Renewable Energy — Conservatives vs. Liberals?

It seems that affection for renewable energy often breaks down across political (conservative vs. liberal) lines. I’m not sure I understand how this can be. Obviously, everyone cares about the quality of the planet we live on and leave to our descendents. So I’m guessing the fundamental issue is the cost of renewables.

But, as Tom Rooney points out in his recent article Why Conservatives Are Bad on Energy, the financial analysis of clean energy is largely based on misconceptions. A recent editorial in the Wall Street Journal referred to photovoltaic solar energy as a “speculative and immature technology that costs far more than ordinary power.” The author went on to point out that the only thing holding the industry together were subsidies. Didn’t this guy get the memo? A few weeks ago, the International Energy Agency said worldwide, fossil fuels receive $550 billion in subsidies a year — 12 times what alternatives such as wind and solar get.

I know I’m arguing against a brick wall when I urge our leaders to make decisions based on a wider set of costs of fossil fuels, i.e., long-term environmental damage, increased healthcare costs, etc.  This concept is gaining strength, as noted in this report from the National Resource Council — but let’s shelve that argument for right now. You’re still looking at a cost/price structure that unfairly tilts the playing field in the direct of oil and gas. Can’t we simply knock that off?