I mean, the subsidies are for solar energy production.
2013/11/15 Alberto G. Corona <[email protected]> > The fantastic amount of subsidies to the solar energy (That not even > Germany will have enough budget to pay them) not only have destroyed the > familiar and industrial economy with such incredible amount of taxes. They > also *have stopped further solar cell research* in the countries where > these subsidies have been granted. > > I leave as an exercise to figure out why that has happened. It is quite > easy. But I guess that some people here well versed in QM and cosmology > will be unable to figure it out. > > > 2013/11/15 Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> > >> Hi Russell, >> >> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Russell Standish >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:09:18PM +0100, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:32 PM, Russell Standish >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > The good news is that the figures I've seen is that its not such a >> >> > tremendous cost after all. >> >> >> >> I am very interested in this. Could you be more specific? How can this >> >> be? Was there some breakthrough in sustainable sources that increased >> >> their efficiency? >> > >> > The following is an article dealing with the economics in Australia of >> > PV vs coal fired stations >> > >> > >> http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/renewables-now-cheaper-than-coal-and-gas-in-australia-62268 >> > >> > And here is one for wind power: >> > >> > >> http://www.smh.com.au/business/carbon-economy/rising-risk-prices-out-new-coalfired-plants-report-20130207-2e0s4.html >> > >> > These figure also do not include the existing carbon price of $20 per >> tonne. >> > >> > Existing fossil fuel generators will continue for a while, though, of >> > course, particularly as renewables have not yet solved the baseload >> > supply problem. Vanadium batteries may be good for that. >> >> Thanks for this. I hope it works. >> Reading the articles I have a feeling that this is more related to >> banks fearing investments in non-clean energy that could be subject to >> increasingly high taxes -- even though it appears that the Australian >> conservatives are not inclined to do that. I have no doubt that the >> technology is improving and I hope it does, but I would be more >> convinced if they addressed the hard numbers on the energy efficiency, >> sans current economical incentives, be they regulation or market >> conditions. Because I believe that those are the ones that will count >> in the long term. >> >> Part of the reason for my worry is that I saw heavy subsidising of >> wind farms destroy the industry in my home country (Portugal). The >> energy bill there is now about 60% taxes, to maintain the wind farms. >> Keeping your house warm in the winter is too expensive, even for the >> upper middle class. >> >> >> >> > Obviously fossil fuel will run out anyway, so even without >> climate change >> >> >> > we'd have to do something. >> >> >> >> >> >> Yes, but that something we have to do is very different depending on >> >> >> whether or not we have to cut CO2 emissions and, more importantly, >> one >> >> >> of the path leads to immense human suffering. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > The point is whether we do something, or do nothing, energy costs >> >> > _will_ rise. Yes this _will_ lead to human suffering, either way. We >> >> > can either choose to pay a bit more now, and have less costs later, >> or >> >> > pay less now, and have steeper rises later. >> >> >> >> I agree that energy costs will rise and this is a very serious problem >> >> that we need to face. If you don't have to worry about CO2 so much, >> >> it's easier and less painful -- the more expensive fossil fuels >> >> become, the more economic incentive there will be for renewable >> >> sources. In this scenario we can retain economic freedom, which is >> >> highly correlated with prosperity. >> >> >> >> > A 10 or 20% energy cost increase to hasten decarbonisation by a >> decade >> >> > will save many billions of dollars of geo-engineering, or >> evironmental >> >> > restoration down the track. >> >> >> >> Are you aware of geo-engineering proposals that would be very cheap? >> >> >> > >> > Nothing earth-scale will be cheap, or easy to understand all the >> > consequences. Ultimately, it will need to come down to a cost-benefit >> > analysis, factoring in the unknowns as some kind of risk factor. >> >> But if the technology break-throughs are real, we don't even have to >> worry all that much, maybe. There will be a lot of money to be made in >> moving to sustainable sources. Pushes for regulation make me suspect >> that the technology is not there yet. In which case I agree with you. >> >> >> > Seems like quite an astute investment to >> >> > me. Our current conservative government, alas, doesn't seem to think >> >> > so. >> >> > >> >> >> Then there are the geo-engineering ideas that John mentioned. They >> >> >> appear to be ignored. This makes the entire thing start to smell a >> bit >> >> >> of religious moralism. >> >> >> >> >> >> Telmo. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > They're not being ignored. But they do require a lot more small-scale >> >> > research to understand their risk-benefit tradeoff. >> >> >> >> I never see this as part of the discussion. I'm very skeptical that >> >> this is being seriously pursued. >> >> >> > >> > >> http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/oct/15/pacific-iron-fertilisation-geoengineering >> > >> > amongst many other similar experiments. >> > >> > I can see why certain environmental movements have put geoengineering >> > off the table for political reasons, but this doesn't mean it >> > shouldn't be researched theoretically, and experimented practically on >> > a small scale so that we better understand the costs, efficacy and >> > risks if (or more likely when) it becomes a necessary part of the >> > total solution. >> >> Ok, we agree. >> >> > As for carbon pricing, which is the current hot topic in Australia. As >> > a philosophical point, I am in favour of some sort of carbon pricing, >> > but I'm not enough of an economist and energy technologist to know the >> > ideal timing for its introduction, nor the amount of the pricing. The >> > current fixed price scheme we have amounts to an increase of 10-20% on >> > fuel costs, which I would have thought to be "too little, too late". I >> > don't know how the price of $20 per tonne was arrived at. I do know >> > that the Eurpoean market price is even lower, at around $8 per tonne, >> > so I can't see economics providing much of a push. >> > >> > The problem is that when our current newly elected government was in >> > opposition, they went around denying that there is even a problem. I >> > wouldn't have minded if they kept the political discussion to whether >> > a carbon price was appropriate right now, or questioned the economic >> > modelling used to set the price, or whether it should be set by a >> > market mechanism. Instead they denied the scientific consensus, >> > labelled the carbon price as a "tax", and stood on a platform of >> > "scrap the tax", which will be one of the first bills they will >> > introduce in parliament in the next week. It makes me mad - >> > effectively they have shut down much needed debate on how best we should >> > address climate change, and resorted to slogaineering and ideology. >> > >> > I just hope that the opposition and independent parties act to block >> > this behaviour, and hopefully return discussion back to issues of >> > policy, not science, which is the proper scope for a parliament. But >> > we shall see... At least what Australia does is unlikely to bugger up >> > the whole world, we're too small for that. >> > >> > -- >> > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) >> > Principal, High Performance Coders >> > Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected] >> > University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Everything List" group. >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >> an email to [email protected]. >> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> > > > > -- > Alberto. > -- Alberto. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
