Would someone please explain to me why we’re in such a hurry to corner the market on a losing industry? That’s one of those 2 + 2 = 4 questions that Newt Gingrich spoke of in the great video posted the other day by Hardnox.
It would be one thing if China or other countries were raking in big bucks in the solar panel business and measurably reducing their demand for fossil fuel energies; but Obama himself apparently acknowledged that those countries are having to “subsidize” the industry to the tune of “billions” of dollars, and no mention is being made of any miraculous reduction in their demand for oil and coal. By my definition that makes it a losing industry, at least for the time being.
Obama’s premise seems to be that renewable energy is the wave of the future, a gold mine just waiting to be discovered. He could be correct, but if he is then the next 2 + 2 = 4 question is, “If the renewable energy industry is such a gold mine….” Fill in the blank.
Smart investors understand that when it comes to exploring new industries, it’s smart to weigh the benefits of being first in the industry against the cost to get there. Fast food stores will often locate themselves near McDonald’s. Why? Because they know that McDonald’s has already invested the resources to find the most viable locations. Time and again we see new products hit the market only to eventually be overtaken by others who improve on their technology without having to make that initial whopper of an investment. Sometimes it pays to be first. Sometimes it doesn’t. This is what private investors and entrepreneurs are good at figuring out.
China, with its massive population and relatively recent emergence into the competitive industrial world, might have vastly different incentives for investing resources in renewable energy production. It also has a markedly different system of government in which the government is expected to take the role that we in the U.S. prefer to leave to private industry. At least that used to be the case. Theoretically speaking, when China invests billions of dollars of “the people’s” money into something like renewable energy production, then “the people” reap the reward because the technology and means of production belong to them (remember, I said “in theory”). In the U.S., when the taxpayers are asked to subsidize private companies investing in trial technology, who ends up owning the rights to that technology and the rights to the profits? It isn’t the taxpayers. Maybe we’ll benefit in the long run if we’re able to avail ourselves of more cost efficient energy, but that would also be true if private investors put up the money to get this industry going. So I see no real upside for taxpayers, but of course there’s a big downside if we subsidize businesses that fail.
The fact is, the renewable energy industry has thus far not solved a free market problem like successful industries typically do, nor has it given us something that we don’t already have. We have energy now. It’s not a perfect market system (thanks to our government, largely), but neither is the “green” market system. Oil and gas aren’t cheap, but neither is green. Unless and until renewable energies can improve upon what we already have in terms of cost, efficiency and delivery, it will continue to be a loser industry. Our wonderful government, which should be letting the free market resolve this situation, is trying it’s best to stack the deck by throwing obstacles in the way of oil, gas and coal and using our money to subsidize “green” energy. For them, 2 + 2 will never = 4.
Finally, the money that supposedly is lost on deals like Solyndra isn’t really lost. It’s simply been transferred from the pockets of taxpayers to the pockets of people involved in one way or another with the “green” energy agenda. In other words it’s been transferred into the hands of the leftwing constituency. Maybe these people aren’t so stupid after all.
Green = money
ReplyDeleteGreen = jealously
Green = golf course
That sums it up for me, CW. Another great read here.
Right on CW. I think we wrote about this before. The government has no business trying to generate a demand for a product. This should happen naturally in the private sector.
ReplyDeleteAw, now, there you go again! Thinking, and logically at that!
ReplyDeleteSo much insight and widom, CW. Indeed, the site-location strategy for Howard Johnson's was to buy property on the same interstate exits as did Holiday Inn, then charge lower prices.
ReplyDeleteSolar is economically-viable where and only where the transmission of coal, oil, natural gas, and even wind energy would be long-distance relative to the volume. That's why solar is used on highways to post electronic messages. China is a much-less-then-50% urban country while the USA is a more-than-50% urban country. What makes sense in China, thus . . .
Thanks, Mrs. AL,
ReplyDeleteI’m beginning to believe that green = greed.
Hey there Patrick,
ReplyDeleteYou’ve done some great stuff on this topic but, unfortunately for my readers I never tire of pointing out the stupidity of liberals.
Interface
ReplyDeleteThank you. I thought I’d do some logical thinking before the Left makes it illegal.
drpete:
ReplyDeleteExactly!
Glad you stopped by.
CW,
ReplyDeleteFirst, thanks for the honorable mention.
Second, the green thing is a fraud of the highest order concocted to make money out of thin air. The greenies constantly yammer about solar and wind energy so I took them to task. Last winter I spent a ton of time doing the research and calculations. I set out to go off-grid with my house.
For the record, I built a supper-insulated house with my own hands 20 years ago. It is 3700 SF and is all-electric. My average monthly electric bill today is $150.00, and yes, it is heated or air conditioned 12 months a year.
The material COST for the solar panels, batteries, wind turbine, and cables was $256,000. No labor costs were included.
All that to save $150 a month. Whoopee!
I also found out that there is not a single homeowner’s insurance company that will insure a wind turbine.
In addition, the batteries last about 8 years, tops. This means you need to replace them ALL every 6-8 years. Solar panels may last 30 years. Wind turbines maybe 10.
The whole notion of green energy is BS unless you live in a 10 x 10 garden shack with no appliances.
This is why no one is going green. It is too expensive and yields poor results in a cost/benefit ratio.
Why no one has called them on this hoax is unbelievable. I do think that alternative energy is in our distant future but it sure is not available now. This is as big a fraud as the whole Global Warming thing.
The Solyndra scam was designed to fail as were all the others. This is one of the biggest con games ever played on the American public right along with the TARP bailouts.
The left isn’t stupid at all. The republicans are the stupid ones for letting them pull that scam over and over again.
----------
Btw, all the local companies that were hawking PV panels and wind turbine systems after zero got elected are now all out of business since there is no market for it.
Mrs AL,
ReplyDeleteKermit the Frog is Green. :)
Hardnox,
ReplyDeleteYour research perfectly illustrates the free-market dilemma to green energy in dollars and cents. More importantly it provides the key to understanding the Left’s strategy for advancing an agenda that fails the free market. If you can’t be persuaded to do “the right thing” and pay $256K to save $150 a month, then the solution from the Left’s point of view is to mess with the other side of that equation.
Obama, “Under my plan…electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”
See? Problem solved.
I've done some research on powering a 22-acre Pacific island off the coast of Panama. Might end up with some solar there.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think that most of the power would come from ocean-geothermal and tides-hydroelectric. Those work 24/7 while solar is 10-14/5-7, and thus must also be stored in batteries.
Drpete:
ReplyDeleteSounds like you’re planning an escape from civilization. (Or from non-civilization?)
Greetings from another Townhall refugee!
ReplyDeleteObama still does understand that the "green energy" revolution will not occur until it becomes cheaper and more efficient than fossil fuels.
He will never learn. It brings to mind a quote on stupidity of a Spanish Conservative philosophyer names Ortega y Gassett. I believe it goes something like "I prefer evil people to stupid people. At least evil people give it rest. Stupid people never do.
Hahahaha! Welcome, V.L.! I’m glad you stopped by.
ReplyDeleteWhat’s worse, evil or stupid? Sounds like a good subject for a blog post!
If I had the capital, CW, I'd already be there.
ReplyDelete