Photo Credit: AOC.gov
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 (20) View image gallery Image Gallery (1) 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
June 14, 2005

In Uncertain Odds, A Bold RPS Bill Announced

Senators Introduce National Renewable Energy Requirement as Energy Bill Debate Heats Up
Washington, DC [RenewableEnergyAccess.com]

This week debate begins in the U.S. Senate on H.R. 6, the comprehensive Federal energy bill. If they haven't already, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle are putting forward various bills and amendments that could be included in the broad policy package. Among them, two Senators teamed up to introduce an amendment that would require utilities in every state to source 20 percent of their energy from renewable sources.

"This amendment will harness under-utilized renewable energy sources."

- U.S. Sen. Jim Jeffords, I-Vt

The national Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) amendment, introduced by Sens. Jim Jeffords, I-Vt., and John Kerry, D-Mass, creates a renewable energy standard under which utilities would be required to gradually increase the amount of electricity produced from renewable energy resources, starting at 2.5 percent in 2006 and leveling out at 20 percent in 2020.

"Currently less than two percent of the electricity generated in our country is produced by clean, renewable energy sources," said Jeffords, the ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. "This amendment will harness under-utilized renewable energy sources and reduce harmful air and water pollution from coal and other fossil fuels. It is time for Congress to realize that renewable energy is the long-term solution to our dependence on foreign oil."

An RPS will promote the development of wind, solar, geothermal and certain types of biomass energy. Essentially most renewable resources that could create electricity. Different utilities would likely leverage their different resources in their respective states.

And much like the market-friendly cap and trade systems that have successfully lowered power plant emissions, the RPS would provide a flexible, system of tradable credits by which utilities can achieve these renewable energy requirements. The utilities that exceed their own requirements for renewable energy could essentially sell their excess green energy to other utilities that are trying to meet the requirement.

While most energy companies and utilities are traditionally against such a mandatory requirement, they will at least get credit for their existing renewable energy production.

The bill will also allow states to set standards higher than the Federal requirements. California, for example, passed a strong statewide RPS that calls for the same 20 percent requirement of the state's utilities by an even earlier date of 2017. There are 18 other states with similar RPS requirements, although most are not as strong as California's.

Speaking of States, however, the Bush Administration has made its views clear on a national RPS. This week, in a statement intended for congressional lawmakers the Bush Administration said RPS standards should not be supported at the Federal level.

"The Administration would oppose amendments to set a national renewable portfolio standard (RPS) on power generation and believes these standards are best left to the States," said the Statement of Administration Policy from Bush Administration. "A national RPS could raise consumer costs, especially in areas where these resources are less abundant and harder to cultivate or distribute."

The next few days, weeks, or months could determine if this RPS, or any others, make it to the bill's final form. Even then, other issues could drown the bill like they have in years past.

"Consumers shouldn't have to struggle through another year of record-breaking gas and electric bills before Congress sees the light," said Senator Kerry. "By setting an achievable standard now and gradually increasing our share of renewable energy sources, this is a common-sense way to get our energy priorities in order."
Image Gallery (1)
 
Reader Comments (20)
 
No image available
Anonymous
June 15, 2005
Big oil (guest comment#1) should pray that
the US citizenry doesn't wake up and stop their perpetual subsidy.
Comment 1 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 15, 2005
We don't need the Feds to dictate to the states how to regulate their own utilities through their respective PUC's. We don't need higher CAFE standards. The invisble hands of the market has raised the cost of gasoline. Brand new Detroit made SUV's are sitting on dealers lots. GM and Ford's credit ratings are junk because consumers are voting with their feet and buying fuel efficient Japanese compacts and hybrids. Keep Big Federal government out of daily lives. California without the "guidance" of the FED has already set a 20% renewable goal. Lets open up ANWAR and domestic off-shore sites for more exploration and drilling. Its pretty hyprocritical of us to press the Saudis to increase their oil production, but we are unwilling to drill in our backyards or up north where 99.99% of us will never visit. Lets fully develop our own petroleum reserves and incent alternative energy sources with tax credits, not federal mandates.
Comment 2 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 15, 2005
Solar thermal will cut natural gas usage tremendously. Just imagine the cut in natural gas usage if every home had solar thermal hot water systems. Also, solar thermal is very low cost. You get huge results for your subsidy.
Comment 3 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 15, 2005
This is a good news. renewable energy can be 50% of our electricy production in 10 years.
Comment 4 of 20
No image available
June 15, 2005
A mandate will (IMO) increase the cost of renewables. Owners of land with wind resources will hold out for higher lease costs, equipment prices will rise because of low availability and more marginal sites will wind up being developed. Increased efficiency (conservation) through the mentioned CAFE increases, incentives for home weatherization and more efficient equipment will reduce the need to construct new generation facilities and at a much lower cost. Some states (such as Washington and Oregon) are already 60%+ hydropower, so far exceed the proposed standard.
Comment 5 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 15, 2005
Mr Holt, zhark bring up VERY important points. As well-intentioned lawmakers debate this, real guts and long term planning (woefully missing from the current administration) will only be accomplished with tough emmision goals (CAFE), aggressive development in alternative fuels and infrastructure, and a national policy of energy independence. Creating conflict around the world to secure petroleum supplies is a waste of our ingenuity and creativity, not to mention $$$.
Comment 6 of 20
No image available
June 15, 2005
In its own terms, the amendment is fine; but don't forget that it is part of a noxious bill. It devotes vastly more money to propping up fossil fuels and nuclear energy, and still does nothing to raise CAFE (auto & truck mileage) standards.
Comment 7 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 15, 2005
Very good point. With the money we've spent over there we could have healthcare new roads and tax cuts!
Comment 8 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 15, 2005
man I hope this passes
Comment 9 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 15, 2005
sure would be nice if there were federal incentives and credits for individuals.
300 billion$ would have given 20,000,000
(20 million) US families a 50% credit for a 3kilowatt system at $10/watt installed
or 30gigawatts.

gosh, instead we blew up Iraq with those bucks.
Comment 10 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 15, 2005
Also we need to take into account the environmental and health costs when we are calculating the True costs of fossil fuel energy . And the huge government subsidies that the fossil fuel and nuclear industries receive !
Comment 11 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 15, 2005
In the long term though if we support these renewable energy technologies the prices will drop while at the same time fossil fuel prices continue to rise .
Comment 12 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 15, 2005
We will suffer with even more record-breaking gas and electric bills if this piece of legislation actually becomes law. This legislation will subsidize extremely expensive ways of producing energy. The added costs will be passed on to all of us.
Comment 13 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 16, 2005
Oil production has peaked. In the very near future the only homes with any electricity at all will be those powered by solar panels. The end of oil is upon us.
Comment 14 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 16, 2005
Interestingly enough the first comment and many more i am sure is about the cost to us!!!! what about the kids?? If anyone even asked the kids of today they would say yes and they happily pay for something of this nature whereas the energy we are using now has no nature included in its equation.
How can we call ourselves adults and still poison the future generations and then say it is cost effective?? Does anyone REALLYcare about children?...if so, I have not seen it in any of the policies from this administration nor form the christians at all!!!
Where are these people living?? Where do they want to live? .... or do they??
Comment 15 of 20
No image available
June 16, 2005
If they make it easier to buy, like putting stores up in town where the panels are easy to buy and also where they finance it like they do with cars with a very low interest loan, then we would all be tempted to buy solar and wind and put on our own rooftops and in our own gardens. If they offered a tax credit too, that would help. If the price of the panels would lower the cost of my electric bill and the monthly payments are low enough to have solar installed, then I would do it today!!!! What are we waiting for? Please open lots of solar and wind and hydro shops for us to have fun and feed the soul with by being friendly with the environment and enjoying watching TV and playing with the computer and our e-mails.

Thank-you
Comment 16 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 16, 2005
On face value, that's something to march behind. If it has any teeth behind it, ie penalty fees that grow with amount and length of time behind the curve with procedes feeding back into the effort, now that would be a modivation. What utility would want to subsidize it's competition. We certainly need something to break them out of the coal/gas/nuke mentality they're stuck in.
Comment 17 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 17, 2005
This is just a "pork barrel" bill designed to make a few energy suppliers very rich. This bill is not designed to solve our energy problems.
Comment 18 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 18, 2005
Response to solarseattle:

The cost is important because the same subsidy that you give to expensive forms of renewable energy such as solar photovoltaics will produce ten times the results or more if you apply the same subsidy to inexpensive forms of renewable energy, such as solar thermal and wind power.

The cost tells you where you will get the best and most results for the subsidy.
Comment 19 of 20
No image available
Anonymous
June 20, 2005
Does anyone have a copy of this bill?

Some of these bills that are sold to us as renewable energy bills often contain (in the fine print), the biggest subsidies for fossil fuels, such as coal, oil and natural gas, and small subsidies for renewable energy.
Comment 20 of 20
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
Solar Electric Power Association altPOWER, Inc. SolarTech Consortium ABS Energy Research Bella Energy Global Marine Renewable Energy Conference
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo