John Droz Jr. alerted us to this Wall Street Journal poll. It is titled
and reads in part
Federal subsidies have spurred the growth of renewable-energy production in recent years, but many of those subsidies are set to expire soon unless Congress acts.
Supporters say the subsidies will allow renewable technologies to grow enough to become cost-competitive with conventional energy sources—and that their benefits include reduced pollution and decreased dependence on foreign oil.
Critics want to scale back or eliminate the subsidies, arguing that renewable sources have had decades to get established but still aren’t cost-competitive with conventional energy.
Tell us what you think in advance of a special report we’ll be publishing in The Wall Street Journal. We may use some of your comments in print.
The poll is listed within the article.
My view is that the federal research program should support research and proof-of-concept development of wind energy (for feasibility, and a cost and benefit perspective), but that subsidizing any energy source (e.g. through tax credits) should be at most, a short -term approach except for the poor members of our society.
With respect to wind energy, there is a need to assess if it is, for example, a reliable source of energy; and if its footprint on the landscape including its effect on the local ecology (e.g. birds) and the removal of this land from other uses, makes this a viable contribution to the sources of energy for society.