Germany’s new “renewable” energy policy

Wind and solar power + soaring electricity prices = outsourced jobs + more coal burning

Meanwhile, eco activists demand “sustainable lifestyles” – for other people

Guest post by Kelvin Kemm

It is amazing how biased the international media is when it comes to reporting on energy generation, specifically electricity.

In mid-August, Germany opened a new 2200MW coal-fired power station near Cologne, and virtually not a word has been said about it. This dearth of reporting is even more surprising when one considers that Germany has said building new coal plants is necessary because electricity produced by wind and solar has turned out to be unaffordably expensive and unreliable.

In a deteriorating economic situation, Germany’s new environment minister, Peter Altmaier, who is as politically close to Chancellor Angela Merkel as it gets, has underlined time and again the importance of not further harming Europe’s – and Germany’s – economy by increasing the cost of electricity.

He is also worried that his country could become dependent on foreign imports of electricity, the mainstay of its industrial sector. To avoid that risk, Altmaier has given the green light to build twenty-three new coal-fired plants, which are currently under construction.

Yes, you read that correctly, twenty three-new coal-fired power plants are under construction in Germany, because Germany is worried about the increasing cost of electricity, and because they can’t afford to be in the strategic position of importing too much electricity.

Just recently, German figures were released on the actual productivity of the country’s wind power over the last ten years. The figure is 16.3 percent!

Due to the inherent intermittent nature of wind, their wind power system was designed for an assumed 30% load factor in the first place. That means that they hoped to get a mere 30% of the installed capacity – versus some 85-90% for coal, natural gas, nuclear and hydroelectric facilities. That means that, when they build 3,000MW of wind power, they expect to actually get merely 900MW, because the wind does not always blow at the required speeds. But in reality, after ten years, they have discovered that they are actually getting only half of what they had optimistically, and irrationally, hoped for: a measly 16.3 percent.

Even worse, after spending billions of Euros on subsidies, Germany’s total combined solar facilities have contributed a miserly, imperceptible 0.084% of Germany’s electricity over the last 22 years. That is not even one-tenth of one percent.

Moreover, the actual cost of Germany’s wind and solar electricity is far and away higher than its cost of coal and nuclear power. So much for “free” solar and wind. So much for all the German jobs that depend on reliable access to plentiful and affordable electricity.

As to natural gas produced via hydraulic fracturing, that too is prohibited, even if it is required to back up undependable wind and solar facilities. No wonder Germany’s natural gas and electricity prices are practically unaffordable.

Meantime the extreme greens continue to preach about the wonders of life based on solar and wind power. They also talk constantly about “sustainable living,” a “sustainable future,” and an otherwise hydrocarbon-free and “decarbonized” tomorrow. Be warned! What these vacuous exhortations mean is that people must not enjoy the lifestyles and living standards of a modern world.

They mean the First World must cut back significantly on its living standards, and the developing world must give up its aspirations for achieving the lifestyle of the First World.

Believe me, African small-scale farmers all dream of becoming like the large commercial-scale farmers they see next door. They do not wish to plough their fields with oxen, when their neighbours have tractors and automated grain handling machines. The same is true of small-scale commercial and industrial operations in which an affordable and reliable supply of electricity is essential. It is likewise true of virtually every office, shop, hospital, school and family on the entire African continent.

Meanwhile, in South Africa, an organisation calling itself “Green Truth” has distributed a notice about a newly released movie titled simply “Fuel.” Here is part of the promotional notice:

“FUEL is a comprehensive and entertaining look at energy: A history of where we have been, our present predicament, and a solution to our dependence on foreign oil. Rousing and reactionary, FUEL is an amazing, in-depth, personal journey by eco-evangelist Josh Tickell, of oil use and abuse, as it examines wide-ranging energy solutions other than oil; the faltering US auto and petroleum industries; and the latest stirrings toward alternative energy.

“The film includes interviews with a wide range of policy makers, educators and activists such as Woody Harrelson, Neil Young and Willie Nelson. Tickell knew he just couldn’t idly stand by any longer. He decided to make a film, focusing on the knowledge and insight he discovered, but also giving hope that solutions are at reach. A ‘regular guy’ who felt he could make a difference, he spent 11 years making this movie, showing himself – and others – that an individual can indeed make a difference. Stirring, radical and multi-award winning energy documentary! FUEL features experts and eco-celebrities such as: Sheryl Crow, Larry David, Richard Branson and Robert Kennedy, Jr.”

The notice frequently emphasizes “sustainable living” and “a hopeful future.” And the singers, actors, activists and other energy “experts” featured in the film are all extremely wealthy, and not at all likely to adopt the “sustainable” lifestyle that they and Tickell advocate so passionately.

Does this film have anything to do with “truth” about energy? Or is it simply a propaganda film for the producers’ and activists’ version of “sustainable lives,” for others, though not for themselves? It takes but a fleeting moment to realize that it is just like Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” – leagues removed from truth, and laden with scientific errors, personal biases, and the hypocrisies of affluent partisans who own big houses and fly private jets to events where they tell other people how to live “more sustainably.”

I’m sure “eco-evangelist” Josh Tickell is just “a regular guy,” just as his movie promo says he is. But I would much rather have my country’s electricity future planned by electrical engineers and scientists, and by citizens and politicians who actually live here – rather than by a “regular guy” environmental activist and his self-proclaimed “experts” on energy and “sustainable” lifestyles.

As formerly eco-evangelist Germany has demonstrated, countries cannot afford to have national energy policy moulded by movies like “Fuel” and “An Inconvenient Truth.” Their policies – and their future – need to be based on genuine truth and honest reality.

____________

Dr Kelvin Kemm is a nuclear physicist and business strategy consultant based in Pretoria, South Africa. A member of the International Board of Advisors of the Washington, DC-based Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org), Dr Kemm has been awarded the prestigious Lifetime Achievers Award of the National Science and Technology Forum of South Africa.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

The silly thing is that this was obvious 10 years ago. Until we learn how to store gigawatt/weeks of energy for our electric supplies, wind and solar will never be economically viable. The only viable renewable energy source at the moment is cellulose ethanol; there the energy as produced is stored..

John

And that is not only for Germany. A lot more countries in Europe are on the wind power bandwagon… sadly enough.
Maybe cold hard figures will finally wake them up.

jayhd

Now why haven’t the American main stream media reported on this? sarc off

timg56

When I see the names of the “experts” from that film review I am reminded of the credit card commercial where Alex Baldwin tells the pilot of the plane “it’s ok, I’ve played a pilot on tv.”
Ask people if they would board a plane whose pilot was an actor and though not a certified pilot, had played the role in film or tv and you’d have a lot of empty seats. But let someone famous tell them about energy, climate, finance, or any other technical field and a surprising number will believe.

Peter Miller

So the Germans have turned off nice, clean, reliable nuclear energy and switching to coal, which has to be mostly imported, or even worse burn low grade, domestically produced, brown lignite..
At least they have the common sense to see that the use of renewable energy on a large scale makes no sense in a modern economy. As the effective ruler of the Eurozone, they can ignore all the targets set by the bureaucrats in Brussels – see below:
“The EU aims to get 20% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020. Renewables include wind, solar, hydro-electric and tidal power as well as geothermal energy and biomass. More renewable energy will enable the EU to cut greenhouse emissions and make it less dependent on imported energy. And boosting the renewables industry will encourage technological innovation and employment in Europe.”

Doesn’t South Africa get a substantial portion of its local petroleum fuel needs from coal liquefaction?

Nope. No alarmism here. Carry on, mates!

GlynnMhor

If only these truths could be conveniently disseminated to the general public in the developed world…

KnR

Germany’s wind and solar many not have actual produce much power , but you can bet someone done very nicely out of farming the fat subsides .

Lance Wallace

Links please.

Hanzwurst

“As formerly eco-evangelist Germany”
Unfortunantely it still is. The need for coal-plants just arose because of the is only one thing Germans fear more than climate change and gene technology: nuclear power.
After fukushima politicians across the board (and after recommendations of an “ethics commission”, consisting of 17 member of which most were of non-technical background, like priests. politicians, sociologists and philosophers (sic!)) decided to accelerate the shut-down of all nuclear-plants.
Long story short: The situation over here is even more [snip . . you know the rules . . . kbmod] up than that text conveys. And it gets worse by the day.

DirkH

coeruleus says:
August 28, 2012 at 9:33 am
“Nope. No alarmism here. Carry on, mates!”
I’m German and I’m paying 23.5 Eurocent a kWh. Prices are expected to rise to 25 cent next year. Guess we’ll be finally overtaking the Danes and have the most expensive electricity in the world.
Come to Germany, you’re invited, pay German taxes and German energy prices and see how you like it.

Denis Rushworth

On the bright side, does this mean that the Germans need only build 1/2 of the fossil backup power generation for wind energy that they had planned on? But then there is still the max and min issue.

cui bono

Our definition of ‘celebrity’ seems to have suffered an awful lot since 1969. So, so sad.

LizC

” Just recently, German figures were released on the actual productivity of the country’s wind power over the last ten years. The figure is 16.3 percent! ”
Any chance of details of the source for this please?

DirkH

Peter Miller says:
August 28, 2012 at 9:21 am

“At least they have the common sense to see that the use of renewable energy on a large scale makes no sense in a modern economy. As the effective ruler of the Eurozone, they can ignore all the targets set by the bureaucrats in Brussels – see below:
“The EU aims to get 20% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020. “”

Basically Germany designed the Kyoto treaty.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/secret-history-climate-alarmism?page=1
So we set the parameters of that treaty so that we don’t have to do a thing besides wrecking the obsolete industries of the DDR – in 1990 , which was the reference point, they still emitted loads of CO2.
Even with the new added coal plants we probably still fulfill our Kyoto targets. We had so much leeway that we even gave carbon credits to France for free.

A. C Osborn

Reality BITES.

Richard Bell

PLEASE….. Someone send this [article] to ALL the mad British politicians who want to cover the UK with windmills

Paul

The following is completely biased reporting.
Germany’s total combined solar facilities have contributed a miserly, imperceptible 0.084% of Germany’s electricity over the last 22 years. That is not even one-tenth of one percent.
Most of Germany’s solar capacity came online over the last few years. You need to report the percent contributed by solar over the last 2 or 3 years. Shame on you. Such misrepresentation dishonors WUWT.

Kelvin Kemm notes
on wind power: But in reality, after ten years, they have discovered that they are actually getting only half of what they had optimistically, and irrationally, hoped for: a measly 16.3 percent.
on solar: a miserly, imperceptible 0.084% of Germany’s electricity over the last 22 years.
10 years, 22 years – those are weird measurement periods. Even if Germany got 100% of its power from solar this year, then next year they would have gotten less than 5% of its power from solar over the previous 23 years. Well, not accounting for increased energy use overall.
I’d be lot more interested in present times until the subsidy decline can’t be ignored. Then I’d want to see a graph over time of the growth and contraction of even the most miserly and imperceptible newish energy source.

Steve `

@Tom B.
Yes, SA does get an awful lot from coal processing. Look up “Sasol” sometime

Wijnand

I agree with Lance Wallace.
Links please.
If I send this to my green friends, thats what they will ask.
So please give us some references to the 16,3% and the 23 coal plants, that will make this post very lethal. Thanks in advance!!!!

DirkH says: […]
Come to Germany, you’re invited, pay German taxes and German energy prices and see how you like it.
——————————-
I’m also German, living in the US. Germans have historically paid higher prices for natural resources. At this point in history the Russians kind of have you by the balls. OTOH, usage is far more efficient, so paying more hurts a little less than if we were to pay that amount here. I’m not saying that’s necessarily good, but it is what it is and you will need to run things a bit tighter over there than in the US for the foreseeable future.
You also pay higher taxes. But that’s not all about energy production and use; some of the revenue generated goes to some pretty crazy stuff like Kindergeld. And a VAT approaching 20%? Are you kidding me? You really want to complain about marginally higher energy prices before coming to terms with the fact that that’s way too high?
My point was that posts like the one we’re both commenting on tend to sound rather, eh-hem, “alarmist”. What with the German and European economies about to collapse because of wind power. Really? German banks making bad loans to Greece is meaningless compared to a bit of tinkering around in the North Sea? I’m “skeptical” as one would say around here. Especially since whenever I travel back to Germany to visit relatives, it’s plainly obvious that people generally enjoy a much higher standard of living than we do here in the US, and that isn’t going to change anytime soon. People just complain about things more than we do here.

Colin Porter

What hypocrisy. The Germans invented feed in tariffs to create an industry for themselves and forced the rest of Europe to follow with all the consequent problems of destruction of the countryside, inflated prices and an unmanageable grid. Now, since the Chinese have taken over with solar, and will soon do the same with wind, they find that it is hurting their own industry more than it is gaining them new business. So it is now OK to burn the most “polluting” fuel of them all. But look at the mess they have left in the rest of Europe and beyond. And what would have been their attitude to us in the UK if we had shown them two fingers to their policies?

Sun Spot

@ Lance Wallace says: August 28, 2012 at 9:41 am
and
@ LizC says: August 28, 2012 at 9:53 am
Are you two internet illiterate?? Try google.com you dum@%%#$(). How about doing your own home work !
http://fossilfuel.energy-business-review.com/news/rwe-commissions-2200mw-coal-fired-plant-in-germany-170812

Paul: “Most of Germany’s solar capacity came online over the last few years. ”
They started in 1990, hit 1GW by 2004, 4GW by 2007 etc
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Germany
What a grotesque waste of money in a country that barely gets any sunshine in the winter.

Matt Skaggs

This post is a highly skewed hit piece. For example:
“Germany’s total combined solar facilities have contributed a miserly, imperceptible 0.084% of Germany’s electricity over the last 22 years.”
Why not go back 100 years and see how low you can get it?
According to this:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/26/us-climate-germany-solar-idUSBRE84P0FI20120526
Germany nearly reached 50% of its electrical needs with solar power on a recent sunny afternoon, and overall has achieved 4% from solar and around 20% from renewables. The fact is that Germany is planning for its future, things are going as planned, and they do not really care what you think.

Paul rightly commented that the solar capacity quoted did not reflect the installations of recent years.
This Reuters report seems reasonably balanced
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/23/us-germany-solar-incentives-idUSTRE81M1EG20120223
The German govt is cutting subsidies and slowing down installations due to the cost to the end user of electricity.
An intent problem of solar of course is lack of sun/bright day light in many countries coupled with that inconvenient down time called ‘night’
It may have a place in the tropics but probably not in an industrialised northern country with limited sun hours
Tonyb

Phillip Bratby

While German energy giant RWE is building coal-fired power stations in Germany, in the UK RWE is grabbing the huge subsidies to build wind farms (to save the planet of course). Hypocritical money-grubbers, all of them. The UK Government still has no clue that we are being ripped off by the rest of the EU.

cui bono

Hmm. According to wiki solar PV covered 3% of total German electricity consumption in 2011.
It notes a report that says “using photovoltaics in emission reduction is 53 times more expensive than the European Union Emission Trading Scheme’s market price, while wind power is 4 times more expensive, thereby discouraging other industries from finding more cost-effective methods of reducing emissions”.
So 3% at 53 times standard cost means they could have multiplied their electricity generation by 159% using standard means, for the same money.
Surely some mistake on my part? If not, certainly on their part!

Scarface

Recently I talked to someone who was in the business of building windfarms at sea. He was convinced that the costs and maintanance of these windmills, the costs of the cables to the mainland and the effective output of these things could never, NEVER, lead to an economic viable price of electricity.
They earned good money but were sure the game would soon be over. I allow everybody to make a good living, but this wasting of resources and (taxpayer) money is indeed beyond any reason (economically and environmentally) and I hope it stops asap. Pity for him, but he will find a new job for sure. Probably in the oil, coal or shalegas business! 🙂
Germany will lead the EU out of this misery, I hope…
At least they do think and calculate sometimes.
And it also helps that they are running out of OPM.
Maybe Greece and Spain are a blessing in disguise?

MarkB

Is the Bishop Hill site down? I got a blank Squarespace page.

“Argonne National Laboratory, under the stewardship of the Department of Energy, just released a study that found wind energy does not reduce carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation as much as expected due to the need to ramp up fossil fuel plants when the wind is not blowing. It takes more energy and thus more carbon dioxide emissions to ramp a coal plant up and down than if the same coal plant is operated at a continuous, efficient base-load level.”
I think the following conclusion would also apply to PV:
“Wind capacity does not displace actual fossil fuel plants—it displaces the generation from the back-up plants when the wind is blowing.”
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2012/06/08/argonne-lab-study/

Nigel Harris

I’d also like to see references for some of these “facts”. According to the BDEW (and they should know) there were 17 plans in place for coal-fired plant new builds or upgrades/refits of existing sites as of May this year. That’s quite a lot, but I’d be very surprised indeed if that has suddenly turned into 23 plants under construction.
As for the new 2200 MW unit near Cologne, RWE’s Grevenbroich-Neurath project was actually an upgrade of an existing plant, replacing old and inefficient equipment with two highly efficient units with 43% efficiency (that’s a heat rate of 7,935 btu/kWh for Americans). The new units will save around 6 million tonnes of CO2 emissions annually compared with the older units they replaced. They are also much more flexible than older coal-fired plant, having the ability to increase or decrease output by around 500 MW in 15 minutes.

DonS

http://www.germanenergyblog.de/?p=3063 For the search engine challenged.

Kelvin Vaughan
Gunga Din

Paul says:
August 28, 2012 at 10:13 am
The following is completely biased reporting.
Germany’s total combined solar facilities have contributed a miserly, imperceptible 0.084% of Germany’s electricity over the last 22 years. That is not even one-tenth of one percent.
Most of Germany’s solar capacity came online over the last few years. You need to report the percent contributed by solar over the last 2 or 3 years. Shame on you. Such misrepresentation dishonors WUWT.
===================================================================
So solar contributed so much they have to build new coal plants?
Such misrepresentaion ….

Matt Skaggs: Can you please tell me where you got your fantasy pill prescription? Mine are getting a bit weak, I’m afraid.

mogamboguru

Electricity is expensive enough over here in Germany – I know, because I have to foot the substantial bill each month for my family of four.
Over the past two years, our energy-bill grew 30 percent while consumption remained virtually unchanged.
German power stations use to burn Lignite, which we have in abundance. The known reserves are said to last at least 400 years.
We would be nuts not to use this cheap, domestic source of enery – albeit it comes at a price other than money: The open pits where Lignite is mined are HUGE. But once the Lignite is gone, they make for great, recreational lakes.

Gunga Din

Matt Skaggs says:
August 28, 2012 at 10:49 am
This post is a highly skewed hit piece. For example:
“Germany’s total combined solar facilities have contributed a miserly, imperceptible 0.084% of Germany’s electricity over the last 22 years.”
Why not go back 100 years and see how low you can get it?
According to this:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/26/us-climate-germany-solar-idUSBRE84P0FI20120526
Germany nearly reached 50% of its electrical needs with solar power on a recent sunny afternoon, and overall has achieved 4% from solar and around 20% from renewables. The fact is that Germany is planning for its future, things are going as planned, and they do not really care what you think.
=========================================================================
So if they can just figure out how to blast those pesky clouds out of the sky, they’d only have to build half as many coal plants.
(Of course, the resulting drought might be troublesome. Maybe they can import rice and tea from China?)

manicbeancounter

At least in Germany they are partially realizing their stupidity and building coal-fired power stations.
Here in Britain we still have a huge number of windfarms in the pipeline. Could I ask for help on one such scheme? An offshore wind-farm of capacity 1,000 to 1,390MW is about to receive final consent in the Bristol Channel. This will blight the beauty of both the North Devon and South Wales coastline will turbines 590ft or 722ft high.
Objections need to be in by 5pm GMT 31st August (around 9am in California)
http://manicbeancounter.com/2012/08/12/stop-the-blighting-of-lundy-north-devon-by-rwes-atlantic-array/
http://www.slaythearray.com/

mogamboguru

sunshinehours1 says:
August 28, 2012 at 10:46 am
What a grotesque waste of money in a country that barely gets any sunshine in the winter.
—————————————————————————————————————–
You know, we german guys happen to be so extremely cool that we use to cuddle up to a block of ice to stay warm.
Because it’s not the energy-content of the ice per se, but the Delta T which makes all the difference…
/sarc

Resourceguy

Okay so this is another WUWT energy post with hits and misses. Thoughts: 1) Yes, the solar contribution figure is low and out of date and it was mostly rooftop centered FITs so do they really know what they have, 2) Yes, the Germans were a little crazy going overboard on wind while renouncing nuclear and solar FIT and the PV industry at the same time!, 3) The coal plant investments are part of this whipsaw policy picture to stabilize a low cost component as secure base load capacity in addition to the renewables. , 4) The lowest cost solar producer is pulling out due to high production costs in Germany like a lot of other firms have discovered there over time. This is not the end of the story but an end to artificial markets and production. Meanwhile the lowest cost producers will move on to market-based costs and pricing after having benefited from German subsidy schemes for the proof of concept period and scale up. If these comments seems off base to you, then you are still looking at solar averages or still looking at start-up firms like DOE Secr. Chu and other fools with a disdain for due diligence work.

Steve (Paris)

Visiting the inlaws in Northern Germany. Work on a neighbouring new build has come to a halt due to constant rain. The roof is ready for the solar panels but the weather just won’t cooperate. Don’t know wether to laugh or cry.

Gail Combs

What I would really like to know is who have been the recipients of all the lucre generated by this huge world wide hoax. We know Gore Pocketed ~$18 Million from Now-Defunct Chicago Climate Exchange

…Richard Sandor, founded the exchange with a foundation gift of $1.1 million, and pocketed $98.5 million…
NOTE: …Barack Obama was on the Joyce Foundation Board when it provided the funding to establish the CCX. Maurice Strong, founding head of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), precursor to the IPCC, was a CCX board member.

I wonder what Barak Obama and Maurice Strong’s take was?
The US government has spent over $79 billion on CAGW between 1989 and 2009. Carbon trading worldwide reached $126 billion in 2008, and 30 billion dollars was spent on pure scientific research. Climate Scientists are among the most highly paid professionals/university professors in the USA today. not to mention this WUWT article Carbon trading fraud in Belgium – “up to 90% of the whole market volume was caused by fraudulent activities” ( Russian mafia and IRA were linked to swindles,)
According to Climate Money by Joanne Nova

President Bush signed on October 3 last year included the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008 which contained about $17 billion in tax incentives for clean energy services.
Then in February 2009, the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was signed into law, containing some $110 billion in clean energy investments in the bill. Many of these “investments” defy easy categorization…. But expenses like the $3.4 billion for carbon sequestration have no other purpose or use. They depend 100% on the assumption that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant…
According to the World Bank, turnover of carbon trading doubled from $63 billion in 2007 to $126 billion in 2008…. The potential involved in an entirely new fiat currency has banks and financial institutions “wholly in bed” with a scientific theory.
Commissioner Bart Chilton, head of the energy and environmental markets advisory committee of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), has predicted that within five years a carbon market would dwarf any of the markets his agency currently regulates:…
He predicted trades eventually will total $10 trillion a year.” In other words, carbon trading will be bigger than oil, and even the promise of a market that massive and lucrative represents a major vested interest.
As Bart Chilton says:
“This issue is too important to our economy and to our world…

artwest

“[Josh Tickell] A ‘regular guy’ who felt he could make a difference”
Hardly. At least not according to the stomach-turning hagiography at Wikipedia (You’ll get RSI, Josh). The description of his high-flying, no doubt lucrative, eco-career makes creating the universe in a week sound like slacking.:
“Josh Tickell is a thought leader at the intersection of new energy, new technology, new fuel and new urbanism. He serves as a worldwide strategist for Fortune 500 Companies, billionaires, and industrialists.
(…)
His specialty is showing industries, groups, and companies how to save money and how to take advantage of new emerging technologies to create wealth and profits.
Tickell consults on issues ranging from new technology product launches, to consumer attitudes, legislative strategies, operations-wide waste to energy and new technology installations for companies such as Green Mountain Energy Resources, Clif Bar, Yum Brands, Audi, General Motors and William Morris Endeavor.
Tickell has been a featured guest on Jay Leno’s The Tonight Show and Good Morning America. He is a regularly featured opinion leader in news stories on CNN, Discovery, Reuters, NBC, Fox and NPR. Articles on Tickell, his films, and his work have appeared in the Los Angeles Times, New York Times, USA Today, The Huffington Post, Maxim Magazine, Popular Mechanics and thousands of international newspapers and magazines.
(…)
Tickell continues to speak publicly to promote and educate on the subject of biodiesel. He has consulted for companies and organizations such as National Biodiesel Board, Arizona State House of Representatives, Solar Energy International, Quicksilver and Clif Bar. Tickell has spoken at numerous colleges and universities including MIT, Ohio University, Bard College, Vassar College, Harper College, Colorado College and Rider University and has presented in countries including Cuba, Argentina, Burma, and Australia.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josh_Tickell
We are truly not worthy to occupy the same planet.

Gunga Din

August 28, 2012 at 11:31 am
….This is not the end of the story but an end to artificial markets and production.
=================================================================
Key point. All this Green Stamp of Approval energy stuff is artificial demand. NOBODY REALY NEEDS IT! The desire for it has only been planted in the public’s mind by those who profit from it, be that profit in money or power.
(Sorry for the “shout”. I would have just put it in bold but I don’t know how with my system. It’s a dinosaur.)

Jeff

Kelvin Vaughan says:
August 28, 2012 at 11:14 am
That article is a bunch of marketing crap. I moved back here to Germany in 1998, and
my electricity bills have climbed ever since (even though our consumption has dropped…).
We currently pay 26 Euro-cent per KwH, and the BW greens are bound and determined
to make that even higher. Add to that the bird-choppers on order, and we have an
unstable net to look forward to as well….
Last time I checked, we hadn’t had a tsunami in Germany in recorded history (a lot
longer than IPCCs 30-year recorded history 🙂 or 🙁 ), and though a couple of
nuclear plants (Phillipsburg (sp?)) should be shut down because of age, the others
are OK. Kind of ironic that Germany is giving carbon “credits” to the French when
they have mostly nuclear power….who’s winning here? Certainly not the consumer…
Would love to dig deep and strike oil or gold….my luck I’d just strike a sewer line….

3x2

One of the most interesting reads on Coal I’ve had in a while…
http://www.peakprosperity.com/blog/78984/coal-ignored-juggernaut

Richard Bell says: August 28, 2012 at 10:07 am
PLEASE….. Someone send this [article] to ALL the mad British politicians who want to cover the UK with windmills

Richard, as we have seen in recent weeks, it is little wonder that our ‘representatives’ are still pushing the CC/renewable/sustainability agenda. Controlling the committees that direct taxpayer loot is a very profitable enterprise for your typical “sustainability” parasite..
(a James Delingpole piece that has links to the many and various stories)
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100177587/tory-sleaze-is-worse-than-ever-
yeo-and-deben-must-go/
I particularly like the (UK Lord Provost of AGW) Yeo/Boris (London Mayor) scam of forcing London taxi drivers to upgrade to ‘eco-taxis’ supplied …. shockingly by Yeo’s own company…
http://order-order.com/2012/08/17/taxi-for-tim-yeo-green-torys-dodgy-wheeler-deal/
Talking parasitic class – you have to admire our new CCC head (Sir Deben BSE (Gummer)) who, for some reason, wants the largest wind farm on Earth …. to be built by his own company. Shocked I am that he has manoeuvred himself (job interview by Yeo BTW) into a position where he gets to decide that it will be built and how much the taxpayer will cough up.
I’m torn between bankers and politicians and ‘scientists’ as to which leeching parasites we should execute first.

Gail Combs

artwest says:
August 28, 2012 at 11:57 am
“[Josh Tickell] A ‘regular guy’ who felt he could make a difference”
__________________________
Sounds like a well paid PR type.