How can ‘green’ = poverty? The wind is free! The sun is free! True, those ‘fuels’ are free, but their conversion into electricity is extremely expensive- and, ironically, requires the use of fossil fuels for manufacturing. Changes in the world’s carbon emissions are negligible, yet, the world economies have spent HUNDREDS of BILLIONS installing wind turbines all over the planet. If you believe we can ‘save the planet’ with renewable energy, how can you justify the results on humans? This is not the 1st article covering the poverty caused by renewable subsidies. Last year, “To eat or heat” was a study about rising costs in Germany. Everywhere there are thousands of subsidized turbines, you have higher electricity rates. At some point, you need to ask some questions: What does this do to an average family’s budget? What impact could it have on their eating habits? What impact could it have on their health? How will this impact the business that employs average families? Will these businesses be able to support their employees with same wages or reduced? How will it impact their growth potential? How will it impact their cost to produce? The list goes on….and the answers aren’t good.
Britain’s environmentalists proudly announce that households have reduced their electricity consumption by almost 10 per cent since 2005.They seldom mention that this is helped by a 50 per cent increase in electricity prices, in part to pay for Britain increasing its share of renewables from 1.8 per cent to 4.6 per cent. Such a price increase of course hits the poorest hardest. As with many green taxes, it does so because it taxes a basic necessity that makes up a larger proportion of a small budget. Not surprisingly, higher energy prices mean the poor are forced to reduce their electricity consumption far more than the richest, who haven’t reduced their electricity consumption at all.
Over the past five years, heating a home in the UK has become 63 per cent more expensive, while real wages have declined. Unsurprisingly, a greater number of poor households must spend more than 10 per cent of their income on energy, becoming what is known as energy poor. This category now covers some 17 per cent of all British households. Worse, because the elderly are typically poorer, energy poverty affects about a quarter of all households whose inhabitants are over 60. Deprived pensioners are spending their days riding heated buses to keep warm, while a third are leaving part of their homes cold….
But things could be worse. In Germany green subsidies will cost €23.6 billion this year. Real household electricity prices have increased by 80 per cent since 2000, contributing to almost seven million households now living in energy poverty. Wealthy homeowners in Bavaria might feel good about installing inefficient solar panels on their roofs, but their lavish subsidies are essentially financed by poor tenants in the Ruhr paying higher electricity costs….
The rich world generates just 0.8 per cent of its energy from solar and wind, far from meeting even minimal demand. In fact, Germany will build ten new coal-fired power plants over the next two years to keep its own lights on.
Africa is the renewable utopia, getting 50 per cent of its energy from renewables — though nobody wants to emulate it. In 1971, China derived 40 per cent of its energy from renewables. Since then, it has powered its incredible growth almost exclusively on heavily polluting coal, lifting a historic 680 million people out of poverty. Today, China gets a trifling 0.23 per cent of its energy from unreliable wind and solar….
via How green policies hurt the poor » The Spectator.