Jason Tollefson, Microchip Technology, www.microchip.com
All successful commercial advancements in technology are ultimately economically or utility based. The end result must produce a product that either has a lower cost associated with its use or provides additional benefit over prior technology. This is also true in energy.
New energy technology will not be successful unless it fulfills the cost or utility requirements. This can be seen in the nascent solar market. Only now, as efficiencies approach 25%, does the economic equation begin to make sense. Homeowners can expect to see a return on their solar investments in less than 10 years.
Still, if the payback took only two years, many more would order panels. Dramatic investment would occur to meet the demand. Companies would invest in R&D to deliver even higher-efficiency panels.
The issue at hand is how to spur the cycle and start companies investing in the first place. Tax policy could be effectively used. If consumers of alternative energy were allowed tax rebates in proportion to their usage, this would push the economic equation in favor of new technology.
This same model works for other forms of alternative energy, beyond solar. Consider a tax rebate on bio-diesel or E85. Sales tax on gasoline is as high as 8%, and per-gallon taxes are as high as $0.42 (source: Tax Foundation, 2009). At $2.50 per gallon, typical yearly tax expenditures are close to $500.
Whether it is solar, energy harvesting, bio-diesel, high-efficiency air conditioning or wind power, tax rebates on alternative energy usage would have a strong tangible economic benefit to consumers, and would spur faster growth in all of these markets.
References: 2009 Tax Foundation – URL: http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/245.html
|