Renewable energy is also heavily subsidized. Energy subsidies need to be abolished because they are siphoning public money. Without subsidies energy companies could compete and reach the most efficient solution instead of bringing in the government dollars are not having to innovate.
Well, what's most profitable for a company doesn't take into account how much damage it does to the environment. If a wind turbine can produce electricity at 10 energy units per money unit invested, but coal can produce 12, coal may be able to offer cheaper prices, but it may also cause 3 money units worth of environmental damage per energy unit produced. However, those who run the company won't feel that damage - it will be distributed across all of society, or the world.
It's a typical capitalist fallacy that what's most profitable, is the best for society.
And regarding renewable energy, many technologies aren't that inefficient anymore. Now USA isn't a huge interest to me as I don't live there, but in Denmark, analysis from the energy department shows that wind turbines on land are more efficient than other technologies, including coal, per energy unit produced.http://www.ens.dk/info/nyheder/nyhedsarkiv/ny-analyse-vind-billigst
Wind on land: A bit over 0.3 DKK/kWh
Wind on sea, coal and natural gas: ~0.6 DKK/kWh
By the way, Denmark has built up a large export sector of wind turbines and is among the leading countries in that area because of public subsidies going back to the 1980's, which the economy has benefitted from.
And non-renewable energies are also heavily subsidized in USA btw.
Edited 9/1/2016 05:52:50