In a flurry of activity, the U.S. Senate voted down two amendments yesterday that would have created $32 billion worth of energy tax incentives and a National Renewable Energy Portfolio (RPS) requiring utilities to generate 15% of electricity from renewables by 2020. Later that same evening however, the Senate passed H.R. 6, the CLEAN Energy Act of 2007, 65-27.
"Ultimately, we are still optimistic. We have developed a strong and vocal group of solar champions in Congress, and the solar ITC provisions passed by the two tax committees clearly demonstrate recognition that Congress must enact a long-term solar energy policy."
-- Rhone Resch, Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), president
The Clean Energy Act of 2007 is designed to reduce U.S. dependency on foreign oil by investing in clean, renewable resources, promoting new emerging energy technologies, developing greater efficiency and creating a Strategic Energy Efficiency and Renewables Reserve.
But two key amendments that would have provided billions of dollars worth of incentives and revenue for the U.S. renewable energy industry were rejected. The Energy Tax Package—approved by the U.S. Senate Finance Committee and House Ways & Mean committee earlier this week—contained a five-year extension of the tax credit for the production of electricity from wind, geothermal, biomass as well as the solar ITC extension.
Introduced by Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), the National Journal's Congress Daily reported today that supporters of the "Baucus Amendment" were unable to get the 60 votes needed to limit debate and attach it to the larger bill.
"The tax provisions were rejected due to controversy over the revenue raisers or ‘pay-fors' in the bill. Under current rules, any tax cuts that decrease tax revenue to the Treasury have to be paid for through some other offsetting measure," said Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) President Rhone Resch in a statement released today.
"Ultimately, we are still optimistic," concluded Resch. "We have developed a strong and vocal group of solar champions in Congress, and the solar ITC provisions passed by the two tax committees clearly demonstrate recognition that Congress must enact a long-term solar energy policy. The reasons for failure are unrelated to the solar provisions and while we are disappointed that the provisions are not passing now, we are confident that we will succeed in the end."
A spokesman in Senator Bingaman's office also confirmed this morning that Bingaman's RPS proposal was included in a list of amendments officially ruled dead yesterday for "not being germane" to the bill.
The headlines here read "Republicans kill renewable energy tax credits". Let's use this next election to remove those Senators and Congressmen still in the pockets of big oil.
did you know there is an industry that bought a race car, sets of battery, and a charging system (with pat. for all of these things) from a small group of inventers that were demonstrating the power of there batteries in a race car proving they could run at high speed long dist race on one charge
this car could run a nascar race on one charge of the batt only needing to stop for tires and washing the windshield the charging system could fully charge these batt in less then 15 min these batt could hold there charge with over 95% cap for 50 years the charging system was so big it took four flatbeds to move
Here we have a prime example of sick legislation by sick legislatures. I really don't think they are deserving of our trust. This slip-shod legislation is of little or no benefit to our country and these senators have acted in a most shameful way by compromising our country down the corporate controlled oil drain. Where is your intestinal fortitude, senators? Why don't you represent the people who voted you into office?
No. It seems that oil is your bosom buddy and the people of the US must continue to be treated as subserviant to the oil barons.
adrianakau2aol.com
Interesting, but I am not sure I follow.
First of all how does the requirements for the utilities cost money for the treasury?
Second, I we would use $32B in tax credits, that would mean a generated business of at least $100B. So there will be profits to tax, salaries to tax and sales tax. What would the actual net flow of tax money be? Anyone?
Looking for a solution - just impose a federal tax on electricity that equals the $32B ormore to finance also other incentives for renewable energy.
Rejecting the tax credits is not about "big oil". It is simply politics. The reason you have politicians on both sides voting against this was:
"Under current rules, any tax cuts that decrease tax revenue to the Treasury have to be paid for through some other offsetting measure"
No politician wants to cut spending on any existing program that would negatively impact his or her district to fund the tax cuts for this program. We shouldn't be waiting on the government to do something we can do better. Read the other article: Investment trends & the global RE market.
This is something we can count on. Not politicians.
My comment on incentives for alternative fuels has always been the same: Reduce or eliminate petroleum subsidies, remove tax breaks, let the price of gasoline reflect the REAL cost, watch cellulosic ethanol plants pop up at every landfill/dump site in the country.