Wednesday
Mar302011
by 
Josh
Josh Simon says - Josh 91
Mar 30, 2011 Josh 
Simon probably did not mean to let this phrase escape from his mouth, but yes, he really did say the smart money was in Global Warming - oh dear.
More cartoons by Josh here
Reader Comments (21)
"New research by The Pew Charitable Trusts reveals that China has solidified its position as the world’s clean energy powerhouse. China attracted a record $54.4 billion in clean energy investments in 2010–a 39 percent increase over 2009 and equal to total global investment in 2004."
Hello madness; Goodbye pension...
http://www.pewenvironment.org/news-room/other-resources/investing-in-clean-power-329295
Not smart, just money!
The dumb money is in solar
haha,
v good, i noticed this comment.
wanted to ask where the ipcc came on the spectrum of respectability with regard to their use of wwf, greenpeace etc as source material who were at the bottom of his spectrum of responsibility
Josh,
You might want to buy a life insurance policy payable to you on this guy. He could likely provide inspiration for an entire career in cartooning. But no, there are plenty of others.
Surely a little parapraxis.
What is Beaker? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpcUxwpOQ_A
Surely we all had slips of the tongue, but to trip oneself that way head over heels is incredible
At one time the "smart money" was in dot com stocks, Enron, Subprime securities
It's only smart until reality bites and the bubble pops. Not that there has been much of a bubble in renewables.
Note also that Singh's brother is big in wind.
Singhs brother is big in Solar as well!
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100080552/simon-singhs-for-the-joy-of-solar-energy/
stupidboy
It's more than just your pension.
Remember how the
lying bastardsprevious government always claimed (as this one does) that 'there is no direct subsidy for renewables'?That's because it's and indirect subsidy.
Electricity suppliers are forced to pay hugely inflated rates for power generated by renewables either via ROs or the FIT.
They pass on the cost in full to all their customers in the form of higher energy bills.
This hits the vulnerable - low income families, the elderly - hardest.
So renewables are funded by a stealth regressive tax.
Most people find this completely unacceptable once they grasp the nature of the deceit - and its true consequences.
Singh's brother has set out to profit from this situation. Draw your own conclusions.
From Delingpole's piece:
"[Tom Singh] has demonstrated a clear and deep understanding of the solar PV sector.."
And yet he still invested in it!
Revealing that we should have to 'believe' in it. No science there, then.
Follow the money - unless its a government subsidy..
Dale Vince - owner of Ecotricity - is planning to sue the British government because they are slashing the 'feed in' tariff for large solar parks,,,
Ah, bless...
Yeah, right - presumably that would be the same sort of 'smart' money which invested in the South Seas; tulip futures; and (more recently) the Chicago Carbon Exchange...
I think I'll stick with cash ISAS...
BBD The "Consultation on fast-track review of Feed-in Tariffs for small scale low carbon electricity" makes quite clear that the Feed-in Tariffs are a "public subsidy". See http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/Consultations/fits-review/1438-condoc-fasttrack-review-fits.pdf
Philip
Do you disagree that ROs and the FIT constitute a stealth regressive tax?
How many people know as much about this as you do - eg have found and read the document you link?
Would you agree that the previous and present governments have done everything possible to downplay:
1). the fact of subsidies to the renewables sector
2). the size of subsidies to the renewables sector
Have you not heard various politicians trying to suggest that renewables are competitive with fossil fuels?
In summary, do you regard the government position on subsidising renewables as honest and open, and its effects on the public as benign?
Philip
The pdf is 26 pages - can you give me an exact reference (page and point #)? I don't doubt you, but I haven't got time to comb through looking for the sentence you have in mind. As clear statements of this kind are exceedingly rare, I'd like to verify this one so I don't mistakenly claim that such things don't exist at all.
Oops - it's point number 3. Missed it on the first scan. Sorry - ignore above.
There is something hugely potent and immortal about a good cartoon. Memorable ones, and this is an example, get burnt into an iconic identity of this individual. Something about pictures and a thousand words.
Deller's deconstruction of Simon Singh in his blog this a.m.(Sunday) is absolutely, deliciously withering - and accurate. Worthwhile readomg!