To meet the nation's clean energy goals, the US must develop a robust manufacturing capability to produce solar energy panels and components. It can do that by providing financial incentives to US manufacturers to help offset higher domestic production costs, which have been estimated to be 30% to 40% more than imports.
That is the problem.
Congress handing out money will not solve it; forcing Americans to pay that 30-40% more simply bankrupts Americans but through a different way.
There are many things we can do but they don't make any sense to do.
The only reason someone does it is that there's a boot on someone's neck (they're a slave), the environment is destroyed without care (remediation costs money) and similar.
That's the beginning and end of it, when you get down to facts.
This is not just limited to solar panels. Its also true for EVs; you have to dig half a million pounds of earth up to make just one battery, and there is no economically viable means of recycling them either. Yes, technically they can be recycled, but then you get to pay even more.
If the industry will collapse if the 30-40% has to be paid by the end consumer of the product then whatever you're proposing does not work.
Why would you pay 30 cents/kwh for power you can have for 10? Do you understand that this is exactly what we're talking about here? At 30-40% more the panels are non-economic to put in and use; they're simply not competitive. At 300% more than what you pay now for electric power you can't heat or cool your house and eat at the same time.
Understand this folks -- I love technological advancement. I believe we should have invested in LFTRs a long time ago, and we should do so today. Not just directly for electrical power, but because we have several hundred years of known fuel for them, and what we get while digging it up we can use to turn into synfuel at the same time with some of the produced energy. The latter is not fanciful nonsense; Nazi Germany used it close to eighty years ago. We know it works. Yes, there are engineering challenges remaining. But those are engineering problems and thus can be solved. They are not attempts to claim that which is thermodynamically impossible will work.
Physics, chemistry and thermodynamics (which are functionally a subset of physics, when you get down to it) are not suggestions. Irrespective of how you feel these are facts you cannot evade. Shoving off the damage somewhere else, whether to people or planet doesn't change the math.
It only changes who gets screwed, and if Congress subsidizes this the person who gets screwed is you.
Food prices, rent and similar are high enough already -- right?
You don't want any more of that -- right??
That's what I thought.
Now tell me why we allow (and yes, we are allowing it) the current Congress and Executive to remain in office.