The Un-economic Reality of So-Called ‘Green’ Energy

Acme inc recently appointed a new chief executive, and he got off to a flying start.

With the wind in his sails he ripped it up with some a stunning opening results, but the dynamic subsequently shifted.

And, now It seems that he can only work around 25% of the time (1).

On joining he brought in his own team of administrators and executives at an additional onerous financial cost to the business and while they continue to beaver away they are non-productive overheads. (2)

Well, surely you’ll be firing him shortly if he can only work 25% of the time. What’s his problem?

Well, occasionally on the days when he doesn’t want to work we can reach him on what’s app or the phone and he’s able to deliver some stunning insights, (3) but that’s rare as we don’t know where he is most of the time.

What’s the board going to do about this?

Well as we have a lot of Government cash to support the business (4), and his appointment was the result of pressure from many virtue-signalling directors in the thrall of activists (5), we’re having to default to an uneconomic work-around.

Well, what’s that all about?

So the previous chief executive, who was excellent at his job, but had fallen out with the board over his stance on certain issues has been re-employed to takeover the running of the business when the ‘newby’ goes missing (6)

So, effectively we have now have two management and sales structures, one which works only 25% of the time and the other for the rest.

Surely that cannot last and the company will surely go bust?

Our customers are not happy. The prices for our life-saving medications keep rising to accommodate these additional overheads.

We are becoming too expensive and we risk failing the very people we are meant to serve. Unless we change course our customers will face serious hardship.

However we’ve been guaranteed taxpayers cash for the foreseeable, but if the next Government (7) scraps these subsidies we’re done for.

ENDS

1 In the UK wind works about 40% of the time and solar 10%

2 Wholesale energy costs are about one-third of our bills the rest are network costs, operating costs, policy and environmental levies

3. Battery storage

4 Renewable subsidies

5 UN Climate Change reports

6. Gas-fired power

7 Reform UK

Comments

Zero-Energy Poverty Will ‘Trump’ Net Zero

THE progressive pathologies of the 21st Century are collapsing around us so could the most economically damaging of the lot be next? Mass, low-skilled immigration is now acknowledged as a drain on a host nation’s economy, detrimental to social cohesion, and a fuel for criminality. Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg has binned arch-liberal Nick Clegg for a Trump supporter Joel Kaplan; prostrating at incoming President Trump’s feet, he acknowledged his culpability in censoring free speech. America’s leading banks are withdrawing from the Net Zero Banking Alliance which has curtailed investment in hydrocarbons in favour of unreliable renewables. And, now Trump’s incoming energy secretary Chris Wright, is set to axe the damaging Net Zero fallacy in favour of a global focus on Zero Energy Poverty. Wright, Founder and CEO of US gas fracking firm Liberty Energy, says Net Zero is a threat to the prosperity of mankind. Net Zero Lies Where Wright and Trump’s Net Zero scepticism is s...

Net Zero Is Rooted In Socialist ‘Science Fiction’

THE dismantling of the globalists’ Net Zero deceit continues apace as energy prices continue to rise, Arctic sea ice stubbornly refuses to melt and US President Trump’s energy advisors spear the technocrats supra-national ambitions. Hatched by a series of anti-fossil fuel, communist activists and whipped into a planet-saving, apocalyptic, frenzy by the unquestioning technocrats at the United Nations, Net Zero is primarily a capitalism hatchet job. Back in 2015 when Net Zero was being embraced by the elite, UN boss Christiana Figueres, key driver of the Paris climate deal, revealed their hand. "This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally transforming the economic development model that has been reigning since the industrial revolution," she opined (1). Well, this state-mandated ‘socialist utopia’ maybe what the UN, the WEF, the Club of Rome, Blackrock and their political acolytes want - but it is far removed f...

Blaming CO2 Is The Analog Response To Climate Change

OVER 125 years ago Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius fingered carbon dioxide role for its role in warming the planet. At the time it was seen as a good thing - after all it’s the cold that kills - but over the ensuing decades there’ve been a few revisions to how this additional CO2 is perceived. It is now the sinister suspect behind 200 years of global warming and is demonised in a way the witches were in the 16th and 17th centuries. Just as the witches were castigated for spoiling crops, and inducing bad weather, CO2’s fingerprint is now apparently detectable on almost any climatic event. Such is the man-made warming mania that for the last five years the green stenographers in the BBC and mainstream media have neglected their duty of impartiality to the British people by claiming climate science is settled (1). But, surely it is not unreasonable to question how, and why, this trace gas, at a mere 0.04%, or 400 parts per million (ppm) of the atmosphere - and es...

Peter McCusker Energy & Climate

Search This Blog