at 10:14 am
….the countless people that have lost their jobs and businesses, animals that have died, fish populations destroyed, marsh lands lost etc etc…..
First, there is nothing “cheap” about the oil they were going after and the reason they and others are out there pushing the limits of technology, safety, and understanding of what might be encountered. No excuse for the managers at BP. They screwed-up! They must be held accountable. But there is also NO excuse for ALL the OTHER people involved (and I’m NOT saying you are one of them) over the years in forcing the oil industry into deep water WITHOUT adequate oversight AND triple redundant equipment AND contingency plans AND real-world thought-out mitigation plans. Now add-in the absolutely abysmal execution in coordinating the resolution of the crisis by the Administration, the ONE thing they SHOULD be doing AND should be GOOD at, and you’ve got yourself another example of the Law of Unintended Consequences and a “created” disaster.
And let’s keep some perspective – the Gulf of Mexico is FAR from being destroyed, people have lost their jobs/businesses but to this point mostly because of the Federal government twisting in the wind (which it is now clear is the one thing this administration is most proficient at), yes, there have been some number of “animals” lost, (birds, mollusks, crustaceans) and no doubt there will be more but no evidence of any fish populations destroyed, as they do readily move away from undesirable environments. As for marsh land and other coastal areas they will recover rather quickly. But that it got to those “lands” at all is 99.9% the fault of the one and only one entity that had the power, capability, resources, command, position, status, etc. to do it – The Pretender to the Throne, The Man Who Would Be King, The Emperor Without Clothes, The Master of Devastating Intended Consequences, The ONE – whose name shall NOT be mentioned in public…..
Yes, BP will pay – – as will 10s of thousands of others, like in Germany, because OF “Progressive” politics and fanatic environmentalism.
Re; ShrNfr says:
June 22, 2010 at 11:18 am
To Atomic Hairdryer, a tax break or a cheap loan is a subsidy by a different name.
—
Yes, but it’s direct vs indirect subsidies, or just practical subsidies. In the UK, some businesses have been given carbon credits and promptly sold them. They should have invested that money in efficiency improvements but not all did. Next phase will be auctioning credits which will allow speculation and cost businesses. In our budget today, our Chancellor announced he’ll be reviewing carbon trading to ensure stability, which no doubt means higher prices.
No signs that we’ve learned from Spain or Germany and lost our appetite for wind. We did also decide to scrap a loan to one of our few remaining steel makers to help build a mill capable of forging reactor parts. Or even parts for windmills, but I suppose it’s better we import those. Will create green jobs, just not in the UK.
@L. Bowser June 22, 2010 at 11:49 am
Thanks for going to the trouble of looking up what passed for fossil fuel subsidies. I suspected as much based on the one item I could see quickly on the summary, but didn’t have the time during the day to research it properly.
DirkH wrote:
June 22, 2010 at 12:09 pm
“24 workdays is the mandated minimum yearly vacation. 30 days is the standard in most companies. The people hit the hardest by our fantastic energy prizes are the long time unemployed.”
Thanks for the confirmation Dirk.
I worked as a machinist for 20 years and never got more than 12 paid vacation days a year. I always wished 5 weeks mandated vacation in the US would happen making the US as good a country as Europe. That dream of mine died when the great sucking sound decimated consumer manufacturing jobs when Bill Clinton sealed out fate with NAFTA.
mjk
“…On what scientific piece of research are you basing your 3-4 year recovery? In any event ,even if the gulf –by magic–suddenly repaired itself within this time frame, what are your thoughts on the countless people that have lost their jobs and businesses, animals that have died, fish populations destroyed, marsh lands lost etc etc…”
I don’t think that the environmental disaster will be catastrophic as some pundits proclaim. A few years ago an oil tanker, full with about 60,000 tons of tar, broke apart about 150 miles west of the coast of Galicia in Spain, covering it with thick tar the beautiful harbors of Galicia. The political opposition claimed that the environment would be destroyed for many years. Thousands of volunteers helped in clearing beaches and rocks, but the tar underneath remained.
Surprisingly, after one year the coast was clean even under the rocks and sand. Bacteria had eaten up all the tar and oil. I think the same will happen in the Gulf.
As for the 64,000 claims against BP, Government officials now ask that BP pay unemployment compensation for oil workers laid off because the government has suspended drilling permits. Liabilities also include strippers suing for lost earnings from visiting fishermen, hotel and bar owners nowhere near the coast, and shrimpers and fishermen who haven’t been out to sea for so long their anchor chains have seized solid. It looks like every thief and fraudster in America is heading for the BP honeypot and is planning to retire on the proceeds.
Hypnos says:June 22, 2010 at 9:37 am
Fossil fuels receive twice the subsidies renewables energy do. 72 billion against 29.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a2ygdsSj.KQI
If fossil fuels were priced at market rates, without government intervention, renewables would already be competitive. They are nonetheless becoming competitive in some places. And they will only become more competitive as oil prices go back up – or you have already forgotten 2008?
Did you read that article, or just the title?
Of that 72 billion, 15.3 is a tax credit for money paid to other governments. Included in the 72 billion is the cost of the Strategic
Petroleum reserve (article didn’t specifically enumerate $) and rebates for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance (article didn’t specifically enumerate $) .
Oh, and are you forgetting that the government taxes fuel sales.
How much money does this bring in?
For the first quarter of 2009, the mean state gasoline tax is 27.2 cents per US gallon, plus 18.4 cents per US gallon federal tax making the total 45.6 cents per US gallon (12.0 ¢/L). For diesel, the mean state tax is 26.6 cents per US gallon plus an additional 24.4 cents per US gallon federal tax making the total 50.8 cents US per gallon (13.4 ¢/L).[7]
More than 72 bil?
“Michael says:
[…]
Thanks for the confirmation Dirk.
I worked as a machinist for 20 years and never got more than 12 paid vacation days a year.”
On the flipside, we only have about 10 public holidays; i think the US has twice as much. So the difference is about 10 days.
Also, please note that due to our high tax progression working more hours is not worthwhile. So we have no incentive to do that; if you do overtime and get it paid you get about 30% of the money; 70% is absorbed by tax progression.
So working Germans are forced by the system to be lazy. We use overtime to slack off on other days; that’s more efficient. Unemployed Germans are lazy year-round except for the ones doing illegal work; often in construction. But that’s usually done by illegal Ukrainians these days.
At the government feefing trough
http://pgosselin.wordpress.com/2010/06/22/german-solar-energy-gravy-train-the-coming-meltdown/
Germans are disciplined: They go marching to the precipice…☺
Easy!, just make a III WW and solve the problem, but this time choose the green ones.
In Germany this practice of stupid subsidizing has quite a long tradition. Today you can produce electric power by photovoltaics (which is kind of a great joke by itself in `sunny`Germany…) and sell it for twice the price you have to pay for it.
In communist Germany (the GDR) people who had a small garden could sell their own breeded goose in the local shop for 15 Marks. Some hours later they could buy the same goose in this shop for half the price.
In the early 80s the GDR was bankrupt and could only survive, because West Germany was helping out with huge credits. And this is exactly what todays Germany will need soon, if they carry on with policy driven by stupidity.
what are your thoughts on the countless people that have lost their jobs and businesses,
Obviously the solution is to eliminate all the oil drilling businesses, jobs and revenues.
animals that have died, fish populations destroyed, marsh lands lost etc etc… in the mean time?
You may be shocked to learn animals die every day anyway, often killed by other animals. Pictures of oil-covered otters may be good PR but they’re also deeply stupid. The affected populations will recover. The impact won’t be a tenth of what is often claimed. There are massive natural oil seeps in the Gulf anyway.
You and the rest of the “conservative neandrethals” (your descrption not mine) should take pause next time you shout that feel good chant –Drill baby drill.
If you want to throw away your computer and go be a sustainable hunter-gatherer wiping your butt with maple leaves, we’re not stopping you. The rest of us need oil.
Perhaps the economic crisis will bring people to their senses – believe in Global Warming and freeze and starve, or find some realistic policies on electricity production.
TallDave says:
June 22, 2010 at 2:11 pm
[“You may be shocked to learn animals die every day anyway, often killed by other animals.”]
What pathetic logic. You would not even win a first grader’s debate with that one.
[“If you want to throw away your computer and go be a sustainable hunter-gatherer wiping your butt with maple leaves, we’re not stopping you. The rest of us need oil.”]
As equally pathetic, there is no sensible middle ground in your black and white world is there?
MJK
Ok, a link to the article that works:
http://www.handelsblatt.com/technologie/energie_technik/solarboom-treibt-kosten-sonnenenergie-wird-unbezahlbar;2604469;0
VERY interesting is that they have a rating below the article: 1 to 5 stars. The article is rated 1; the worst category! 1226 people have rated. Now that’s quite a lot. The article is dated 21.0.6.10 – you’d expect maybe 20 people to click the rating button. Astroturfing to the extreme. Good lobby work, German solar industry.
@DavidQ
‘Wind and Solar power might not have much impact on nature as such.’
Actually wind and solar have a daily impact on nature. Maybe you meant environment, but nature is part of environment, so moot.
Where do you make a clearing for PV panels? Where do you make a clearing for everything “wind power towers”? But pretty much where you come to grow stuff or protect stuff, because for some “odd” reason that’s the best places for solar and wind. Of course todays green muppets show their heads down the sand and wont see, wont listen, to their policy results.
>@DavidQ
‘Wind and Solar power might not have much impact on nature as such.’
Whaat? 5,000 turbines to equal one nuclear plant, 2,000 to equal output of a medium sized coal plant?
http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2010/03/14/trading-our-environment-for-wind-power/
How about Capt Wind?
What about Fragmentation and Destruction of Mountain Ridge FOREVER FOREVER FOREVER?
https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B5vbWLK5dTl2MTY1YWYzODItYzY2ZC00OWY3LWJiZDMtZDJiY2MyOWZmOTlm&hl=en
When i got started in the birdwatching culture, in the mid 90’s, it was all about “fragmentation”. There were all kinds of articles and studies, many of citizen scientists collected data for them, regarding the effect a clearing on forest species. That has all been completely forgotten. Now to be Green you have to be for clearcutting literally 20,000 acres of prime forest habitat to equal the output of one nuclear plant, and you still need the nuclear plant. I better stop before i get started because my blood is boiling! Do you have any idea how even 1,000 turbines together do almost nothing to supply the energy of our society?