Here's Why Government Should Stop Throwing Money at Green Energy
In California, which has a slew of renewable energy regulations, the cost of electricity increased three times faster than in the rest of the U.S.—and the state still doesn't even get reliable energy.

"We're building a clean energy future," says President Joe Biden.
Who is "we"?
Well, you pay for it.
He and his "green" cronies do most of the building.
Lately, they're pouring more of your money into "renewable energy." They promise to give us "carbon-free power" from the sun and wind.
My new video illustrates some problems with that, using scenes from a new documentary series called Juice: Power, Politics and the Grid.
Political scientist Roger Pielke Jr. notes, "It's quite intuitive for people to understand that there's a lot of power in solar energy. We feel the wind. The idea that you can get something for nothing, people find enormously appealing."
Especially in California, where politicians now require all new homes to have solar panels, all new cars sold in 2035 to be zero emission, and all the state's electricity to come from carbon-free resources by 2045.
They're getting results, but not good ones: California's cost of electricity increased three times faster than in the rest of America.
People in Washington state pay about 11 cents per kilowatt-hour. In Oregon, 13 cents. In California, now almost 30 cents.
Do they at least get reliable energy for that? No.
The big problem with wind and solar power, of course, is that they don't work when the wind doesn't blow or the sun doesn't shine. Sometimes that happens when people most want heat or air conditioning.
Increased use of "renewables" is why blackouts are more common in California. Bloomenergy says there were over 25,000 in 2019—thousands more than the previous year.
"We failed to predict and plan," said Gov. Gavin Newsom. Right.
Instead, they embraced unscientific green fantasies.
Requiring all new homes to have solar panels is a big reason California has the most expensive housing in America. The average house costs almost $800,000.
If you can afford that, you get government money for generating solar power. But the handout goes mostly to the rich. Poorer people are more likely to rent.
On top of that, the subsidy is inefficient.
"As their solar panels produce power during the day when the sun is up," explains electrical engineer Lee Cordner, "They're able to sell the excess power…into the grid exactly when the grid doesn't need it. The grid is then inundated with solar power and can't use it all. Nonetheless, they get paid a very high price for that power."
Nice for homeowners.
Taxpayers pay for rich people to have a highly subsidized solar system.
I put panels on my house partly because of a tax credit.
But I don't delude myself by thinking that solar power will measurably reduce climate change or that wind power is especially green.
"Just to produce one turbine, we have to extract 900 tons of steel, 2,500 tons of concrete, and 45 tons of non-renewable plastic," explains ecologist Merlin Tuttle. "Then we've got to transport that and burn fuel, getting it all carried across the world. None of these things that go into a turbine are renewable."
And they wear out. Turbines now get shut down in just 10 years for maintenance. Maintenance costs almost as much as a new turbine, but it's worth it to "green" companies because of government handouts.
Biden announced an $11 billion subsidy to "bring clean energy into rural communities." That mostly encouraged people to put wind and solar in inappropriate places.
Solar power makes sense in America's south and other sunny places. But an above average number of solar subsidies go to Minnesota.
In the documentary, a Minnesota resident laughs and says, "The state is about to give me a whole bunch of subsidies to…build solar in scenic, sunny Minnesota."
The Juice series highlights the stupidity of government throwing money at "green" schemes pushed by the politically connected.
When solar and wind become more efficient, they'll be cheaper and people will adopt them on their own.
Politicians should stop their destructive meddling.
You can watch the full documentary at JuiceTheSeries.com.
COPYRIGHT 2024 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Government selecting new technologies as "winners" of the taxpayer lottery also means we don't get to see what actually makes sense to build from an economic and efficiency standpoint. The scale is completely unbalanced.
Also, catastrophic climate change is a lie.
And you are a more tendentious liar still.
Stossel remains, in comparison, merely an over the hill bore .
https://fee.org/articles/18-spectacularly-wrong-prophecies-from-the-first-earth-day/
Fuck off and die; take your fake website with you.
Hey, why even have a Democracy! if we can't trade political patronage for votes and donations?
Maybe we should think of our government as a "free" market.
Fun fact: even after the billions of dollars spent on electrical batteries in the past decade, our national grid now has about 5 minutes of power supply capacity. You know, for those super rare times when the sun does not shine and the wind does not blow.
Wind and solar are green.
Men are women.
Bees are fish.
Wind and solar are free of fuel and toxic waste.
But collecting and directing them are not.
You're too dumb to be a nincompoop.
Idiot.
You should be sentenced to work in a mine or refinery mill with a bunch of other "children".
I read this as sarcasm, because nothing else makes sense.
It's funny when you read his comments below because it becomes obvious that what actually happened is Spiritus' sarcasm flew right over the flickering, dimly-lit LED bulb that appeared above GKAM's head as he came up with that comment.
Do you still have to pay for electricity and gasoline?
Not us, we invested in a solar system and electric cars and have lived and driven with free electricity for eight years now.
The PV solar system paid back in three years in gasoline savings alone.
Why do you still have to pay for electricity and gasoline?
"Invested" and "free" are incompatible.
Why are you such an economic illiterate?
Do you still have to pay for electricity and gasoline?
Why are you such an economic sophomore?
We invested eight years ago, and after three years the system paid back, and gives us free power for the last five years.
What did you do?
Try to wrap your head around this: Other people may have different needs or be in different places or circumstances where none of that is possible.
Or is your mind just too tiny to understand that?
Your need to offend is adolescent.
Prove it.
What did you do?
Payed for all the subsidies on your investment.
Nope.
Almost all of my neighbors have them, too.
Why don't you?
SCARED of Liberal Economics?
I've read enough history to know parasites like you end up in difficult circumstances.
Fuck off and die, slaver.
No, you didnt.
+1
They need to come up with a solar system that doesn't get destroyed every couple years by hail. I lived where there was plenty of sun, but the building code mandated solar system for all new construction is now just a broken uselss eyesore. Not worth the cost to remove and dispose of it.
I lived in an older neighborhood with lots of huge trees, not a single roof not partially covered in shade part of the day. One tiny patch in the shade turns it into a resistor that doesn't generate any electricity. Those homes also all had mandated solar systems, all uselss.
Don't even want to get started with snow.
Mandated solar systems are an insane waste.
Mandated solar systems are an insane waste.
Even his non-mandated one per his own numbers below. His electric company pays him $0.51 for what, the next state over (where his eco-cronies haven't been voted into place and deliberately crippled and distorted the price out of existing infrastructure, and not just for electricity either), is less than half the cost of his sell-rate.
He's not some dynamo generating untold amounts of cheap power, he's a grifter leeching money of a captive customer base.
Even if his neighbors are in on the same graft and they aren't extorting from each other, they're extorting the lower class and/or immigrants who haven't/can't readily avail themselves of the more expensive infrastructure (because of the captive market).
I'm gonna call bullshit.
It's possible that you live in one of the rare parts of the country where solar is consistent enough to generate all your personal energy needs. It's unlikely but there are a very few small areas where the local climate is that free of clouds. There are, however, no batteries sufficient for you to store all the energy you require to be truly self-sufficient.
I believe that what you're really doing is "selling" your excess electricity back to the local utility when you don't want it (and they don't really need it) and pulling from the grid for all the times that your personal solar system isn't generating enough energy. In other words, you're leeching off your neighbors and only show the net as "free" because you've voted in a utility board that is heavily subsidizing your chosen lifestyle.
But feel free to prove us wrong. Disconnect from the grid entirely and tell us how long the food in your refrigerator stays frozen.
I have a pair of PowerWall II batteries with my PV system and electric cars. I can disconnect but why? The power company (for which I was senior engineer) loves the peak power I deliver and trade for the low-cost power I take out at night.
I like using the distribution circuit as an energy bank.
Sorry, still bullshit.
A Powerwall 2 has a capabity of 13.5 kWh. With two of them, you have capacity for (on average) 2.5 or so days electricity - but that average does not include recharging your electric cars so my guess is that your actual capacity is less than a full day.
The power company does not love your electricity because what you can deliver in daylight is most definitely not peak power. The only reason you get paid as if it were valuable power is because your government has put a heavy thumb on the scale.
I get that you like using the existing grid as your "bank". That doesn't change the fact that you're externalizing huge costs onto everyone else.
That doesn’t change the fact that you’re externalizing huge costs onto everyone else.
Right. He's got it exactly backwards. Especially from the numbers below. If he were a dynamo and the people around him were dynamos, electricity would be cheap and the peak power they get paid for would be marginal on an already cheap and abundant good. It's not cheap because the State has overpaid for "his" "infrastructure" and under invested, to the point of foregoing rather basic maintenance, in the far more productive systems of their own.
He's using his electric company like a payday lender and bragging about how he hasn't paid any ATM fees in years.
Something you said earlier made me do a little more digging. According to what I can find, the average electric car uses 394 kWh per month. That works out to, on average, 13 kWh per day. A different article says the average home uses about 10,500 kWh per year or about 29 kWh per day.
Assuming only one car (even though you said "cars" above), the total is = 42 kWh per day. Your two Powerwall 2 batteries have a combined capacity of 27 kWh so your storage is about 65% of your daily need. In other words, your “investment” can go a grand total of 16 hours before the food starts to melt.
Turning to generative capacity, unless you live in Arizona, the best "peak sun hours" you can get is about 5 per day. To produce 42 kWh per day (breakeven for your needs), that means you need a bit over 8 kW of solar panel capacity. On average, solar panels produce 100 watts per square meter (or about 10 sq feet). So you need 84 square meters (840 sq feet) of panels. And they must be on the south-facing part of the roof with no vents, chimneys or obstructions in the way and no trees shading your house. These calculations also assume that despite the panels being on the roof, you somehow are able to keep them clean of dust, debris and damage.
I don't think I live in a small house (it's certainly larger than my California-dwelling sister can afford) but I don't have anywhere near the necessary area of south-facing roof. Maybe all the stars aligned for you and your house is perfectly positioned in ideal climate to take advantage of solar. That is nowhere close to true for the vast majority of us.
I can disconnect but why?
Because you sound like an alcoholic lying to themselves about how they can quit any time.
The power company (for which I was senior engineer)
Was that between becoming a Navy SEAL and meeting your underwear model wife? Dumbass.
You weren’t a Sr. Engineer. You’re a fucking retarded sea lion. You had trouble grasping Spiritus Mundi’s sarcasm above and, when confronted about proof or evidence, needlessly and ineffectively deflect.
You’re like a flat earther when shown pictures of the curvature of the Earth replying with “The edge is round, like a disc, I shouldn’t have to prove it beyond that.” You aren't doing anything except convincing people here that you're a lying moron and that anyone associating with you or your cause is OK siding with lying morons.
You have made a number of unproven assertions. Also you aren't discussing the actual lifespan of the equipment. Solar panels wear out. Everything does. When they wear out they will need replacent. How will that impact your free energy?
Where is all this cheap California electricity?
My last PG&E bill (2024-02-06) says offpeak price was 48.701 cents, peak was 51.536.
Hey, are you a lucky upper class wealthy capitalist user who gets to pay higher rates? For energy justice.
Total usage was 390 kWh.
Our PV system has produced more than 52.94 MWh, or almost 53,000kWh.
Good investment. Liberal economics.
And like every liberal economic model it is all bullshit and unsustainable and is going to fall apart and cause massive pain for everybody else who knew it was bullshit from the start.
You fail to provide useful numbers.
What was your initial investment.
How did you pay for the initial investment.
How many square feet of panels do you have.
Where is this magical home located.
No, I am one who invested in a PV system eight years ago, and have gotten free power for our electric cars and the household for the last five years.
Do you still have to pay for electricity and gasoline?
I dare you to come up here to Northeast Montana (you know, where we grow the food this country eats) and see how well your solar panel works, and E-Vehicle when it's minus 30 fahrenheit air temp with a felt temp of -60°F. But I'm betting you don't understand how severe cold and or heat impact battery life and ability to recharge. But when you're E-Vehicle dies half way to town, I'll pull over and give you a ride in my nice warm gas powered truck, mainly because I don't want you freezing to death due to your undeserved smugness.
Off-peak for me is 35 cents. PG&E EV-2A schedule.
Time to have them review your rate schedule.
Wait, you are paying for electricity!? I though everything was free?
The electricity I take out at night after putting it in that day is worth 35cents/kWh. I trade it for the 51 cent stuff I produce into the grid.
So, as Rossami points out above: Because your service provider is buying your expensive shit off of you and passing the cost on to your neighbors it looks like you're making/saving money when, in fact, you're still paying more for electricity, and making less money, off peak than pretty much anywhere else in the country save maybe HI. You aren't actually generating more power more cheaply, you're just charging and getting paid more by government handouts.
Again, you aren't savvy, you aren't smart. You're a grifter and con artist peddling the same tired con that's been peddled for several decades while tards like you suffer wildfires and rolling brownouts that don't happen anywhere else outside parts of India and S. America. Most people would be ashamed to be advertising that they're less productive that the average consumer *and* living off of handouts the way you are, but not you.
This ASVAB waiver isn't intelligent enough to understand anything more than he gets paid for electricity that he doesn't need or use (because he is at work? Or because daylight hours are almost always the least electric demanding hours) and most everyone else doesn't need either, and then has to pay higher than national average prices for electricity when he does actually need it and think he's developed some type of cheat code. Oh and he was lead engineer, just didn't say what kind of engineer he was, because he was senior sanitation engineer.
So even with your power wall and panels you still need to take electricity from the grid to keep your system working at night. Tell us, what kind of fuel do you think is being burned to keep your frozen foods from spoiling and your home a comfortable temperature?
The Environmental and Energy Study Institute reported that direct subsidies to the fossil fuel industry totaled $20 billion per year, with 80% going toward oil and gas. In addition, from 2019 to 2023, tax subsidies are expected to reduce federal revenue by around $11.5 billion. Considering that production subsidies grew 28% between 2017 and 2019, the United States will be under a lot of scrutiny from other countries wanting to see evidence of reform before making their own commitments.
Define "subsidies" as used in this context.
Yes. The claim is bullshit.
The greenie rants about oil and gas subsidies usually include the billions that the feds hand out to cover heating costs for the po peeples, and standard commercial accounting like depreciation for an asset with reduced value, like what happens when an oil or gas field produces leaving less resource in the ground.
What drivel.
More money toward Green Energy is needed if the DC politicians and their cronies are going to get rich off our tax dollars.
How anyone with a conscience can entertain the idea of depriving our obvious betters billions of our hard earned money is beyond me.
Perhaps it is economics which is beyond you.
Do you still have to pay for electricity and gasoline?
Not us, we invested in a solar system and electric cars eight years ago and have lived and driven with free electricity.
The PV solar system paid back in three years in gasoline savings alone.
And, as you indicate above, you charge more for power in CA than pretty much any place else in the United States.
You aren’t getting paid because you’re reliably and consistently generating 150 MWh at fair or below market prices, you’re getting paid because you fucked up the power grid, voted for your cronies to fuck up the market, and are living off the graft.
You’re so stupid you have rolling brownouts and wildfires so often that even people who agree with you ecologically are saying “Holy Shit! This is retarded, we’ve got to go!” and then you come on the internet to *brag* about how retarded you are as though everyone else is beneath your genius. You aren't even a bad joke.
At first, you seemed to be a parasite. Now it's obvious you are a poor liar.
Unless you pay back any and all tax credits, rebates, and other taxpayer or utility customer subsidies, fuck off--and fuck your "economics".
Oh, and you might own reparations to any slave laborers in China.
All the Libertarians, esp posters on here, raved about the 30 x 30 project and now it looks like the worst environmental idea in history :
2 weeks ago the stupidest and laziest President in our history backed this
"BLM proposes to open 22 million acres in Western states to solar development"
It is a health-restoring guffaw this gives me. Under the heading of environment he is initiating the biggest destruction of american land in history
California is about 100million acres so Biden is commandeering something the size of 1/5 of california FOR SOLAR PANELS
I'm hoping at least some of this land is in critical sage groups or pigmy rabbit territory because I'm sure the same idiots who use to keep our cattle out of this land (despite the scientific evidence showing grazing actually benefits sage grouse and has no impact on pigmy rabbits) will sue to stop the complete destruction of these critical habitats.
I’m sure the same idiots who use to keep our cattle out of this land (despite the scientific evidence showing grazing actually benefits sage grouse and has no impact on pigmy rabbits) will sue to stop the complete destruction of these critical habitats.
Don't think for a second that the grifters are not counting on that exact scenario. The politicians want their contributions and the government contractors will collect as much of the contract as possible before abandoning it. They will end up building a fraction of the solar farms at while inflating the cost 2-3 times over the government estimates. The lawsuits will be their justification for demanding continued payments without delivery of power.
These solar morons are willing to pay owners of farmland to rent their land to put solar panels on. They are offering upward of $1,000 an acre.
Not for pasture. No, for flat farmland that grows food. They want to pay us far more than we can make using it for agriculture to.put solar panels for long term leases. I get about $150 an acre for renting to a kid who farms the land. 1,000 an acre is insane.
What does the bit about turbines in the middle of the article have to do with the rest of it? To get back to the topic, check this out: https://www.catf.us/resource/california-needs-clean-firm-power-and-so-does-the-rest-of-the-world/#038;swpmtxnonce=5d80b96d90
The thesis of the article is about "green" energy. There are two flavors of that - solar and wind. He first dissects solar, then goes on to dissect wind. Both are essential to the article's thesis. Then (and yes, this is a little clumsy) goes back to solar before wrapping up to his conclusion.
The article you link to throws out some alternatives but gives little to no discussion of their respective shortcomings. For example, geothermal is indeed independent of weather but it is only viable in certain locations and even there is a depletable resource. (Over decade time-scales, geothermal uses up the very temperature differential that makes it work.) The article talks about "green hydrogen" but ignores the problem of the energy need to split out that hydrogen in the first place. Hydrogen is at best an energy transfer medium, not a source. Biofuels are theoretically possible but our relatively minor investments in biofuels so far are already having disastrous consequences on food production and the environment. I'm sorry but nothing in that linked article is a serious proposal.
Power outages in California typically have little to do with whether or not the energy being delivered is green, or not. Where I live, power outages are almost always the result of foul weather causing trees to fall on power lines, or failing old infrastructure including rotting poles, shorts, transformers spontaneously exploding, and so forth. Within a block of my home there have been at least three equipment-based power outages in the past year, including two pole failures and a corroded wire.
Every region in the country has bad weather and falling trees. We don't have blackouts and brownouts because we have sufficient spare capacity that the failure doesn't cascade. California doesn't, which means that any little failure escalates to catastrophe.
California trees and power lines are not unique. That is therefore not a plausible cause for your uniquely bad power situation.
But California does have dysfunctional laws about utility spending and other restrictions about ROW maintenance, so more frequent physical interruptions do happen. And yes, to that you can add lack of spare capacity.
Power outages in California typically have little to do with whether or not the energy being delivered is green, or not.
This is a deflection, just another form of a poor tradesman blaming his tools, or the selection of them that he himself put in his toolbox, for his own incompetence. The premise being that there is a right tool for solving a problem the wrong way. Just because a nut is rusted onto a bolt and won’t budge doesn’t mean a hammer and I pipe wrench are equivalent at solving your problem.
If you can't maintain your grid reliably enough to provide 99+% up time, a less reliable source isn't going to improve overall service reliability. Rather, the opposite.
Nobody anywhere is saying solar panels and windmills don’t generate electricity. They’re saying they don’t do it as abundantly, reliably, flexibly, predictably, *and* cheaply as other sources. And the more you play retarded in defense of using a hammer to get the screw off a nut, the more just plain retarded you look.
‘Laissez-Faire’ Sweden Had the Lowest Mortality in Europe From 2020–2022, New Analysis Shows
Yet the people who were so very, very wrong will never apologize and will never face consequences.
Put these 2 statements together :
1) Most large solar farm panels are made of a compound called cadmium telluride. While this material is cost-effective, it can be toxic. Cadmium telluride has been associated with kidney, heart, skin, and lung issues. For residents who rely on well water, the worry is that any leaked chemicals from damaged panels could contaminate their water supply. --and this happened yesterday on 4000 acres in Texas after a storm
2) Jan 2024
BLM proposes to open 22 million acres in Western states to solar development
Biden is long dead, Kamala is Pres and millions of acres are leaching into the water supply