Clinton's Solar Scheme Would Cost Taxpayers $200 Billion/Year, Have No Effect on CO2 Levels

Craig Bannister | February 8, 2016
Font Size

Hillary Clinton says she wants to deploy a half-billion more solar panels in her first term as president.

During last Thursday’s Democrat presidential debate in New Hampshire, Clinton laid out her Green Goal for her first four years in the White House:

“I will begin to work immediately on putting together an agenda, beginning to talk with members of Congress and others about how we can push forward.

“I want to have half a billion more solar panels deployed, the first four years. I want to have enough clean energy to power every home the next four years.”

But, Clinton’s solar plan would cost taxpayers $200 billion a year, be extremely difficult to reach – and be utterly ineffective, Publisher Steve Milloy tells MRCTV.

“The solar industry says there are now over 22,700 MW of solar electric capacity operating in the U.S., enough to power more than 4.6 million average American homes.  If the average panel produces 200kW then there are about 113 million or so panels currently installed in the US. 

“So Hillary’s plan (500 million panels) is to almost quintuple the number of solar panels in the US.”

And, since U.S taxpayers already pay $39 billion/year in solar subsidies, Clinton wants to spend almost $200 billion/year subsidizing solar power, Milloy explains.

What’s more, even if Americans shell out the $200 billion required by Clinton’s solar scheme, the effects on CO2 levels would be negligible:

“None of this will make any difference. You can stop all U.S. CO2 emissions for the rest of the century and you would make virtually no difference in atmospheric CO2 levels.”