Of course the differential becomes even more absurd when the value of each resource is considered.
Claims that wind energy is free ignore the high cost of constructing them and the high costs of transporting electricity from wind farms to users.
Similarly, claims that hydropower isn’t subsidized seems to ignore the reality that American big dams where constructed with federal dollars, and transmission lines were funded by tax-dollars and later rate-payers. Maybe it’s that case that these state and federally funded water projects (dams, transmission lines, related irrigation) have been financially successful in generating low-cost power that allowed for state and federal government to recover their initial capital costs. (Of course, even if early giant dams were financial successes, govt. built way too many and too close dams later). https://energyhistory.yale.edu/the-big-dam-era/
I don’t know enough (as usual) but wonder if initial govt.-funded construction should count as a subsidy in the chart.
The chart shows subsidies from FY 2016 to 2022. There were no power dams built in the US during those years.
Checking federal agencies and states (like Wisconsin) I find tens and hundreds of millions budgeted to state and federal dam repairs and management. But much of spending is environmental in nature. Plus there are revenues. I’m guessing others have researched annual government dam expenses and revenues. Wisconsin DNR, for example, $4 million 2023-2025 budget. https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/aid/DamMunicipal.html
Mail (will not be published) (required)