What’s going with the leading renewable energy companies, which were supposed to be leading the way to a new, brighter and greener future?
Tax evasion investigation clouds Vestas’s horizon. Image: Vestas
German online SHZ daily here reports that Danish wind energy giant Vestas saw its Hamburg and Husum, Germany, offices raided by German tax authorities earlier this year amid suspicions of tax evasion. Vestas executives deny any wrongdoing and said in a statement that they are cooperating with German authorities.
According to the SHZ, the raids of the German head offices took place on February 9th and involved cases over the time period of 2006 to 2011. Vestas German headquarters in Husum employ 2000 employees. The SHZ writes:
The case is connected to an earlier one involving former Vestas former directors who were accused of bribery in Germany. Over the past years Vestas has replaced almost the entire company management, and for this reason Sydbank analyst Jacob Pedersen sees little danger for the company’s image.”
Meanwhile the Wall Street Journal here reports that the SEC is investigating solar energy giant SunEdison’s “financial disclosures to investors about how much cash the solar-power company had on hand as its stock price collapsed last year.” The Journal writes:
Officials in the SEC’s enforcement unit are looking into whether SunEdison overstated its liquidity last fall when it told investors it had more than $1 billion in cash, the people said.”
SunEdison shares have collapsed since last summer, with shares down 96% from a July high. “The company’s market value has fallen to around $400 million from nearly $10 billion in July.”
These are just the latest examples of the woes dogging the world’s renewable energy companies. With so many in trouble, it’s hard to see any future for the branch.
Berlin paper Tagesspiegel reports about crisis of power plant operators RWE, EON, Vattenfall.
http://www.tagesspiegel.de/wirtschaft/energiewende-der-wind-hat-sich-gedreht/13392870.html
For the first time ever, German press mentions the cost of 24 bn EUR annually in subsidies (though, their number is one year too old; it already ballooned to 28 bn in 2015).
I like their conclusion: “Oversupply of subsidized electricity pushes the unsubsidized electricity out of the market.” Somewhere else they mention RWE’s proclamative slogan “RWE starts future business”; meaning the orientation of RWE towards renewables.
Taken together we can say: The future is subsidized energy; the past was unsubsidized energy. And, as we all know: Unsubsidized energy was half as expensive for the customer!
The conclusion is: The SPD-CDU government introduces central planning, eradicates the market, and destroys wealth. A textbook example for the effects of central planning and the incapability of the state.
“I like their conclusion: “Oversupply of subsidized electricity pushes the unsubsidized electricity out of the market.” ”
Yeah, it is a real pity, that we do not have the pleasure of all that nuclear, coal, oil and gas power which never got a single cent of a subsidy.
” The future is subsidized energy; the past was unsubsidized energy.”
This is the world up side down. In the real world, for example roof top solar has reached grid parity basically everywhere. So now people can simply decide to get their power from a company or from their own roofs. Batteries will even improve that situation., sit and watch.
“And, as we all know: Unsubsidized energy was half as expensive for the customer!”
No, it was not. Pierre gave the link below in a recent post. Nothing doubled at all.
https://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/strompreis-entwicklung-haushalt-bdew.jpg
“The SPD-CDU government introduces central planning, eradicates the market, and destroys wealth. ”
This is also utterly false. For the longest time, electricity markets were without any form of market. The only reason that we see some market activity are renewables and those are currently winning bids when there are real auctions:
http://www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/solar-wins-substantial-contracts-in-chiles-energy-supply-auction_100021755/
“Yeah, it is a real pity, that we do not have the pleasure of all that nuclear, coal, oil and gas power which never got a single cent of a subsidy. ”
This is a Tu Quoque argument; it does not invalidate what I said but CONFIRMS it – while insinuating that I support subsidies to other producers which I do not.
So thanks for confirming me.
“This is also utterly false. For the longest time, electricity markets were without any form of market.”
Wasn’t it YOU who complained about that old widow who doesn’t get informed by state media that she can change electricity providers? Which actually would have saved her money in the days before 70% of the electricity price were state-mandated taxes and fees.
Also, as you are a warmuni$t, I take it that “for the longest time” means 200 million years. Or does it mean since the start of the Keeling measurements? Since Tindall? Since Fourier? Since that Swedish guy who thought electric fields would accelerate learning in school children, what’s his name, Svante Arrhenius?
“” The future is subsidized energy; the past was unsubsidized energy.”
This is the world up side down. In the real world, for example roof top solar has reached grid parity basically everywhere. So now people can simply decide to get their power from a company or from their own roofs. ”
I take that “basically everywhere” means “in California”, to run an air conditioning, and grid parity even there only because PG&E is a local monopolist with extortion as their pricing model.
In cloudy Germany with 800 sun hours a year? Yeah right. A German buys solar cells to cash in on the subsidies. It’s a money loser in every other scenario. That’s why they subsidize in the first place. Don’t you have a pocket calculator or something?
“I take that “basically everywhere” means “in California”, to run an air conditioning, and grid parity even there only because PG&E is a local monopolist with extortion as their pricing model.
In cloudy Germany with 800 sun hours a year? Yeah right. A German buys solar cells to cash in on the subsidies. It’s a money loser in every other scenario. That’s why they subsidize in the first place. Don’t you have a pocket calculator or something?”
Deutsche Bank has used their pocket calculator and came up with this graph:
http://c1cleantechnicacom.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/files/2016/03/gridparitycountries.png
Germany is easy for solar PV, because our electricity prices have always been high.
““” The future is subsidized energy; the past was unsubsidized energy.”
Yep, that’s what has to happen if you change from coal to “unreliables”.
Unreliables are an energy source that HAS to be subsidised to exist.
April Fools joke?
When a company’s share price drops it is usually for a good reason. This does not mean there is no value left. The question is who gets that value and how orderly the process will be.
There will be new owners after the share holders and the new owners will want to recover as much value as they can, and quickly. There reason for being is not to build or run companies. They can continue operations and take profits without doing things to ensure long term survival. After a short time, they will sell and take what is offered. Then the new-new owners will follow the same strategy. Buildings and land will be sold as equipment fails and is dismantled. This can be a long process.
On a small scale, I know of several old buildings that have not been used for years. They soon become surrounded by weeds, empty, parking lots, and often inhabited by rats. One place was a bowling ally, after a long life it closed in 2011 and the roof failed last year. Use Google Earth – Street View from coordinates:
41.204286, -79.347755
View the parking lot and building south of the marker. Here’s the story:
http://clariontoday.com/clarion-bowling-complex-collapses/
This is the future.
Okay, you want a wind tower. Try these coordinates and look east:
47.101063, -120.751270
A Darrieus wind turbine about 30 years in place. The company went under about the time it was completed.
Off topic, but have you seen this about the price of food with “environmental costs” added?
http://www.spiegel.de/international/tomorrow/the-true-price-of-foodstuffs-a-1085086.html
I was really surprised by some major positive news on the alternative energy sector. Deutsche Post is starting to build electric delivery cars.
http://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/article153925288/Die-Deutsche-Post-baut-und-verkauft-Elektroautos.html
they want 30000 of these to replace their fleet. This is a major move.
Electric cars are NOT an alternate energy.
They will still have to source their energy from mainly coal/gas or nuclear.
Why did you have to say that, Andy? Have you no heart?
“Electric cars are NOT an alternate energy.”
I know. But they are driving storage, which is important for renewables.
Poor sob, is that the best you can do.
The energy will only come from fossil fuel or nuclear…
or are you going to say you can charge on a windless night.
Anyway.. the storage capacity is absolutely minimal and requires MASSIVE investment in mining and production using fossil fuels to even exist.
Well, my cellphone is as well. Do I get subsidies?
Sod won’t tell ya but I will.
A kWh that goes into a Li-Ion accu and out again costs, irrespective of where it came from approximately at least 1 EUR (1.13 USD), simply because of the limited lifetime and the price of the accu, the inverters, the losses.
Of course IF one were to actually use accus for storing electricty one would NOT DRIVE THEM AROUND. And, one would use anything BUT Li-Ion. Again, sod’s suggestions makes one think of
WHOM THE GODS WANT TO DESTROY THEY FIRST MAKE MAD.
Here in New Zealand in the last days one electricity supply business has just announced it will be charging customers who have their own solar panels, a higher price for their connection and electricity they buy, than those who rely on said business for their total electrical supply. The rationale being, those with solar panels will be buying less electricity, therefore supply company will make less money from those customers, but still must maintain the supply network to them. So to maintain the profitability of the supply business, those semi self sufficient customers will have to pay more, if they want to stay connected to a reliable “backup” supply. By the way, largest proportion of generation here is hydro.
Sweet.
About time the solar scammers started to pay their way, instead of relying on government handouts and subsidies. 🙂
That’s a rational argument – so it’s hatespeech! Sue the company for 50 billion Kiwi-Dollars!