Clean Energy: Wall Street's New Love Affair
by Justin Thomas, Virginia on 08.10.06
BusinessWeek is reporting that energy independence is becoming a national imperative, and renewable energy is attracting an unprecedented array of groups. "We're seeing an alignment of the environmental interests, automakers, the agricultural industry, the security and energy-independence proponents, even the evangelicals," says billionaire venture capitalist L. John Doerr. "When did all those [interests] come together before?" You know a cultural movement is real when the money men get on board. In just the past year a broad swath of financiers -- venture capitalists, hedge funds, investment banks, public pension funds, and even stodgy insurers -- have begun sinking billions of dollars into producers of ethanol, fuel cell superbatteries, microscopic bugs that turn glucose into plastic, environmentally friendly pesticides, anything that might tap into the green craze.
Saving the planet, protecting America, doing God's work, cynically exploiting a feel-good trend -- call it what you will. Wall Street sees money to be made. When John V. Veech, a managing director at Lehman Brothers Inc. (LEH ), showed up at a renewable energy conference in June, he was amazed to see that it was standing room only. "If you went five years ago you'd see a lot of ponytails," he says. "Now these conferences are packed with suits."
The U.S. is not about to resemble an eco-utopia anytime soon. For all the happy talk about clean energy and green technology since the 1970s, people just haven't adopted the gadgets and concoctions written about in science magazines. The government has provided billions in subsidies over the decades for ethanol, wind, and solar technologies to help make them more economically competitive -- without much success. In 1975 renewable energy accounted for 6.6% of total energy consumption. By 2005 the figure had slipped to 6.1%. It would take decades more and tens of trillions of dollars to produce the countless windmills, solar panels, geothermal plants, and power-generating dams needed to mothball the nation's coal- and gas-fired electric plants. And production of biofuels such as ethanol and biodiesel would need to soar from 325,000 barrels a day to nearly 16.5 million to replace conventional road fuels. Getting there quickly would be "physically impossible," says Steven C. Taub, director of emerging-generation technologies at Cambridge Energy Research Associates, a firm that advises big oil companies and utilities.
Via: Business Week
So, investors 'follow "Pony-Tails" to green business opportunities'. I wonder if the content of WSJ editorial sheets for the last decade had anything to do with holding the chase back for so long?
Thanks a bunch, this article reminds me why I stopped my Business Week subscription 6 years ago and have never missed it. Did anyone else notice the cognitive dissonance between the first paragraph and the last?
Wall Street is in love with alternative energy stocks (i.e. ethanol, fuel cells and solar). For names of publicly traded alternative energy stocks, you should visit http://www.cutoilimports.org/stocks.asp
Will
http://cutoilimports.blogspot.com/
I'm surprised that more investors have not been looking into renewable energy, and sustainable living business models. We are looking at an unsustainable future if the whole world aspires to have an economy and lifestyle similiar to Americans. The world can't afford another America. So Americans need to start reducing their consumption.
Some pretty questionable stuff here, I'm afraid:
The government has provided billions in subsidies over the decades for ethanol, wind, and solar technologies to help make them more economically competitive -- without much success. In 1975 renewable energy accounted for 6.6% of total energy consumption. By 2005 the figure had slipped to 6.1%.
1) At the same time, the government has provided even more billions in subsidies to conventional fossil and nuclear technologies. In 2003, for example, wind energy collected just 1% of federal subsidies to all energy sources.
2) Wind energy has grown from nothing 20 years ago to a $10-billion-a-year industry today worldwide, and is continuing to expand at 30% annually.
It would take decades more and tens of trillions of dollars to produce the countless windmills, solar panels, geothermal plants, and power-generating dams needed to mothball the nation's coal- and gas-fired electric plants.
Well, yeah. As I recall, it took roughly the same amount of time and money to produce the coal- and gas-fired electric plants in the first place. So it's not really a rap on new technology.
peo's comment has it right: reduce electricity consumption and ramp up renewables--that's the way to make progress.
Regards,
Thomas O. Gray
American Wind Energy Association
www.awea.org
www.ifnotwind.org