If renewables are now so cheap, why do they still need government subsidies and mandates?
-
Yes, and what I'm pointing out is that, since even with these taxes and subsidies renewables are overwhelmingly not being chosen by the market, they're a lot worse than they're made out to be.
Also, the externalities of fossil fuels have been greatly overestimated and those of renewables underestimated, so large subsidies and taxes favoring the latter are bad, but that's a separate point.
-
-
Here are the best estimates of the pollution cost of fossil fuels: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.101.5.1649 … For coal, the externalities are larger than the entire value added – we’d be better off with zero coal production. As we did with acid rain, lead and cfcs, we can address this.
-
Yes, coal is a bad polluter, but natural gas is not. And all costs and benefits of each alternative must be considered. On balance, natural gas is currently a better option than renewables.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.