世界各国对生物燃料和可再生能源领域的补贴,与几十年前对煤炭、钢铁和造船等行业提供补贴的情形类似。最初,这些行业会以高昂的启动成本和规模收益递增效应,作为证明政府补贴合理性的理由,接下来这些领域通常会成为国家经济实力以及经济自足性的象征,但最终常常难逃全球产能过剩、供过于求、产出价格下降以及贸易争端的后果。
True, there may be a strong economic case for subsidising the use of solar and wind power if it cuts carbon emissions relative to fossil fuel – a sector that has also traditionally received handouts. But many interventions are producer subsidies designed to build up domestic industries, potentially distorting competition and leading to waste.
如果使用太阳能或者风能相对于化石燃料能够降低碳排放量,那么对之提供补贴或许具有较强的经济合理性——毕竟化石燃料行业过去也曾得到政府补贴。但政府的很多干预措施是为壮大本国工业而给予生产企业的补贴,这可能扭曲行业竞争并导致浪费。
Since 2010, for example, the US has greatly expanded existing programmes of grants and loan guarantees to energy equipment manufacturers. The bankruptcies of two such businesses – the solar company Solyndra and the battery-maker A123 Systems – have become a cause célèbre among critics of Barack Obama’s administration.
【用贸易法终结补贴战?】相关文章:
★ 投行的乱世机遇
★ 廉价背后的代价
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15