WFB: Hillary Clinton’s solar plan would add more than $60 billion in new subsidies, according to a report released by the American Action Forum.
The Democratic presidential nominee is promising to expand the amount of solar panels to generate 140 gigawatts by 2020, an increase of 700 percent.
The plan would require 10 times more subsidies than are provided today, at an estimated cost of $62 billion.
“Secretary Clinton has made a bold promise to install ‘half a billion’ new solar panels in her first term, increase total solar power capacity to 140 Gigawatts (GW), extend renewable energy subsidies, and create new incentives for renewable energy investment,” said the American Action Forum, a center-right policy institute, in a new report released Friday. “Such a policy will be un-abashedly pro-solar, even if it comes at the expense of other clean energy sources.”
“On the topic of expense, promising to both extend subsidies and reach 140 GW of solar power has the potential to increase subsidy costs between $27.5 and $62 billion,” the group said. “This amount alone does not even address the enormous gap between her goal, and the projected demand for solar. The end result of such a policy will be massive government spending that does not succeed in efficiently achieving energy or environmental policy goals.” MORE
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/28/science/earth/28solar.html?_r=0
I noticed this a couple of weeks ago when I was up there. I noticed a solar panel under a street light and thought, ‘Only in NJ’.
This won’t cost anybody anything, the government will just print the $60,000,000,000 needed. If that is not enough they can print all they need. Easy peasy.
Renewable? Think again.
Solar panels degradation rates vary from 1% to 35% per year depending on environment and degrade even faster the older they become.
By the time 2020 rolls around and $62 billion spent the 140 gigawatt goal is on an accelerating downward slope.
Just budget more panels every year (renewable!) — That won’t be subsidized any longer and you’ll be left holding the bag. Good luck with that!
You still need a full fledged back up power plant for the times when there’s no sun (can you say double cost) and the environmental impact & cost of minin for the materials to make the panels and batteries is substantial.
Then there’s the fact that all these panels are made in China AND that they lose conversion capacity at a steady rate until 20 years out they need to be replaced.
Google tried a solar facility and can’t make a go of it. They want the taxpayers to take over all financial responsibility while they get to keep any profits from selling electrical power. Natch.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/11/the-sun-aint-gonna-shine-anymore.php
Solar power has been a failure everywhere it has been tried. The US lost Billions with subsidies to solar plants.
I heard you could cook a hotdog with the sun. Some kind of reflector thing and about 4 hours and you can have a pretty nasty, burned, cold hotdog.
They spent millions on solar panels in Little Rock, AR. But most of them go unused, they are just for cosmetic purposes to show that they are willing to tow the progressive line.
I could make good use of a few of those panels the V.A. installed but don’t use for electricity. They are fine for powering small electronics and lights in a single off-grid home, but not so much for commercial purposes. The sun doesn’t shine enough to make them useful. I’ve got a 14 watt panel for charging batteries and phones, works great on sunny days, but takes hours to charge.
That’s around 10% of electric generation capacity. Get ready for daily brown outs and regional power grid destabilization. Better to get Grandma Clinton a pot bellied stove for Christmas and leave the rest of us to the real world.
$62 billion here, $62 billion there, and pretty soon you’re talking about some real money…