As rumors swirled around the slashing of UK solar subsidies, I posted a rebuttal to the age-old complaint that solar subsidies benefit the well off. Besides being partially untrue (solar subsidies have benefited many poorer household by incentivizing solar leasing), subsidies for decentralized power, even if they benefit the relatively well off, are actually more progressive than previous support for fossil fuels and nuclear which have largely benefited an even narrower corporate elite.
Feed-In Tariffs Provide Distributed Economic Stimulus
By putting money into local economies around the country, they provide an important economic stimulus—as well as delivering on their core mission of supporting a crucial, emerging energy source that cannot yet compete with the heavily subsidized (and ultimately economically ruinous) fossil fuel industries.
Encouraging the Rich to Do Better
This is, it would seem, something that comedy legend and EV/renewable energy advocate Robert Llewellyn would agree with. In fact, he goes a little further. There is, says Robert, a case to be made that feed-in tariffs and other subsidies should be supported even for the filthy rich—as they help shift the focus of the world's largest consumers from yet another gas guzzler or a gigantic house, and instead to something that helps us all move forward from the predicament we are in.
For this, and insights on electric bikes, the idiocy of Top Gear's Jeremy Clarkson, and even a tantalizing teaser that Red Dwarf will be back on the air soon, check out Llewellyn's latest offering below. For those os us who think it makes sense for the UK to keep supporting the industries of the future, check out my post on the solar industry's call for manageable, phased cuts to the feed-in tariffs.