#1 most loved electric vehicle, solar, & battery news & analysis site in the world. Support our work today!

Clean Power no image

Published on August 21st, 2017 | by Zachary Shahan


Solar & Wind Subsidies = Less Than $0 In USA … Because Clean Energy Saves Lives!

August 21st, 2017 by  

Anti-cleantech companies, think tanks, politicians, and messengers like to talk a lot about renewable energy and electric car subsidies. Meanwhile, they pretend that fossil fuels have gotten no subsidies and continue to get no subsidies. That’s absolutely rubbish, but it’s more or less something we’re going to ignore in this article.

Aside from subsidies, polluting products come with massive “externalities” — extra costs placed on society that are not priced into the product. These externalities include the harm pollution does to our health, the climate, and natural resources we need. There are also externalities related to protecting fossil fuel resources, but we’re again ignoring these costs for the purpose of this article.

This article is focused on just a few externalities and subsidies related to the production of electricity — including the economic costs of premature death from pollution.

First of all, note that a previous study concluded that coal costs the United States economy $140 billion to $242 billion a year. That is far more than all of the subsidies given to solar and wind energy in the last 20 years. Between 1994 and 2009, wind and solar received subsidies totaling $5.6 billion. Adding in roughly calculated subsidies from 2010 through 2016, the total comes to about $31.5 billion.

That means that the health costs of coal in one year exceeded the subsidies given to solar and wind over 22 years by about $110 billion to $210 billion. Of course, that doesn’t equate to direct savings, since renewable energy hasn’t displaced that amount of coal use.

The new study, published in Nature Energy, has calculated the amount of money saved in the US over the last decade by replacing part of our coal use with renewable energy.

Millstein et al. estimated that between 3,000 and 12,700 premature deaths have been averted because of air quality benefits over the last decade or so. Those avoided early deaths and some other human health and environmental benefits have created a total economic benefit between $30 billion and $113 billion from renewables.

Note that the study hasn’t even included avoided health care for non-fatal pollution-caused illness and lost work days.

Coal has dropped from producing over 50% of US electricity 13 years ago to 30% in 2016, in large part because of renewables. The Millstein study concludes that the reductions have at the very least covered the cost of renewable energy subsidies, or may have saved the US economy billions of dollars in averted premature deaths.

Altogether, renewable energy subsidies are basically just offsetting costs of burning fossil fuels — or are even much cheaper than the costs that they help society to avoid. Supporting renewables is a no-brainer. Fighting renewable energy is … well, something very different, perhaps a “warped brainer.”

Appreciate CleanTechnica’s originality? Consider becoming a CleanTechnica member, supporter, or ambassador — or a patron on Patreon.

Sign up for our free daily newsletter or weekly newsletter to never miss a story.

Have a tip for CleanTechnica? Send us an email: tips@cleantechnica.com


Latest CleanTechnica.TV Episode

Latest CleanTech Talk Episode

Tags: , , , , , ,

About the Author

is tryin' to help society help itself one word at a time. He spends most of his time here on CleanTechnica as its director, chief editor, and CEO. Zach is recognized globally as an electric vehicle, solar energy, and energy storage expert. He has presented about cleantech at conferences in India, the UAE, Ukraine, Poland, Germany, the Netherlands, the USA, Canada, and Curaçao. Zach has long-term investments in Tesla [TSLA] — after years of covering solar and EVs, he simply has a lot of faith in this company and feels like it is a good cleantech company to invest in. But he does not offer (explicitly or implicitly) investment advice of any sort on Tesla or any other company.

Back to Top ↑