That begs the question: if oil and gas is steeply subsidized, does government support for renewables simply create a level playing field?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/01/02/oil-ga...
The percentage depletion part of the tax code is specific to oil and gas, so it's not quite the same as saying it's what "ever [sic] business in the country does." I agree it's not a subsidy, but it seems like a very specific carve-out for a very specific industry and a specific commodity. It feels to the layperson that it's an odd fact that the percentage depletion can exceed the cost of the well, which makes non-viable wells suddenly viable again. That seems like favoring a specific industry in legislation. A dairy farmer cannot, for example, depreciate "future reserves" of cows milk to make a non-viable farm suddenly profitable, can they? (Understanding that there are true subsidies for farming, that may not be a good analogy).
Unfortunately, iirc most of the windfarms are owned by a few people, but people are getting paid for wind instead of fracking. I don't think wind and oil are at competition in Texas though. Most oil drilled in Texas isn't destined for Texas, or the US really.