I've never seen any credible evidence to support the theory that major power generation is subsidised to even a fraction of what wind/solar is. Certainly, wher

I've never seen any credible evidence to support the theory that major power generation is subsidised to even a fraction of what wind/solar is. Certainly, where I live, all electricity is generated by coal powered generation. The state government is a net winner on this because they receive royalties for the coal dug up. There's certainly no subsidy. The only upward pressure on the price of electricity is, again, political. There's enough coal in the ground to provide cheap power for centuries, the only thing that is going to change that is laws made by politicians to either restrict the building of new power stations, or to lump the power stations with extra costs. Again, both of these changes would be politically led, rather than anything occuring naturally in the marketplace. As a perfect competitor for alternative energy, political changes in towards coal powered electricity would be just as devastating as political changes away from alternative energy. I'm not commenting on the 'correctness' of either change, just saying that both are equally as likely, thus making the sector the last thing I would get involved in.