Comments on: Sixteen House GOP Freshmen Forget Principles in Support of Wind Subsidies

By: jani

jani — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 20:20:22 +0000

Where did you get the 100 billion number? Despite rampant coal use in Asia, life expectancy has gone up. These fake numbers completely made up by environmental organizations do not justify any subsidy. These environmentalists will come up with all kinds of phony numbers associated with coal, gas and nuclear. That does not mean that we have to live in dark, and subsidize junk sources of energy like and wind and solar.

By: PR

PR — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 19:34:07 +0000

agreed. Thats why a balanced approach is best (inc: wind, solar, hydro and nuc) But I think everyone would agree, all costs should be exposed. All of em.

By: Ralph

Ralph — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 10:05:50 +0000

You don’t have to worry about living in the dark with coal, gas and oil.

By: PR

PR — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 19:35:57 +0000

I thought the oil, gas and coal industries enjoy large subsidies now? Should your article point that out?

Doesn’t coal cost the US north of 100 billion in health care annually? Should that be included in the cost of coal – and would wind be cheaper at that point?

Seems if we are to follow the market no matter what, we better give it all the info we can.

Trying to understand the “whole” picture…