GE Renewable Energy Logo. Fair Use, Low Resolution Image to Identify the Subject

GE Renewable Energy Posts $419 Million Loss

Essay by Eric Worrall

Midterm blues? While GE Aviation posted a $1.2 billion profit, GE Renewable Energy Posted a loss. GE blames inflation and the expiration of Federal tax credits.

GE CEO reports progress but ‘much is still uncertain’

Aviation business carried profits, but renewables is still volatile

Larry Rulison
July 26, 2022
Updated: July 26, 2022 12:26 p.m.

SCHENECTADY – General Electric Co. surprised Wall Street on Tuesday with higher-than-expected adjusted profit of $1.7 billion, up 81 percent from a year ago as CEO Larry Culp Jr. continues to cut costs and improve operations at the Boston-based industrial conglomerate.

Uncertainty remains for GE’s Capital Region workforce, which includes GE’s power plant and renewable energy businesses in Schenectady that GE is planning to spin off as a separate company known as GE Vernova.

GE’s aviation business carried the day, posting a profit of nearly $1.2 billion on $6.1 billion in revenue. Profit margin was 18.7 percent, and orders were up 26 percent as the commercial airline industry rebounds from the COVID-19 pandemic.

GE’s renewable energy business, which is currently based in Paris but will be merged with GE Power before its planned 2024 spin-off, lost $419 million during the second quarter, forcing GE to cut back on its expectations for the unit for the rest of the year. Orders were down 3 percent.

Read more: https://www.timesunion.com/business/article/Political-and-business-climate-hurting-GE-s-17329251.php

Maybe GE Renewable Energy will turn their business around. But potential downsizing and a shrinking order book doesn’t exactly scream raging business success.

5 19 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
87 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Janice Moore
July 27, 2022 2:10 pm

GE blames … the expiration of Federal tax credits.

Well, they got that right.

Any business that heavily relies on taxpayer funds to cover its costs of production deserves to fail.

But for misled voters and crooked politicians, they would never have had a market — at all.

Last edited 11 days ago by Janice Moore
Dave Fair
Reply to  Eric Worrall
July 27, 2022 4:21 pm

97?

Janice Moore
Reply to  Dave Fair
July 27, 2022 4:32 pm

Oh, Mr. Fair. What’s black and white and red, er, read, all over is: 97% of all scientists say that human CO2 is causing significant shifts in the climate zones of the earth! Mm, hm. 😉

Dave Fair
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 27, 2022 4:38 pm

Brain freeze, Janice. Call me Dave. Love ya!

Janice Moore
Reply to  Dave Fair
July 27, 2022 4:56 pm

Aw. 😊 Okay, Dave. Thank you. And you may call me Janice (heh, heh). 🙂

Dave Fair
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 27, 2022 5:10 pm

I tell some people that my friends call me Dave, but you may call me Mr. Fair. Wanna get together for fun and games, Janice? I may be old, but I still like racy women. 👀

Janice Moore
Reply to  Dave Fair
July 27, 2022 5:55 pm

I am most definitely not “racy.” I am a lot of fun, though… . Heh. Thanks for the fun, here. Anyway, I think we live about 2,000 miles apart!

Here’s someone to emulate when you do your “Mister Fair” bit (one of my faves):

Pumba in “The Lion King” “They CALL me….. MISTER PIG!!

Dave Fair
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 27, 2022 6:46 pm

Ah, Janice, haven’t you heard that distance makes the heart grow fonder? And racy is in the eye of the beholder!

Thank you, too, for the fun here. Many WUWT commentors seem a bit dour.

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 28, 2022 3:22 am

Hey, you two!
Get a room!

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 27, 2022 2:30 pm

Thanks, Eric. 🙂 For anyone still wondering… 🙄 Read all about it here:

comment image

https://cartoonsbyjosh.co.uk/subsidy-sam

Last edited 11 days ago by Janice Moore
Gary Pearse
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 27, 2022 3:14 pm

Janice you beat me to it. I was going point out the big ‘tell’ of GE putting the subsidies as a second cause. You more effectively showed it as the only real cause. Inflation for goods that the market actually demands they paid on to the customer.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Gary Pearse
July 27, 2022 4:03 pm

I am honored (er, honoured — smile), Mr. Pearse, to know I thought along the same lines as your sharp mind. 🙂

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 27, 2022 4:45 pm

Thanks Janice for your kind words. I’m equally honored to have shared the same thought.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Gary Pearse
July 27, 2022 4:58 pm

😊

Bryan A
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 27, 2022 2:51 pm

They need to pass the blame to something other than the fact that, just perhaps, it’s the cruddy power source that no one in their right mind really wants

Richard Page
Reply to  Bryan A
July 28, 2022 2:18 am

Not just that – GE turbines have developed serious faults on several occasions leading to them being replaced wholesale on some installations. I don’t know whether they are assembling their own or from Chinese components but GE turbines appear to have a reputation for failure within the wind industry.

n.n
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 27, 2022 2:55 pm

The subsidies, the scientific cult, the social status, the economic legerdemaine (e.g. labor and and environmental arbitrage), etc. They would have had a market, but it would have been substantially smaller, and specialized, a niche market.

Janice Moore
Reply to  n.n
July 27, 2022 4:02 pm

Perhaps. There are barriers to entry, nevertheless. I don’t think they could overcome them without sticking their hands into the taxpayers’ pocketbooks.

H.R.
Reply to  n.n
July 27, 2022 4:32 pm

Correctomundo, n.n. Wind already has a niche market where it actually works and makes sense.

It is just plain magical thinking that wind can be used as baseload for the grid.

Drake
Reply to  H.R.
July 27, 2022 6:51 pm

Yep, pumping water or grinding grain.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  H.R.
July 28, 2022 5:51 am

Beyond Magical Thinking : Time to Get Real on Climate Change by Vaclav Smil

https://e360.yale.edu/features/beyond-magical-thinking-time-to-get-real-about-climate-change

Janice Moore
Reply to  Dave Andrews
July 28, 2022 9:50 am

The gist of that article is to push electric vehicles.

It is chock a block FULL of misinformation about human CO2 emissions and CO2 generally.

To promote EV’s it uses, mostly, a lot of garbage/lies about CO2.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 29, 2022 5:22 am

Smil does seem to have a bit of a blind side as regards EVs but I think he makes many other pertinent points. You don’t have to take everything a person says on board.

ATheoK
Reply to  Dave Andrews
July 28, 2022 10:36 am

Beyond Magical Thinking”

Yes!
Beyond magical thinking to full blown absurd delusion and falsehoods.

Let us know when mr. “get real” identifies where all of the metals, minerals and fossil fuel necessary to build out the grid let alone AND all of those EVs.

Just today’s EV manufacturers are driving prices for raw materials stratospheric through excessive demand while the supplies and sources are dwindling.
Alleged EV mandates will completely drain supplies of the metals and minerals. Meanwhile, biddy biden is trying to shut down the supply of fossil fuels necessary for energy and raw materials.

Just more elites whining that the world has to convert to their bad ideas so they can virtue signal their pals.
All while wearing fossil fuel products head to toe and living in fossil fueled comfortable housing.

It’s a shame the EV, wind farm, solar arrays burn so much fuel making their products. Drives the renewables actual CO₂ footprints sky high.
All this delusion and panic because people have falsely demonized a molecule absolutely essential to life on Earth.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  ATheoK
July 29, 2022 5:30 am

I absolutely agree that the massive increase in mining necessary for the planned expansion of EVs means it is unlikely to happen as some want it and have in many posts on WUWT made exactly that same point myself.

I also regularly point out in my posts that thinking we can go from the c 16m EVs in the world at the end of 2021 to replacing all the 1.4 billion ICEVs currently in use by 2050 is pie in the sky thinking

Last edited 9 days ago by Dave Andrews
J N
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 27, 2022 4:15 pm

It should indeed be a rule not to be broken. I even concede that a plant that really works could have one year of incentives to amortise investments, making a profit after that. If something makes a loss when there are no incentives it is stupid investment.

Rud Istvan
July 27, 2022 2:24 pm

Without tax credits (and equivalents like preferential feed in tariffs or direct subsidies), there never was a viable GE renewables business. And never will be.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 27, 2022 2:32 pm

Plus another 97 🙂

Mr.
Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 27, 2022 4:01 pm

Warren Buffett agrees with you Rud.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Mr.
July 27, 2022 5:07 pm

I know. Quoted him up front in the old Climate Etc. guest post ‘True cost of wind.’

HotScot
Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 27, 2022 4:14 pm

I’m all for government giving innovative fledgling businesses a leg up. I’m going through that myself right now.

But to be subsidising ongoing businesses with their own sources of risk finance is just disgusting.

I can’t go to a bank to raise finance because I’m an individual with a home and pension as my only collateral. If I risk and lose that, I’m on the street. It’s a risk too far for even a slam dunk wizard business idea.

A business concept survives or fails on its viability, not its source of funding. The UK seems to have twigged to this after generations of ‘government knows best’, and application for funding for small business seems more interested in the idea now than the process.

The process is still horrendous but, in my case, I’m driven through the professionally and academically proven, ‘design route to market’ to qualify for government assistance, rather than simply conforming to tick box bureaucracy. But I just do not get how a renewables business model could possibly have gotten through the process I’m navigating.

Which proves a couple of things to me; the UK government does understand how business works and, shelling out sackfuls of money to renewables businesses has nothing to do with sound investment decisions, and they know it.

Dave Fair
Reply to  HotScot
July 27, 2022 4:26 pm

HotScot, I’m sorry but government involvement in financing business ventures ensures bad decision-making. I’ve been there.

TonyG
Reply to  Dave Fair
July 28, 2022 10:36 am

The best “leg up” government can give business, fledgling or otherwise, is to get out of the way.

July 27, 2022 2:29 pm

GE used to bring good things to life….used to have progress as its most important product….sad.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Anti-griff
July 27, 2022 2:36 pm

😥 Yes.

[~00:35] “… and that’s a pretty nice business to be in.”

AndyHce
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 27, 2022 8:32 pm

That part of the business was sold to China.

n.n
Reply to  Anti-griff
July 27, 2022 2:50 pm

It still does. Progress is an [unqualified] monotonic process. They are still making progress: one step forward, two steps backward.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  n.n
July 27, 2022 2:54 pm

That is wicked funny. I am so stealing it.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 27, 2022 4:28 pm

Rud, how about: Progress … one step forward, fall in a hole.

John Garrett
Reply to  Anti-griff
July 27, 2022 2:57 pm

Jack Welch laid the seeds for the destruction of GE with all his accounting finagling and chicanery.

Wall Street lionized him and the media morons crowned him a management genius. In fact, he pulled the wool over all their eyes.

Immelt was in way over his head right from the git-go but Welch was the one who instilled a culture of intellectual dishonesty and “making the numbers” regardless of the means.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  John Garrett
July 27, 2022 3:33 pm

Yes, Immelt was in over his head. Mainly because he did not countenance the financial shenanigans Welsh relied upon. Plus, Immelt had bad luck/bad strategic insight. His bet on oil field services made sense from a GE ‘core capabilities’ perspective (something Welsh instilled as religion) but not from a global strategy perspective knowing fracking was going to unleash a lot or oil and gas, so drop crude and natgas prices, thereby forcing the frackers to cut way back, thereby ‘ruining’ GE’s newest ‘core capabilities’ business financial prospects.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  John Garrett
July 27, 2022 5:00 pm

GE founder Thomas Edison has rolled over in his grave a number of times. With at least 3 generations of dumbing down it was inevitable that they chose to go on the government dole.

Derg
Reply to  John Garrett
July 27, 2022 7:34 pm

Just like IBM

Paul Hurley (aka PaulH)
Reply to  John Garrett
July 28, 2022 6:04 am

Indeed. GE became something of a financial black box under Welch. Immelt continued the practice.

TW2020
Reply to  John Garrett
July 28, 2022 1:15 pm

Let me just offer a little different take on Welch v Immelt, as someone who was hired by Welch and did work there for several years.

I think the problem with GE Capital was not the shenanigans but just the sheer size it grew to. Under Welch it got to 40% of profits and Immelt continued to grow GE Capital so in 2007 (Immelt took over in 2001) it got to over 50% of profits. So that last growth is on Immelt. GE, the company, became a bank, albeit a hugely diversified bank that did everything any bank does, from equipment finance (the original business) to consumer credit cards to investment banking to reinsurance to owning Lehmann Bros. to you-name-it. When the 2008 financial crisis hit, all banks got hurt. But Wall Street realized, hey, GE, you’re not a manufacturer, you’re a bank. We will stop valuing you and your earnings like a manufacturer, (manufacturer earnings are valued higher than bank earnings), unless you wind down your banking side. This meant forced sales at low values, and some financing like the expensive BH loan, which got negotiated under Immelt, was needed to save the day.

Letting GE Capital grow big started under Welch. But all the other mistakes were on Immelt, he did a comprehensively terrible job. My GE alumni friends from those days still marvel that one terrible CEO could do that much damage to a conservatively managed, rock-solid company like GE.

Immelt followed every fad and every government-pushed boondoggle, like renewables. Immelt got them big into Renewable Energy, and we all know that all renewable energy is only viable when it gets subsidies. It’s just more visible and obvious with GE vs, say, Vesta which gets hidden Danish government and EU subsidies. Immelt bought Alstom and got 30,000 unionized European employees that you can’t fire when sales turn down, and of course sales did turn down. Huge mistake.

Welch never lost sight of the fact that GE is a big bunch of mostly mature, mostly cyclical businesses. “Managing through the (business) cycle” was one of his mottos, and when the business cycle turns down in a huge, mature cyclical business, you gotta lay off workers or you start losing money. I remember a meeting early in my tenure where 5 division managers flew in, each in their own jet, for business reviews, and at the start a finance guy read through that period’s financial results for these businesses. He droned on and at one point said, “… and since the start of the recession your divisions have laid off 41,723 workers to protect earnings…” I just got hired and leaned over to my boss and asked, “we fired 40,000 people the last few months?” “Yup, Tom.” I decided to work late that night, show them they should keep me on.

Immelt sold off Genworth including the reinsurance business but inexplicably kept on GE’s books a lot of the liabilities, which eventually came due as over $21B of losses, which dragged down GE’s earnings for years, strained GE’s balance sheet and took resources away from profitable investments. GE went from being in “every SIC code except food” to a smaller, less profitable company with ageing products because Immelt underinvested in the manufacturing side, which even he admits. Mature cyclical businesses require constant investment in order not fall behind with flow of new products, cutting manufacturing costs, etc.

So overall, much more on Immelt than Welch.

And Rud, here’s a different take on that job you turned down. If it really was corporate head of strategy reporting to Jack, he always generously rewarded senior guys for results. The stock option that job would have included, would have been a lot more valuable than that bonus you didn’t get, a lot more.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  TW2020
July 29, 2022 12:27 pm

It really was. But I left senior partner BCG for Motorola instead, eventually became global head of strategy there, and made a ton of money on my stock and stock options when I left MOT 10 years later at its very peak stock price to go to a startup in Fort Lauderdale as the #2.

Bryan A
Reply to  Anti-griff
July 28, 2022 6:31 am

Used to … Bring good things to life…
Now … Bring useless energy to light…

Tom Halla
July 27, 2022 2:31 pm

“Renewables” were always subsidy mining exercises.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Tom Halla
July 27, 2022 4:25 pm

Another succinctly pithy comment, Mr. Halla. Whenever I happen to be “the first to comment!” I always feel a little bad that I happened to get there before you. And, so, I say, take heart! I feel quite certain that you have and will retain the record for “first comments.” 😊

ATheoK
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 28, 2022 10:42 am

Nothing embarrassing being the first to be at the post, especially when you really rock the comment!

Keep it up!
Wait for no man!

Janice Moore
Reply to  ATheoK
July 28, 2022 4:16 pm

Aw, Theo… . Thank you, so much. Good to see you. 😊

John Garrett
July 27, 2022 2:38 pm

It wouldn’t surprise me if there were some write-offs included in that reported GE Renewable loss (the article was written by a newspaper journalist and, as a rule, they are utterly clueless— if not flat-out dangerous— when it comes to accounting and interpreting financial reports).

Jeff Immelt and GE got absolutely taken to the cleaners and snookered with their ill-considered acquisition of the French company Alstom’s electricity generating business (including a formal commitment to retain all of the French employees of the bloated Alstom division, all of whom were covered by preposterously onerous and burdensome French labor laws).

Last edited 11 days ago by John Garrett
Janice Moore
Reply to  John Garrett
July 27, 2022 4:19 pm

GE provides us, here, with:

“How to Scam the Taxpayers with ‘Renewable’ Energy In a Nutshell”

1. Pivot from Reliable Tech to Take Advantage of Human CO2 Lie-based Tax $$

General Electric Co’s (GE.N) plan to spin off energy units into a standalone company

2. Uh. Oh. “Renewables” Cash Paid STILL Outweighs Cash Received

[A significant] hurdle is the loss-making renewables business, which includes wind turbines. That unit has not achieved an annual profit since 2018, and posted a third-quarter loss of $151 million …

3. Cheer Up! Negative Cash Flow Will Be Overcome by Sheer Volume and Market Share by Fiat

But the projected size of the market may prove more enticing. Annual spending to limit global warming to under 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2050 could cost more than $3 trillion, estimates the UN-backed International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).

(Source of italicized parts: https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/ge-energy-spinoff-aims-capture-interest-renewables-2021-11-09/ )

In a word: disgusting.

Last edited 11 days ago by Janice Moore
ResourceGuy
July 27, 2022 2:49 pm

No wonder that were pushing for the Green New Deal to keep the flow of taxpayer funds into their pockets. Isn’t that right Uncle Joe and the New England delegations.

Rud Istvan
July 27, 2022 2:51 pm

Jack Welsh tried to recruit me to GE back whenever to be his head strategy guy. I declined for three reasons:

  1. The GE he created relied an GE Capital financial shenanigans, not corporate strategy, for success. When 2008 hit, Warren Buffet bailed them out with a multibillion loan in the form of preferred equity with (if I recall correctly) a 15% dividend because beggars cannot be choosers. Why Buffetbis really rich and GE stock is on the rocks.
  2. GE was unable to get out of businesses which after decades of dominance, because of unionization, had become marginal losers. Lighting and Appliances are good examples. Both since ‘given away’ rather than sold.
  3. In the businesses they had that were winners, they were adding losers. GE Power was a true profit power (their CCGT benefited from all the aircraft jet engine R&D (an internal subsidy)). Then they bought the albatross called France’s rigidly unionized Alstrom Power. Then they added renewable wind turbines to really mess things up except for green power cred.
John Garrett
Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 27, 2022 2:58 pm

You were very wise to steer clear. It was an accident waiting to happen.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  John Garrett
July 27, 2022 3:45 pm

There is a reason that once upon a time I headed a new practice group at BCG and was their global #1 senior partner rainmaker. Usually brought in about $4 million annually over almost 10 years. My best (next to last) year brought in $22 million of business. That fed a lot of hungry consulting mouths. I quit the next year because my reward for that (which cost a family vacation so I could fly to Switzerland for two weeks, and then Sweden for a week, ultimately leading to a divorce) was just a blue glass bowl rather than a BIG (as in per then norms significantly more than $1million) financial bonus. Long actual story, short summary.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 28, 2022 6:18 am

My small company has worked on the electrical protection and control side with GE (multilin) for 4 decades.
I see them as always trying to get in front of some parade too late.

And yes the Alstom thing is a continuing disaster, endless annoyance

ResourceGuy
July 27, 2022 2:51 pm

Maybe the Chinese will take it like they did the appliances division.

markl
July 27, 2022 2:52 pm

“Spin off” is another way of saying it’s time to dump a failing business to get the last bit of government largess in the form of a tax write off.

2hotel9
July 27, 2022 3:11 pm

GE Renewable Energy? These lie spewing c*cksuckers are finally admitting oil, coal, gas, hydro and nuclear are the only real renewables sources of energy for the Human Race? Of course not, they are all lie spewing c*cksuckers.

H.R.
July 27, 2022 3:49 pm

What?!? Can’t make any money without the tax credits?

It seems Warren Buffet had wind and solar pegged. I wonder if he has bailed out yet?

Rud Istvan
Reply to  H.R.
July 27, 2022 3:54 pm

He has in a way by not adding investment since Trump made subsidies look insecure. Just gander the BH investment portfolio.

John Garrett
Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 27, 2022 6:09 pm

There are tons of windmills in MidAmerica Energy (the Berkshire subsidiary that holds Berkshire’s utility and energy operations).

Rud Istvan
Reply to  John Garrett
July 27, 2022 9:19 pm

True. The issue is how many are recently added? Which is what I asked you to gander.

H.R.
Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 28, 2022 9:31 pm

That was John Garret you replied to. You asked me to take a gander, not him.

But I did get my answer; not completely, not yet.

Thanks for the pointer, Rud.

Richard Page
Reply to  H.R.
July 28, 2022 2:27 am

A fair chunk of those losses will be down to GE turbines being less reliable or total failures; needing spare parts or replacements under warranty. The turbines have a bad reputation in the wind industry now and few customers are willing to risk using them.

H.R.
Reply to  Richard Page
July 28, 2022 9:41 pm

Thanks, Richard. I did not know that.

HotScot
July 27, 2022 3:49 pm

GE blames inflation and the expiration of Federal tax credits.

No shist Sherlock. You exist on the taxpayers dime, and when it’s withdrawn you express indignation that those damn Taxpayers deprived you of your profit.

How about you say “sorry Taxpayer, I took your money and blew it.”

Or, how about not taking Taxpayers money in the first place to support an impossible concept?

JimK
July 27, 2022 3:57 pm

As an owner of GE stock, I have to say their investments in green energy suck big time.

Mike Maguire
July 27, 2022 4:02 pm

419 million, is that all (-:
Get used to it.

The cost to switch totally to fake green energy in the US is actually 433 trillion with a T. This is 20 times the current United States GDP and 1 million times this particular loss by GE.
In other words………it ain’t happenin!

Calculating The Full Costs Of Electrifying Everything Using Only Wind, Solar And Batteries

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2022-1-14-calculating-the-full-costs-of-electrifying-everything-using-only-wind-solar-and-batteries

Len Werner
July 27, 2022 4:23 pm

From the original article–

GE reports both “adjusted” earnings that don’t include various costs and businesses that are short-term or being discontinued. So while GE’s adjusted earnings were strong on paper – which Wall Street relies on to predict future growth, GE actually lost $244 million during the quarter. That was 76 percent better, though, than the same period last year when GE lost $1 billion.

I’m a geologist, not an economist–but I don’t think I need the ‘I’m not a biologist’ caveat used by a Supreme Court nominee to get out of admitting what a woman is, to see that this company just can’t be a good investment.

And, I think this fits in the ‘it’s worse than we thought’ category–

GE’s renewable energy business, which is currently based in Paris but will be merged with GE Power before its planned 2024 spin-off, lost $419 million during the second quarter, forcing GE to cut back on its expectations for the unit for the rest of the year.

That quoted loss seems to be for a quarter, not a year. The annual loss projects to $1.7 Billion.

I have watched the evolution of modern wind power since it was a collection of designs being tested at a site on the Oregon coast, to seeing the first mills built in Tehachapi and Banning passes (I never went near Altamont until years later). Every time subsidies and tax credits ended, when windmills broke down they stayed idle, it did not ever appear to be economic to repair them. Only when subsidies in some form were reinstated did the blades turn again.

I concluded from scientific observation that windmills run on subsidies, not wind.

Gordon A. Dressler
July 27, 2022 4:41 pm

And just wait until the warranty claims against GE renewable energy products—rushed to market to tap into the governmental subsidies before they expire—start rolling in.

Bob
July 27, 2022 8:18 pm

None of this could happen if we had honest and knowledgeable politicians, administrators and bureaucrats.

Rod Evans
July 27, 2022 10:36 pm

Today in the UK our entire wind turbine fleet of power monuments are generating all of 1.5GW. The rated maximum of the fleet is about 25 GW. Not very good is it?
We are also having to use our coal fired power plants to help support the grid, here in summer and at a time of day when demand is barely 26GW nationally.
On the plus side, at least the ex coal fired power stations now burning wood pellets from Virginia USA, are still operational and have avoided being blown to bits by the green energy movement. Thanks only, to the deforestation required to feed them being term environmentally sound green energy practice….?
When energy green cost reality finally comes, those ex coal fired plants can be used economically again to burn the coal that sits directly underneath them.

Nick Graves
Reply to  Rod Evans
July 28, 2022 12:37 am

I think it was at Zerohedge that I read that during last week’s ‘heatwave’ we had to buy-in some electricity from Belgium at a 5,000% surcharge over base cost in order to prevent a blackout.

Energy green cost reality indeed…

Last edited 10 days ago by Nick Graves
Rod Evans
Reply to  Nick Graves
July 28, 2022 1:00 am

yes that situation is also covered today by the Telegraph though they hide the unbelievable cost/kWh by using the more obscure measure of ‘therms’
for the unfamiliar here is a helpful explanation…

Therm:
noun;
a unit of heat, especially as the former statutory unit of gas supplied in the UK equivalent to 100,000 British thermal units or 1.055 × 108 joules.

They could have reported the price was £100/kWh but too many people would have understood what was being said and been shocked at the cost of Green energy policies.

Ken
July 27, 2022 11:06 pm

Any business model that is based on federal tax credits and subsidies is doomed to fail when these run out – as they always will when reality bites.

Shytot
July 28, 2022 12:26 am

Surely the cause of the loss was “climate change”?

John Garrett
Reply to  Shytot
July 28, 2022 10:04 am

LOL. I got it. Well played.

The GE Renewable Energy business segment is clearly a victim of “[business] climate change” and, as such, it is surely deserving of Big Government aid, bailouts and largesse !

Rod Evans
July 28, 2022 12:39 am

This latest article re energy planning madness caught my eye today.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/07/28/britain-relying-imported-power-keep-lights-winter-says-national/
The final para says they are conscious of the gas shortages in Europe, yet still they will be relying on continental Europe (EU) for energy back up here in the UK.
The facts are, there is no shortage of gas in Europe.
The UK could supply all the gas Europe needs. We could fill the shortfall from Russia simply by fracking Bowland Shale deposits here in the UK. The gas price and shortfall is contrived. It is a political decision. Energy scarcity is created by Net Zero policies being progressed across the Western World. Those policies are preventing the extraction of energy resources so desperately needed to meet our winter demand.
The pain that will be suffered this coming winter, is entirely self inflicted by Green energy zealots poisoning the minds of energy policy makers.
It has to stop.

Andrew Wilkins
July 28, 2022 3:21 am

“Good paying green jobs”
Um, yeah….

Coach Springer
July 28, 2022 6:08 am

Well, don’t build a business farming tax credits. They are temporary. (Well, sort of.)

observa
July 28, 2022 6:29 am

GE Renewable Energy Posts $419 Million Loss
Chicken feed as we’ve crunched the numbers-
Climate for ‘great reallocation’: Deloitte (msn.com)
Given solutions do not yet exist for the dirtiest sectors, the report says it is critical that business and governments work together, with government subsidies required to develop new technology and fuels.

Andy Pattullo
July 28, 2022 8:16 am

Karma – a useful business that moves people and things from place to place makes a profit. A useless business that tries to replace the reliable energy underpinnings of society with nonsense in the name of saving a perfectly healthy planet is penalized with losses. Reality is so sensible at times.

%d bloggers like this: