article tools
Increase Text Size Increase Text Size Decreate Text Size Decrease Text Size
Share Email This Story Share Share This Story Reader comments Reader Comments (5) Add to favorites Add to Bookmarks Printer friendly version Printer Friendly Version
Article Tool Sponsor:

Advertise with us

More Jobs
0 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
April 29, 2005

D.C. Reps. Call for Renewable Energy Budget Increases

Washington, D.C. [RenewableEnergyAccess.com]

Sixty-seven Members of the U.S. House of Representatives are calling upon congressional appropriators to significantly increase funding for the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EE/RE) programs above the Fiscal Year 2006 levels being proposed by the White House.

"We support both fuel cell and renewably-produced hydrogen technologies. However, they are not substitutes for the mix of energy-efficiency and renewable energy technologies that are poised to address the nation's most pressing energy needs today - and tomorrow."

- Rep. Greg Walden, Rep. Mark Udall; letter to House Appropriations subcommittee on energy and water

Representatives Greg Walden and Mark Udall, who are members of the House Appropriations Committee, co-authored a letter outlining their request and submitted it to Rep. David Hobson, who is the chairman of the subcommittee on energy and water; and Peter Visclosky, who is the ranking member of the same subcommittee. The letter calls for the "restoration of funding to last year's enacted levels for the DOE's EE/RE budget, while supporting the President's recommended levels for wind, fuel cells, and renewably based hydrogen."

"Robust R&D funding for [EE/RE] programs remains important to help further reduce technical, institutional, and economic barriers to enable even faster market penetration," they stated in the letter. "Such funding should not be curtailed when these technologies are just beginning to approach making real inroads into the marketplace."

Walden and Udall used the letter to highlight specific cuts being proposed in a number of DOE's core EE/RE programs.

Funding levels for most of the DOE's core renewable energy programs were reduced in the proposed budget for FY06. Overall funding for biomass/biofuels, geothermal, hydropower, and solar energy programs would be reduced by nearly $24 million, not including another $4 million targeted to be cut from the budget's Distributed Energy account. Of all of the DOE's core renewable energy programs, only wind energy has been proposed for a modest increase.

A number of core energy efficiency accounts are also targeted for reductions, including a 24 percent cut to the Industrial Energy Efficiency program, an 11 percent cut to the Energy Efficient Buildings program, and a 7 percent cut to the State Energy program.

"We support both fuel cell and renewably-produced hydrogen technologies. However, they are not substitutes for the mix of energy-efficiency and renewable energy technologies that are poised to address the nation's most pressing energy needs today - and tomorrow," Walden and Udall wrote. "Further cuts will only increase U.S. vulnerability to energy supply disruptions, worsen fuel price volatility, and cause higher energy prices overall unnecessarily, while also ceding lucrative energy efficiency and renewable energy product markets to other countries, such as Japan and Germany."

Walden and Udall cited the budgets for oil and natural gas imports in 2004, which totaled $166 billion and $18 billion respectively. Keeping that cost down depends on a mix of energy sources, and renewable technologies have the potential to tap large domestic resource bases at lower and lower costs, both to the economy and the environment, they wrote.

"We therefore strongly urge you to develop an appropriations bill for FY06 that restores funding for those EE/RE programs being recommended for cuts, while accepting the President's recommended funding levels for wind, fuel cells, and renewably-based hydrogen."

The letter was made available through the Sustainable Energy Coalition, which is a coalition of 85 national and state business, environmental, consumer, and energy policy organizations which work with Members of Congress and other interested parties to increase public support for energy efficiency and renewable energy.
Reader Comments (5)
 
No image available
Anonymous
April 29, 2005
Was this letter bi-partian?
Comment 1 of 5
No image available
Anonymous
April 29, 2005
Bush said, "clean Nuclear energy...". I hope he's speaking of FUSION. A recent article describes a process involving a crystal in water,etc. that created table top fusion energy which unlike fission does not leave radioactive waste behind. However, the output power does not exceed the input power it required, but fusion was achieved and corroborated. I expect further R&D funding would be required.
Comment 2 of 5
No image available
Anonymous
April 29, 2005
Let's use the dwindling old energies wisely to create facilities for our new sources of the future.....
Eventually Solar Cells will be made with solar or wind electricity; biofuels cooked up using biofuels. If we do not act now, we fall behind in world technology, postpone response until conventional energy is very expensive, and losejob creating capabilities and money to reduce debt. Representatives do not see the whole picture, or are dancing with old energy market interests. Let's unify and make a great voice - write your representatives and be heard!
Comment 3 of 5
No image available
Anonymous
April 29, 2005
Alter the bill to increase renewables, eliminate the pork barrel financing of the "old energy" technologies. Ethanol and biodiesel can wean us away from imported oil, and are needed for the next decade until hydrogen can be made affordable.
Bush touted clean nuclear energy - the only source of "clean" is the sun. Conventional nuclear plants need energy to be built (petroleum oil), maintained (workers drive there), and to eventually de-commission. Then to transport radioactive by-products and waste, and long term storage; meaning energy using facilities and people, not to mention the expense of preparing centuries of storage. Let's use the dwindling old energies wisely to create facilities for our new sources of the future.
Comment 4 of 5
No image available
Anonymous
May 4, 2005
Mark Udall is the representative formy district, and I intend to thank him for writing this letter, even if it only requests restoring funds to last year's meger level. I suggest everyone else find out if their rep. has signed on to this, and thank them for doing so, or persuade them to do so.
Comment 5 of 5
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In
Featured Total Access Partners
Click company logos to learn more
Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. PetersenDean Roofing and Solar Systems Standard Solar Inc. Alteris Renewables Ferraz Shawmut Sonobond Ultrasonics
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo