What the Wind Industry doesn’t want you to know!!!!………..it’s “Enron Roots”!

Posted: January 16, 2012 in Uncategorized

If you just woke up or just thought that something is a bit “amiss” when it comes to claims by the Wind Industry and their paid “spinners (lobbyists)” then just start here and join the obvious dots leading you down a “rat hole” that you may never return from!

Imagine a whole multi billion $$ Industry built on the foundation of a “criminal empire” and then imagine that this would last decades without one single politician ever questioning one single action made by their friends and fellow investor “buddies” who are/were active inside this “black box of money botulism”!

Take for example the newly elected Mike Crawley to the Presidency of the Liberal Federal Party  yesterday.  He was one of the most active developers in Ontario with his AIM Powergen Wind Company that has basically destroyed people’s homes, health and wildlife in Western Ontario yet proudly he serves as “advisor” now to whatever is left of the Federal Liberal Party in Ottawa. I assume one can’t have a conscience when one is involved in the Wind Industry yet will tell anyone who listens that they are “saving the world” one kilowatt at a time!

But then nobody would want you as a poor working slob in Ontario who’s paying your taxes to support these “Enron-based Pioneers” to KNOW THIS:

Remembering When Enron Saved the U.S. Wind Industry (Best of MasterResource)

by Roger Donway
September 4, 2010

[Editor Note: This post by Robert Bradley Jr. from January 19th documents a fact that American Wind Energy Association might not want to know. If the American public understands why windpower is and must be government dependent to exist as an industry, and if the public knows about industrial wind’s Enron roots, then the same public might just say: ‘let’s take our energy back’.]

January 7, 1997, some 13 years ago, was one of the worst days in my 16-year career at Enron. Enron had already entered into the solar business (1994) in partnership with Amoco (Solarex), and the U.S. wind industry was on its back. Zond Corporation was struggling, and  rival Kenetech had recently suspended its dividend and was on the way to  bankruptcy. Enron bought Zond on this day and renamed it Enron Wind Company.

Enron Wind would never turn a profit, and it would be sold in May 2002 by the bankrupt parent to GE. (GE and Enron would have other ominous parallels.)

Enron came in at just the right time for a troubled, undeserving industry by

  1. Putting a big-name corporation in the U.S. wind industry for the first time;
  2. Issuing countless press releases on ‘wonderful’ green wind for the next several years; and
  3. Successfully lobbying Texas politicians to enact the most strict renewable mandate in the country in 1999.

Regarding the third point, the Texas mandate created an unholy business-government alliance of sufficient size for the state to increase its renewable mandate in 2005. Texas is the leading wind power state in the country–but hardly by consumer choice.

Right after Enron purchased Zond to enter into the wind business, I got a call from Hap Boyd, Enron Wind’s PR person. The Cato Institute had just published my windpower-cenric study, Renewable Energy: Not Cheap, Not ‘Green (August 1997), and Hap was trying to sell me on the benefits of wind. One of his arguments I remember was that landowners were receiving royalties from allowing the use of their land for wind turbines, as if this really meant something.

My relationship with Enron Wind went downhill from there. The head of the subsidiary wanted to get me fired for my public opposition against this technology (see the interoffice memos posted at my political Capitalism website).

Oh how sad I am that Enron purchased Zond and did so much to enable the artificial windpower boom in Texas and United States.Houston Chronicle business editorialist Loren Steffy wrote about this in a column, Wind Whispers of Enron (June 3, 2008).

The importance of Enron’s purchase is indicated in the following announcements.

Enron Purchases Zond Corporation (as reported in the New York Times):

ENRON ACQUIRES ZOND, A MAJOR WIND-POWER COMPANY
The Enron Corporation said yesterday that it had acquired the Zond Corporation, one of the largest developers of wind-powered electricity generation, and formed a business unit to focus on developing renewable energy projects. Terms were not disclosed. Zond, which is based in Tehachapi, Calif., will become a subsidiary of the Enron Renewable Energy Corporation, which was formed to develop projects for Enron, which is based in Houston. Zond is expected to break ground this year on the largest single wind-power project to date, to supply power to the Northern States Power Company.

——————————————————-

And from the American Wind Energy Association:

For immediate release: January 6, 1997
Contact: Jessica Maier, (202) 383-2500

Houston-based natural gas and power marketer Enron Corp. announced today that it has purchased wind power developer and manufacturer Zond Corp. of Tehachapi, Calif., and will form a new business unit, the Enron Renewable Energy Corporation, which will be responsible for developing renewable energy sources for Enron. The acquisition of Zond was described by the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) as “a tribute to the foresight of Enron, the leading power marketer in the U.S.”

ENRON ACQUIRES ZOND, LAUNCHES ENRON RENEWABLE ENERGY CORP.

AWEA Calls Transaction Signal of Wind Energy’s Role in Emerging Competitive Market

READ THE REST HERE:

Comments
  1. Tom Blacksmith says:

    And how did we get here?

    The Electricity Competition Act of 1998 mandated
    the privatization and deregulation of electricity in Ontario
    through the divestment of at least 65% of Ontario
    Hydro’s generating capacity.

    Ontario’s made-in-Canada Enron

    Apr 21, 2002
    http://cupe.ca/PrivatizationUtilities/BE4330

    And from the Hansard record:

    http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/committee-proceedings/committee_transcripts_details.do?locale=en&BillID=&ParlCommID=841&Date=1998-08-14&Business=Bill+35%2C+Energy+Competition+Act%2C+1998&DocumentID=19473#P365_118087

    ENRON CAPITAL AND TRADE RESOURCES CANADA CORP

    The Chair: I now call upon representatives from Enron Capital and Trade Resources Canada Corp. Good morning and welcome. Please make yourself comfortable. Are you Mr Shapiro?

    Mr Richard Shapiro: I am.

    The Chair: It’s nice to have you here. Please introduce yourself and your title in full for the Hansard record.

    Mr Shapiro: I will do that. My name is Richard Shapiro. I am vice-president of state government affairs for Enron Corp.

    Enron Corp is a global, diversified energy company that includes among its corporate family ECT Canada, Enron Capital and Trade Resources Canada. Enron Capital and Trade Resources Canada is, among other things, a leading wholesale natural gas provider in Canada. It employs over 75 people here in this country and has over $2 billion in annual revenues. Enron is also a company that is very proud of its environmental businesses and environmental track record. We are the leading producer of wind energy in the world. Through a joint venture, we are the second-largest manufacturer of solar panels and have been recognized by the White House recently for our environmental stewardship record.

    We as a company, I think very importantly to this subject, have supported the competitive restructuring of the energy industry and liberalization of energy markets around the world. We believe that our customers and our competitors’ customers have benefited significantly from our efforts.

    GREEN ENERGY COALITION

    The Chair: Now calling representatives of Green Energy Coalition, please. Good morning and welcome. Please make yourselves comfortable. As I’m sure you know, you have 30 minutes for presentation time. Please begin by introducing yourselves for Hansard.

    Ms Christine Elwell: Good morning. Thank you very much. My name is Christine Elwell and this is my colleague Greg Allen. We’re here this morning to file a submission on behalf of the Green Energy Coalition. We thank the committee very much for this opportunity to address you on the urgent matters before you today.

    We have a few extra copies of our brief if needed. In addition to our brief, we’ve also filed a number of other documents. We’ve filed a technical report by the Sierra Club on environmental aspects of the Ontario Energy Competition Act, which reviews in more detail and gives more background on the particulars. We’ve also filed a renewable energies cost and capacity fact sheet. They’re our best numbers, based on government statistics, on what the costs are, and the members can judge for themselves how affordable and competitive they are. Finally, we’ve also filed a copy of an overhead called Environmental Portfolio Disclosure: Consumer and Air Quality Protection in Deregulated Electricity Markets.

    I would take instructions from you, Madam Chair. We do have available the slide presentation. It’s basically an indication of what US producers are going to offer in the competitive market for green energy. I think it would be very insightful for the committee to see what the competition is up to. It’s a very short presentation. We can judge at the end, depending on our time, if there’s time to actually show it. We need a minute or two to set up. Otherwise, we have made a photocopy available for you in your package.

    As you’re thinking about the environmental aspects of the Energy Competition Act, we’d like to remind members of their duty and the province’s duty to avoid the 1,800 premature deaths every year of our citizens related to air pollution. In your considerations, you also have a duty to avoid harm to our neighbours such as Quebec, and our unnecessary demands for their land and water resources and flooding of their terrestrial space. In addition, we have concerns about air quality of our neighbours to the south, for example, Vermont and Massachusetts, that are directly downwind of our electricity sources. Indeed, the duty you have today is a global one. Your duty needs to take into account avoiding harm with respect to global warming and whether this legislation helps or hinders efforts to mitigate climate change.

    So there was the big picture, but indeed we have a number of specific recommendations we’d like to make to improve the bill.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s