Wind energy was the source of about 9.2% of total U.S. electricity generation and about 46% of electricity generation from renewable energy in 2021. Wind turbines convert wind energy into electricity. President Biden’s 2021 $2.3 trillion infrastructure plan included a 10 year extension of wind and solar tax credits. Qualifying wind farms will receive tax benefits based on their output for a 10-year period. The credits, which can be shared with investment partners, reduce federal tax bills. Opponents to wind farms, including many environmental biologists argue that they are one of the…
Read moreNarrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
@8PPQLGG5yrs5Y
No, wind power is an inferior alternative to hydroelectric power
Instead of funding the wind power industry, which is dangerous for many local wildlife species, the government should invest that same money into clean energy sources that don't require large amounts of land to be cleared.
@9TFW7591yr1Y
I think large companies receive too many subsidies off the backs of taxpayers and there needs to be more regulations on the ROI and cost to the end user. The concern is multi-million/billion dollar companies receiving subsidies to them inflate costs and profit, while not paying back that initial investment made by the government.
No, wind and solar are dramatically inferior to nuclear power in terms of both energy output and environmental safety
@9LP26G61yr1Y
Yes, wind is unreliable so we should focus of sending those expenditures to water or electricity based energy plants
@9KMKHL52yrs2Y
No, end all tax credits and subsidies to the energy industry because, as it stands, fossil fuels are an expensive, inferior power technology. Solar and wind would be more competitive if fossil fuels and (especially) coal weren't subsidized. The government COULD give tax credits to the wind power industry, and they COULD better support solar and other renewable technologies, but right now, it's most important to stop subsidizing technologies that are actively ruining the environment.
@9JZCV87 2yrs2Y
The government shouldn't subsidize any form of power. Once we stop subsidizing fossil fuel and coal (especially coal), renewables will be more competitive and the switch will occur according to the free market.
@9GN7VRZ2yrs2Y
every energy source comes with its own risk, nuclear creates waste that last forever, coal puts carbon in the air, and wind turbines kills birds. I feel that the government supports trends for votes.
Yes, but nuclear energy should be prioritize to replace fossil fuels
@963R9B93yrs3Y
No. There are better methods out there such as nuclear. They should increase funding for green energy research
@93K5QK43yrs3Y
No, the government should support nuclear or thorium power instead
@8ZLNZBF4yrs4Y
No, they don't need to give tax credits, leave as is.
@8YPWPDS4yrs4Y
No, thats not the governments job
@8SF76Y64yrs4Y
Yes, but these should be limited in scope and only offered if they are also given to other renewable energy industries as well.
@8QVJM4SConstitution5yrs5Y
No, fund nuclear power instead.
@8P26X7CRepublican5yrs5Y
No, as stated before, the current notion of "green energy" is terribly flawed. Aside from obvious habitat destruction brought about by wind and solar farms, there are other, unforeseen impacts on the environment from "green" energy. For example, wind mills have killed 2.9 billion birds since the 1960's and, according to the Audubon Society, it would be nigh impossible to train windmills to be bird save as every bird approaches windmills differently. Solar panels are made with cancer-causing materials such as lead and cadmium that tend to be washed out by rain, leading… Read more
@8MTDWHJ5yrs5Y
Yes, but only after ensuring the efficiency of the wind power sector.
@8LK7WJR5yrs5Y
I will need more information on this topic before I answer.
@8F96HKJRepublican5yrs5Y
No, solar power is more economical
@8CGQ6XC5yrs5Y
@8CF29FB5yrs5Y
Only tax credits should be provided to the wind power industry, similarly to other renewable energy industries; subsidies for them should be abolished.
@98L9TGL3yrs3Y
Yes, as long as it is accompanied with regulation to mitigate the destruction of wildlife habitat.
@98JBVGN3yrs3Y
Yes, but nuclear power would be a much better alternative.
@9872PXX3yrs3Y
@96VT9R53yrs3Y
Although wind power is better than fossil fuels, it harms the environment still by killing flying animals
@8GC9YC85yrs5Y
no, the energy industry is not a government problem unless the companies are doing something morally wrong.
@97ZP8TD3yrs3Y
No, wind power is worse for the environment than even nuclear power due to the impact of production of the equipment, habitation loss, low and inconsistent output, high maintenance (in terms of replacing parts), and the almost inconsequential waste of nuclear power. A combination of solar power (using perovskite or similar technology) and thermoelectrics for increased efficiency and throughput is likely the best possible solution utilizing conventional physics, and tax subsidies and credits should be given to those industries instead. Truly renewable energy is impossible anyways, unless theories regarding synthesis of virtual particle pairs from oscillations from uncertainty are proven true.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
