This Is How The Scam Works – 1970’s Redux

Here’s the full article.

But solar power has few downsides, except for one thing: the cost. The combination of soaring electric prices and state subsidies are giving solar a new jump.

In the wake of the last energy crisis of the 1970s solar energy looked like the next big thing. So big that Jimmy Carter installed solar panels on the White House. But Dan Kammen, an energy expert at the University of California in Berkeley, says the panels weren’t up very long.

Ronald Reagan came in, the price of oil fell and he promptly ripped them off.

And then he eliminated a federal tax credit on solar. The fledgling solar industry went into deep hibernation.

But that could change.

The state incentives and federal incentives cut the cost of the installation in half. And it comes down to there’s less than a ten year payback on a piece of hardware that has at least a 30 year lifespan so it makes a lot of sense.

But even with incentives the costs are still high. An average installation costs about $43,000. Connecticut’s rebate cuts that in half. And eliminates the sales tax. Municipalities don’t charge property tax on the systems. And until the end of the year there’s a federal tax credit of up to $2000. But Lise Dondy says government incentives are critically important.

This technology is not cost competitive and without these incentives we’d go back to nothing because they are still too costly .

Connecticut’s three-year $36 million rebate program is paid for by ratepayers. Lise Dondy says rebate programs like this need reliable funding.

Some states they’ve launched a program with great fanfare, put out a lot of money and had to halt it because they ran out of money. So our program is smaller. We don’t have as much money by any means as a state like California or New Jersey, but so far we have been able to be consistent and to keep the growing installer community busy.

And there you have, ladies and gentlemen, the ‘70s all over again. We have an artificial energy “crisis” followed by a “fix” paid for by you and me, again. If it was too expensive in the ‘70s and it’s still too expensive 30 years later after a period of “deep hibernation” when they could have figured out how to make it cost effective, why didn’t they? What evidence is there that as long as “reliable funding” is available it will ever become self-sustaining?

Here is a modern rah rah article from The Atlantic propping up Silicon Valley pushing for what will turn out to be a replay of '70s.