Why are we subsidizing dirty power & dangerous pipelines, not renewable energy?

Apparently the residents of Massachusetts are going to be charged $1 extra per month on their electricity bills for the next two years to subsidize an unprofitable, dirty power plant that isn’t even needed most of the year:



What if we indeed added that surcharge to everyone’s bill, but instead of using it to give in to extortion by a for-profit electric company, used it to subsidize the construction of new solar and wind farms, solar panels on people’s rooves, and large energy storage facilities that store solar energy during the day to be used at night?

4 replies on “Why are we subsidizing dirty power & dangerous pipelines, not renewable energy?”

  1. You should not have provided a link to the Boston Globe article that only a subscriber to the Globe can read.

    1. Anyone can read the article if they haven’t used up their allowance of free online Globe articles for the month. Obviously, I have no way of knowing which people reading this posting have already used up their allowance.

      Furthermore, given that the Globe is by far the biggest newspaper in New England, it’s not at all unreasonable to share a Globe article.

Comments are closed.