Sunday, June 4, 2017

Renewable Energy Will Always be Under a Political Cloud

Sometimes I have to laugh when I read an article or a op-ed that is written by a libtard.  I swear it is audacity of the incredulous and nothing demonstrates this more than renewable energy.  A headline by the New York Times says it all: Even as wind power rises, it falls under a political cloud.

Really? Do you think?!  Anytime a government entity forces its citizens to subsidize an industry or mandates its use, it will become a political issue.  This should be common sense; however, progressives don’t think this way.  They believe in the supremacy of their beliefs and to hell with yours.  Can anyone say Obamacare?

What is amazing is how liberals can accuse the opposition of ideology without recognizing their own biases.  This excerpt from the aforementioned article is a perfect example:

The study has been praised by trade groups representing the nuclear and coal industries. But it is being conducted without including many of those potentially affected. And clean-energy executives and advocates, as well as some lawmakers, have expressed concern that it will be grounded more in ideology than in evidence.

A group of trade organizations representing clean-energy interests delivered analyses to the department in mid-May arguing that renewables do not threaten grid reliability and that subsidies are not to blame for the economic troubles of coal and nuclear plants.

I’m sorry, but forcing the American people to subsidize inefficient energy schemes while over-regulating proven energy sources is a threat to grid reliability.  Even the author of this article concedes renewable energies can’t exist without subsidies.

Energy experts say that without the credit and other favorable subsidies, mandates and market policies in place, wind development and production will be threatened. When the credit has periodically expired, installations nearly ground to a halt — dropping by roughly 76 to 93 percent, according to an analysis by the Union of Concerned Scientists — only to resume again with its renewal. Congressional estimates put the cost of the credit at $3.1 billion last year, and the figure is expected to reach $4 billion this year.

“There’s no question: if the P.T.C. goes away, that’s a big number,” said Robert F. Shapiro, a lawyer at Chadbourne & Parke in Washington, who focuses on project finance and energy. “New plants would have to meet a tougher test, a market-price test, that can’t be masked in part by that subsidy.”

You’re damn right renewable energy is under a political cloud and will continue to be as long as the federal government forces it upon us.


No comments: