Could this be a good thing, page-5

I think "profit making" is the debatable part there.  Profitiable... when subsidised?  But what about bottom line? Would they still be profitable if they were paid closer to what other providers are paid for their juice?

The Guardian and others have been pushing Denmark's success story in wind power generation, but their geography and weather is a pretty special case.  Wind reliability varies too much here, and areas with good winds tend to be hundreds of miles from the high use areas of the grid.  Without storage it can't be depended upon to reduce baseline generation by as much as we'd hope.

It seems that the argument being made is that the money the gov puts in should be used for research of new tech.  I can understand where the Government is coming from.  They want genuine solutions that can both reduce CO2 emissions and power bills, not something that works 50% of the time and costs more money when it does.  As the owner of a solar system I know that Labor and the Greens have stated issues with them in the past; the very idea of people who can afford solar getting smaller power bills than those who can't afford solar triggers their socialist PTSD/sand-filled-underpants.  But while the focus is on the Government having issues with them they will remain mum.  I imagine if Elon Musk's Powewall (http://www.teslamotors.com/powerwall) takes off they will be even sandier in the pants.  If I had one I could just about disconnect from the grid altogether, even in winter.

I think the current news *is* positive for CWE. If CWE can prove that the CETOs produce xxkW/h +/- 20% or so as a steady baseline then that will be absolutely massive, and something solar and wind can't do (the sun goes down, the wind stops).  Also Ian MacFarlane in particular seems to be very much on board with wave energy.