Contact Name:
Jeffrey Upin
Contact Title:
General Counsel
Company:
International Green Power
• When I started my interview, I asked Mr. Upin what exactly his company does because I was a little confused based on what I read from the website. He immediately complimented me on my knowledge of his company because it showed I that I had a true interest in him and his company. He said that knowledge on the company is important for any job candidate.
• Venture capital firms, most notably Khlosa Ventures, have been investing huge sums of money into the green energy sector. With an emphasis on the fact that oil production is going to slow down, he says that this sector shows huge potential for growth. He notes Mutamax, which is a joint venture between BP and Dupont, as a result of the changing landscape. It hopes to create massive amounts biobutamol, a reproducible biofuel.
• When I asked him about investing, he told me that it is all about my preference in investing. For a high risk, high return investor, he would suggest biofuel companies. For a low risk, low reward investor, he suggests wind and solar companies.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Plausible TVA Auction
According to a Wall Street Journal article from Monday November 15th, a clean energy group called the Coalition for the Green Bank (CGB) is set to propose an auction of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), a federally owned corporation in charge of electricity generation among other things. There are several companies like Duke Energy and Southern Co. that could potentially be interested in this sort of purchase. The money from the auction would go to green energy projects, to finance tax breaks for renewable energy, or to balance the growing federal budget deficit, a measure that could appeal to the tea party. This effort comes in the wake of the GOP surge on November 2nd as Democrats are reaching out to Republicans.
Another group, the Center for American Progress (CAP), plans to sign proposals “for how to move beyond legislation to establish a ‘cap and trade’ system,” a bill that never developed in the senate. They are making proposals and announcements to change their strategy, now pushing an agenda that is more investment focused and not reliant on a cap and trade system. The CAP has not endorsed the TVA auction but it relates to its agenda of fostering investment, not forcing it like a cap and trade bill would. As I wrote before, this sort of proposal comes after the November mid-term elections. Environmentalist and clean energy groups have been forced to adapt to a new house majority and compromises will be more important than ever any sort of progress to be made. Both the CAP and the CGB have proposed mandatory investments in clean energy enforced by states and they are beginning a discussion about reclassifying nuclear as clean energy, an argument I have made countless times in this blog. In order to finance these projects, the CAP and the CGB are examining the idea of an Energy Independence Trust that would “provide low-cost financing for ‘clean energy’ and energy efficiency projects,” (WSJ).
I do not think there is anything wrong with this proposed auction. The author of the article, Siobhan Hughes, explained that southern Democrats have been for the auction of the TVA for a long time, and of course Republicans and tea partiers would support it because it would shrink the government. Therefore, it sounds like everybody would agree on this measure. To be honest, the way the proceeds are spent is not the important part of this issue for me. I realize that it would be a huge sum, but the options that I listed in the first paragraph—financing green energy projects, financing tax breaks for renewable energy, or balancing growing federal budget deficit—all sound like pretty logical, wise plans of action to me. I would prefer a smaller government and it seems that every one would agree that the TVA can be auctioned and that the proceeds can finance some useful projects or lighten the debt load.
Hughes, Siobhan. "Shift To Center On Energy: TVA Auction Up For Consideration." Wall Street Journal (2010). Web. 16 Nov 2010.
Enel Green Power's IPO
On Monday, John and I asked the guest lecturer, Marla, what her thoughts were on investing in alternative energies versus in big oil and gas. Her answer was that she would stick with oil and for many reasons. The main reason being that the majority of alternative energy projects rely heavily on government subsidies, and these aren't a guarantee. There is always a demand for oil, and the stocks always seem to be doing well. She said that she won't invest in alternative energy until she sees a company come up with a viable plan to stand on there own. Ironically enough, when I logged into the WSJ today, there is an article about an alternative energy company that recently issued an IPO and is raising concerns due to this issue.
Enel Green Power has issued an Initial Public Offering and took their company public in Italy and Spain. They are an alternative energy company dealing in wind, solar, hydro, and geothermal with a "unusually international reach" (WSJ). Their hydro and geothermal sectors are the majority of their current assets, but have big plans for wind. There market capital is currently at 8 billion Euro, which makes them the 13th largest company in Italy (WSJ). The shares since their IPO have remained flat, which leaves investors weary of the company for several reasons. One of the biggest reasons correlates directly with what Marla said to John and I. People are concerned that governments no longer have the funds to provide subsidies for these renewable energy companies and nobody is sure if the companies can stand on their own. Wind energy is the asset with which they plan to grow, but this is the most expensive and requires the most subsidies, which is another reason for concern to investors. Investors are also concerned due to the company's amount of debt, which it has given plans on how to reduce this and already has reduced it a bit. One last concern is that of the initial shares sold, the majority were to individuals and not to investment firms, which is a cause for alarm in the markets. Enel Green Power is positive that they will perform well in the markets, but have yet to perform.
With the IPO remaining flat, it isn't a good sign for renewable energy in the markets. As very few companies specializing in alternative energies are entering the public market, how the first ones due is very crucial. Although it is still early, the fact remains that in the markets, the first couple of days are key and this one isn't as successful as hoped. This could send signs to other alternative energy firms thinking of doing the same thing. Investors still clearly aren't ready for this, and it seems they won't be until these companies can rely on themselves and not government subsidies. This could also be read as a vote of confidence to the oil industry, as their stocks are still performing brilliantly. When it comes to the markets, people seem to cherish the security of big oil companies and are very uncertain about investing in alternative energy companies.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703805704575594102623544836.html?mod=WSJ_Energy_leftHeadlines
Enel Green Power has issued an Initial Public Offering and took their company public in Italy and Spain. They are an alternative energy company dealing in wind, solar, hydro, and geothermal with a "unusually international reach" (WSJ). Their hydro and geothermal sectors are the majority of their current assets, but have big plans for wind. There market capital is currently at 8 billion Euro, which makes them the 13th largest company in Italy (WSJ). The shares since their IPO have remained flat, which leaves investors weary of the company for several reasons. One of the biggest reasons correlates directly with what Marla said to John and I. People are concerned that governments no longer have the funds to provide subsidies for these renewable energy companies and nobody is sure if the companies can stand on their own. Wind energy is the asset with which they plan to grow, but this is the most expensive and requires the most subsidies, which is another reason for concern to investors. Investors are also concerned due to the company's amount of debt, which it has given plans on how to reduce this and already has reduced it a bit. One last concern is that of the initial shares sold, the majority were to individuals and not to investment firms, which is a cause for alarm in the markets. Enel Green Power is positive that they will perform well in the markets, but have yet to perform.
With the IPO remaining flat, it isn't a good sign for renewable energy in the markets. As very few companies specializing in alternative energies are entering the public market, how the first ones due is very crucial. Although it is still early, the fact remains that in the markets, the first couple of days are key and this one isn't as successful as hoped. This could send signs to other alternative energy firms thinking of doing the same thing. Investors still clearly aren't ready for this, and it seems they won't be until these companies can rely on themselves and not government subsidies. This could also be read as a vote of confidence to the oil industry, as their stocks are still performing brilliantly. When it comes to the markets, people seem to cherish the security of big oil companies and are very uncertain about investing in alternative energy companies.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703805704575594102623544836.html?mod=WSJ_Energy_leftHeadlines
Informational Interview With Liberty Tower
Last week I interviewed Felice Gorordo who is a consultant at Liberty Tower and is responsible with the government sales sector. Throughout the interview I learned key aspects of our industry that could help with the final paper. For an example, in the regulations section there are two aspects of the market, the regulated and deregulated, that require different policies and serve different types of consumers. Also, in the entrepreneur section I learned that there is a lot of opportunities for innovation in the renewable energy resources. I also learned that energy corporations are looking for researchers that can invent ways to supply "green energy" with more affordable prices. The Smart Grid is another innovation that is also being highly talked about. When I asked him what part of the industry he would recommend me to invest in, he suggested any sector within the renewable energy area.
Question and Answer:
Q: Can you first tell me about your job at Liberty Tower and what are your responsibilities?
A: “I am in charge of government sales. As we know, Florida is a monopoly, where consumers only have one choice for their energy supply which is FPL. In other states they have up to 16 different companies to chose where their energy comes from and this makes it a competitive market driving costs down. What I do is that I sell energy to the government at the state and national level from an energy source in Connecticut making costs more affordable.”
Q: What employment trends to you see in your industry over the next five years? For example, are you hiring more engineers and salespeople while decreasing the number of administrative support staff?
A: “There are a lot of opportunities in sales, innovation, research, and development especially in global energy.”
Q: In what area of the industry are there opportunities for innovation?
A: “Research development having to do with renewable energy. We are working a lot with wind, solar, ethonal, crude, and coal. The problem with renewable energy is that we have not been able to find a way to make it affordable. That is why there is so much opportunities for innovation, we want to make it affordable so that everyone can participate in it.”
Q: What are key regulatory issues that affect the industry's future prospects?
A: “There are two parts of the market, regulated and deregulated. Regulated are like the monopolies, they produce to distribute. Deregulated cannot do both so there are companies that focus on one aspect. When there are multiple companies, consumers have multiple choices making more competition driving down costs. This is where more regulatory issues come up because the more competition the cheaper consumers want power to be. There is also Cap and Trade where the government puts pressure on energy producers. The government puts a tax based on how much energy was produced and how much it polluted the air. If companies use renewable energy then the tax can be offset or exempt. Each company should participate in green energy to off set the carbon foot print so that taxes are lower. Using green energy gives credit to companies which can be bought and sold on the market for lower taxes. This affects many energy producers and their major consumers that manufacture goods.”
Q: In what area of the industry do you recommend to invest in and why?
A: “I definitely recommend to invest in any renewable energy area, not only in the production but also in the demand and response. In markets that have a high demand they are starting to implement a new technology called Smart Grid. Smart Grid offers to give companies that run big generators the ability to shut off production that uses a lot of energy remotely. The extra energy made through the generators can be sold through the Smart Grid system and they will get paid in either credit or cash. Also, there are a lot of opportunities in clean technology which cleans “brown energy” and lessens the pollution. The reason why I would recommend to invest in these renewable resources are that there are tax incentives involved.”
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Not So Sure Anymore
“For investors, the energy business used to be a pretty simple play: Buy a stock and stick with it.” Now, the game has changed says Liam Denning. Everything is far more complex. Due to the economic stumble in 2008, the energy industry has been as stable as the infamous BP oilrig.
Oil and gas producers are now suffering from the storm that ensued after the BP debacle. And, alternative energy companies are not doing any better because legislation in their favor has been stalled.
Yet, he states that the biggest problem facing the oil industry is oversupply. New techniques have allowed companies to obtain higher levels of crude and gas, but the demand of oil has gone down. Also, he says that if there is more economic trouble, then the prices of energy will fall even more causing more trouble for energy companies.
Despite the dark clouds looming above, Denning still says there is light; you just need to know where to spot it. He tells us to look for a premature cancellation of the deepwater-drilling moratorium. Some of the new technologies are more expensive than the more traditional types. If the cost of these new techniques does not go down quickly, then supply will go down and prices will go back up, thus pushing up stock prices.
Oil and gas producers are now suffering from the storm that ensued after the BP debacle. And, alternative energy companies are not doing any better because legislation in their favor has been stalled.
Yet, he states that the biggest problem facing the oil industry is oversupply. New techniques have allowed companies to obtain higher levels of crude and gas, but the demand of oil has gone down. Also, he says that if there is more economic trouble, then the prices of energy will fall even more causing more trouble for energy companies.
Despite the dark clouds looming above, Denning still says there is light; you just need to know where to spot it. He tells us to look for a premature cancellation of the deepwater-drilling moratorium. Some of the new technologies are more expensive than the more traditional types. If the cost of these new techniques does not go down quickly, then supply will go down and prices will go back up, thus pushing up stock prices.
My Informational Interview
I did my informational interview with Mark Nutt, who is a section manager at Argonne National Laboratory. He works primarily in nuclear energy, specifically in waste disposal. His interview yielded some interesting points that I think we should consider when making our investment decision. His main points are listed below:
- What Will Determine Growth?: Government funding primarily drives the nuclear energy industry. The industry's growth mainly depends on how the government and the public see nuclear energy relative to other options. My interviewee hopes that “they [the government] have a clue,” because he sees nuclear as a viable option given U.S. energy demand. He expects demand to rise rapidly, which would cause the price of natural gas, currently a major fuel source, to increase quickly. This would make options like nuclear more cost-competitive. He then explained that many renewable energy sources that are focused on right now, such as wind and solar, will not be able to keep up with the growing demand for energy. This is a useful point when considering a long-term investment.
- Short vs. Long Term: He also explained that there is a big push in renewable energy like wind, solar, and battery technology and that government financing is currently behind this movement. He told me that these “renewables” are solid for growth. He also said that for short-term investments, natural gas has potential to grow quickly. For a more long-term investment, he said either nuclear or traditional “renewables” like wind and solar will grow. This would depend on government policy, though.
- A Specific Company: In a more specific suggestion, he brought up an interesting company with a unique business model. It is called Castle Holdings, Limited. They are in the business of going through the licensing process that is required before building a nuclear plant. Essentially, this company finds a site, takes care of the government and all of the regulatory hurdles, and then sells the license and the site to a builder. To me, this sounds like a great investment idea if nuclear grows. I posted an article about an incident in which a nuclear project was going to end because of a dispute between two companies and the government. This sort of company could be useful in averting these disputes and ensuring that nuclear projects do not fail for insignificant reasons.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Informational Interview
I did my informational interview with a man who works in Dubai. He is the CEO, owner, and founder of the company The Oil Consultancy. They are consultants dealing with oil, gas, and mining. I learned a great deal from the man and he was quite helpful in providing insights on the industry.
He listed some of his job responsibilities as bringing in new business, procuring mandates, overall management, and dealing with the financials of the company. When I asked him about what types of entry-level jobs his company offers, he told me that they don't hire entry-level, a candidate must have at least 15 years experience. A valuable trait he looks for in potential candidates is the drive to succeed. He stressed the fact that he wants employees who are driven and determined. He said that in the past couple of years, he has seen an immense amount of job growth in the alternative energies sector. He told me of the rising popularity of social responsibility and how that has created many new jobs. Along with this point, he predicts that in the next couple of years, there will be many new jobs in the green sector of the industry. He said what he calls 'specialty' engineers will be where there is future job growth. By this, he didn't mean mechanical or civil engineers, but ones that specialize in things that will help in the green sector, such as radiology or biotechnology. These will be areas of growth because these jobs are needed to expand the alternative energy movement.
When I asked him where he would invest his money in the energy industry, he told me that he would invest in the oil exploration and production sector. He gave many reasons for this. First, there is much opportunity for rapid capital growth here. This sector has the ability to develop it as an investment, meaning it can easily be evolved into trade. Also, the value that lies within this sector could virtually be endless. This was very valuable advice.
This man gave me much useful information and was very accommodating with answering anything I could ask him.
He listed some of his job responsibilities as bringing in new business, procuring mandates, overall management, and dealing with the financials of the company. When I asked him about what types of entry-level jobs his company offers, he told me that they don't hire entry-level, a candidate must have at least 15 years experience. A valuable trait he looks for in potential candidates is the drive to succeed. He stressed the fact that he wants employees who are driven and determined. He said that in the past couple of years, he has seen an immense amount of job growth in the alternative energies sector. He told me of the rising popularity of social responsibility and how that has created many new jobs. Along with this point, he predicts that in the next couple of years, there will be many new jobs in the green sector of the industry. He said what he calls 'specialty' engineers will be where there is future job growth. By this, he didn't mean mechanical or civil engineers, but ones that specialize in things that will help in the green sector, such as radiology or biotechnology. These will be areas of growth because these jobs are needed to expand the alternative energy movement.
When I asked him where he would invest his money in the energy industry, he told me that he would invest in the oil exploration and production sector. He gave many reasons for this. First, there is much opportunity for rapid capital growth here. This sector has the ability to develop it as an investment, meaning it can easily be evolved into trade. Also, the value that lies within this sector could virtually be endless. This was very valuable advice.
This man gave me much useful information and was very accommodating with answering anything I could ask him.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
PANASONIC INVESTS $30 MILLION IN TESLA
Pansonic as we all know it is a company supplying consumer electronics for many countries all over the world. A few of us know that Pansaonic is the world’s leading battery cell manufacturer and one of the biggest automotive industry providers. Recently, Panasonic purchased 30 million dollars worth of stocks from Tesla Motors, a manufacturer of high performance electrical vehicles. The deal was sealed through the purchase of common stocks in a private placement. The deal was struck to expand and elevate the market of electrical vehicles.
Tesla In order to produce advanced battery packs for it’s products, saw this deal as fundamental and crucial to the company. Many people will wonder why I brought up this article in the energy industry blog. Well, the main reason is that Tesla cars are electrical rather than depending on gas. Panasonic aims to be one the leading Green companies in the electronics industry. This vision will propel the cultural corporate image and boost it’s public relations.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704506404575593162128563810.html?mod=WSJ_Energy_leftHeadlines
Is Biofuel The Future of This Industry?
Bio MCN, one of the leading biofuel manufacturers in the world, has over produced to supply the entire Dutch biofuel gasoline quota for 2010 and more. Biofuel gasoline is produced by vegetables and animal fat and is considered as a renewable energy since it is made from certain types of residue. The positive aspect that biofuel has is that it reduces 78% of the carbon dioxide emissions. This company focuses to expand and influence others around the world to invest in biofuels as well. They strongly believe that this is a great alternative to natural gas and that it could possibly be the future.
Though I am impressed by Bio MCN’s aspirations and accomplishments in expanding and encouraging biofuel, I do not think that it is neither the answer nor the future. All that biofuel does is replace natural gas, and to produce this biofuel natural gas is used. So in the end we are still using harmful substances. This biofuel is great for if and when we run out of oil, but others are looking to alternative resources that use wind, water, and solar to create energy. Burning biofuel can still harm the ozone layer since it is burned substances. It is a great start in looking into other forms of energy, but if this company wants to expand I think they should also consider other options.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Top Ten Alternative Energy Companies
The author, Jeffery Martin, starts off by saying this is a “one-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to invest because our green economy is just starting. He compares our opportunity to those who had the chance to invest in AT&T in 1877. But, of course, he says that you must know which particular companies are safe to grow your portfolio.
Topping the list is Winslow Green Growth (WGG). Martin says that the safest investments are those that span the spectrum of risk. WGG is a fund that invests in socially responsible companies.
Number two on the list is WFI Industries. It helps to produce geothermal energy in new buildings. It does this by drilling long pipes more than five feet into the ground and then sending that air, which is basically constant throughout the year, into the building above. This air is warm enough for winter, yet cold enough for summer.
First Solar is ranked third for the sole reason that its solar panels are much cheaper than the rest. Their panels lack silicon.
Fourth on the list is Fuel Tech. He mentions how Fuel Tech has zero profitability but still an egregiously high stock price. He says that this is risky, but he points back to history to others like Google and Amazon that were once in the same position.
Bio-Solutions Corporation rounds out the top five. It offers organic solutions to organic problems. Not only has it developed a method to reduce mortality among industrially farmed poultry, it has discovered innovative ways to fight malaria. All of this is done with chemicals that are eco-friendly.
Sixth is Blue Earth Solutions, which has developed a way to breakdown styrofoam. The brokendown molecules can then be sold back to the Styrofoam producers.
Seventh is Zoltek. Zoltek produces carbon nanofibers. The nanofibers that it produces are extremely strong and equally lightweight. These are purchased by airplanes and car companies to reduce weight and therefore fuel consumption.
At eight is Composite Technologies, which produces some the world’s biggest wind turbines.
Number nine is Plug Power. It produces hydrogen fuel cells that might be the energy of the future. The writer notes that this company has the highest potential.
At bottom of the top is Ormat Industries. It provides alternative and renewable energy solutions. It also owns geothermal power plants.
So what do you guys think? Should we advise others to invest in these companies? Quite honestly, after reading the article, I’m tempted to invest in all of them. Obviously more research must be done. What other criteria do you think we should look for in companies that we plan on investing in? Do you think potential of the these green companies is worth risk? Should we go with the fail-proof option? Or, should we go with both and diversify?
http://www.helium.com/items/1537789-invest-in-green-companies
Topping the list is Winslow Green Growth (WGG). Martin says that the safest investments are those that span the spectrum of risk. WGG is a fund that invests in socially responsible companies.
Number two on the list is WFI Industries. It helps to produce geothermal energy in new buildings. It does this by drilling long pipes more than five feet into the ground and then sending that air, which is basically constant throughout the year, into the building above. This air is warm enough for winter, yet cold enough for summer.
First Solar is ranked third for the sole reason that its solar panels are much cheaper than the rest. Their panels lack silicon.
Fourth on the list is Fuel Tech. He mentions how Fuel Tech has zero profitability but still an egregiously high stock price. He says that this is risky, but he points back to history to others like Google and Amazon that were once in the same position.
Bio-Solutions Corporation rounds out the top five. It offers organic solutions to organic problems. Not only has it developed a method to reduce mortality among industrially farmed poultry, it has discovered innovative ways to fight malaria. All of this is done with chemicals that are eco-friendly.
Sixth is Blue Earth Solutions, which has developed a way to breakdown styrofoam. The brokendown molecules can then be sold back to the Styrofoam producers.
Seventh is Zoltek. Zoltek produces carbon nanofibers. The nanofibers that it produces are extremely strong and equally lightweight. These are purchased by airplanes and car companies to reduce weight and therefore fuel consumption.
At eight is Composite Technologies, which produces some the world’s biggest wind turbines.
Number nine is Plug Power. It produces hydrogen fuel cells that might be the energy of the future. The writer notes that this company has the highest potential.
At bottom of the top is Ormat Industries. It provides alternative and renewable energy solutions. It also owns geothermal power plants.
So what do you guys think? Should we advise others to invest in these companies? Quite honestly, after reading the article, I’m tempted to invest in all of them. Obviously more research must be done. What other criteria do you think we should look for in companies that we plan on investing in? Do you think potential of the these green companies is worth risk? Should we go with the fail-proof option? Or, should we go with both and diversify?
http://www.helium.com/items/1537789-invest-in-green-companies
Federal Funding For Renewable Energies
In my previous post regarding the California solar energy plant, I discussed the federal program through which they are trying to receive a loan for the plant. Now the government is discussing whether they should continue this loan program or cancel it. Many of the president's aides are telling him to not discontinue it but there are some other concerns. The main argument is over a wind farm in Oregon. There are concerns that the corporate backers are only contributing about 10%, whereas the government would be providing over 65% and they don't feel this is a fair trade (WSJ). The government claims that they have no plans to discontinue the program and that they just plan to streamline it.
I felt this loan program, which pushed for advancement of of renewable energies, is a great program. I appreciate when the government tries to move our country towards better forms of energy. It saddens me to see that they are going to cut back with it, when oil projects aren't stopping. This will also have a wide effect on the industry as a whole, as it hurts the advancement towards renewable energies and possibly fosters positive energy for the oil and gas industry.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703506904575592843603174132.html?mod=WSJ_Energy_leftHeadlines
I felt this loan program, which pushed for advancement of of renewable energies, is a great program. I appreciate when the government tries to move our country towards better forms of energy. It saddens me to see that they are going to cut back with it, when oil projects aren't stopping. This will also have a wide effect on the industry as a whole, as it hurts the advancement towards renewable energies and possibly fosters positive energy for the oil and gas industry.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703506904575592843603174132.html?mod=WSJ_Energy_leftHeadlines
Proposition 23 Rejected in California
A November 3rd Wall Street Journal Article states that a ballot measure that would have delayed the implementation of a state cap on greenhouse gas emissions in California has failed (WSJ). The vote was not a close one, with 61% against the measure to postpone the bill and 39% for it. The bill was called Proposition 23 and it created a lot of controversy. There were oil companies and other businesses dependent on the fossil fuels industry who campaigned for the proposition and environmentalist groups and “alternative energy investors” who were against the proposition. In total, the campaigns both for and against Proposition 23 spent $40 million, a sum that mostly went to advertising (WSJ).
There are, of course, legitimate arguments coming from both sides of this debate. Again, according to the Wall Street Journal article, the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association said that because of the greenhouse gas cap, businesses and jobs will simply move from California to other states and countries because outside of California, they will not have to pay for their emissions (WSJ). On the other end of the spectrum, a group called the Union of Concerned Scientists claims California’s rejection of this proposition shows their belief that reducing carbon emission can help both the economy and the environment (WSJ).
This is an important issue for the energy industry. Because the proposition has now failed, I predict, like the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association, that traditional energy companies that rely on fossil fuels will simply abandon California because of the increased costs. Yes, rejecting this measure is an accomplishment for alternative energy investors because they will see less of an influence of oil and gas companies and an incentive to invest in clean energy. However, I am not entirely sure how intelligent it is to scare large companies that provide large amounts of tax revenue and jobs away from a state that is facing a $19 billion deficit and 12.4% unemployment, according to the Los Angeles Times and the U.S. Department of Labor Statistics. Perhaps this sort of bill will be wiser when the economy is more stable than it is now and when other states and countries adopt the same policy. For now, I think that Californians have made a mistake.
Ball, Jeffrey. "Californians Defend Carbon Caps." Wall Street Journal (2010): n. pag. Web. 3 Nov 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)