SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Meanwhile, a report from Scottish Renewables suggests that onshore wind farms could compete subsidy-free in the UK, as long as they were allowed to take part in the country's competitive auction process. (Known as contracts for difference, or CfD, the competitive auction process does not currently include onshore wind.)
Finally, while the loss of incentives and tax credits might have less impact than it once did—thanks to ongoing cost reduction and technological improvement—we are right to be concerned that political obstructionists can still do a lot of damage to the future of renewables. (The exclusion of wind from the aforementioned CfD process in the UK is one example.) But here too, there are signs of progress—because oil giant Shell is lobbying for the Dutch government to quadruple its offshore wind target for 2030 to an installed capacity of a whopping 20 gigawatts (GW). As Shell joins the likes of Statoil—which recently quit tar sands in favor of offshore wind—the shift of political and lobbying power starts to shift.
More signs that the pivot point in the energy economy is upon us.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @07:26AM
We paid 25million to not have wind farms built because we need to spend several more billions to referb nuke plants that are fast breeders because reasons, which I am sure have nothing to do with the 1 trillion dollars that the US is spending to update it's no longer needed nuclear arsenal that we as and member of the nuclear weapons ban club have nothing to do with because we don't provide technical support did not do the primary design and testing of the cruise missile and are reall a non nuclear nation just ask us trudeu the second will tell you except unlike his father he will be lying