President Obama will pay a visit on Sunday to the scene of the one of biggest oil spills to strike US coastal waters. This visit  will come more than a week after the BP oil well exploded and is gushing oil in the waters .I can’t think what the President will do after  a week since I can’t see his oratory stopping the thousands of barrels of oil from coming out of the well .The only reason I can see for his going is that he trying to  damage control after his administration was criticized for doing too little to control damage from this horrific environmental disaster.

Obama to visit Gulf Coast, oil slick approaches – Reuters

President Barack Obama will visit the U.S. Gulf Coast on Sunday as his administration aims to deflect criticism that it could have responded more quickly to a huge oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico that threatens to become an economic and ecological catastrophe.

The CEO of British Petroleum has offered to compensate for the costs of the oil spill, not that he would have much of a choice after his company is hit with lawsuits.Note he is concerned with his company’s operations and future  prospects rather than the people or animals that have been affected by this spill.Guess the PR spin doctors of the company are not doing their job too well
BP CEO says will pay oil spill claims – Reuters

BP Plc will compensate all those affected by an oil spill from one of its wells in the Gulf of Mexico, said its chief executive, who admitted that the disaster could hit plans to open new areas off the U.S. coast to drilling.

What will be the outcome of this oil disaster ? NOTHING

Just like earlier oil spills like Exxon Valdez and other , don’t expect this oil spill to change anything in regulation or policy making.The current administration has offered to allow states to drill oil off their coasts, I don’t think this spill will change anything . The super rich  oil industry with its army of lobbyists will ensure that nothing changes the status quo. What options do we have to substitute oil  – NOTHING.

Well that is what the oil lobby will tell you.They will also tell you that renewable energy energy is too expensive,its not scalabe and global warming and IPCC are frauds.

I would have a different answer but would let my readers decide for themselves what they want to believe in

Ontario,Canada  has a 60% “local content” requirement for renewable energy installed in the province.This is illegal according to WTO but unless someone challenges it in the body nothing will come out of it

China from 2004 to 2010 had a “70% local content” requirement.Now that their wind turbine makers are making major inroads into foreign markets ( read A-Power Systems) , they revised the law in Jan 2010 . No doubt as it has become redundant .

USA which has not done anything major to mitigate climate change , now wants to put a local content requirement on renewable energy. This was pushed because a large amount of cash grant going to a large wind power project promoted by a Chinese consortium.

‘Buy American’ boondoggle – LA Times

The refusal by most Republicans to have anything to do with clean energy or the fight against global warming means the job is being left almost entirely to Democrats, who have a strong grasp of environmental science but often a dim understanding of economics. That can undermine even the most well meaning of environmental initiatives, as a group of Senate Democrats seems determined to do with green-energy projects funded by stimulus dollars.

Sens. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Jon Tester (D-Mont.) are leading an effort to freeze payments from a clean-power grant program until Congress can consider a bill they introduced in March. SB 3069 would impose “buy American” rules on such projects, ensuring that taxpayer funds would go only to renewable energy plants that use materials made in the U.S.

Schumer et al say they just want to create American jobs. They were appalled when developers of a huge proposed wind farm in Texas announced they would seek up to $450 million in stimulus funds while buying their wind turbines from a Chinese company.

It’s a good clue that you’re on the wrong track with an initiative meant to encourage renewable energy when it’s opposed by the renewable energy industry. The American Wind Energy Assn. disdains the Schumer proposal because a freeze on stimulus payments would stall the country’s nascent clean-power movement. And buy American rules would have a chilling effect on the industry, in addition to wasting taxpayer dollars.

It would make more sense for the policymakers to use policy to make American renewable energy companies with great technology more competitive with Chinese ones which get huge subsidies in terms of extremely low cost of capital and labor

There have been numerous industry rumors that Spain may cut back on the guaranteed FIT rates that it has given to solar plants in the past.This would not only cause a huge amount of problem for renewable energy in Spain but have repercussions throughout the world as private investors in renewable energy  rethink about the safety of their investments .Most of the investments can’t stand economically on  their own but are dependent on government incentives and subsidies.But with the “PIGS” government  in such a precarious financial state all bets may be off. This may start of a broader trend where finance around the world also has to increase the sovereing risk premium

Spain Pricks Solar Power Bubble as Greek Fate Looms – Bloomberg

Spain is lancing an 18 billion-euro ($24 billion) investment bubble in solar energy that has boosted public liabilities, choking off new projects as it works to cut power prices and insulate itself from Greece’s debt crisis.

Industry Minister Miguel Sebastian is negotiating reductions in subsidies for solar plants that would curb energy costs, a ministry spokesman said this week. Grupo T-Solar Global SA, the world’s biggest photovoltaic plant owner, shelved its Spanish stock offering three days ago. Solar Opportunities SL postponed a 130 million-euro deal due to be signed today.

“They’ve put the fear of god into all these investors,” said Paul Turney, chief executive officer of Madrid-based Solar Opportunities. “By the time they’ve finished dithering around, they’ll have hurt their credibility so badly that no one will want to invest.”

Spain is battling on several fronts to revive its economy and convince government bondholders it can avoid getting dragged into a Greek-style debt spiral after Standard & Poor’s cut its credit rating April 28. Solar-plant owners including General Electric Co. earn about 12 times what’s paid for power from fossil fuels. Most of that is a subsidy charged to customers.

Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero’s government last cut solar rates in 2008, hitting plants not built at the time. Now it’s weighing reductions for the thousands of installations already making power from the sun, wind and biomass.

‘Excessive Subsidy’

“This is necessary,” said Leon Benelbas, chairman of Atlas Capital Close Brothers investment bank in Madrid. “It’s an excessive subsidy at a time Spain has to gain competitiveness, and the cost of energy is a determining factor.”

Spain’s fixed-price system for renewable power, which attracted more investment in solar panels in 2008 than the rest of the world put together, boosts the state’s liabilities even though they don’t show up on its balance sheet.

That’s because the Spanish system delays payments by consumers for part of their electric bills for years. The government guarantees repayment to power suppliers such as Endesa SA and Gas Natural SDG SA. The cost of those unpaid bills rose last year by about 4 billion euros to 16 billion euros.

Spain intends to revise the clean-energy rates down “to avoid damaging the competitiveness of industry,” Sebastian told the Spanish parliament yesterday.

6.3 Billion-Euro Premium

Renewable-power generators will receive 6.3 billion euros in subsidies this year compared with 5 billion euros in 2009, and they may get more than 126 billion euros in subsidies over the next 25 years under the existing tariff regime, the Industry Ministry said in a report published by Expansion newspaper on its website today.

The fixed-price system has created a “bubble” in photovoltaic power because the government didn’t initially fix limits to the number of plants that could claim subsidized prices, the report said.

S&P cut its rating on Spanish debt to AA on April 28, saying the nation that was AAA-rated until January 2009 is underestimating its fiscal problems and overestimating its ability to grow.

Government officials, who spurred more than 18 billion euros in solar-power projects since 2008, are meeting with industry representatives to negotiate cuts to subsidized rates.

‘Gold Rush’

“We had a gold rush here,” said Turney who, based on current power rates, planned to invest 240 million euros of equity into Spanish solar plants by next year. “They were building plant like crazy.”

Instead, the Solar Opportunities executive postponed a deal with 30 million euros in equity and 100 million euros of debt that was set to be signed today. He said he may cancel other projects too.

Groups such as the Spanish Photovoltaic Industry Association say they’re willing to accept cuts for future plants. They argue that reducing the price for existing facilities will breach their agreements with the government and damage the country’s reputation with investors.

“No sensible government is going to do this,” Juan Domingo Ortega, co-owner of Renovalia Energy SA, said at an April 23 outlining the company’s plan to raise 153 million euros in a stock offering. Renovalia is set to begin trading May 12.

Shares of solar producer Abengoa SA lost 8.9 percent this week. Solaria Energia y Medio Ambiente SA dropped 8.8 percent.

Forced Haircut

Forcing solar investors to take a haircut increases risks of doing business with Spain’s government, which may damage its ability to sell bonds, said Juan Laso, president of the Photovoltaic Business Association and T-Solar’s chief executive.

“The consequences of this are enormous, not just for the companies and financial institutions that have invested their money, but for the credibility of the country,” Laso said.

Investors began questioning the strength of Spanish assets as the shockwaves from Greece’s financial meltdown spill across Europe. The extra yield investors demand to hold Spanish 10-year government bonds reached 113 basis points this week, the widest spread in more than a year as the scale of the bail-out needed by Greece ballooned.

The legal dispute on Spanish solar rates turns on a reading of the 2007 law that governs renewable-power production. The government says it gives it the right to revise prices for existing plants this year. Executives say their prices are guaranteed for 25 years.

With Obama’s election there were lots of hope on the climate change issue with regards to the USA. Under the previous Republican administrations US was actively trying to kill each and every initiative on climate change , so it was assumed that Obama would change that . But except for token measures under ARRA , there has been no significant long term commitments being made towards climate change. The administration has been so busy with other issues that it has stopped paying attention to one of the biggest threats to our world right now. With the US not paying enough attention to mitigate climate change , you can’t expect other developing countries  in the world to make major contributions either . Think that only a major environmental disaster will get US to move forward on this issue.Until then expect the politicians to play the their useless political games as you  can see in interview with Republican Lindsey Graham who is one of the co sponsors of the climate change bill .

Sen. Lindsey Graham: ‘I care equally about immigration and climate change’ – Washington Post

EK: So what allows climate to move forward now? What do you need to hear from Reid?

LG: Here’s the problem with climate. Do you have any chance of bringing it up and getting 60 votes in this environment? There’s a controversial provision in the transportation section. We have done as good a job as we can to get oil and gas companies to pay for their pollution. Some of that cost will be passed onto consumers. But it’s not a gas tax. I need Harry Reid to say I agree with you. I support that. I won’t introduce a bill and have the majority leader, who I have less than a strong bond with, say, “I can’t support that gas tax.” There was also a Fox News article where the White House said they couldn’t support Graham’s gas-tax gambit. I will not let this get blamed on me. It would be the worst thing in the world to take the one Republican working with you and make him own the one thing you don’t like.

EK: So what you need isn’t just an assurance on immigration. It’s an assurance that if you’re going to do the dangerous things on climate reform, you won’t be hung out to dry on it.

LG: Right. Ask yourself: Why did they leak the story to Fox News? That told me they weren’t committed to this issue. Why let a story start on a venue that would hurt your partner the most?

EK: Have you asked the White House?

LG: Yeah. They say, “Oh, we didn’t do it.” And it’s true: Rahm and David didn’t. But somebody involved in energy and climate there did. They’ve always worried about being in a bad spot on this. So someone pretty clever said, “Okay, we’re going to get on the record against this.”

EK: Do these assurances go in the other direction, though? You want to make sure the Democrats don’t leave you hanging on this. But they’re worried that this bill comes out, and you’re with them, but 40 other Republicans are hammering them for supporting what they’ll call a gas tax, cap-and-tax.

LG: This is exactly what they’re going to say. I have never suggested they won’t. And they’ll say it about me, too. So we have to hold hands so I can make a credible argument, alongside business, saying it’s not a gas tax. But you can’t make this into my idea alone. It wasn’t my idea.

Copenhagen was a disaster and there has been no agreement on how to proceed with policies on a global basis to deal with the ever growing problem of climate change and global warming. Its each country adopting its own policies and targets with reducing carbon emissions, which can only work on a local or at best a regional level not at a global level. There are some countries going ahead with their own carbon reduction policies which will lead to conflict with trade partners . Domestic goods/services with carbon mitigation costs will have a disadvantage with imported good with no such problems.

Carbon tariffs on imports risk trade war – EU study — Reuters

The European Union is considering border tariffs on imports from more polluting countries, but an initial assessment shows such levies could risk sparking trade wars, draft documents show.

“Border measures risk clashing with the obligations under the WTO (World Trade Organization),” said a draft European Commission study looking at the cost of increasing EU curbs on climate-warming emissions.

The Commission, the 27-country EU’s executive, said it would continue to look at how imports might be included in the Emissions Trading Scheme, the EU’s carbon market and its main tool against climate-warming emissions.

But the initial assessment was that such measures would be fiendishly complex to calculate fairly, create a huge administrative burden and risk a trade conflict.

“The introduction of border measures may also trigger retaliatory measures and even hinder international negotiations,” added the document, seen by Reuters. “The system could at best only be envisaged for a very limited number of standardized commodities, such as steel or cement.”

Border tariffs on countries that do not play their part in fighting climate change are a hot topic in the United States, as it negotiates its own climate laws.

“Similar proposals are also being discussed in the U.S., and obviously any further political and operational steps taken in this direction should be taken together,” said a related EU draft.

EREC has released a  new report “Re-thinking 2050″ outlining the roadmap to make Europe 100% powered by renewable energy by 2050  . The report was released in the European parliament .While the report discusses a lot about the benefits  to getting to the objective,it has precious little on the specifics of the costs and policies required to get there.Lot on intent and little on action like the Copenhagen meet. The main features to the report are

  1. Develop a European wide supergrid
  2. Large scale growth in wind ,geothermal,oceanic,solar PV,solar thermal and biomass energy
  3. Solar at 50% and Wind at 25% will form the bulk of the renewable energy supplying Europe by 2050
  4. Transport to be mainly fueled by biofuels
  5. Heating and Cooling to be provided by biomass,solar thermal and geothermal energy
  6. Not a lot on policy measures except sticking to the European directives,carbon tax and removal of subsidies for fossil fuels.

The report is hugely bullish for solar PV and somewhat bullish for wind if Europe manages to implement this report