Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-23-2012, 10:11 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,045,587 times
Reputation: 17864

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Everest209 View Post
Subsidies or not, I doubt anyone else is putting that much money into green energy.

We'll all be gone, but I wish I could see coal and oil lovers explanation when everything is ran by green energy in 100 years.
It's inevitable that renewable energy will emerge as the only source of energy, to think otherwise would be naive. You don't run the bus off a cliff in the meantime.

Being able to compete against fossil fuels is huge plum to pick so advancements over the coming decades will be substantial. Having said that these subsidies may actually be having the opposite effect. If Uncle Sam is going to make up the difference there isn't a whole lot of incentive there to push the envelope and then you have other issues where companies may not want to get involved.

Here a great quote from Exxon's CEO from a few years back:

Quote:
Exxon Mobil: We Like Renewable Energy Subsidies. Wink, wink. - Environmental Capital - WSJ

“If I wanted to kill [tax subsidies], the thing to do is for Exxon Mobil to go and invest heavily in them and then Congress would immediately cancel the tax subsidy. Actually what they would do is they would just cancel it for us,” said Mr.Tillerson, during the annual analyst meeting at the New York Stock Exchange.

He added: “In reality, that is what I fear would happen. So we are not going to go into investments that are dependent on a government providing a tax system to make them viable.”
Since then Exxon has made a significant investment in algae bio fuels but you can bet there is something to it if they are pursuing it. The question is this, why should Exxon's algae product have to compete against something like the mandated ethanol which is a complete failure and always will be.

Now lets say we lift the mandate on ehthanol, where does this leave all the people invested in it over the last few decades with the understanding Uncle Sam has their back?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-23-2012, 10:27 AM
 
5,760 posts, read 11,545,794 times
Reputation: 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
I don't worship any companies either but I do give some respect to a company that invests it's own money in alternative energies...

So where's that URL concerning the HUGE government subsidies Google receives that I asked you for earlier?

Or was your post just another flippant off the wall BS statement that this forum is famous for?
Not that complex.

US Treasury Grant 1603 is 30%.

1603 Program: Payments for Specified Energy Property in Lieu of Tax Credits

Production Tax Credit is 2.2 cents per kWh.

Federal Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credit (PTC)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:36 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top