The Guardian has a revealing article on the insanity of trying to cut back on carbon emissions by circumventing the free market and ignoring nuclear power in favour of solar. It quotes a McKinsey report that finds that to save a ton of carbon emissions by nuclear power costs £8, Geothermal £3 which it contrast with solar power’s cost of £430 per tonne of carbon saved!
But it gets worse. Here’s the truly insane bit:
“” the German government made the same mistake 10 years ago. By 2006 its generous feed-in tariffs had stimulated 230,000 solar roofs, at a cost of €1.2bn. Their total contribution to the country’s electricity supply was 0.4%. Their total contribution to carbon savings, as a paper in the journal Energy Policy points out, is zero. This is because Germany, like the UK, belongs to the European emissions trading scheme. Any savings made by feed-in tariffs permit other industries to raise their emissions”"
~ and as the article points out:
“” It can’t be long before thousands of petty criminals discover the perfect carousel fraud, bypassing their solar panels by connecting the incoming wire to the outgoing wire. By buying electricity for 7p and selling it for 44p (if you sell power to the grid rather than using it yourself, you get an extra 3p), they’ll make a 600% profit. Amazingly the government has decided not to measure how much electricity people are selling.”"
So how would you answer the Guardian’s question?
- Solar Producer: Why Not Supporting The Nuclear Energy? (7/26/2011)
- Solar Producer: What Is A Tariff In Economics? (6/22/2012)
- Solar Producer: What Is This Tariff Article Saying? (6/23/2012)
- Solar Power: When Is The Democrat Supermajority Going To Embrace The Nuclear-powered Revolution? (4/10/2012)
- Solar Producer: Essay On Alternative Energy..suggestions? (2/7/2012)