For the same reason governments the world over subisidize research (which, on its own, obviously emits more co2 than it directly saves, as it directly saves zer

For the same reason governments the world over subisidize research (which, on its own, obviously emits more co2 than it directly saves, as it directly saves zero), or why e.g. germany has subsidized solar so hard there were plenty of obvious net-negative cases to be found: To pull the technology through the hole where it is financially inefficient - without having to wait for some investor to take that gamble (and expect the 10x return that goes with it). _IF_ the subsidies continue forever and _IF_ this technology now takes over all other attempts, you're totally right: Utter madness. But those 2 ifs are extraordinary claims.