Counter Argument and Rebuttal for Green Energy Subsidies

Counter-Arguments & Response

• Obama's plan on subsidizing renewable energy failed to create jobs

- One of the arguments against renewable energy is that if we look back at Obama’s renewable energy plan, the renewable energy plan did not turn out well at all. "Obama’s plan was to decrease 4 billion a year in subsidies and tax breaks for oil companies and promote other renewable energy by providing federal subsidies to alternative energy such as petroleum, coal, hydropower, wind, solar and biofuels. In 2008, Obama promised to create 5 million green jobs but only 4000 permanent jobs were created according to Wall Street Journal" (Obama's failed Scranton promises).

The reason that Obama’s plan is not working is because renewable energy companies are still not yet competitive enough to compete with fossil fuel companies. The problem is that it takes time for renewable energy companies to gain enough capital from the subsidies and demand from consumers to be able to keep up with large fossil fuel companies. In the long run, we should be able to see more green jobs being created.

• Renewable energy still has some risks and flaws

Another counter-argument against subsidizing renewable energy is that fossil fuels are still considered to be the most reliable source of energy because other renewable energy still possesses some flaws. For example, solar energy is effective when the sun is shining. Our rebuttal to this counter-argument is that granting subsidies is key to help renewable energy to become more reliable because the subsidies can be used on research and development. In the case of solar energy, research on solar battery chargers can help reduce the effects of the disadvantages of solar energy.

• We can't get republicans and democrats on board for government change.
• "Companies in countries with a more progressive alternative energy policy framework developed technology at an earlier state. However the potential for growth in the U.S. is greater, and once a longer term framework has been put in place, we would expect the U.S. to catch up fast" (Should the US subsidize alternative energies?).
• Why support subsidies if the system itself is inefficient?
• "The subsidies in place allow the [alternative energy] industry to grow and technologies to be developed and mature to drive costs down" (Should the US subsidize alternative energies?).
• The Failure of Solyndra
• One case is not indicative of the industry as a whole because we have seen much success in other subsidized industries. The department says government subsidies are essential to keep the United States competitive in renewable energy, and not all companies will succeed" (Wald).

"Solyndra, a solar panel maker that went bankrupt despite lots of federal subsidies. A great deal of attention has been focused on Solyndra, a start-up that received $528 million in federal loans to develop cutting-edge solar technology before it went bankrupt, but nearly 90 percent of the $16 billion in clean-energy loans guaranteed by the federal government since 2009 went to subsidize these lower-risk power plants, which in many cases were backed by big companies with vast resources" (Wald).