Comment: How cheap should it be?

Wednesday, 17 July, 2013 - 12:00

COMMENT

Striving for profit is a core element of the capitalist market economy. The quickest way to maximum profits is to have minimum costs. “More is better than less” and “cheap is better than expensive” are firmly anchored in people’s minds.

But when horse meat instead of beef suddenly appears in frozen lasagne and our clothes are sewn in run-down barracks in Bangladesh, then the reason is not to be found amongst evil businessmen looking to maximise profits, but in society’s call of “can we have it a bit cheaper still, please?”

Everywhere we want the cheapest – and are then shocked when the result doesn’t meet our standards of quality and morals. Afterwards there is always the smart-aleck remark: “You should have known! At that price it can’t have been done by the book,” but it’s true.

And yet even our politicians still want to persuade us consumers that the cheapest is best for us when it comes to the price of electricity. It is an old argument that offshore wind power would lead to an explosion in the price of electricity. “Strompreisbremse” (electricity price brake) is the current watchword in Germany. And society hears it gladly, for it sounds like “we can do it more cheaply”.

When consumers find out afterwards that thousands of fish had to die in an oil spill to provide that cheap electricity, that thousands of Japanese lost their homes and even towns to nuclear contamination, or that their dear uncle is being forced out to make way for open cast brown coal mining, then voices are loudly raised once again. But with a difference: it is not something we should have known – we know it! We know the dangers. We just have to look at them and not away.

Even if electricity from offshore wind power is currently a few cents more expensive than power from conventional sources, there is firstly lots of cost ­reduction potential and secondly, clean energy simply doesn’t come at a discount price. Cheaper is not always better!

Katharina Garus

Similar Entries

Memorandum of Understanding covers investigations on several Korea-focused fronts including construction of new Korean production facilities. Non-binding agreement envisioned as paving the way towards expanding Korean offshore wind industry.

Norwind Offshore. from left:: Maren Kleven Fox, Magnus Kleven, Sverre Olav Farstad, Jon Ketil Gjørtz, Sverre Andreas Farstad, Svein Leon Aure, Espen Volstad, Eivind Volstad

Farstad, Volstad and Kleven are combining forces to establish the ship-owning company Norwind Offshore. The company will offer specialised vessels designed specifically for advanced maritime operations in the development and service of the offshore wind sector. Norwind Offshore has entered into a contract with Vard for the delivery of three vessels by 2024 - with options for two more vessels in 2025. The first vessel is due to be delivered in 2022.

Siemens Gamesa, Arise and Foresight Group will collaborate for another major project in Sweden using the company’s most competitive onshore platform, the Siemens Gamesa 5.X. The project will be acquired by Foresight Energy Infrastructure Partners, Foresight Group’s flagship energy transition fund.

(l to r): Austin Coughlan, Head of Temporis Aurora Fund and Director of Inis Offshore Wind;  Vanessa O’Connell, Head of Inis Offshore Wind and Aoife Galvin, Senior Offshore Project Manager, Inis Offshore Wind, who joined from ESB (pict. ReputationInc)

Temporis Investment Management (“Temporis”) has on October 11th announced the launch of Inis Offshore Wind, a new Irish renewable energy firm with plans to develop at least 1GW of offshore wind capacity by 2030. This would constitute a significant contribution to Ireland’s offshore wind targets and provide enough electricity to power over 800,000 homes.