Monday, June 27, 2011

‘Green' jobs: Shrewd PR, bad economics

Globe and Mail Blog
Posted on Monday, June 27, 2011 6:27AM EDT

"Job creation should not be a goal of environmental policy, no more than it should be a policy goal in the fields of health or national security. If, instead of hiring people, we could use magic to stop disease, crime and environmental degradation, we would. Pointing to jobs ‘created’ to fix these problems is an error that Frédéric Bastiat identified in his ‘parable of the broken window’. Broken windows generate work for glaziers, but that doesn’t mean that breaking windows will increase national income. "

Read it all here:

Friday, June 17, 2011

On The Hijacking of the American Meteorological Society (AMS)

"I am very disappointed at the downward path the AMS has been following for the last 10-15 years in its advocacy of the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) hypothesis. The society has officially taken a position many of us AMS members do not agree with. We believe that humans are having little or no significant influence on the global climate and that the many Global Circulation Climate Model (GCMs) results and the four IPCC reports do not realistically give accurate future projections. To take this position which so many of its members do not necessarily agree with shows that the AMS is following more of a political than a scientific agenda. "

Bill Gray Professor Emeritus, Colorado State University
(AMS Fellow, Charney Award recipient, and over 50-year member)

UK faces job losses as businesses threaten to flee abroad to escape green energy levies

Sir Roger Carr warns in an interview that the Coalition must give "some sort of support" over rising energy costs to UK manufacturers or else risk seeing businesses relocate abroad with the consequential loss of jobs.

"Not every country in the world has the same commitment to climate change [as the UK] and therefore you may feel commercially disadvantaged," Sir Roger says, adding: "That gives you cause for thought as to where you want to invest."

Thursday, June 16, 2011

McGuinty Liberals' energy rebate confuses the issue

"“A perverse incentive,” Ontario Environmental Commissioner Gord Miller said this week of the 10-per-cent rebate that Dalton McGuinty’s Liberals have given homeowners on their energy bills. And well it might be, from a conservation standpoint, since the “clean energy benefit” gives the most relief to consumers who use the most energy."

Read more, I've got comments posted:

Monday, June 13, 2011

Hudak widens lead on McGuinty: poll

By Bradley Bouzane

OTTAWA — Ontario appears poised for a changing of the guard when the next provincial election takes place, with a new poll suggesting the Progressive Conservatives have expanded their lead to unseat Premier Dalton McGuinty’s Liberals.

According to the exclusive Ipsos Reid poll, the PCs — led by Tim Hudak — have the support of 40% of decided voters, up two points from the start of the year. The Liberals, meanwhile have dropped one point in that time and currently have the support of 34% of decided Ontarians.

Kyoto may be empty shell by 2012 as nations opt out

NEW DELHI: The future of the Kyoto Protocol is in peril and the global compact could end up being an empty shell by 2012.

Major developed countries including Japan, Russia and Canada have refused to be part of the protocol in its second phase and to commit targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions under it. Europe has also changed the goalposts. It is now suggesting that it would not sign on to the protocol unless emerging economies, including India and China, take strong targets as well under a new deal.

Under the first phase of Kyoto Protocol, the developed countries had emission reduction targets running up to 2012. The sole exception was the US which steadfastly refused to sign it. Under the protocol, developing countries had no such commitments.

UK business poised to flee green carbon tax

From The GWPF, newsbytes on the subject of UK Businesses Threaten To Flee Abroad To Escape Green Energy Levies

British industry’s ability to compete with companies overseas is under threat from punitive green energy costs, the new president of the CBI has told The Sunday Telegraph. Sir Roger Carr warns in an interview that the Coalition must give “some sort of support” over rising energy costs to UK manufacturers or else risk seeing businesses relocate abroad with the consequential loss of jobs. His comments – ahead of a CBI energy conference on Tuesday – come amid growing concern over the cost of renewable energy subsidies and so-called ‘green stealth taxes’. –The Sunday Telegraph, 12 June 2011

Saturday, June 11, 2011

Costs will be “recovered from consumers,”

Ontario Power Trip: Today’s forecast — higher power prices

Parker Gallant Jun 10, 2011 – 7:39 PM ET

The Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO), who is responsible for managing the electricity grid in Ontario, in December 2010 published “design principles” for integrating renewables into the grid. The primary purpose of this “Renewable Integration,” labeled SE-91, was to ensure stability to the grid by including the impact on surplus baseload generation of those renewables. This is meant to ensure no blackout or brownouts. IESO has predicted that with the additional 3000 MW of Feed-in Tariff (FIT) projects installed and operating, the Ontario grid would experience surplus conditions roughly 9% of the time based on average wind output.

The proposal put out to stakeholders was to basically determine the viability of forecasting production of electricity (principally wind), determine who should pay for that forecasting and to constrain or shut down the supply of power when it wasn’t needed and, in the event of the latter, how to honour the Ontario Power Authority’s feed-in-tariff contracts that guaranteed payment to the renewable operators. Logically these issues should have been considered and taken into account when the Green Energy Act was passed and the Energy Minister issued directives to the OPA for implementation of the FIT program!

Objections from stakeholders were filed in respect to the SE-91 initiative and as expected the principal objections were from the industrial wind turbine developers. They wanted full compensation when they constrained their production and they didn’t want to pay for the weather forecasting equipment.

IESO released its “Final Design Principles” March 8, 2011 and will now develop the final market rules governing those design principles.

The rules will require the renewable operators to forecast wind production, which means they will need to add meteorological forecasting to their industrial wind developments at a estimated cost of $300-million. Those costs will be “recovered from consumers,” according to the Final Design Principles.

Principle 9 of the Design Principles states; “Variable generators will be entitled to Congestion Management Settlement Credit (CMSC) payments.” This simple principle is stating that wind developers will be paid for power that is not delivered to the grid and the payments will be at the OPA contracted rates of $135 per MWh (13.5 cents per kWh) for wind and $713 per Mwh (71.3 cents per kWh) for solar. In the event the wholesale price is reasonable, however, IESO will have the ability to call for the almost immediate delivery of the power to the grid which will marginally reduce the costs to the ratepayers.

So the integration of renewables to the grid under the IESO design principles will cost ratepayers; firstly for forecasting the power that won’t be delivered to the grid 9% of the time and secondly for constrained power. That 9% of constrained power by 2012 with 4400 MW of installed capacity will cost Ontario ratepayers over $125-million annually for power that won’t be delivered to the grid or power even one 40-watt light bulb.

Some plan, some principles!

Parker Gallant is a former Canadian banker who didn’t like what he was seeing in his Ontario electricity bills.

Thursday, June 2, 2011

McGuinty: "What we are asking Ontarians to do is not an easy thing."

The term "asking" involves if not a choice, then to at least be asked for an opinion. I don't recall him going to the media and saying, "Hey, the economy is really bad so my plan is to double your hydro bills and give some of that money to a foreign company even though many companies in Ontario are out of work. What do you think? Is that OK?"

If the contracts that he signed are as ironclad as he says, then he was not asking anything. He should say "What we are telling Ontarians is not an easy thing to do."

Unless, of course, what he meant was asking us to vote for them. In that case, I totally agree. And, on Oct. 6, I will get my one chance to tell them something.


Read more: