From FOXNews -- In a radical change of policy, the Netherlands is reducing its targets for renewable energy and slashing the subsidies for wind and solar power. It's also given the green light for the country's first new nuclear power plants for almost 40 years.
Why the change? Wind and solar subsidies are too expensive, the Financial Times Deutschland , reports.
When green energy becomes cheaper than traditional fossil-fuel, hydro-electric, and nuclear energy, without government subsidies, then the American people will use it. Right now, it's too expensive, inefficient, and unproven on large scales to be competitive in the free energy market-place. Holland has figured that out. I wonder when, or even if, liberals in the US will get a clue?
2 comments:
All lights have advantages – none should be banned.
Even if there were energy savings with regulations on light bulbs:
Citizens pay for the electricity they use,
there is no energy shortage justifying usage limitation on citizens,
and if there was a shortage of finite coal/oil/gas, their price rise
limits their use anyway – without legislation.
Emissions? Light bulbs don’t give out CO2 gas -power plants might.
If there is an energy supply/emissions problem – deal with the problem!
Ceolas.Net has extensive research on why the regulation arguments are wrong,
including that the supposed energy savings are not there anyway,
http://ceolas.net/#li171x
with US Dept of Energy references
Under 1% overall energy savings from efficiency regulations on incandescent lights.
Right you are Peter. Why ban a perfectly good product and destroy an entire industry over what is clearly an imaginary benefit to the environment. The only logical answer is it's a craven political payoff to Jeffery Immelt.
Post a Comment