Turning solar developers into a big, greedy business capable of running roughshod over poor neighbors' concerns in small towns was an unintended negative consequence of all the cronyism for solar development.
It's a two-pronged, self-defeating argument that solar advocates make without seeming to notice how the second prong makes an utter shambles of the first. Solar energy is a powerhouse new industry in NC, and if you removed any governmental favoritism, it would come to utter ruin.
Cronyism is directly opposed to market competition. After all, you don't have government forcing people to do what they'd do anyway. That's why there's no law saying you have to put on your pants before your shoes.
Another study, this one from MIT, finds that electric vehicles can have greater lifecycle carbon dioxide emissions than some regular cars with internal-combustion engines. It's an object lesson for regulators.
Since at least the 1970s, renewable energy advocates have said their industry is just a few short years away from competing with traditional energy sources, so they need government support for only a few short years more. Now a Forbes headline asks, "Renewable Energy Tax Credits — Forever?"
Arguing against subsidies for traditional energy sources and for more subsidies for renewable energy sources is just another example of arguing "That cronyism is bad because it can't go to this cronyism." How about no cronyism at all?