Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

Does the Passage of a Stripped-Down Energy Bill Mean Momentum is Lost for Renewables?

Do you like this opinion & commentary?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 

The information and views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on its Web site and other publications.

24 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 24
December 19, 2007
Ironic, strange, and pathetic that Senator McCain, who claims to care about global warming failed to show up for the cloture vote that killed things like the RES. Too busy losing the presidential campaign I guess.
Comment
2 of 24
December 19, 2007
"So while politics, unfortunately, certainly can prove victorious in a near-term battle, public sentiment will inevitably demand further attention to what matters most in their eyes."

Wow, that's a statement crafted by a talented politician. Since when is public sentiment not a huge part of politics? Special interests craft public opinion through well funded efforts, and the public then puts pressure on elected officials... part and parcel of politics.

Granted, I sincerely hope the special interest parties in the renewables camp are the victors in this battle... but lets not pretend anyone seeking largesse from Uncle Sam can somehow stay out of the political mud hole.
Comment
3 of 24
December 21, 2007
Let me compliment you guys on a great discussion. I'm ready to man the barricades on a protest. Where is everybody?
Comment
4 of 24
December 21, 2007
..."What we are talking about here are "entrenched interests"."

Thanks Michael. I normally think more about what I want to express before hitting the submit button. I would like to revise my words and concur with your description.

However, an argument could be made that the RE bill would have been a benefit everyone!
Comment
5 of 24
December 21, 2007
The commenter who said "if the goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emmissions..." is only partly right. The other side of that coin should be "energy independence," being free from the enslavement of OPEC. And, if we get truly cost-effective, grid-competitive, solar technology, a lot of good things will happen without the government doing anything.
Comment
6 of 24
December 21, 2007
Giving 700 Billion to the "Pork" bill and nothing to RE is like eating all carbs and no greens; it is a very unhealthy diet. If Congress keeps this up, we are going to be a very sick country.

adrianakau2aol.com
Comment
7 of 24
December 21, 2007
Be careful how you use the "special interests" label. A case can be made for any group who wants something from the government is a "special interest". That label can be very easily turned around. What we are talking about here are "entrenched interests".
Comment
8 of 24
December 21, 2007
Perhaps letter writing, emails and phone calls to local politicians did not raise the profile of the renewable energy provisions high enough. The day after the vote all of the major networks and newspapers headlined with the baseball steroid scandal - little or nothing about stripping the energy bill bare and preserving big oil tax incentives.
How about an old fashion march on the capital? Call out all of the environmental groups, RE supporters, industry associations, GHG emission advocates, outraged citizens, informed college students, etc, etc. Surely a crowd of several thousand chanting and carrying signs will get some press coverage. Combine it with a coordinated web & texting campaign to get the young ones fired up.
Nothing gets better coverage than a mob, or motivates a politician like a crowd turing against them.
NO RE, NO PEACE.
Comment
9 of 24
December 21, 2007
If decentralized, community owned technologies, er solar, wind, ocean, geothermal could be centralized the way nukes, coal and oil can, perhaps the CONG (coal, oil, nukes, natural gas) industry wouldn't be so controlling and intransigent about adopting RE technologies and policy. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for distributed energy generation, hybrid RE systems, and the future of a world wide energy web—power to the ppl! But perhaps tactically, we in the RE industry need to approach this unyielding King CONG mindset from another angle? Just a thought...
Comment
10 of 24
December 21, 2007
Let's be honest. Whether it's in Congress, Bali or California's effort to limit vehicle greenhouse emissions the game is not going well for our side. And time to respond is short, probably even shorter than we now know.
Of course momentum is building, and there are any many dedicated people on our side. But will it be enough, and soon enough to make any real difference?
Comment
11 of 24
December 21, 2007
The USA is a Republic and not a democracy. The people we elect are supposed to act as a representative of us, NOT for special interests, not for the people with the deepest pockets. So, why can't we elect people that will represent us? Where are men that will hold true to US? BTW, McCain, you disgust me! I am a Renewable Energy business owner in Arizona and here's my message: You have a snowballs chance on a Phoenix highway in July of becoming my president.
Comment
12 of 24
December 21, 2007
Curses foiled again !
Comment
13 of 24
December 21, 2007
Nicely said Doug!
Comment
14 of 24
December 21, 2007
This may sound way out there but consider this. During the Vietnam police action some one coined the phrase, "What if you had a war, and no one showed up." What if medical marijuana has a place in the pharmaceutical arena and you can produce it yourself. What if every new house start produced a net zero energy home. Would these things allow the common man to benefit? I just got my bill for 235 gallons of heating fuel in the amount of $670. Did the administration reject the Renewable section of the Energy Bill and pass the Farm Bill which continues subsidies for for the rich. Renewables will continue to fight for their place in the energy spectrum because this is a war between the rich, (subsidized) and the poor that few realize is in progress. GO SOLAR!
Comment
15 of 24
December 21, 2007
If the goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, why isn't that the requirement instead of specifically requiring a certain amount of renewable energy?
Comment
16 of 24
December 21, 2007
It's enough to make a dyed in the wool Republican change to being a registered independent. No matter how many phone calls, hand written letters and e-mails to my elected officials- federal and state- got the message across to them. DISGUSTED,DISAPPOINTED,and ready for a change. Can't do any worse with a new group!Unless I'm wrong they work for the majority of us who said they want renewable energy legislation.
Comment
17 of 24
December 23, 2007
Does anyone know of a site that will tell us where we can direct resources and public opinion most effectively to create change? Writing my representatives here in California is simply speaking to the choir. Which representatives are up for election in '08, voted against RE and are vulnerable? That's where AWEA and Vote Solar need to be directing us to focus our efforts.
Comment
18 of 24
December 23, 2007
McCain just shot himself in the foot, he could have been a hero, but now he can't be president. I'd rather have Lou Dobbs and/or Jack Cafferty, at least their in touch with our needs and not in bed with corporate America.
Comment
19 of 24
December 24, 2007
If we concentrate our efforts and energy on the media, political,sports,(fill in the blank)... circus more than the real energy work, it is no wonder we are all in this sad current state of affairs. I contend that a multi-prong approach is necessary to crack this nut. 1) Science and technology are part of the answer to deliver viable solutions. 2)The ability of consumers to make an informed choice with their wallets and votes to sway the tide is also key to creating the support. Bad technologies and practices will evolve away if we choose to do better as a collective society. Totally informed energy choices applied intelligently by informed/committed voters who are passionate can have real sway in influencing the correct direction. Stay involved to make sure that elected officials do the job they promise and don't let them off the hook or they should be replaced with REAL workers.
Comment
20 of 24
December 29, 2007
Why is there not a word in this article or the previous comments about the ITC that was also excluded from the energy bill? The ITC is vitally important to solar power, just as the PTC is important to wind. Is the renewable energy community becoming so splintered that individuals only care about issues that are important to a narrow part of the RE picture?
Comment
21 of 24
December 29, 2007
I am am a Republican who is furious that one vote stopped the energy bill as written. I will consider voting for the Democratic nominee, after weighing all the other issues. I was really mad about the money still going to the oil companies, instead of to alternatives. I voted for Bush twice, and support Romney so far.

We need to really nail down the candidates positions on energy.
Comment
22 of 24
January 2, 2008
According to the White House and the Washington Post, President Bush wants to leave a legacy of being known as a green President. He definitely has a long way to go in a short time if he wants to be known as a green President. He will have to start encouraging a stronger renewable energy bill with Congress rather than threaten veto power because of renewable energy.
Comment
23 of 24
January 4, 2008
<span style="font-size: 7.5pt; font-family: Verdana">Good news!<span>&nbsp; </span>I just found this article at the Union of Concerned Scientist website that states that Congress did in fact renew the Pproduction Tax Credit (PTC)&nbsp;for one more year @ $0.019/KWH as part of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (H.R. 6408). <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/clean_energy_policies/production-tax-credit-for-renewable-energy.html" target="_blank">http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/clean_energy_policies/production-tax-credit-for-renewable-energy.html</a></span><span style="font-size: 7.5pt; font-family: Verdana">However, the UCS points out that with the uncertainty of a sustained tax credit investment in renewable projects, which may take mulitple years to implement, is discouraged.</span>
Comment
24 of 24
January 4, 2008
<span style="font-size: 7.5pt; font-family: Verdana">The Natural Resources Defense Council&nbsp;provides this comprehensive summary of the Energy Bill.&nbsp; It does not&nbsp;mention the&nbsp;ITC:&nbsp; <a href="http://www.nrdc.org/legislation/factsheets/leg_07103001A.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.nrdc.org/legislation/factsheets/leg_07103001A.pdf</a></span>
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

Carl Levesque

View Carl Levesque's Profile
About: Carl is Editor & Publications Manager at the American Wind Energy Association, where has worked since 2006. At AWEA he oversees AWEA's online and print publicat... more »

Advertise With Us

HESLIN ROTHENBERG FARLEY & MESITI P.C. Blue Sky Energy, Inc. Texas Renewable Energy Industries Association Natural Power Upsolar American Electric Technologies, Inc. (AETI) North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine North America Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Photovoltaics World Magazine Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters