A comment posted on a site I like.
Ditto to Warwick's comments and then some. If the opposition is saying PV is middle class welfare let them. So what if they're right... Don't argue against the opposition - argue for your proposition. Be forward and pick your field and force the opposition to argue the points on your ground. We know that PV in high quantity pushes prices down in the wholesale market. Everybody, whether they have PV or not, should benefit from those lower wholesale prices. This should be a leading argument on our side.
PV starts out as an option that lowers electricity costs for the entity that installs the system. In the beginning PV systems are subsidized so there are costs that are spread out into the larger community. PV in Australia grew through the "in the beginning" stage like bamboo on steroids. PV is now growing into a utility.
Utility: Noun, The state of being useful, profitable, or beneficial
I see PV as becoming a utility. Utilities aren't free. We all recognize that utilities need to make a profit but that's ok because they provide a service that's worth paying for. Why not frame PV as a utility? The people that install PV get to make their profit but they also share a useful service with the community.
And oh yeah... No smoke is involved in PV... No Sulfur oxide... no nitrogen oxide... no mercury... no particulate.
I don't think the case for PV should lead with the green aspects but I think they are great closing arguments.