Contact FreedomWorks

111 K Street NE
Suite 600
Washington, DC 20002

  • Toll Free 1.888.564.6273
  • Local 202.783.3870

Op-ed Placement

Hillary Clinton's Solar Energy Baloney

Originally Published in The Washington Times on 10/9/16.

One of Hillary Clinton’s wackier ideas is to build half a million solar panels — at taxpayer expense. It would be one of the largest corporate welfare giveaways in American history. The Institute for Energy Research (IER) estimates that the cost of the plan will reach $205 billion. That’s a lot of money to throw at Elon Musk and all of Hillary’s high-powered green energy friends.

By the way, there are only 320 million people in the country so her plan would mean more solar panels than people. If Hillary has her way, the entire landscape in America will be blighted by windmills and solar panels. How is this green?

The economics here are even worse. Back in the 1970s Washington made a big bet on green energy with synthetic fuels and renewable fuels. The programs crashed and were all mercifully killed off during the Reagan years. Billions of dollars went down the drain. George W. Bush made a big bet on switch grass and wood chips to produce energy. President Obama has spent more than $100 billion on wind and solar subsidies. Instead of energy independence, we got bankruptcies like Solyndra.

A lesson of the last several decades is that the government has a horrible record of intervening in energy markets. Mr. Obama was running around the country in his first term warning that America was running out of oil. He wasn’t paying attention to the shale oil and gas revolution and the advent of clean coal technology that overnight doubled our fossil fuel resources. At the very time that natural gas prices were falling to $2 per cubic million feet, the government was trying to force feed the nation on wind and solar power which costs three to five times more per kilowatt hour of electricity.


All of this is supposed to save the planet from greenhouse gases and catastrophic planetary warming, but then why not use our cheap, clean and super abundant natural gas? Mr. Obama’s own Department of Energy (DOE) notes that natural gas has been the main factor contributing to the big reduction in U.S. carbon emissions. Natural gas has arguably done more to reduce pollution than virtually all the green energy programs in history. Yet the left is against natural gas production. Nuclear power would also be an obvious and easily achievable form of clean and reliable electric power but the greens hate nukes too. They want to go with the energy sources that are least reliable and in need of the most taxpayer assistance.

ellislee's picture
ellis allison

liberals always putting in there two (no) [sense]worth of ill beliefs that have no realistic science or proof to give any credibility to their fear mongering rhetoric. Doom and gloom must be all they exist for?

fgbouman's picture

Cheap and abundant natural gas has, at the end of the day, about the same CO2 footprint as oil. It's better than coal but is far worse than solar, sea or wind power. It is regarded as a good transitional fuel because of the ease of conversion to using it and its relative abundance. However, put away any idea that it is a long-term answer. Natural gas merely slows down the rate at which we are screwing things up. We need to stop and, if possible, reverse the damage we're doing and have done.
Also put away any of your ideas of how long our natural gas reserves might last if we were to substitute it for coal and oil. In fact, at that rate of use it would be gone very quickly. When you see reserve estimates in years, they are generally based on a continuation of business as usual, not on a mass switchover.
Mr. Moore, rather than griping about things and being generally negative you could justify your existence by helping in the development and dispersion of clean energy technology throughout the world.
Oh, and take your time to get your facts straight. That's always useful too. Not to mention retaking second grade arithmetic.


I suggest you check you numbers. You say Hillary want to build a half million(500,000) solar panels. How is a half million(500,000) more than one for every American(320,000,0000.) Did you mean a half a BILLION??