
US green economy’s growth dwarfs the fossil fuel industry’s - rblion
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/10/us-green-economys-growth-dwarfs-the-fossil-fuel-industrys/
======
zaroth
TFA is a superficial look at the very highest level hand-wavey numbers.

What I think you would find if you peel the onion is that the green economy is
driven by the extraordinary value that “green” technologies actually present
for those that invest in them, net any offered subsidies of course.

The way to grow the “green” economy is to continue to foster ways for green
tech to provide massive economic value to its adopters.

For example, net metering provides a tremendous incentive to install solar
that otherwise wouldn’t exist because the batteries are _currently_ too
expensive to use all your own generation.

As battery prices have plummeted, the time will come when _removing_ net
metering is the best way to incentivize the next wave of green investment, and
replacing it with demand pricing of distributed supply.

Personally I think investing trillions of dollars before the tech is ready to
provide a solid return on investment would be a huge mistake. If the ROI is
there then the government can spend $1 today to save $2 over the next 10
years, and since it prints money and inflation / discount rate is super low,
it can do that all day long.

Versus spending $1 to replace infrastructure with something that performs
worse, meaning $1 today costs you even more money tomorrow, which is the
equivalent of burning money for jobs programs.

------
marcusverus
This article sources Fortune article, which sources a Rolling Stone article,
which says "[The source IMF study] defines “subsidy” very broadly, as many
economists do. It accounts for the “differences between actual consumer fuel
prices and how much consumers would pay if prices fully reflected supply costs
plus the taxes needed to reflect environmental costs”"

In other words, the the quoted '$649 billion in fossil fuels subsidies' is not
a subsidy, but the difference between current prices and what some IMF quant
thinks the prices 'should be' to offset the climate effects of those fuels.
This is intentionally misleading, as the word 'subsidy' has an actual meaning
and implies a dollar cost--line item in a budget.

It is difficult for me, personally to get on board with any environmental
cause, given the heavy reliance with hyperbole and misinformation that seems
to accompany climate advocacy.

~~~
rblion
Thanks for pointing this out and helping me have a better understanding. I am
growing to distrust more and more media by the day, especially anything
regarding the climate.

> It is difficult for me, personally to get on board with any environmental
> cause, given the heavy reliance with hyperbole and misinformation that seems
> to accompany climate advocacy.

I'm going through a revolution of sorts inside as I realize just how prevalent
this is. This is hard because I've been obsessed with animals and with nature
my entire life. The recent developments with protests and activists has
actually polarized people even more in my opinion instead of unite them. The
media industry is very one-sided in this debate and attacks any counterpoints
or critiques.

