See if you can figure out the thread among this week's stories. (Hint: It's not corporate-bashing or treehuggery...) We rely so heavily on the argument that our actions must "make economic sense", but have no recourse when the marketplace that sets prices in our economy gets corrupted. It's hard enough to get us to align our economy with our priorities without having also to deal with manipulation.
California to get $750 million dollars in energy crisis settlement
"Although California grid operators still must contend with market manipulation, the difference is 'things are much better today,' said Frank Lindh, the PUC's general counsel. State and federal regulators now "are much more aggressive about policing than they were in 2000 and 2001.
'That was the Wild West. Today it's not so rampant.'
In the just-settled case, British Columbia Hydroelectric's subsidiary, Powerex Inc., allegedly gamed the California energy market. Harris said it purchased and exported to Canada huge quantities of electricity and then sold it back to California with extreme price markups."
It is interesting to note that even in a marketplace that still favors the incumbency of fossil-fuel-generated electricity, we see the point on the horizon in which solar-generated electricity reaches market parity. If we have the courage to remove the permanent subsidies for fossil fuels from the marketplace, and include all the costs of burning fossil fuels for electricity in the price of fossil-fuel-generated electricity, then that point on the horizon will move significantly closer.
Charting the fall of solar prices
"If solar prices do continue to fall quickly, the technology will come ever closer to its moment of glory: (hazily defined, so-called) grid parity. This is when solar can really be called 'cheap' -- grid parity comes when solar is less expensive than fossil fuels, even without subsidies. (That fossil fuels receive several types of subsidies, in particular a free pass for carbon dioxide emissions remains a sore spot for solar advocates in the debate about subsidies.)"
We already know that we have reached price parity for wind-generated electricity, and that those states that made the early investment have reaped the double benefit of price stability and job growth in the wind manufacturing industry.
ACORE: The American energy markets want more wind power
"A major Midwest power producer, Xcel Energy, is voluntarily adding 750 MW of wind to their portfolio, citing competitive costs that are actually lower than natural gas and will save customers $590 million in fuel expenses over 20 years. Other businesses, like Wal-Mart and Google are adding solar PV to their facilities, with the goal of powering their operations with 100% renewable energy. And just before recess Congress passed a rare bipartisan bill that cuts regulations to encourage hydropower retrofits, expected to create 700,000 new jobs nationwide through 2025. These investments will pay major dividends tomorrow and for generations."
Even with all we have accomplished here over the past five years, and through the third worst economic downturn in the last hundred years, we still lag several other nations in our approach to sustainable business. If this showed a list created by Greenpeace or Amnesty International, it would still be important, but not nearly as poignant as noting it comes from an investment company that sees the relationship between a country's approach to sustainable business and environment and the country's risk profile as an investment. We are reaching the point where investors will see little value in "throwing good money after bad" by investing in countries that have economic and physical infrastructure that depends on polluting and life-damaging technologies.
Sweden named 'most sustainable country in the world'
"A report from the Swiss investment group RobecoSAM launched late last week ranked 59 countries on a broad range of environmental and social governance issues such as carbon emissions, social cohesion and civil liberties.
The report was designed to provide investors with deeper insight of issues that could affect a country's credit rating but are not usually considered by traditional sovereign ratings, such as climate change."
It is respectable for my Chicago to end up in the top 20 of cities worldwide in terms of economic development, although it is more than a bit disappointing that it ranks 6th among metro areas in the US, and that our country only has 3 of the top 10. It does, however, reflect what we all know: that we have so much more that we can do.
Seattle ranked #2 among global cities for economic development
"Researchers scored 61 global cities on a wide range of criteria which were divided into four categories: talent, technology, tolerance, and quality of place. Seattle was one of just eight cities to receive an A grade, and our overall score of 87.5 was second only to Ottawa-Gatineau, Canada."
Happy Friday!
No comments:
Post a Comment