Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The cost of a green economy

By Arthur Thomas - posted Wednesday, 17 February 2010


Where are we today?

The uncertainty over carbon trading and its ability to achieve real reductions in emissions, the ongoing effects of the global financial crisis, and a crucial review of the CDM criteria are likely to reduce the rate of renewable energy manufacturing and generation development in China and parts of the developed world.

The global financial crisis is far from over and planned easing of unemployment across Europe and the US is reliant on a surge in manufacturing and public works.

China on the other hand is reporting an increase in economic growth based purely on massive infrastructure spending that is running in parallel with massive overcapacity in steel, aluminium and cement and the concealed level of real debt.

Advertisement

By the end of 2012, China will have developed a massive manufacturing and infrastructure capacity. Global demand however, will continue to grow slowly due to consumer credit constraints and demand. It is highly likely that this new capacity will exceed global demand well into the future.

Correcting this excess will be a serious challenge for Beijing, especially its banking sector that has underwritten manufacturing capacity, property development and infrastructure faced with falling property and stock markets.

Domestic consumption is still reliant on unlocking personal savings from those in the rural areas and on low incomes until China commits to funding a social welfare and environmental recovery program that will be far greater than the 2008 stimulus package, increasing China's consumer demand to the level needed. This is yet another growing challenge for Beijing.

Water demand

In Germany the solar arrays are in close proximity to cities and services, but in China, the US and other countries, solar is located in remote flat dry areas with abundant sunshine, on "cheap" land, but where transmission costs can be high.

Recent experience in the US has highlighted the immense thirst of solar arrays and power towers. The vast arrays of PV cells and mirrors consume quality water, that leaves no residue, to flush dust particles from surfaces that would otherwise reduce their efficiency. Power towers and concentrating PV systems also consume vast volumes of water for cooling.

To avoid major drawdown of scarce water resources in arid regions that serve cities and large communities some US states are refusing applications for large-scale arrays reliant on water resources. It comes down to priorities. Which is the more important - water or power?

Advertisement

Regardless of which politicians are in power, greening and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction comes with an unavoidable price tag , no matter what the spin from government or others. Like health care, education and law enforcement, the government needs taxation revenues to pay the bills for growing consumer demands.

Germany, Spain, France, UK, Germany and Denmark are all cutting back on earlier rhetoric, while the Obama administration chases wind and solar options requiring balance with water availability and demand.

Obama plans to cut unemployment by creating jobs in the green energy sectors. The program will cost US$2.3 billion and comes with a bill of US$135,000 per job: it will be reliant on  large quantities of cheap imports, particularly Chinese components.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

14 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Arthur Thomas is retired. He has extensive experience in the old Soviet, the new Russia, China, Central Asia and South East Asia.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Arthur Thomas

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 14 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy