The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Are feed-in tariffs a market designed structure or a government encouraged activity?
It is a way to structure a market, just like take-or-pay contracts are a way to structure the gas market. They are, of course, government designed, because the electricity market is government designed and operated (where it works, at least).
As I said, long-range contracts have gone out of fashion and this is atypical.
Your own example (Enron in California) is actually noteworthy here, in that long-term contracts did not "go out of fashion" with the market participants. They were forbidden by the regulators, because they were thought to stifle "competition." When this ban was lifted, the majority of the juice went back to being sold under long-term contracts.
In fact it is almost a validation that the present wind plants being built are uneconomic over the long term. If they weren't they wouldn't need a guaranteed income stream.
Huh? You mean, like Gazprom's insistence on take-or-pay contracts is evidence that gas extraction is uneconomical?
Instead we can expect to see the price of future construction drop as technology improves making cost recovery of existing plants impossible.
And so what? Should we stop making integrated circuits today, because we know that a cheaper, faster version will be available in six months? What's the point here?
You pointed this out yourself implicitly by saying that bankrupt wind farms would always be a good deal for later investors.
scratches head I don't get it. How do you get from there to here?
Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.
I read about an small island in northern Sweden that was used for trade between locals and southerners with a simple system of placing items on a given date, leave for a day and then return. If there was any takers there was a pile of stuff next to yours. If you accepted you took that pile and left. If you wanted to barter you either decreased your pile or left it all. Anyhow you then left for a day. When you returned the other side had either made a new bid or taken their stuff back. I believe it was described in the 18th century (possibly Linneaus or one of his pupils) as having been around longer then anyone could remember. This is what I would call a market that was regulated, but without government.
You can also have trade without regulation - for example viking style - but a market implies something a bit more permanent. And then there is regulation.
Bit ot, but the "unregulated market" is an annoying term.
Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by gmoke - Oct 1
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 24 2 comments
by Oui - Sep 19 19 comments
by Oui - Sep 13 35 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 11 5 comments
by Cat - Sep 13 9 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 2 2 comments
by gmoke - Oct 1
by Oui - Sep 3017 comments
by Oui - Sep 29
by Oui - Sep 28
by Oui - Sep 279 comments
by Oui - Sep 2618 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 242 comments
by Oui - Sep 1919 comments
by gmoke - Sep 173 comments
by Oui - Sep 153 comments
by Oui - Sep 15
by Oui - Sep 1411 comments
by Oui - Sep 1335 comments
by Cat - Sep 139 comments
by Oui - Sep 127 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 115 comments
by Oui - Sep 929 comments
by Oui - Sep 713 comments
by Oui - Sep 61 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 22 comments