http://www.ambitgambit.com/2007/08/09/green-energy-heats-up-in-the-act/ Ambit Gambit Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:31:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.ambitgambit.com/2007/08/09/green-energy-heats-up-in-the-act/comment-page-1/#comment-1833 Ronda Jambe Sat, 11 Aug 2007 18:15:28 +0000 http://localhost/ambit/?p=2206#comment-1833 sounds sad but true, I wonder if the Greens are picking up on the sober message you offer. Co-generation, commercial applications and wind are much needed in the overall mix. sounds sad but true, I wonder if the Greens are picking up on the sober message you offer. Co-generation, commercial applications and wind are much needed in the overall mix.

]]> http://www.ambitgambit.com/2007/08/09/green-energy-heats-up-in-the-act/comment-page-1/#comment-1834 xoddam aka Jonathan Maddox Fri, 10 Aug 2007 10:52:26 +0000 http://localhost/ambit/?p=2206#comment-1834 It's grand that decentralised renewable electric generation is being subsidised, but kind of a pity that the generators targeted -- solar photovoltaic cells -- are at present the most expensive decentralised generators available, and that the subsidies go only to householders. The biggest users of electricity are the resources industry and large commercial and office buildings -- I see no indication of subsidies to reduce greenhouse emissions from those sources (except the very-long-term "clean coal" boondoggle). Far greater net greenhouse emissions reductions could be achieved today by subsidising cogeneration equipment on industrial and commercial premises. By switching a shopping centre or large office block from using coal-fired, centrally-generated and network-delivered electricity for heating, lighting, ventilation and air conditioning to a local gas-powered trigeneration facility producing electricity, heating and cooling, the same amount of money might deliver ten times the net CO2 reduction achieved by PV panels. And as far as I am aware there is no equivalent state, territory or commonwealth subsidy for large wind turbines, which (in 2007) are three or four times more cost-effective than photovoltaic panels but are only bought by electric utilities. Household-scale wind turbines are next to useless. PV panels can be expected to be far more cost-effective in another five or ten years' time -- a subsidy then will hardly be necessary to persuade householders to secede from the electricity grid and leave it all to big business. Right now, it looks like a lot of money is being thrown away on one of the most expensive greenhouse mitigation technologies. Not as wasteful as nuclear power stations, but almost in the same category. A cynic might guess that this direct subsidy to green-leaning homeowners is nothing more than a vote-buying exercise. It’s grand that decentralised renewable electric generation is being subsidised, but kind of a pity that the generators targeted — solar photovoltaic cells — are at present the most expensive decentralised generators available, and that the subsidies go only to householders.
The biggest users of electricity are the resources industry and large commercial and office buildings — I see no indication of subsidies to reduce greenhouse emissions from those sources (except the very-long-term “clean coal” boondoggle).
Far greater net greenhouse emissions reductions could be achieved today by subsidising cogeneration equipment on industrial and commercial premises. By switching a shopping centre or large office block from using coal-fired, centrally-generated and network-delivered electricity for heating, lighting, ventilation and air conditioning to a local gas-powered trigeneration facility producing electricity, heating and cooling, the same amount of money might deliver ten times the net CO2 reduction achieved by PV panels.
And as far as I am aware there is no equivalent state, territory or commonwealth subsidy for large wind turbines, which (in 2007) are three or four times more cost-effective than photovoltaic panels but are only bought by electric utilities. Household-scale wind turbines are next to useless.
PV panels can be expected to be far more cost-effective in another five or ten years’ time — a subsidy then will hardly be necessary to persuade householders to secede from the electricity grid and leave it all to big business.
Right now, it looks like a lot of money is being thrown away on one of the most expensive greenhouse mitigation technologies. Not as wasteful as nuclear power stations, but almost in the same category.
A cynic might guess that this direct subsidy to green-leaning homeowners is nothing more than a vote-buying exercise.

]]>