This is 2007 data but I've seen newer charts and the relative subsidy amounts have not changed much.
Wind and solar have never truly been a genuine source for feeding the grid, and they can't unless an inexpensive way to store power is developed.
Considering wind represents less than 1% of energy produced in this country this chart is a joke. You have to base subsidies on a megawatt hour basis so everything is equal.
For example, total federal subsidies in fiscal year 2007 were $23.37 per megawatt hour for wind, compared with $0.44 for conventional coal and $0.25 for natural gas and petroleum liquids.[2] In fiscal year 2010, they were even higher. Winds subsidies amounted to $56.29 per megawatt hour, while the figures for coal, and natural gas and petroleum liquids, were tied at a mere $0.64.[3]
Do the same chart in $/kWH
This data is meaningless with correlating dollars per kwh!!!
“ALL forms of energy receive government subsidies”
Yes, but only some of them would still exist as industries without them.
“Wind and solar receive less than some others”
Well, yeah, but that’s apples and oranges. Of course coal and nukes will get more Big Mother’s milk. Wind and solar are baby industries, and a baby can only suckle so much.
“Wind and solar are baby industries”
Oh, and in case this was unclear, they are baby industries because as energy producers they are losers and as investments they are sinkholes.
Now, not only a per energy unit basis is wind larger but even measured in dollars it is more than oil, gas and coal combined.
Subsidies for Energy Production in FY 2010
Source |
Total Federal Expenditures ($ bn) |
Energy Output (Qbtu) |
Subsidy in $/mmbtu |
Coal |
1.358 |
23.940 |
0.057 |
Oil and gas |
2.820 |
38.730 |
0.073 |
Solar |
1.134 |
0.004 |
274.180 |
Wind |
4.986 |
0.323 |
15.439 |
Hydro |
0.216 |
2.920 |
0.074 |
Nuclear |
2.499 |
8.770 |
0.285 |
Biofuels |
7.761 |
4.700 |
1.651 |
Geothermal |
0.273 |
0.052 |
5.260 |
All Renewables (except hydro) |
14.154 |
5.079 |
2.787 |
Total |
21.047 |
79.354 |
0.265 |
I’d love to see that done in $/kWh placed on the grid.
Done like that it seems pretty misleading. Plus I’d be interested in knowing what they consider a “subsidy”. I operate on the assumption that these days, everyone in gov’t is favoring so-called “Green” energy.