Is wrong to spend grant money to "save" money when there are no savings for the Net Tax Payer?

Example.

Let us say NYS has a rebate/grant for solar panels.

Even if you can qualify for $500,000 in grants do you still consider it a waste of money?

The receiver of the grant might save $10,000 a year off their electric bill but in the end $500,000 was spent of the Net Tax Payers funds.

IF you took the savings and divided it into the money spent it would take $500,000 / $10,000 = 50 years just to get the initial cost.

I understand the receiver of the grant will save on the electric bill but they are ignoring the fact the Net Tax Payer paid for the grant. Make sense?

When you look around our community it seems the "grant" funds should be going to items that make a true difference. Example $500,000 to repair a old bridge, $500,000 for needed equipment that benefits the community or pot hole repairs etc...