Ideal Taxes Association

Raymond Richman       -       Jesse Richman       -       Howard Richman

 Richmans' Trade and Taxes Blog

The USA Must Follow Spain's Lead in Ending Wind and Solar Subsidies
Raymond Richman, 7/7/2012

Spain has cleared the decks for its economic recovery by ending its subsidies to “Green” energy. The crisis in the Eurozone requires Spain to bring its fiscal budget in better balance. Spain has ended its subsidies for building wind and solar plants. New wind and solar plants will have to be financed by investors with no subsidies in the form of cash grants and tax subsidies. The average wind and solar plant built in the U.S. receives subsidies from state governments and the federal government which amount to an estimated 50% of the total costs of the project. This is at the expense of the American taxpayer who, in addition, pays higher prices for electricity and outsourcing of his job. Spanish Associate Professor of Economics, Gabriel Calzada Alvarez, of King Juan Carlos University concluded that the wind and solar plants crowd out two jobs in the economy’s private sector for every job they create in the alternative energy sector. He testified before a U.S. Congressional Committee that the same is true of the alternative energy plants built in the U.S.

More than $69 billion of wind and solar plants have been installed in Spain since 2004. The unreliability of wind and solar energy means that there is no saving in capital since back-up power facilities using traditional fuel sources are required to ensure a continuous supply of electricity.  

To make matters worse, public utilities have been ordered to purchase electricity from wind and solar plants at prices exceeding the costs of electricity from traditional sources, coal, natural gas, nuclear, etc. The same is true in the U.S. The effect is to raise the prices of electricity to households and businesses on whom it acts like a sales tax. It raise the cost of living and it dampens the desire to invest in new factories in the U.S. since it will increase the future prices of electricity.

In addition, the construction of wind and solar plants requires imports which amount on the average to 30 percent of the machinery and parts required for installing the windmills and solar panels. Instead of creating a substitute for imported fuel, our subsidies to alternative inefficient energy actually increase the demand for imports from abroad. The reader should be reminded that a negative trade balance is a subtraction from GDP. GDP  is the sum of the value of all the goods produced for use in our economy plus the goods produced that are exported minus the goods that are imported. So when imports exceed exports, it acts as a drag on the economy. We estimate that our chronic annual trade deficits have cost us upwards of 5million jobs. China is the most efficient producer of the best solar panels. Our production of solar plants creates jobs in China and costs jobs here. At the very least, we should not be subsidizing the importation of wind and solar machinery and equipment.

To accelerate recovery in the U.S., Congress should do as Spain has done and eliminate all subsidies to new wind and solar plants. The prospect of low energy prices in the future would encourage investment in new factories in the U.S. Coupled with balancing the trade deficit, a genuine economic recovery can be expected. Failure to eliminate the wind and solar subsidies would promote economic stagnation such as we have experienced for the past two years. Not only are the subsidies to alternative energy plants not an economic stimulus, they have a negative effect. They cause real GDP to decline.  

Your Name:

Post a Comment:

Comment by ep, 7/23/2012:

You guys write great articles -- please keep it up!

I actually favor solar and wind as a renewable Supplement to our power grid.  But they will never be a Replacement.  The Green advocates seem to think we can get rid of all nuclear and all coal power plants once we get solar and wind fully established.  This is folly.  Scientific American, which has unfortunately has become quite liberal, recently discussed the science behind the "dirty little secret" weaknes of soalr and wind:  energy storage.  More precisely, the lack of economical storage.  The sun does not shine at night.  Sometimes the wind is not blowing.  What is needed is a way to store the energy Economically, and there are not many candidates.  The only technology that has any merit at this time is pumping water into a natural lake on a nearby mountaintop or from the bottom of an abandoned mine shaft, then running the water back downwards through generators at night or when the wind is not blowing.  In Amarillo, where I live, there are hundreds of huge windmills and lots of wind -- but No Mountains!  So this lone economical energy storage option is only available in a small fraction of the locations that produce solar and wind power.  Other options such as batteries and elevated water tanks or even compressed air are Prohibitively expensive.  The devil is in the details, and engineers and scientists unfortunately have to deal with the actual facts and figures -- not just emotion-based arguments that simply will not work in practice.

  • Richmans' Blog    RSS
  • Our New Book - Balanced Trade
  • Buy Trading Away Our Future
  • Read Trading Away Our Future
  • Richmans' Commentaries
  • ITA Working Papers
  • ITA on Facebook
  • Contact Us

    Jan 2022
    Dec 2021
    Nov 2021
    Oct 2021
    Sep 2021
    May 2021
    Apr 2021
    Feb 2021
    Jan 2021
    Dec 2020
    Nov 2020
    Oct 2020
    Jul 2020
    Jun 2020
    May 2020
    Apr 2020
    Mar 2020
    Dec 2019
    Nov 2019
    Oct 2019
    Sep 2019
    Aug 2019
    Jun 2019
    May 2019
    Apr 2019
    Mar 2019
    Feb 2019
    Jan 2019
    Dec 2018
    Nov 2018
    Aug 2018
    Jul 2018
    Jun 2018
    May 2018
    Apr 2018
    Mar 2018
    Feb 2018
    Dec 2017
    Nov 2017
    Oct 2017
    Sep 2017
    Aug 2017
    Jul 2017
    Jun 2017
    May 2017
    Apr 2017
    Mar 2017
    Feb 2017
    Jan 2017
    Dec 2016
    Nov 2016
    Oct 2016
    Sep 2016
    Aug 2016
    Jul 2016
    Jun 2016
    May 2016
    Apr 2016
    Mar 2016
    Feb 2016
    Jan 2016
    Dec 2015
    Nov 2015
    Oct 2015
    Sep 2015
    Aug 2015
    Jul 2015
    Jun 2015
    May 2015
    Apr 2015
    Mar 2015
    Feb 2015
    Jan 2015
    Dec 2014
    Nov 2014
    Oct 2014
    Sep 2014
    Aug 2014
    Jul 2014
    Jun 2014
    May 2014
    Apr 2014
    Mar 2014
    Feb 2014
    Jan 2014
    Dec 2013
    Nov 2013
    Oct 2013
    Sep 2013
    Aug 2013
    Jul 2013
    Jun 2013
    May 2013
    Apr 2013
    Mar 2013
    Feb 2013
    Jan 2013
    Dec 2012
    Nov 2012
    Oct 2012
    Sep 2012
    Aug 2012
    Jul 2012

    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010

    Book Reviews
    Capital Gains Taxation
    Corporate Income Tax
    Consumption Taxes
    Economy - Long Term

    Economy - Short Term
    Environmental Regulation
    Last 100 Years
    Real Estate Taxation

    Outside Links:

  • American Economic Alert
  • American Jobs Alliance
  • Angry Bear Blog
  • Economy in Crisis
  • Econbrowser
  • Emmanuel Goldstein's Blog
  • Levy Economics Institute
  • McKeever Institute
  • Michael Pettis Blog
  • Naked Capitalism
  • Natural Born Conservative
  • Science & Public Policy Inst.
  • Votersway Blog
  • Watt's Up With That


  • [An] extensive argument for balanced trade, and a program to achieve balanced trade is presented in Trading Away Our Future, by Raymond Richman, Howard Richman and Jesse Richman. “A minimum standard for ensuring that trade does benefit all is that trade should be relatively in balance.” [Balanced Trade entry]

    Journal of Economic Literature:

  • [Trading Away Our Future] Examines the costs and benefits of U.S. trade and tax policies. Discusses why trade deficits matter; root of the trade deficit; the “ostrich” and “eagles” attitudes; how to balance trade; taxation of capital gains; the real estate tax; the corporate income tax; solving the low savings problem; how to protect one’s assets; and a program for a strong America....

    Atlantic Economic Journal:

  • In Trading Away Our Future   Richman ... advocates the immediate adoption of a set of public policy proposal designed to reduce the trade deficit and increase domestic savings.... the set of public policy proposals is a wake-up call... [February 17, 2009 review by T.H. Cate]