Comments on: The economics of advancing alternative energy in the United States http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/06/17/the-economics-of-advancing-alternative-energy-in-the-united-states/ Citizen Economists is an online economics magazine written by citizen journalists. These ordinary citizens provide reports and commentary on the current events affecting the economics of the fields they work in. Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:44:52 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Dirk http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/06/17/the-economics-of-advancing-alternative-energy-in-the-united-states/comment-page-1/#comment-12611 Dirk Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:35:22 +0000 http://citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=577#comment-12611 The best solution for alternative energy adoption is strong economic growth. No one did as much for alternative energy as George Bush. When oil is over $100/barrel and demand is strong, you'll be amazed at the investment you'll see in solar and electric vehicles. Feed in tarrifs, on the other hand, are destructive- they incentivize bad behavior, such as wind. Wind tends not to blow on the hottest days, and so it doesn't do a very good job of filling peak power, but rather power when it's not needed, causing utilities to have to deal with that excess power (while paying 5-10X what they could buy alternative power for). It's a problem more than a solution. Imagine if we would have provided incentives so solar could have been implemented to a greater extent 30 years ago? We would have payed for solar at $300/Watt, instead of current $2-3/watt (which is heading towards $1 or lower). No, focus on economic growth and confidence, not government manipulation and scarcity fear. The best solution for alternative energy adoption is strong economic growth. No one did as much for alternative energy as George Bush. When oil is over $100/barrel and demand is strong, you’ll be amazed at the investment you’ll see in solar and electric vehicles.

Feed in tarrifs, on the other hand, are destructive- they incentivize bad behavior, such as wind. Wind tends not to blow on the hottest days, and so it doesn’t do a very good job of filling peak power, but rather power when it’s not needed, causing utilities to have to deal with that excess power (while paying 5-10X what they could buy alternative power for). It’s a problem more than a solution.

Imagine if we would have provided incentives so solar could have been implemented to a greater extent 30 years ago? We would have payed for solar at $300/Watt, instead of current $2-3/watt (which is heading towards $1 or lower).

No, focus on economic growth and confidence, not government manipulation and scarcity fear.

]]>