So the US is scrapping green tech subsidies yet is also using trade barriers to keep out Chinese green tech. I don't get it. What's the plan here? To fall behind the rest of the world in this sector of the economy?

>unc pipe
bussin

>>60572524 (OP)
Do you even have any clue where the "green tech subsidies" actually go? Heres a hint its not for solar panels and nuclear reactors

>>60572524 (OP)
it makes perfect sense when you realize the government exists to harm its citizens. chinese solar panels are cheap which is why theyre putting a 3521% tariff on them. they want you to pay $80k for a solar panel system that costs $10k, or worse yet lease it for $500/month for the next 30 years.

all of these AI scam data centers sucking down electricity should have an interesting effect on our poorly maintained grid. i look forward to the day that grid failures during a heat wave kill thousands of obese mutt retards.

>>60572550
Aren't there large tax credits for EV purchases and green energy installations?

No money goes to nuclear because US utilities are wary of nuclear construction projects after the Vogtle and Summer debacles

>>60572550
It goes towards the manufacturing of solar and wind, and the IRA subsidies did have incentives for nuclear power research and tax breaks for nuclear power. That is why a lot of nuclear plants have been coming online starting in 2023.

>>60572747
The Vogtle 3 & 4 reactors started construction in 2013, preliminary works began in 2009, and planning started before 2006. This was long before the IRA passed.

The construction time for a civilian nuclear reactor is >10 years in the US. The Vogtle and Summer expansion projects were financial Chernobyls, so there are barely any new nuclear reactors planned in the US, only a few small demonstration reactors which may or may not get built.

Relocating assets from inefficient energy production to literally anything is net positive and bullish

>>60574365
EVs have a lot more development potential than ICEVs. In 5-10 years, EVs will probably be better than ICEVs in every way. EVs are widely thought to be the future of road transportation.

Solar and wind have the lowest LCOE already, and they're expected to get cheaper still. Solar and wind are intermittent, but that's not that much of a problem for the US because of cheap natural gas for load balancing. In the future, cheaper batteries will help solve the intermittency problem. So solar and wind could be super cheap sources of energy. Unlike gas, they will never run out. So it's a game you want to be in. When the Permian eventually starts to run out of tier one prospects, you don't want the US to have to go hat in hand begging China to sell you the means to generate electricity and hydrogen feedstock in a price-competitive manner.

Nuclear is also important. China for example has a well developed nuclear industry and can build nuclear reactors for 2.5 $/W, which I think is quite competitive with CCGT plants when you consider fuel costs and the fact that a reactor lasts for 60-80 years. And it's a strategically important export market; there are lots of countries that want to buy nuclear reactors.

>>60574630
Evs have a place in urban commuter transport but the whole truck thing is not gonna happen

All this shit bar nuclear hinges on a battery breakthrough that you can't force, it could literally be 100 years if a solution is found, if there is a solution at all

>>60574665
But but but youtube told me thorium reactors are right around the corner.

>>60572747
>It goes towards the manufacturing of solar and wind
I'm not american but this is bullshit. solar panels are cheap af, equipment is not that expensive, yet installers charge a shitload of money. THAT is where the money goes.