There should be more subsidies available for wind energy users for several important reasons.At some point fossil fuels will run out and there will have to be some kind of energy used.Second of all it will cheaper for everyone involved once the technology and logistics are perfected to the point they are efficient.
I am doing a debate in science & this is my topic. I do think we should use wind and solar power because it is cleaner and seems to be best for our government at this time. I think it can also help with our job problem, because i will need one in a few years.
Our government leaders tell us that switching from conventional to renewable energy is going to help us move toward a better tomorrow. The idea behind this is to create more jobs, reduce pollution and advance new technology. Without subsidy, the transition may fall short of the intended goal.
Because wind energy is a clean and efficient alternative to more traditional energy solutions, and because it could not only help us to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, but also to reduce pollution and increase energy efficiency, I do believe that the government should provide more subsidies to encourage more people to use wind energy.
People tend to do what they are accustomed to, and they need motivation to do things differently. Increases in gas prices, plus subsidies, have increased interest in hybrid and electric vehicles. Wind energy is clean and free, but it is vastly underused. More effort should be taken to get people to use this type of energy.
Wind energy is a growing source of energy that needs to be exploited and grown. As a source of energy, it is always renewable, and can not be used as a weapon of political and economic blackmail like oil is. The development of industry has always been a policy of the American government, beginning with Alexander Hamilton under George Washington, to the current subsidies and tax breaks given industries, such as agriculture and oil. Tariffs, bond guarantees, and other policies have always been used and help the establishment, development, and growth of such areas, such as canals, textiles, steel, and railroads. Their growth and success bode well for supporting wind energy.
We have for many years given tax breaks and other incentives to the oil, coal and natural gas industries. It is long past the time when we should "put our money where our mouth" is and provide monetary incentives to those who innovate in environmentally friendly energy sources, those who produce such energy, and those who use such energy.
If we are serious about turning around our actions that have caused global warming and a host of other ecological and environmental disasters, we need to realign our priorities. There is no quick and/or painless way to do this.
If we stop subsidizing the energy sources that pollute and destroy, the cost to the users of that energy source will rise and it will create some level of inconvenience and possibly hardship for the users. However, at the same time, with intelligently applied incentives for wind, solar and geothermal energy sources, the cost of those energies will be reduced.
At some point, it will be more cost effective to use non-polluting energy sources than it will be to use the oil, gas and coal that are so damaging to the earth.
There is no quick fix. There is no easy way.
If there is no support for a more eco-friendly world, we can't achieve one. Wind energy is excellent and safe to the environment. Some argue that windmills are unsightly and sometimes harmful to birds, but that's a small price to pay for a clean source of energy that doesn't ruin our earth. Individual homeowners should be allowed to install them in their backyards if they choose and the government should help them.
Our planet is going to be in trouble if we don't use green energy. Wind energy is a great way to meet our energy needs in a safe, clean way so the planet is in good shape for future generations. If wind energy is expensive to implement and set up at first, no one will do it if there is no incentive. A subsidy is an excellent way to provide this incentive and keep users in good financial shape. A subsidy will also encourage people to stick with wind energy once it's been implemented.
There should be more benefits to using wind energy. It does not harm the environment like coal, oil or gas so along with solar energy there should be more encouragement to use this form of energy. It costs more upfront to use, but in the long term is cheaper and safer. It should be promoted.
Wind energy may someday become a viable alternative form of energy. However, in order for this to happen, subsidies must be avoided. Subsidies are like a drug, and dependency occurs very quickly. Allowing free market investors with capital to bring a product to the market would ensure maximum efficiency and effectiveness. Hence, a better product at a better price will be offered to the general public. Furthermore, tax credits for those seeking alternative forms of energy should also be avoided, because this, too, will encourage products coming into the market at an inflated price.
The market is the most efficient mechanism for determining what people value. It also provides a means to provide the lowest price. If wind energy is subsidized, then consumers may be harmed by higher prices in competing industries. Resources are redirected from the most valued uses into less valued uses. There is already a market incentive to make wind energy cost efficient,it's called profit. By subsidizing wind energy, the market forces to find the most efficient means of delivering wind energy are reduced. This could inadvertently lead to less efficient use of energy over the long run.
I oppose more subsidies for wind energy users because wind energy has serious problems. It would be better to devote support to solar energy. Wind turbines cause significant problems for nearby residential areas, including the strobe effect that can cause migraines and seizures, the low frequency vibrations transmitted through the ground, and noise. Additionally some turbines in bird migratory pathways, such as the Alta Mesa wind farm in California, have killed thousands of birds. In Denmark, blades have separated from turbines in high winds, posing a severe danger to nearby individuals. Solar energy does not have any of these problems and is rapidly becoming more affordable.
Subsidies do not make wind power more affordable. They take money from people who may build their own solar panels, improve energy efficiency, or simply need to buy food and give it to an inefficient technology. Wind energy is also in need of several improvements, including turbine efficiency, to make it more economical per kilowatt. Subsidizing currently inefficient designs will only propagate those inefficiencies, instead of encourage designs like on roof designs currently in development. And as Spain has discovered, wind blows in the spring and fall and during the night, precisely when the lowest power demand is. They have had to build natural gas plants to meet summer, winter and daytime demand. Thus building wind turbines didn't reduce energy demand, it only lead to additional natural gas plants that could have been built anyway without the wind turbines, driving up energy costs for everyone without actually avoiding the hydrocarbon fuel need. Don't take food money from the poor to make environmentalists feel better without actually helping the environment.
If wind energy is supposed to be sustainable, it should be able to generate more money and energy than is required to go into investing in wind energy.
The government should not try to encourage different types of energy through the use of subsidization. When government does this, they manipulate the market place, and prices and costs become to high when government interferes in the market place. In a free society, the government has no business intervening in the market place, especially in energy markets. Let people choose their energy, how they use it and produce it.