Robert Merkel's take on things is less than helpful, though it probably does describe some of the government's thinking.
The problem is that it implies that the only way other "better" renewable energy can be funded is to remove the funding from "inefficient" solar PV. What a load of crock. How many billions are going to the coal industry and on new road construction again? How much money did they allocate to these new renewables instead of solar PV? Riiiight.
I think its pretty clear where this government's priorities lie - in supporting their mates in the fossil fuel industry while paying token lip service to anything else.
Robert Merkel's take on things is less than helpful, though it probably does describe some of the government's thinking.
The problem is that it implies that the only way other "better" renewable energy can be funded is to remove the funding from "inefficient" solar PV. What a load of crock. How many billions are going to the coal industry and on new road construction again? How much money did they allocate to these new renewables instead of solar PV? Riiiight.
I think its pretty clear where this government's priorities lie - in supporting their mates in the fossil fuel industry while paying token lip service to anything else.
True.
I would agree with this reasoning if we didn't spend billions subsidising fossil fuel industries.
If they remove all that expenditure and tax breaks, I'd support means tested PV subsidies (as long as the MRET was raised to a reasonable level).