The difference is that all of those advances were made by private investment in a free market system. The incentive was to make a better, more economical mouse trap so that consumers would want to buy it. There was no waste of tax dollars by the government propping up technologies that were not yet ready for the market.
Leave the alternative energy industry alone and let it find a way to make a profit by producing an economical product and things will progress a lot faster.
And now I'm going to go watch the Cup race from Darlington and leave you greenies to keep on dreaming!
Hard to see the TV with your head in the sand.
Some KNOWLEDGE of history is also often useful when forming opinions supposedly BASED on history, or when making pronouncements ABOUT history.
Just two huge examples of many that contradict your position:
1) The development of aviation was largely subsidized and funded by governments. The U.S. Army bought Wright Flyers when they weren't much beyond curiosities, and U.S. Mail carrier contracts helped to spur further development as did continuing military utilization of unproven aircraft.
2) Hoover Dam, using many novel techniques unproven at the time, was a joint Federal / private-enterprise project, and paid for itself well ahead of schedule.
And BOTH solar and wind energy are approaching grid-cost-parity WITHOUT subsidization.
Edited by Ace-Garageguy, 11 May 2013 - 02:15 PM.