By: Mike Hosking | Wednesday, June 20, 2012 9:10 AM

I see the renewable energy sector are all over the Government to try and get them to subsidise their pet projects. They’ve seen the stories over the price of power and they’ve seen some good PR, who can blame them. The average house allegedly will pay about $800 a month which seems absurd. Mind you we have a big house with seven people and we never pay above $600 so I don't know what people are doing with their heaters or fires or hot water.

Anyway as laudable as alternative energy is, the reasons we still produce power the way we do is because nothing yet has come along to beat it. Solar is not as efficient as wind, but no one wants wind because to have wind you need turbines and everyone hates them. Actually I don't. I think they’re architecturally interesting and they can look spectacular if they’re put in the right place the right way. But that's just me. Most people don’t want a bar of them near their place.

Part of the solar industry’s argument is that panels are getting cheaper, so that's good. They also argue their business has doubled which also sounds good until you look into the numbers. Last year they installed 400 units at homes as compared to 180 the year before. Some growth but not what you’d call a mass market product. Why? Because they’re ugly. Because they’re still too expensive no matter how much they’ve come down. If they really were the answer, don’t you think your average punter who’s fed up with power companies upping the prices would be onto it by now?

The world is full of alternatives, ideas that will allegedly revolutionise the way we do things from power generation to electric cars to airline travel. But you’ll note the vast majority is more theory, not a lot of reality. Virtually none of it is at mass production stage. Virtually none of it has the wide consumer acceptance you need to make it work properly. For specialist groups to ask the Government to boost their cause is to be applauded on the PR front but cheeky in reality.

They make one good point - the current way we produce power is inefficient. Too much of it is made in one area i.e. the south and therefore needs to be dragged all over the country, thus requiring far too much infrastructure. But beyond that, like most pressure or lobby groups in the sector, it’s really not the Government’s job to heat your house, the same way it isn’t their job to roof it or put spouting on. If they subsidise solar, why not open fires or wind or wave power?

Is solar energy the way of the future? Should the Government fund it? Leave a comment below...

Photo: Stock.xchng