The longer you stay, the harder the work becomes.

Agreed. Actually all subsidies need to stop.

Oil & gas as well?

Every last one.

It'd be a curious experiment. How about defense? The sheer amount of R&D & procurement programs boil down to subsidies as well. Quick search estimates well over $100B a year for what amounts to defense subsidies which is more than ag, fossil fuels and renewables combined.

Subsidies are obviously complex and arguably useful in stabilizing the economy along with promoting progress. I'm probably not in the nuke'm all camp but smart reductions might not be the worst thing.

I don't see how infrastructure, defense ... are "subsidies." You get something in return for your money. Subsidies prop-up otherwise unprofitable sectors. In the case of farming/green industries, it's rent-seeking.

You do know part of the "China is advancing in infrastructure and tech" part is also investing in renewable energy right? Idk man, energy independence sounds pretty important to me in the nationals security list.

need to get back to work on that high speed rail project in CA and end all the pollution put out by aircraft and cars.

There is absolutely no reason we shouldn't have high speed rail between our largest metro areas. It's a no brainer

things i like are smart investment in national security. things i don’t like are pork legislation meant to buy votes.


is eviscerating our farming capacity and concentrating what’s left in the hands of agribusiness conglomerates a good national security move? one could argue that it leaves you dependent on food imports

I'm not expert on subsidies, but in a broad sense it includes stabilizing markets, housing, food supply, etc. You get returns on those, some tangible others perhaps more intangible. Kind of like US soft power that we are giving up.

Again, I'd certainly consider a reasoned approach to reductions but you can't in one sentence say 'get of them all' but then only pick the ones you favor.

Absolutely. Along with much better bike, bus & pedestrian infrastructure.

$15 Billion so far in California, with nothing to show for it. Total estimate of $130B, as of now. I'd about guarantee it will skyrocket from there.

What will it take to get ROI for that investment, even if it gets finished? I don't have an answer, but it's a fair question to ask, and I'm highly skeptical it is worth it.

​​​​​​​
Agree. I'm an "all of the above" guy. Drill baby drill, but also do things smart/green where it makes sense. There is absolutely a place for electric cars. I will say I'm not a fan of wind farms, they take a looooong time to return on investment or CO2. And are ugly and noisy as heck.

I'm in agreement with you there. It's a complicated subject, and has broader implications than first glance would suggest.

since you’re always all about the actual facts, you probably know that there’s a lot of on the ground work done. saying “with nothing to show for it” is quite incorrect.

I guess if you live right under a windmill they’re loud. I lived in northwest Oklahoma for a long time and the only way they affected me were on my low levels.

This bit here is incorrect. They pay for themselves in terms of energy cost to build within months and return positive ROI for investment dollars. Not huge, but consistent. The last part is of course subjective. Have you ever lived near a coal plant or coal mining? I did, grew up next door to it all. Not fun.

I've stood under a massive windmill as it spun, was a decently loud whoosh. Moved about 20 yeards away and it sounded about the same as the wind.

Has a single train moved? Or even a single piece of rail? Are they even close?

Of course, there are variances depending on where they are (how consistent is the wind), and local electricity costs, as well as how remote/expensive it was to build. But months? Not even close. Wind farms take from 10-12 years to pay for themselves.

Ugly compared to a coal plant? They're not noisy. Sitting right underneath one, my idling motorcycle (which itself isn't that loud at idle) was louder than the wind turbine.

Coal is nasty. There's no such thing as clean coal and coal burning plants actually release more radiation into the environment than nuclear plants.

What we need is a rebirth of the nuke sector in this country. It's happening but too slowly. We will always need a constant load into our power infrastructure that only nuclear, nat gas, and coal can do. We just need to pretty much get rid of coal altogether.

Wind has been great and I just read China built a solar farm that's twice as big as Manhattan. It's all doable we just need the will to do it.

Also much easier for them to do since they a) are basically the world's producer of solar cells, and b) can steamroll their way into any project since the government has complete societal control there.

Well, I said noisy, not loud.

And yes, IMO, wind farms ruin the landscape. There are better ways, and I’m not a fan. It’s JMO, and it won’t ever change.

Totally agree about Nuclear. It’s a very clean source of limitless energy. Obviously the downside is the wasted but we have good ways of dealing with that.

did you actually try to find the answers to the current project status and why it is so, or are you using opinions from your media diet?

You know Google is a thing, right... ;)

Now, try answering the question.

I doubt that, there're codes for how close windmills can be to residential areas.

IF what you say is true, can't wait for when that gear box melts, catches fire and rains down burning carbon fiber remanants of fan blades on your house. Hope you have good insurance.

Go find one and see for yourself.

What about when the windmill gearbox explodes and 500 gallons of oil gets spilled on the ground

That only happens during catastrophic failures and those are extremely rare. Way more common is a slow leak.

Ruin the landscape? Have you seen open pit coal mines? Coal towers?

Try again. More like 7-10 years financial ROI average and I said in terms of energy production recapture is mere months.

https://windexchange.energy.gov/projects/economics

Gearbox failures do happen but they are orders of magnitude more infrequent and less severe than other means of energy production issues. Wind energy remains one of the cleanest means of energy production.

i wonder if other types of power plants ever have polluting leaks…

Christ more oil is spilled into the ground by daily tanker truck crashes then windmills in a year

Lets not even talk about how much pipelines leak

Working out well for Europe, that's why they are scrambling to build conventional power plants over there.

They really enjoy the rolling blackouts

Your media bias is showing

https://www.npr.org/2025/10/08/nx-s1...newable-energy

Just to add a bit to your comment, which was in response to a comment regarding China.

From a Foreign Affairs article by Dan Wang & Arthur Kroeber; "The Real China Model". First, a few facts.
Over the past 30 years China :
Has built a national express network twice the length of America's interstate system.
A high speed train network with more miles of track than the rest of the world combined.
A network of modern ports. The largest, Shanghai, moves more cargo in some years than al U.S. ports put together.
(the biggie)China generates more electricity each year than the U.S. and the EU combined. (a modern electric grid with lots of battery storage capability)
In 2024 China made75% of EVs, had 40% of EV exports, and a lock on the solar power supply chain.

To summarize a few points from a 14 page article.
With an industrial policy they have created the deep infrastructure required to become a resilient technological powerhouse.
A massive trained, experienced workforce that now has advanced manufacturing knowledge.
Powerful electricity and digital networks. Which now. along with 70 million managers, engineers, and workers with decades of process knowledge, is a motor of industrial innovation
The U.S. can't compete because it lacks the infrastructure that China has.
U.S. leadership has attempted to use tools such as export controls etc. to halt/slow China's momentum. A massive mistake. "They are sending lawyers into an engineering fight."

My takes:
the USA will fall behind in AI due to the simple fact that we lack the ability to generate the electrical power it requires. (plus ever increasing power supply diverted to mine cryptocurrency)
One thing China IS NOT investing in is cryptocurrency. They are not pouring financial resources into 'pet rocks'.
Another thing is they have, so far, managed to avoid having a financial sector call the shots. Finance and financing is used to provide capital for tangible reality.
A financial sector economy becomes a house of cards. (In the USA, currently finance mostly finances finance). It creates psuedo purchasing power and prevents our grasping the reality of the economy.

China recognizes that the underlying cause of manufacturing downturns and financial crises is increasing scarcity, lower quality, and much more cost of the 58 critical resources required by industrial civilization. They are using these nonrecurring natural resources as quickly as possible to build their infrastructure prior to other countries getting them.
It will put them in charge once other nations realize that the increased pressures from resource depletion have priced them out of the market of physical reality. Leaving them to play with financial gimmicks, clever computer games and monopoly money.

It's always deeply annoyed me that the conversation around renewable energy in this country always revolves around climate impact and never as a national security priority.