There was a HUGE tribe of solar/wind supporting Freepers just a few years ago.
I don’t understand the romance.
Solar and wind are an adjunct to, not a replacement for fossil fuels.
You will still find some, mostly those of us who understand the technology and how it fits into the picture. As a mainstay - no. As part of an “all of the above” energy solution? Yes, for utility-scale wind today, Not “small wind” like you see on houses or farms, and not for solar regardless of scale at todays production vs. cost points. In the future - maybe.
Here’s my point: energy is a complex technological issue that requires research and analysis, not something you can reduce to “I’m for it” or “It sucks”. We resent crap science when it’s handed off by Algore and his ilk to support their nonsense, yet many FReepers use similar crap science to try to denigrate alternate energy.
But here’s where we can agree: Most conservative free market folks are very reluctant to use government incentives (whether investment, production, or R&D oriented) to push new technologies into the market. That’s what free enterprise is all about and it is far better at picking winners and losers than gov’t is or ever could be. The fact that subsidies are given to every other form of energy is no justification just as “two wrongs don’t make a right”.
I just wish these discussions were focused on the real core public policy issues instead of silly ones or incorrect information.