The Question of Cape Wind Profits and Marsha Marsha Marsha!

Mass AG Marsha Martha Coakley is an ick. The fact that she facilitated the election of Scott Brown by running a lousy senate campaign does not ameliorate her sins, which extend, most recently, to an excuse for illegal immigration

Technically, it’s not illegal to be illegal in Massachusetts

which rivals “I didn’t inhale” for hair-splitting lameness.
Having said that, I concede that she is not wrong to demand the disclosure of the profits anticipated from the Mass Cape Wind project.

Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley is demanding that Cape Wind’s developers disclose cost and profit estimates for the energy project and is questioning whether power from the proposed Nantucket Sound wind farm would be a good deal for consumers.

Is this an anti-capitalist, anti-free market, anti-privacy stance on the part of someone (me) who is pro-capitalism and prefers that Big Brother butt out of everyone’s business? Certainly, that last describes Cape Wind’s reaction to the AG’s request.

Cape Wind’s developers are fighting Coakley’s demand, saying they believe their cost estimates are proprietary and should be kept confidential.

Unfortunately, they have no basis upon which to make this assertion. The Nantucket wind farm is not a capitalist or free market project, nor are any of Cape Wind’s projects in the area. They have secured a government mandate that compels everyone to pay a lot more for the electricity generated by these turbines. This makes them government projects; therefore, privacy is not a factor.
We can take this a little further. One of the reasons that profits are paid is because the investor takes a risk with his capital. He’s gambling that the project will be a success and that he will secure the return of his investment and then some. Profits are in part the reward for that gamble. But if he calculates wrong, he loses his money.
Yet, theoretically, there is no risk with the Cape Wind project. The return has been guaranteed by an overly intrusive government (mistakenly attempting to alleviate a phenomenon that has been linked weakly, if at all, to the generation of electricity through fossil fuels … but that’s a secondary matter here).
So, disclosure of profits. Yes, minimally. A larger question arises, however. In light of the absence of risk attached to this project, plus the government mandates which make it, effectively, a government operation, why should Cape Wind make any profits at all?
A spokeman for the company points out that the AG’s demand

could have a chilling effect on companies investing in clean energy projects in Massachusetts going forward.

Respectfully, sir, those of us who face the prospect of paying three or four times market rate for electricity while watching ever more businesses flee the area to escape pointless expenses such as this sure hope it does.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
1 Comment
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ken
Ken
11 years ago

In the letter from Patrick Lynch RI AG to RI Speaker of the House Senate President outlining his disapproval of the Deepwater deal he cited many reasons but I listed only the following four reasons which are: 1. Actual true cost to RI ratepayers would be $0.317/kWh based on PUC testimony not the 24.4 cents per kWh or possible lower 22 cents per kWh now reported. 2. Deepwater and Governor have not pursued combining both the BI 8 unit RI water wind farm and 110 unit federal water wind farm to guarantee lower rates and the future of 800 promised new jobs which means Cape wind can bid on 110 unit federal water wind farm and if won but because of Quonset deal with Deepwater wind could construct out of state. Cape Wind is the only company to obtain a federal permit to construct offshore wind fame in federal waters. BI 8 unit wind farm in RI waters will create only 8 full time jobs. 3. RI ratepayers under current terms between National Grid and Deepwater would put approximately $452 million in project-level free-flow cash into the pockets of Deepwater just on the 8 turbines located in RI water serving BI. 4. Companies like Toray Plastics America would be severely impacted by rate increases (estimated to be over $7 million additional utility cost across 20 years) might move out of state taking with it over 600 jobs and financial support to local suppliers and taxes paid to state and town. Full letter from Patrick Lynch RI AG to RI Speaker of the House Senate President: http://www.nodeepwater.com/images/docs/5-28-0Ltr.toSenatePres.PaivaWeedandSpeakerFox.pdf No one is paying any attention to the other two negotiated purchase price agreements between a power utility and an offshore wind developer: 1. Gray’s Harbor offered 20 cents per kWh and Hawaiian Electric… Read more »

Show your support for Anchor Rising with a 25-cent-per-day subscription.