[TheLoneWolfling]

I agree with what you say.

But again you're missing what I was saying with my original comment - namely that wind turbines seem to be far too often built where it makes political sense, not necessarily where it actually makes sense.

As is far too often the case for renewable energy, it seems.

[ZeroGravitas]

Why have you singled out wind and renewable energy to be affected by politics? I think the current nuclear plans in the UK, the fracking support, and the anti-wind hysteria all have very strong political aspects. The IMF recently suggested fossil fuel is heavily subsidized since it's pollution is externalized.

I don't see anything about wind power that makes it particularly susceptible to politics, in fact the decentralized nature of wind and solar seems to make it a bit less likely for one entity to be given monopoloy rights and therefore be able to kickback large sums to politicians and lobbyists.

[TheLoneWolfling]

This comment chain was started by talking about wind. And people here seem to take it for granted that nuclear is affected by politics, but tend to be fuzzier about things like wind. Wind power is very political in nature. On the one hand, tax credits / etc. On the other hand, regulations as to where you can put wind turbines, etc. And general discontent about bat deaths / noise complaints / etc. (And in some cases, at least, for good reason.) And unmetered (and as such, unknown, which is "interesting") power used for things like rotating the wind turbines, feathering them, and keeping them turning when there isn't wind.