Reuters tells us that Ernst & Young, London, keeps track of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Poland, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, the UK, and the US in matters of investment in renewable energy.

And to our utmost surprise we found that the US is regarded as highest potential for making profits by investing in renewable energy.

Actually the article was intended to show that renewable energy could boom in Britain under planning and energy policy changes announced last week, making it the second most attractive country for investment in clean energy, analysts at Ernst & Young said.

Although the blustery British Isles have huge potential for wind, tidal and wave power, earlier this year the country slipped down the consultancy’s league table of best places to invest in clean energy because of a lack of investment in the power network which is needed to connect new projects.
But last week’s energy and planning policy papers have reversed that.

The proposed changes to the way renewables are supported through the UK government’s Renewables Obligation and a more streamlined planning system could make Britain equally as attractive as Spain and India but still less of a lure for renewable energy than the United States, the consultancy said.

“The proposed changes to the Renewables Obligation (RO) and reforms to planning should level the playing field for many technologies competing for development capital in the UK,” Jonathan Johns, head of Ernst & Young’s Renewables Waste and Clean Energy Group, said in a statement.

“The challenge now is for industry and the finance providers to make the necessary investment in these new and emerging technologies in order to meet the UK’s goals for renewable energy in the future.”

As a result of last week’s proposals — aimed at cutting Britain’s carbon emissions while ensuring future energy supplies — the UK is set to overtake Germany in Ernst & Young’s league table of most attractive countries in which to invest in clean technologies.

The government last week put cutting energy use, boosting support for clean technologies and replacing Britain’s ageing nuclear power reactors at the centre of its strategy to reduce emissions of the gas largely responsible for climate change.

Under the proposed reforms, which are yet to become law, more expensive and newer technologies like offshore wind and tidal power will get more money than established and cheaper types such as onshore windfarms.

The problem with the US, and this is not said in that article, is that US Congreesmen and Senators are all out to push also for coal liquids and nuclear power - so in order to have these nice subsidies for renewables, there will be even larger subsidies planned for coal liquids and even excuses made to build some nuclear plants. The Department of Defence, and specifically the airforce, will be shown as patriotic when tied to buy coal-based diesel. Here is the rub - Washington willforget that there is a global warming and not just an energy security issue - and pushing for more fossil carbon based fuels will not save us from Katrina’s daughters. Will Halliburton, now Dubai-based dip also into the money trough?

We think Ernst & Young could enlarge their study - after all they are only investment barometers and have no pretense of presenting to us social value judgements.