This is why you subsidize research, not production.
This is a point, but ultimately the methods of making green energy need to be cheap to produce to begin with. As long as the technology is not being made in ways that are at a low cost, people will choose the cheaper option, or no one will be able to afford it. Solar is, as much as it's a nice idea, not a really viable option because it works better being installed on individual buildings, and unless you're large enough to afford it, it's not a great plan. Wind power, too, is very weather-dependent. There are other alternatives to fossil fuels that can help us bridge the gap (thorium/liquid salt reactors, etc), and research into other technologies like fusion generators and such is good. But like the parent said, have to put lots of funding out there to develop the new technologies, not just produce what we already have.
The "positive outcome of the [second] test makes us more confident in the result," said Fernando Ferroni, president of the Italian Institute for Nuclear Physics, in a statement released late Thursday. Ferroni is one of 160 physicists involved in the international collaboration known as OPERA (Oscillation Project with Emulsion Tracking Apparatus) that performed the experiment."
Link to Original Source