Arquivo da Categoria ‘eólica’

Boom das renováveis perto do fim?

Segunda-feira, 5 de Outubro, 2009

Sucedem-se os artigos com dados estatísticos sobre o abrandamento do investimento privado, e sobretudo público, no sector das energias renováveis. Basicamente os argumentos são estes:

  1. as energias renováveis —eólica, solar, bio e mini-hídrica— são substancialmente mais caras do que a energia eléctrica oriunda das centrais nucleares existentes, dos hidrocarbonetos, das grandes barragens e das redes de distribuição instaladas;
  2. o financiamento destas energias tem dependido até agora de subsídios públicos directos e indirectos, de garantias estatais à realização de contratos público-privados (PPP, etc.) e de arquitecturas várias de investimento privado especulativo;
  3. a crise de endividamento mundial que atinge muito fortemente as economias norte-americana e europeia, entre outras, agravada pela explosão da bolha de crédito barato e fácil, a qual começou pela crise hipotecária do Subprime, se agravou com a falência do sistema financeiro assente na hegemonia da moeda americana, e prossegue sob a influência nefasta da implosão dos mercados de Derivados (future contracts, Credit Default Swaps, Edges Funds, OTC Derivatives, etc.), bem assim como do especulativo mercado cambial, conhecido por Forex, de que o chamado Carry Trade é um dos venenos mais letais para a economia global;
  4. a mudança de paradigma energético conduz a inúmeras falências, deslocalizações e desemprego: por cada emprego criado no sector das energias renováveis, o qual custou em Espanha, até agora, entre 500 mil e 1 milhão de euros, são destruídos em média 2,2 postos de trabalho, ou, por cada MW “verde” instalado são destruídos em média 5,28 empregos — 8,99 pela fotovoltaica, 4,27 pela eólica e 5,05 pelas mini-hídricas (ler Renováveis implodem em Espanha).

Renewables Q3 Investment Down on Q2

5-10-2009, London, UK [RenewableEnergyWorld.com]

Latest figures from analysis firm New Energy Finance (NEF) show that total worldwide new financial investment in clean energy totaled $25.9 billion in the third quarter of 2009, down 9% from a revised Q2 total of $28.6 billion, but still markedly ahead of the dramatic low of $13.3 billion reached in Q1.

…Narrowing its forecast range for full-year 2009 total new investment to $105-$115 billion, in the upper band of the previous forecast range of $95-$115 billion, New Energy Finance still expects that total new investment in clean energy is likely to exceed $300 billion per year by 2020, but this is well below the $500 billion per year that would be required to limit the rise in global temperatures to two degrees Centigrade or less, the company argues.

…Michael Liebreich, chairman and chief executive of New Energy Finance, commented: “It is heartening to see that the collapse in investment seen in the first quarter of this year is firmly receding in the rear-view mirror. However, the financing environment remains difficult, with undue reliance on stimulus funds, development banks and state-backed capital providers of various sorts. Most significantly, the levels of investment required to bring global carbon emissions to a peak during the coming decade are as far out of reach as ever – particularly significant given the rapidly-approaching Copenhagen deadline.”

Por outro lado cresce a pressão dos argumentos ambientalistas, para quem o aquecimento global provocado pelo aumento de partículas de CO2 na atmosfera tem vindo a agravar-se mais depressa que o previsto pelo próprio Painel Intergovernamental para as Alterações Climáticas (IPCC).

Wind Power Could Supply Global Electricity Needs 40 Times Over. By Dr. Mae-Wan Ho.

Wind turbines on land could provide more than 40 times the world’s current electricity consumption or over five times its total energy needs. That’s the latest assessment using wind data from meteorological sources. A network of 2.5-megawatt (MW) turbines on land restricted to non-forested, ice-free, nonurban areas operating at as little as 20 percent of their rated capacity would do the trick; allowing for the fact that the wind does not blow constantly. To put this into perspective, wind turbines installed in the US in 2004 and 2005 operate on average 36 percent of rated capacity.

For the United States, the central plain states could accommodate enough wind turbines to provide as much as16 times its total current demand for electricity.

Wind power is on a steep ascent. It accounted for 42 percent of all new electrical capacity added to the US in 2008; but it is still only a tiny fraction of the total capacity, 25.4 GW out of 1 075GW. The Global Wind Energy Council projected a 17-fold increase in wind-powered generation of electricity globally by 2030. [Read more here]

Green Energies 100% Renewables by 2050.
By Mae-Wan Ho, Brett Cherry, Sam Burcher & Peter Saunders

Global warming is happening much faster than the IPPC (Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change) predicted in its latest 2007 report. For one thing, its climate models failed to account for the rapid summer melting of the polar ice caps that’s been making headlines several years in a row.

The IPCC helped set the target of 450 ppm maximum of atmospheric CO2, which they thought would limit the global temperature rise to below 2 ˚C, and prevent “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.”

But top climate scientists Jim Hansen and colleagues, using more realistic climate models and key data from the remote history of the earth, showed that 450 ppm is well beyond the danger zone, and we must even reduce the current 385 ppm atmospheric CO2 down to 350 ppm, or else face “irreversible catastrophic effects”. And the head of IPCC Rajendra Pachauri now agrees.

The good news is that we can still do it. It is not too late. All it takes is to stop burning fossil fuels in order to bring 385 ppm back down to 350 ppm within the next decades. But we must act now, because 385 ppm is already within the danger zone, and we cannot afford to let it remain there for too long, or we push the planet past the point of no return.

That is why we need to commit ourselves to truly green energies as a matter of urgency. [Read more here].

Renováveis implodem em Espanha

Domingo, 27 de Setembro, 2009

LESSONS FROM THE SPANISH RENEWABLES BUBBLE

Europe’s current policy and strategy for supporting the so-called “green jobs” or renewable energy dates back to 1997, and has become one of the principal justifications for U.S. “green jobs” proposals. Yet an examination of Europe’s experience reveals these policies to be terribly economically counterproductive.

This study is important for several reasons. First is that the Spanish experience is considered a leading example to be followed by many policy advocates and politicians. This study marks the very first time a critical analysis of the actual performance and impact has been made. Most important, it demonstrates that the Spanish/EU-style “green jobs” agenda now being promoted in the U.S. in fact destroys jobs, detailing this in terms of jobs destroyed per job created and the net destruction per installed MW.

The study’s results demonstrate how such “green jobs” policy clearly hinders Spain’s way out of the current economic crisis, even while U.S. politicians insist that rushing into such a scheme will ease their own emergence from the turmoil.

5. Despite its hyper-aggressive (expensive and extensive) “green jobs” policies it appears that Spain likely has created a surprisingly low number of jobs, two- thirds of which came in construction, fabrication and installation, one quarter in administrative positions, marketing and projects engineering, and just one out of ten jobs has been created at the more permanent level of actual operation and maintenance of the renewable sources of electricity.

7. The study calculates that since 2000 Spain spent €571,138 to create each “green job”, including subsidies of more than €1 million per wind industry job.

8. The study calculates that the programs creating those jobs also resulted in the destruction of nearly 110,500 jobs elsewhere in the economy, or 2.2 jobs destroyed for every “green job” created.

9. Principally, the high cost of electricity affects costs of production and employment levels in metallurgy, non-metallic mining and food processing, beverage and tobacco industries. 10. Each “green” megawatt installed destroys 5.28 jobs on average elsewhere in the economy: 8.99 by photovoltaics, 4.27 by wind energy, 5.05 by mini-hydro.

10. Each “green” megawatt installed destroys 5.28 jobs on average elsewhere in the economy: 8.99 by photovoltaics, 4.27 by wind energy, 5.05 by mini-hydro.

14. The price of a comprehensive electricity rate (paid by the end consumer) in Spain would have to be increased 31% to being able to repay the historic debt generated by this rate deficit mainly produced by the subsidies to renewables, according to Spain’s energy regulator.

15. Spanish citizens must therefore cope with either an increase of electricity rates or increased taxes (and public deficit), as will the U.S. if it follows Spain’s model.

16. The high cost of electricity due to the green job policy tends to drive the relatively most electricity-intensive companies and industries away, seeking areas where costs are lower. The example of Acerinox is just such a case.

17. The study offers a caution against a certain form of green energy mandate. Minimum guaranteed prices generate surpluses that are difficult to manage. In Spain’s case, the minimum electricity prices for renewable-generated electricity, far above market prices, wasted a vast amount of capital that could have been otherwise economically allocated in other sectors. Arbitrary, state-established price systems inherent in “green energy” schemes leave the subsidized renewable industry hanging by a very weak thread and, it appears, doomed to dramatic adjustments that will include massive unemployment, loss of capital, dismantlement of productive facilities and perpetuation of inefficient ones.

18. These schemes create serious “bubble” potential, as Spain is now discovering. The most paradigmatic bubble case can be found in the photovoltaic industry. Even with subsidy schemes leaving the mean sale price of electricity generated from solar photovoltaic power 7 times higher than the mean price of the pool, solar failed even to reach 1% of Spain’s total electricity production in 2008.

19. The energy future has been jeopardized by the current state of wind or photovoltaic technology (more expensive and less efficient than conventional energy sources). These policies will leave Spain saddled with and further artificially perpetuating obsolete fixed assets, far less productive than cutting- edge technologies, the soaring rates for which soon-to-be obsolete assets the government has committed to maintain at high levels during their lifetime.

20. The regulator should consider whether citizens and companies need expensive and inefficient energy – a factor of production usable in virtually every human project- or affordable energy to help overcome the economic crisis instead.

22. Renewable technologies remained the beneficiaries of new credit while others began to struggle, though this was solely due to subsidies, mandates and related programs. As soon as subsequent programmatic changes take effect which became necessary due to “unsustainable” solar growth its credit will also cease.

23. This proves that the only way for the “renewables” sector – which was never feasible by itself on the basis of consumer demand – to be “countercyclical” in crisis periods is also via government subsidies. These schemes create a bubble, which is boosted as soon as investors find in “renewables” one of the few profitable sectors while when fleeing other investments. Yet it is axiomatic, as we are seeing now, that when crisis arises, the Government cannot afford this growing subsidy cost either, and finally must penalize the artificial renewable industries which then face collapse. —— in Study of the effects on employment of public aid to renewable energy sources, by Gabriel Calzada Álvarez PhD.

Comentário: na linha do post anterior, a leitura deste explosivo relatório produzido pela Universidade Rey Juan Carlos, merece uma leitura atenta e a extracção das devidas ilações, nomeadamente para o caso português. — CS

Bolha solar rebenta em Espanha

Sábado, 19 de Setembro, 2009
O fim da bolha fotovoltaica?

O fim da bolha fotovoltaica?

Spain’s Solar-Power Collapse Dims Subsidy Model
By ANGEL GONZALEZ and KEITH JOHNSON (WST)

Spain’s hopes of becoming a world leader in solar power have collapsed since the Spanish government slammed the brakes on generous subsidies.

The sudden change has rippled across the global solar industry, in a warning of the problems that government-supported renewable-energy programs can encounter.

Valerá a pena insistir em projectos de microgeração subsidiada?

Não é possível rentabilizar um investimento em microgeração fotovoltaica ligada à rede em menos de 6 anos. Ora seis anos, no actual quadro de desorganização mundial da economia, e sobretudo do sistema financeiro, é muito tempo! Os benefícios governamentais e fiscais estão por um fio. A recessão global e o imparável deslizamento do dólar americano fazem cair os preços reais do petróleo. O crescimento previsto dos consumos energético está posto em causa. O excessivo endividamento dos grandes fornecedores de energia eléctrica, seja na especulação bolsista, nas operações de crescimento por aquisição e fusão de empresas, ou nos investimentos colossais nas energias eólica e fotovoltaica, anuncia uma inflação dos preços da energia junto dos consumidores a curto e médio prazo. Como disse, com grande frieza, o presidente da Iberdrola, Ignacio Sánchez Galán, “a energia solar era um produto financeiro, não uma solução energética”. Numa palavra, o boom fotovoltaico acabou! — CS.