What's Eating the Green Movement?

There have been a number of Patch articles about the Green movement, including an Opinion piece by David Mayer, mayor of Gloucester Township, concerning all the benefits of Gloucester Township pursuing ‘green’ technologies. I am not as impressed as some and would like to offer another view as well as cut through all the hype.

The Wall Street Journal has reported that clean-energy “subsidies” (read “taxpayer funding”) more than doubled between 2007 and 2010 yet, in spite of the billions of dollars of taxpayer handouts funneled to the solar and wind power industries, a whopping 2.4% of America’s electricity is supplied by these industries. That may be overstated. The New York Times, on September 14th, reported that solar power supplies less than 1% of America’s electricity usage.

Another hidden subsidy popular in Europe and coming to the U.S. is the ‘feed-in tariff’. This scheme requires electric utility companies to purchase solar power at a high, fixed price. Guess who ends up paying for that? At this point the main drawback to solar power is the expense to produce it and the costs to generate power which is four times the cost to do so with coal. I have learned that the 60% share of New York City’s power needs that are currently supplied by coal and natural gas could be replaced by 4 Nuclear Power Plants each generating 1,000 megawatts of power and each assuming a footprint of 2 square miles (8 square miles total). The same energy output generated by Solar Panels would have a footprint seventy-four square miles and would require 145 million solar panels generating 175 watts of power each; quite inefficient to say the least.

Our country has massive reserves of tried-and-true energy sources in coal, oil, and natural gas but we continue to chase a dream conjured up by people who seem bent on destroying our way of life by demanding that we abandon these traditional power sources for ‘pie in the sky’ whether it be wind or solar energy. Contrary to ‘popular belief’ there is no shortage of any of the afore-mentioned traditional energy sources (oil, coal, and natural gas) in our country. The real problem is the adamant refusal to bring these products to market here instead forcing us to buy them overseas from those who stand opposed to everything we believe in thus shipping billions of dollars out of our country in a real economy killer; money that could be better spent here at home. Another ill-conceived idea is to fund our Latin American neighbors and so build up their energy infrastructures to sell us energy rather than spending the money here. A 2009 study by Madrid’s King Juan Carlos University found that the creation of every green job eliminated at least 2.2 jobs in other industries, the result of a government push toward wind and solar power at the expense of other fuels.

Solar Power at this point is a non-starter. The technology itself exists only because of the hidden taxpayer funding that makes it even remotely viable. I wonder if the current claim of savings for Gloucester Township generated by switching over to solar power has included the hidden cost to the taxpayer. The real question is how much the Green Team will ultimately cost the taxpayer in the end? Where are all the Green Jobs we have been promised and how many people could be employed if we allowed the mining and manufacture of coal, oil, and natural gas products in this country to grow to meet our daily needs? I am all for saving money and pursuing those things that will actually help us do that, in the meantime, however, let him or her who desires to use solar power bear the full brunt of the cost involved in moving to that “technology-in-training”. When my income is already suffering why do I continue to be penalized further by having to subsidize the ‘Green Movement’? Let’s see how many people are willing to switch to Solar Energy when each one of them has to bear all the costs associated with such a scheme. When the solar power industry has grown up and can stand on its own, then is the time to switch. Until then, especially in light of our current economic woes and given the fact that we cannot continue to draw revenues from a smaller and smaller pool of people as the employment picture worsens, I am not interested in subsidizing a fledgling and questionable industry. My taxes keep going up so my challenge to the mayor or anybody else willing to consider it is “Show me the true savings going forward.”

As a final note it is pertinent to draw attention to the recent bungles regarding Green Energy in the news of late. Have you heard of the Genesis Solar Project in California? Here are a group of people that wore out the carpets at the White House and plowed large contributions into Mr. Obama’s campaign coffers only to be rewarded with a lucrative $852 million loan guarantee to fund something called the Genesis Solar Project in California. And what do we get for 852 million dollars of taxpayer money? The possibility of 800 temporary construction jobs to build the plant is expected and that to be followed by the promise of 47 full-time positions to operate the plant once it is up and running. Is any ‘green’ advocate willing to do the math for us as to the soundness of that project? And who was instrumental in obtaining this funding? Have you heard of our Energy Secretary, Steven Chu? This is not the first time Mr. Chu and Mr. Obama have been here. Maybe you’ve heard of Solyndra. Solyndra declared bankruptcy less than 48 hours after Mr. Chu announced the Obama administration’s faith in Genesis by the awarding of the above mentioned 852 Million dollar ‘Green’ contract. Solyndra, Obama’s and Chu’s earlier foray into the ‘Brave New World’ of Green, saw the funneling of nearly 500 million dollars in federally guaranteed loans consisting of taxpayer money into a company that ultimately declared bankruptcy without making one penny of profit. And what was Solyndra’s great promise? To build solar panels and provide thousands of Californians with high-paying jobs. This is the face of the New Green Economy. The promise that was made for the half-billion dollar project utilizing taxpayer money was to create 4,000 jobs; jobs that never materialized. The solar panels Solyndra designed and manufactured were too complicated and expensive to compete in the marketplace and were ultimately sold at a significant loss. There is even now an ongoing investigation as to whether we have a Pay-to-Play scheme at work with the whole Solyndra debacle. Additionally, Evergreen Solar Inc. and SpectraWatt joined the ranks of failed taxpayer subsidized alternative energy companies both declaring bankruptcy only last month.

Daniel Kish from the non-profit Institute for Energy Research is not alone in thinking that large-scale wind and solar projects are inherently unprofitable, largely as a result of the unpredictability of when the sun will shine brightly enough and when the wind will blow. Without government subsidies, he said, such projects would have no chance of competing with oil, natural gas, nuclear power or coal. It’s really not surprising that these start up ‘Green’ companies would rip off the government when the politicians throwing away our money refuse to even look at the facts of creating alternative energy.

President Obama is on record as stating that he wants to make America less dependent on foreign oil but has again called for raising taxes on domestic oil and gas production. The fact is that new discoveries of oil and natural gas have occurred in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, North Dakota, Texas, Montana and Colorado—causing a near doubling in U.S. recoverable reserves but we refuse to pursue these resources.

The bottom line is that nothing in the alternative energy market can compete with oil, coal, and natural gas. Given the devaluation of our dollar by the “out of control” spending of our government at all levels it is not the time to subsidize a technology that is not yet mature when we have everything we need right here and now.