Another good read demonstrating the devastating and catastrophic failure of Germany’s ‘energiewende’ scheme.
Green centralised planning, like central economic planning of socialist regimes gone by has failed with devastating results…
European Power Plants Face Widespread Bankruptcies
Germany’s economics minister Sigmar Gabriel (SPD) wants to levy penalty payments onto coal plants if they produce CO2 emissions above a certain threshold. Against this plan intense resistance is growing in Germany: Within the Christian Democrat, within industry and – for especially dangerous for Gabriel – within the trade unions. The Christian Democrats (CDU) in particular are taking on Gabriel’s climate levy. And Merkel is allowing her party colleagues to assail him. Armin Laschet, the vice chairman of the Federal CDU, is accusing Gabriel of breaking the coalition agreement. –Jochen Gaugele , Martin Greive , Claudia Kade, Die Welt, 25 May 2015
The transition to renewable power generation is accelerating closures of coal and gas-fired power generation plants at a quicker rate than expected…
View original post 375 more words
It’s the great irony of ‘climate change’ that the protagonists of the green faith, usually of leftist or progressive persuasion, lay claim to be the “champions of the poor”. When ultimately the radical “save the planet” climate policies and futile green schemes, dreamt up in ivory towers of the sanctimonious political elite and wealthy chattering class, ultimately end up hurting the poorest in society.
Whether it be Carbon taxes, aimed to increase the cost of electricity to inhibit its use, expensive renewable energy, or even the World Bank’s no-coal decree, that would leave developing nations in the dark, radical climate policy does much for the political elite and very little for the impoverished majority …
A bit dated, from Feb 28th of this year, but given the big push for Paris and the Pope’s encyclical, it is germane at the moment. -Anthony
Stanford research reveals that it is ultimately people – not corporations – who would bear the costs of climate change regulation. Under a hypothetical carbon tax, households in the lowest income group would pay as a percent of income more than twice what households in the highest 10 percent of income distribution pay. The findings suggest a fairer way to regulate greenhouse gases in the United States.
New research finds the heaviest burden for climate change regulation falls on the poor, for whom basic necessities take up a bigger chunk of the budget.
The heaviest burden for climate change regulation costs falls on people – especially lower income groups – and not corporations, according to new Stanford research.
View original post 844 more words