Interesting article from BishopHill website today:
A few weeks ago, and unnoticed by yours truly, David Davis MP took a step to address one of the most egregious practices of windfarm operators.
The big companies that build windfarms tend to put each of their developments in a separate shell company, with a small share capital and funding provided instead through a large loan from the parent company. With profits immediately passed up to the parent, the operating businesses will usually have no net assets, which means that if any large liabilities arise there is nothing available to meet them.
And liabilities certainly do arise. The most obvious ones are claims for damages from the neighbours, whose sleep patterns are disturbed by the noise and the flickering light. Further down the line of course there is the cost of removing redundant windfarms from the landscape. As it is, these costs will fall on the public.
Davis's Public Nuisance from Wind Farms (Mandatory Liability Cover) Bill would force windfarm operators to hold cash and insurance sufficient to cover against these costs. Its second reading is in September.
I don't think the subsidy junkies are going to like it.
The same thing is happening here in Ireland.
It sounds like the Irish taxpayer is being set up once again to pick up the tab for greedy profiteers.
I think most of us would agree that extreme capitalism, as witnessed in Victorian Britain can be a cruel form of government, especially for the poor, it did work at building Britain's infrastructure, but there is little room to further development now. The result is that capital has no where to invest and turns to subsidised schemes like renewable energy to make a fast buck from captive consumers. Extreme socialism also brings hardship, totalitarianism and stagnation so that most prefer the middle of the road system. We see here that there is a problem in that the value of the assets used as collateral for loans of public and private money is no longer based on the real saleable value of the assets, but by the dependence on voters and their politicians to continue to subsidise green schemes. The green economy has sucked up capital from the real economy. Last Monday 40% of stock value was wiped off Chinese markets. This is not only a Chinese issue, its the lack of value in the countries where the Chinese trade. Seven years on from the 2008 crash, we see no sign of any relief from austerity. Austerity only works as a temporary concession by voters while the real economy is being got ready for a spurt of growth to put things right. The attempt to bring growth is very tenuous. Eventually voters will abandon austerity politics, by voting for left wing politicians. They will print money and nationalise many public assets again. They are not without merit. The privatisation of Ireland's electricity market and transmission operators has failed, because the likes of Eirgrid bent over backwards to facilitate the new green racket, including the publication of overstated capacity factors for wind.We have state bodies like the forestry and peat Boards competing against each other for the right to build wind farms with our money. All the money is being ploughed into energy capacity and it has attracted the buccaneers with 2 euro balance sheets. Obama has swallowed it all, but his time in office is limited. The only hope is that the British and Australians will see sense, but they are alone with India and Russia. The balance sheets of the world are way overstated and it is not the Chinese we need to worry about, it's us. I hate to be dour, but it appears that it is impossible to warn people in advance, the crash must come before they listen. The next step will be a public enquiry paid for by the robbed taxpayers to create another bonanza for lawyers. Yet the world is full of highly qualified economists, scientists and experts. Only a few cry wolf in the night, so if we rely on education, forget it. I never met anyone who did not have to count in some form or another, but it seems that the more education we give our children, the weaker they become at counting. If one can't count right, they must rely on those they vote for to do it for them, but what if they can't count either?
ReplyDelete