Essay by Eric Worrall
Clap hard people – every time you say “I don’t believe in renewables”, a Western solar manufacture company dies.
Energy Technology Perspectives 2023 highlights major market and employment opportunities, as well as the emerging risks, for countries racing to lead the clean energy industries of today and tomorrow
The world is entering a new age of clean technology manufacturing, and countries’ industrial strategies will be key to success
12 January 2023
The energy world is at the dawn of a new industrial age – the age of clean energy technology manufacturing – that is creating major new markets and millions of jobs but also raising new risks, prompting countries across the globe to devise industrial strategies to secure their place in the new global energy economy, according to a major new IEA report.
Energy Technology Perspectives 2023, the latest instalment in one of the IEA’s flagship series, serves as the world’s first global guidebook for the clean technology industries of the future. It provides a comprehensive analysis of global manufacturing of clean energy technologies today – such as solar panels, wind turbines, EV batteries, electrolysers for hydrogen and heat pumps – and their supply chains around the world, as well as mapping out how they are likely to evolve as the clean energy transition advances in the years ahead.
The analysis shows the global market for key mass-manufactured clean energy technologies will be worth around USD 650 billion a year by 2030 – more than three times today’s level – if countries worldwide fully implement their announced energy and climate pledges. The related clean energy manufacturing jobs would more than double from 6 million today to nearly 14 million by 2030 – and further rapid industrial and employment growth is expected in the following decades as transitions progress.
“The IEA highlighted almost two years ago that a new global energy economy was emerging rapidly. Today, it has become a central pillar of economic strategy and every country needs to identify how it can benefit from the opportunities and navigate the challenges. We’re talking about new clean energy technology markets worth hundreds of billions of dollars as well as millions of new jobs,” said IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol. “The encouraging news is the global project pipeline for clean energy technology manufacturing is large and growing. If everything announced as of today gets built, the investment flowing into manufacturing clean energy technologies would provide two-thirds of what is needed in a pathway to net zero emissions. The current momentum is moving us closer to meeting our international energy and climate goals – and there is almost certainly more to come.”
“At the same time, the world would benefit from more diversified clean technology supply chains,” Dr Birol added. “As we have seen with Europe’s reliance on Russian gas, when you depend too much on one company, one country or one trade route – you risk paying a heavy price if there is disruption. So, I’m pleased to see many economies around the world competing today to be leaders in the new energy economy and drive an expansion of clean technology manufacturing in the race to net zero. It’s important, though, that this competition is fair – and that there is a healthy degree of international collaboration, since no country is an energy island and energy transitions will be more costly and slow if countries do not work together.”
The report notes that major economies are acting to combine their climate, energy security and industrial policies into broader strategies for their economies. The Inflation Reduction Act in the United States is a clear example of this, but there is also the Fit for 55 package and REPowerEU plan in the European Union, Japan’s Green Transformation programme, and the Production Linked Incentive scheme in India that encourages manufacturing of solar PV and batteries – and China is working to meet and even exceed the goals of its latest Five-Year Plan.
Meanwhile, clean energy project developers and investors are watching closely for the policies that can give them a competitive edge. Relatively short lead times of around 1-3 years on average to bring manufacturing facilities online mean that the project pipeline can expand rapidly in an environment that is conducive to investment. Only 25% of the announced manufacturing projects globally for solar PV are under construction or beginning construction imminently, according to the report. The number is around 35% for EV batteries and less than 10% for electrolysers. Government policies and market developments can have a significant effect on where the rest of these projects end up.
Amid the regional ambitions for scaling up manufacturing, ETP-2023 underscores the important role of international trade in clean energy technology supply chains. It shows that nearly 60% of solar PV modules produced worldwide are traded across borders. Trade is also important for EV batteries and wind turbine components, despite their bulkiness, with China the main net exporter today.
The report also highlights the specific challenges related to the critical minerals needed for many clean energy technologies, noting the long lead times for developing new mines and the need for strong environmental, social and governance standards. Given the uneven geographic distribution of critical mineral resources, international collaboration and strategic partnerships will be crucial for ensuring security of supply.
…Read more: https://www.iea.org/news/the-world-is-entering-a-new-age-of-clean-technology-manufacturing-and-countries-industrial-strategies-will-be-key-to-success
The main report (available here) identifies China being the main manufacturer of renewable components as a supply chain risk.
… China currently dominates the manufacturing and trade of most clean energy technologies. China’s investment in clean energy supply chains has been instrumental in bringing down costs worldwide for key technologies, with multiple benefits for clean energy transitions. At the same time, the level of geographical concentration in global supply chains also creates potential challenges that governments need to address. For mass-manufactured technologies like wind, batteries, electrolysers, solar panels and heat pumps, the three largest producer countries account for at least 70% of manufacturing capacity for each technology – with China dominant in all of them. …Read more: https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-technology-perspectives-2023/executive-summary
The report also predicts renewable energy component prices will continue to fall, despite admitting resource constraints are driving up prices – but I can’t find a clear explanation for WHY they believe costs will continue falling, other than some vague statements about specialisation and government policy;
… The cost of wind turbines outside China has also been rising after years of decline, with the prices of inputs such as steel and copper about doubling between the first half of 2020 and the same period in 2022. Similar trends can be seen in solar PV supply chains. … As countries make progress towards their climate pledges, with renewable electricity costs continuing their decline and electrolyser costs falling rapidly, the cost difference between regions is likely to shrink somewhat, but competitiveness gaps will remain. Carefully considering where in the supply chain to specialise domestically, and where it might be better to establish strategic partnerships or make direct investments in third countries, should form key considerations of countries’ industrial strategies. … Energy costs will continue to be a major differentiator in the competitiveness of countries’ energy-intensive industry sectors. Industrial competitiveness today is closely linked to energy costs, especially natural gas and electricity, which vary greatly between regions. …Read more: https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-technology-perspectives-2023/executive-summary
Why is China the main exporter of renewable energy components?
The answer is devastatingly simple. China uses cheap energy to manufacture renewable energy components.
Nations which attempt to use renewable energy to manufacture renewable components cannot compete with China’s low manufacturing costs.
European solar PV manufacturing at risk from soaring power prices – Rystad
By Jules Scully
October 6, 2022
Around 35GW of PV manufacturing projects in Europe are at risk of being mothballed as elevated power prices damage the continent’s efforts to build a solar supply chain, research from Rystad Energy suggests.
Audun Martinsen, Rystad Energy’s head of energy service research, said high power prices not only pose a significant threat to European decarbonisation efforts but could also result in increased reliance on overseas manufacturing.
“Building a reliable domestic low-carbon supply chain is essential if the continent is going to stick to its goals, including the REPowerEU plan, but as things stand, that is in serious jeopardy,” he added.
…Read more: https://www.pv-tech.org/european-solar-pv-manufacturing-at-risk-from-soaring-power-prices-rystad/
Shortly after the above was published, a French solar module plant was closed;
Maxeon closes French solar module manufacturing plant
By Jules Scully
October 7, 2022
Maxeon Solar Technologies has shut down a PV module manufacturing plant in France, citing a challenging price environment.
The facility was impacted by rising costs and taxes on raw material imports, according to a Maxeon spokesperson.
“The production price of the Porcelette plant no longer allows us to be competitive on the European market,” the spokesperson said in a statement sent to PV Tech.
Located in northeastern France, the facility was inaugurated in 2012. According to press release from that year, the plant had a 44MWp production line capable of producing 150,000 solar panels annually.
…Read more: https://www.pv-tech.org/maxeon-closes-french-solar-module-manufacturing-plant/
Green politicians across the world, green politicians in the USA, Australia, Europe, Britain, are selling their supporters a false narrative that the renewable energy push will bring back manufacturing jobs. But this claim simply isn’t true.
So long as China is able to compete on the world stage, with their low cost slave labour produced fossil fuel powered factory renewable energy components, they will effortlessly undercut any manufacturer who attempts to set up in high energy cost nations which seriously attempt to use renewable energy products sold by China to try to kickstart their own sustainable manufacturing industry.
Renewable energy manufacturing is energy intensive, especially solar manufacturing, which requires refining silica mixed with coal in a blast furnace to produce silicon, zone melting the silicon to remove impurities, then slicing, doping and recombining the silicon in yet another furnace, to turn it into silicon semiconductor solar panels. At least 3x in the process of manufacturing silicon solar panels, that large amounts of material have to be heated to over a thousand degrees – not counting the manufacture of supporting components like the Alumina or steel frames.
As of 2021, 45% of the world’s solar components come from Xinjiang, the centre of China’s Uighur slave labour horror and a major coal mining province – because Xinjiang has the slave labour and cheap energy ruthless Chinese manufacturers crave, to undercut every other manufacturer of renewable energy components.
All the global renewable energy push is achieving is to add to the economic incentive for China to commit horrific human rights abuses. The alleged “new industrial revolution” manufacturing opportunity, for everywhere except low cost energy nations like China, is a pipe dream.
Actually doing nuclear would work, if one eliminated the Jimmy Carter dialatory approval process, and told a few anti-nuclear activists to sit down and shut up. They would rather rely on Uighur slave labor.
“They would rather rely on Uighur slave labor.”
Out of sight, out of mind.
Let me fix that for you
Why is China the main exporter of renewable energy components?
The answer is devastatingly simple. China uses
cheap energyslave labor to manufacture renewable energy components.
Nations which attempt to use
renewable energypaid labor to manufacture renewable components cannot compete with China’s low manufacturing costs.
In a communist country, everybody except the small handful of people who are at the top, are slaves.
The only difference between people is how many layers of management exist between the individual and the ultimate slave masters. The more layers, the easier it is to exist without being noticed by the masters. However, stick your head up, or become a problem and you will quickly find out just how much of a slave you are.
Not to mention the apparent vast difference of China ignoring the physical and toxic destruction of its manufacturing sector. That really reduces costs.
Nations which attempt to use
renewable energy paid laborthe myth of ever-increasing profits in an ever-growing economy to manufacture renewable componentsanything, cannot compete with China’s low manufacturing costsacceptance of realistic profits.
P.S. What’s the difference between exploiting a poor community, and having 4% of your own population in prison, working for a dollar an hour in jail, and replacing the rest of the workforce with third-world immigrants?
The pot is not that shiny, and the kettle has worked long and hard.
With the right outlook, the US could have its own large supply of slave labors, just waiting to be scooped up.
The use of fossil fuels and slave labor in the manufacture of Unreliable Energy systems is a feature, not a bug! The WEF puppets, embedded in our Western governments like swollen ticks sucking the lifeblood out of their economies, heartily approve of the CCP economic model! The undermining of property rights and the rule of law is already being used against political dissidents in Canada, the US, and European nations! Wherever the Unreliables have been pushed far enough into the grid one sees soaring prices and energy instability (black/brownouts for the those who remain True Believers!)
It is long past time to begin hanging the proslavery title on those who blindly support this anti-human and anti-wealth delusion! Only in a fantasy world does one find the fabled unicorn of inexpensive intermittent energy and it’s storage! In the REAL world the feasibility of their widespread use only comes with increasing levels of poverty and totalitarian rule! Like an updated version of Feudalism without the benefits of noblesse oblige and a church that cares about human suffering!
“The use of fossil fuels and slave labor in the manufacture of Unreliable Energy systems is a feature, not a bug! “
Now substitute cotton for fossil fuels … cue the outrage?
Story/movie idea: “Renewables – It’s a Wonderful Lie”, by Peter Pun.
I notice you omitted the obligatory trigger warning…
So, what exactly is supposed to be ‘triggering’ about Peter Pan? According to Aberdeen University, it isn’t the ticking crocodile or the villainous Captain Hook that is likely to give students the biggest fright, but the novel’s ‘odd perspectives on gender’.
You have the feeling that academics at Aberdeen never grew up….
Perfect example of continued mass delusion in the green energy policy cult. We can only afford to keep flushing investment capital down the toilet for so long.
‘Millions of jobs’ don’t come from employing people (‘give them spoons’). Employment comes from the availability of energy, and the cheaper and more plentiful the energy is, the more jobs that are created. The fossil fuel industry has been brilliant at creating jobs, and if all that coal, oil and gas could have been produced using a lot less people, then it could have created a lot more jobs.
NB. Corruption and political ineptitude can still stuff things up.
Dylan Thomas via “Brendan Behan’s Ireland”
“”A job is death without dignity” as opposed to real work for he was a hard working man”
Interesting point that if fossil fuels are currently unavoidable to make the materials and equipment for renewable energy production then the period of time for the operation of that renewable energy equipment would have to be long enough to more than recover the cost of that fossil fuel input before it can be considered to be truly renewable and additionally it would over time have to become cheap enough for the equipment to be created economically without fossil fuels.
How long would that need to be for wind and solar ?
Is it actually being achieved anywhere ?
Economic application seems to be achieved for small scale solar setups that do not require rebuilding the entire grid but only because of the slave labour and cheap fossil fuel consumption currently derived from China plus subsidies which bring the cost of the setup below the value of the power derived over the life of the equipment.
Absent those three factors and if the grid needed to be upgraded then even small scale solar would be uneconomic.
It seems that renewable energy is less sustainable and more damaging to the environment than fossil fuels given that the Earth’s crust has now been found to be awash with fossil fuels subject only to our engineering ability to extract them.
It may even be the case that nuclear is less desirable than continued fossil fuel use provided we scrub out particulates and assuming CO2 has no adverse climate effect.
Imagine if the money and effort put into nuclear, wind and solar over the past 75 years had instead been put into highly advanced and clean fossil fuel energy production.
Well, uh, not that much has been put into nuclear. The thorium liquid salts reactor development was dumped in favor of “breeder” reactors….BIG MISTAKE. We could have had cheap reliable clean thorium liquid salts cooled reactors providing abundant electricity today.
If you look at the fuel cycle, Thorium reactors might be considered a breeder reactor. It’s just that the Thorium cycle make it more difficult to make a bomb. It’s not that you can’t but U233 is nasty stuff and working with it makes it more likely you’re going to kill your self before you get a rather dangerous (to you) bomb out of it.
Breeder reactors of the fast neutron variety would be desirable because they are able to burn existing waste (U238) and the waste products would half life out in around 100 years. No real long term waste problem and it would rid us of waste generated in the past. We wouldn’t even have to dig up new fuel to power them.
I would agree we should look into Thorium because its 6 times more abundant however don’t overlook the problems that breeders could solve.
There are many hours of videos on Youtube about Thorium liquid salts cooled reactors…Kirk Sorensen….and others…these reactors can be as small as a rail car…maybe even shipping container size and you just stack ’em as more power is required….small towns have water and sewer systems and could have their own power – no huge cross country power grid needed. The military could power their bases off grid…..the reactors are basically heat generators…..24/7.
It may be possible to build small reactors but I suspect the cost per mwh would be much higher than for large reactors.
Assembly lines and standard parts baby. Ship it back to the factory for an overhaul. These giant fixed fuel rod water cooled reactors are huge white elephants.
We’re building a small modular reactor in Ontario at an existing nuclear complex (Darlington) as a test of concept. We’ll let you know how it goes…..
Yes I have seen the videos but they omit a few facts. They need a small chemical processing plant to remove the waste products and introduce the u233 that was produced from the Thorium. The salts are highly Corrosive so unless there is a breakthrough in metals, it will take a good deal of effort to keep them running. The formulas indicate there are enough neutrons for the reaction and to produce U233 BUT that many not be true when they try to build one of these. Last but not least, they have built the reactor but it wasn’t fueled by Thorium. It will be more encouraging when they actually get one running.
Keep some development money flowing to see if they can get a test reactor running for a long time but don’t repeat the clean fuel disaster by putting all your money in one basket. Build light water or breeder reactors but get something working now.
“employment opportunities, as well as the emerging risks”.
As wind and solar go, the risks are very well known and can hardly be described as emerging. One risk, for example, was paying 5000% of the normal price for imported electricity from Belgium into the UK. What price virtue? Any price it seems.
As for the much vaunted green jobs, nobody has actually defined what they are; but there will, we are told, be thousands of them. They don’t include, say, jobs manufacturing wind turbines for the domestic market:
“Bosses at Fife’s BiFab have expressed their bitter disappointment after contracts to supply turbine jackets for Scotland’s largest offshore wind farm were awarded to firms thousands of miles away. BiFab had hoped to secure some of the work for the Seagreen array, which is being built off the East Fife coast – just miles away from its yards in Burntisland and Methil. Instead, jobs to manufacture platforms for the wind farm’s 114 turbines will head to China and the United Arab Emirates”
So that leaves cleaning solar panels, retrofits (insulation, windows etc) for older housing stock that nobody is in any position to afford and the dear old heat pump – and only last night Lord Gumboot of Deben was on the telly trying to sell them to us…
“Government plans to replace domestic gas boilers with electric heat pumps could unleash an army of poorly trained fitters and outright scammers on the nation’s homes
Now a new threat has emerged, as the government-backed Boiler Upgrade Scheme fails to set any minimum legal standard for all engineers installing heat pumps, in a move industry experts call “nonsensical.”
I believe the correct term is yeeha.
“a new industrial age”
Or more accurately a post-industrial, neo-feudal age:
“A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States [now the entire Western world]. De-development means bringing our economic system into line with the realities of ecology and the world resource situation.” —Dr. Paul Ehrlich, Anne Ehrlich, and Dr. John Holdren, Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment, 1970
Net Zero means Zero human impact.
No, Net Zero means ZERO ENERGY.
For the impacts, see Haiti.
I think of it as ZERO JOBS.
I don’t understand why Deben is still regaling us. His term at the CCC was supposed to be up last September. Recruitment for his replacement was commenced in July. They extended the application period, and were supposed to whittle down to a shortlist in October, and conduct final interviews in November. Neither has happened.
Fortunately I haven’t been ‘t involved but I’ve seen the results of relying on cheap, semi-skilled labor for home renovation and addition projects.
As somebody over at Manhattan Contrarian said, “Don’t call it feudal”. Feudalism was a highly ordered established social structure with clear mutually recognized rights and obligations at all levels of society. De-development of the western world will not have anywhere near enough stability to allow the institution of feudalism. There will be no Church, for one thing, to give the whole thing legitimacy. It will be all against all.
Expect the UK Government’s heat pump expansion plan to begin in 2028 to be as big a fiasco, if not bigger, than the disastrous government cavity wall filling plan of the early 2000s. The attempt to remediate that plan was as big a disaster as the original plan. Still millions of legal cases going on
So renewables are competitive with fossil fuels as long as fossil fuels are cheap?
Renewables are only competitive if one completely ignores the cost of reliable backup generation capacity, the environmental/moral impacts of mining the component resources, and the construction/disposal costs at the beginning and end of useful renewable collector life.
“So renewables are competitive with fossil fuels as long as fossil fuels are cheap?”
An astute observation. And the answer is yes, if the appropriate assumptions are applied; i.e., if a) China builds the wind, solar, and battery systems using cheap coal and cheap labor; b) the Chinese don’t attempt to monopolize the market so that no competition is left standing; and c) the requirement for backup of some kind is completely ignored until it is too late to do anything else but buy Chinese made batteries. At which point millions if not billions of chickens come home to roost.
No, they are not, and will never be “competitive.”
Renewables are in fact 100% dependent on fossil fuels for their existence.
Mass stupidity in energy policy terms may create an ILLUSION of renewables being “competitive,” but that is all it has ever been or ever will be.
But…but…SO MUCH INVESTMENT!…SO MUCH TECHNOLOGY!…SO MANY JOBS!!
Right. For so little useful energy, and for such flimsy reasons.
Turns out clean energy manufacturing is a dirty business.
Nobody challenges the assertions about jobs from “renewables.” The left, including the media, or an incurious lot. Any statement that reinforces their worldview is accepted without question.
The drivers of our local buses are touted as having “new green jobs” ever since the existing fleet was replaced by “undependables”.
In fairness, EVs are a spontaneous heat source as a by-product of charging.
That’s green, isn’t it? Isn’t it?
I can remember the old days when the Welsh were so angry at English people buying cottages in Wales, Not the Nine O’Clock News did a sketch with the tagline “Come home to a real fire. Buy a holiday home in Wales”
If television comedians weren’t so woke the new tagline would now be “Come home to a real fire, buy a Tesla”
The herd of elephants in the room being willfully ignored, of course, is that said “green jobs” will of necessity be relatively UNPRODUCTIVE and therefore low paying “jobs.”
They will most certainly NOT earn anyone but the owner-grifters a living.
subsidies will work to increase wages
IIRC the WSJ recently reported the average USA “green’ job [wind & solar]
paid ~ $48k/yr vs $78k/yr for fossil fuels [oil & gas].
FYI US Bureau of Labor Statistics says US median income is $54k/yr in .2022
That’s why the “Just Transition” that Canada’s Liberal government is trying to sell to the oil and gas workers in Alberta is not being enthusiastically received. Neither was its idea that they should learn to code. Actually the Liberals just wish Alberta would drop dead. They all vote Conservative out there.
“ if countries worldwide fully implement their announced energy and climate pledges…”
And IF my Uncle had…..
Dr Briol’s parents provided her with an appropriate given name – Faith.
Reminds me of that cute Sinatra movie “High Hopes” (there goes another rubber tree plant..)
Fatih (“The Conqueror”) Birol. He.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the sycophantic Fatih at the IEA is aiming for the top job at the UN so he can live up to his name.
Add on the trillions society just wasted on Coronavirus health and economic support and mitigation. (unprecedented waste, fraud and abuse according to a Brookings Report) and we have the equivalent of a economic weapon of mass destruction.
People seem to have an unlimited capacity to fool themselves that they are doing good when the objective evidence is that they are doing massive harm to others and the world they live in. There is no excuse. People with integrity and good intentions can’t claim ignorance and keep patting themselves on the back when their words and actions are so malevolent.
“People with integrity and good intentions can’t claim ignorance and keep patting themselves on the back when their words and actions are so malevolent.”
Well stated and the reason I have turned away from the Catholic Church. Their support of climate policies do more to punish and harm the poor; a group they are suposed to champion!
“Pope Francis declared that the science of climate change is clear and that the Catholic Church views climate change as a moral issue that must be addressed in order to protect the Earth and everyone on it.”
well, that must be true because the Holy Father is infallible, as we recovering Catholics were taught in Sunday school /sarc
The Brave New World of Leftists’ Utopia involves: severe energy rationing, ESG scores, severe rationing of goods and services, the eventually elimination of private property rights, equal outcomes for all, government housing, travel restrictions, bugs replacing animal protein, no diary products, etc.
The World Economic Forum wants to create a future where, “No one will own anything, and be happy.”….
Ummm we tried that system before….It was called slavery… It didn’t end so well for the slaves— they weren’t very “happy”..
Too bad Spartacus and his army didn’t win.
Since one’s social credit score will depend on it, how many will be brave enough to report unhappiness?
In Leftist Utopias, “unhappy” slaves are either sent to indoctrination camps for reprogramming or on your knees in front of pit filled with calcium oxide..
Closures, closures everywhere….
Liberty Steel plans to make up to a quarter of its UK workforce redundant and halt work at two plants as high energy costs and cheap imports hammer the industry.
The company, which is part of Sanjeev Gupta’s GFG Alliance, will begin consultations over 440 redundancies and said it will idle its plant at West Bromwich and convert another in Newport, Wales, into a storage facility.
Jobs are also likely to be lost at its Rotherham plant after Liberty said it became “unviable” to produce cheaper steel products, “due to high energy costs and imports from countries without the same environmental standards”.
Where are the protests against slave labor products and components in EU imports?
They’re cheaper, so people willfully close their eyes and act like Sergeant Schultz, “I know nuthink”.
“The analysis shows the global market for key mass-manufactured clean energy technologies will be worth around USD 650 billion a year by 2030 – more than three times today’s level – if countries worldwide fully implement their announced energy and climate pledges.”
hmmm…. I thought “clean energy” would take over the world since it’ll be so cheap- not because of government pledges- which of course means regulations and vast subsidies.
No explanation is possible, but then no explanation is needed – it’s an article of faith that renewable energy will continue to get cheaper. After all, I keep reading it in the newspaper, so it must be true, right?
“renewable energy will continue to get cheaper”
That must be why all 5 of Europe’s wind turbine manufacturers have been operating at a loss for over a year now in their attempt to keep true to that article of faith. 🙂
I must ask, are there any reasonable people that work at the IEA? This report is trash. Telling us all now is the time to create energy with renewables, there is tons of money to be made and unimaginable opportunities for employment. The one thing not mentioned is how effective renewables are, how dispatchable are they, how dependable are they, can they be cranked up when needed. Renewables are none of these things. I hate liars.
I see a new Woke label replacing “liars”, those poor misunderstood and and discriminated against souls.
I can’t even read their drivel without seeing red. There is no “clean energy,” there is no “transition,” and the only “opportunities” are for swindlers to rob people who actually work for a living with the blessing of the government.
Oh they see red alright as they know ‘green’ hydrogen is a fantasy and their renewables are jacking up prices making the natives restless so what’s their answer? No prizes for guessing-
An alternative market structure would set rewards for generators according to their average costs plus a slight surplus which could be reinvested into deploying more renewables and other green technologies, providing consumers with cheap electricity. This can only be achieved through a robustly regulated market or by nationalising energy companies and setting prices and production.
Unreliables creating jobs?
In February 2022 Wind Europe wrote to Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission.
“The European Wind energy industry is going through unprecedented times, closing factories and halting investments in the EU. In the last two years the industry has had to close factories making turbines and components in Germany, Spain and Denmark, Europe’s traditional wind industry strongholds”
“The net result is the industry is cutting jobs.” They say it still accounts for 300,000 jobs in Europe but note that “Germany alone has lost over 50,000 wind industry jobs in the last 6 years”
All 5 of Europe’s turbine manufacturers have been operating at a loss for over 12 months now and are unable to invest in new projects. They are pleading for more subsidies whilst looking over their shoulders at Chinese competitors who have recently won orders in France,Italy, Croatia, and Serbia. (Chinese manufacturers had also won an order in Ukraine but presumably that is in abeyance because of the war?)