The case for nuclear power
25 May 2016 Leave a comment
in energy economics, environmental economics Tags: atomic energy, coal, nuclear power, solar power, wind power
The renewable energy curse – does corruption turn clean energy into dirty? @GarethMP
30 Apr 2016 Leave a comment
in comparative institutional analysis, constitutional political economy, energy economics, environmental economics, global warming, Public Choice, rentseeking Tags: European Union, expressive voting, green rent seeking, Italy, renewable energy, solar power, wind power
Massimo Tavoni and Caterina Gennaioli published a nice paper showing that corruption and violence was higher in the high wind provinces of Italy after the installation of wind generators. They built on earlier work about countries with abundant renewable resources and weak institutions. The main question in their paper
… is whether an increase in the expected returns of investments in wind energy, following the introduction of the new policy regime based on a green certificate system, has driven economic agents, namely bureaucrats and entrepreneurs, to engage more in rent seeking activities.
As they studied Italy, there is no surprise about the answer which was yes. High winds ensure high returns of the wind farm investment, but whether this translates into more bribery depends on institutional quality. There was more corruption, and so especially in high-wind provinces of Italy.
Source: Green policy and corruption | VOX, CEPR’s Policy Portal.
The construction of an average wind park is associated with an increase of criminal association activity of 6%. Italy will have more corruption than elsewhere in the old European Union.
The wider problem is renewable energy is a celebrity technology. In the context of expressive politics, so many cheer for solar and wind power that standards drop in terms of who qualifies for subsidies and who should lose support when their investments do not turn out as promised.
https://twitter.com/CountCarbon/status/715136022414299138
Wind power is not new, it is intermittent, is unsuitable for modern work, and is land constrained but it is still subsidised. Green rent seeking is a real risk even in countries with the best political institutions.
How much of global low carbon energy is wind and solar?
21 Apr 2016 Leave a comment
in economic history, energy economics, environmental economics, resource economics Tags: geothermal power, hydroelectric power, nuclear power, renewable energy, solar power, wind power
The sources of low carbon energy since 1965
14 Apr 2016 Leave a comment
in economic history, energy economics, environmental economics Tags: atomic energy, hydroelectric power, nuclear power, solar power, wind power
Global energy use by source
12 Apr 2016 Leave a comment
in economic history, energy economics, environmental economics, global warming Tags: coal prices, hydroelectricity, Oil prices, solar power, wind power
How much of Swedish power is renewable energy?
28 Mar 2016 Leave a comment
in economic history, energy economics, environmental economics Tags: hydroelectric power, renewable energy, solar power, wind power
New Zealand’s renewable energy as a percentage of the total primary energy supply
24 Mar 2016 Leave a comment
in economic history, energy economics Tags: geothermal power, renewable energy, solar power, wind power
Can We Rely on Wind and Solar Energy?
23 Mar 2016 Leave a comment
in economics, energy economics, environmental economics, global warming Tags: solar power, wind power
Solution aversion and the anti-science Left
11 Mar 2016 1 Comment
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, comparative institutional analysis, constitutional political economy, economics of regulation, energy economics, environmental economics, global warming, health economics, law and economics, politics - Australia, politics - New Zealand, politics - USA, property rights, Public Choice Tags: antiscience left, climate alarmism, geo-engineering, GMOs, growth of knowledge, gun control, motivated reasoning, nuclear power, political persuasion, solar power, solution aversion, wind power
Climate science is the latest manifestation of solution aversion: denying a problem because it has a costly solution. The Right does this on climate science, the Left does it on gun control, GMOs, and plenty more. Cass Sunstein explains:
It is often said that people who don’t want to solve the problem of climate change reject the underlying science, and hence don’t think there’s any problem to solve.
But consider a different possibility: Because they reject the proposed solution, they dismiss the science. If this is right, our whole picture of the politics of climate change is off.
Some psychologists wasted grant money on lab experiments to show that people that think the solution to a problem is costly tend to rubbish every aspect of the argument. Any politician will tell you you do not concede anything. Sunstein again:
Campbell and Kay asked the participants whether they agreed with the IPCC. And in both, about 80 percent of Democrats did agree; the policy solutions made no difference.
Republicans, in contrast, were far more likely to agree with the IPCC when the proposed solution didn’t involve regulatory restrictions…
Here, then, is powerful evidence that many people (of course not all) who purport to be skeptical about climate science are motivated by their hostility to costly regulation.
The Left is equally prone to motivated readings. For example, it was found that those on the left are much more concerned about home invasions when gun control can reduce them rather than increase them.
The Left picks and chooses which scientific consensus as it accepts. The overwhelming consensus among researchers is biotech crops are safe for humans and the environment. This is a conclusion that is rejected by the very environmentalist organisations that loudly insist on the policy relevance of the scientific consensus on global warming.
Previously the precautionary principle was used to introduce doubt when there was no doubt. But when climate science turned in their favour, environmentalists wanted public policy to be based on the latest science.
The Right is welcoming of the science of nuclear energy or geo-engineering. The Left rejects it point-blank. Their refusal to consider nuclear energy as a solution to global warming is a classic example of solution aversion. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Are we there yet on solar power? @GarethMP @GreenpeaceNZ @NZGreens
24 Feb 2016 Leave a comment
in economic history, energy economics, environmental economics, Public Choice, rentseeking Tags: Big Solar, green rent seeking, rational irrationality, solar energy, solar power
Source: History of Solar Power – IER.
@RusselNorman @JulieAnneGenter a hedge fund specialises in shorting renewable energy shares @Greenpeace
03 Feb 2016 Leave a comment
in defence economics, economic history, economics of regulation, energy economics, entrepreneurship, environmental economics, financial economics, global warming Tags: active investing, disinvestment, entrepreneurial alertness, ethical investing, Fossil Fuels, green rentseeking, hedge funds, passive investing, renewable energy, solar power, Vice Fund, wind power
Just as the Vice Fund specialises in investing in tobacco, alcohol, gaming and defence shares, Cool Futures Funds Management is starting-up to specialise in betting against global warming by shorting green stocks:
…instead of renewables being our energy future, they’re betting on the subsidies drying up and the whole industry collapsing; instead of fossil fuels being left in the ground as “stranded assets”.
An example of the nice little earners this hedge fund can come across is anticipating when particular investors will want to disinvest from fossil fuels.
When institutional investors ranging from universities to sovereign investment funds such as the New Zealand Superannuation Fund seek to disinvest from fossil fuels, that will be a good time to buy cheap shares.The
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments