The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Thursday, May 23, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search
Don't Miss The Great Solar Debate: Where Does the Global Solar Industry Stand? Click Here to Register! ×

Obama May Kill Key DOE Loan Guarantee Program

Jim Lane, Biofuels Digest
November 08, 2010  |  10 Comments

The Obama Administration has been debating an option to kill the Section 1705 DOE Loan Guarantee program and transfer remaining funds to a pool for Section 1603 investment tax credits. The move could be good for wind and solar, but bad news for biofuels companies.

Solar, Wind Win, Biofuels Lose

The big potential winner is wind energy (and possibly solar), as wind energy projects are helped by the Section 1603 program and in 2009 nearly 10,000 megawatts of wind energy were built in the US. Researchers at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory estimated that up to 25 percent of the capacity would not have been built if the tax credits had not been available.

The proposal was included in a package of options placed before President Obama by White House energy policy coordinator Carol Browner, former chief economic policy advisor Lawrence Summers, and Vice President Biden’s chief of staff Ron Klain. Among other options: improving the efficiency of the loan guarantee process, or limiting the oversight role of OMB and the US Treasury.

Lame-duck Session Is Key Target

The proposals, which require legislative approval, have been targeted for the lame-duck session where Democrats still control strong majorities in the House and Senate. They indicated that the new policy could be appended to the upcoming tax extenders package.

The advisors, however, warn that the option to defund the Section 1705 loan guarantee would risk incurring the wrath of Senate Energy chairman Jeff Bingaman, noting that the program is “his program.” Vice-President Biden is reported to favor streamlining the loan guarantee program rather than transferring funds to the investment tax credit program.

Admission of “Failure of Key Recovery Act program” Feared

The advisors also note that de-funding the Section 1705 program “could signal the failure of a Recovery Act program” that has been featured prominently by the Administration,” and runs the risk that Congress will agree to take the funds away from the loan guarantee program but fail to apply them towards the investment tax credits.

The goal is to get dollars out of the door before the Recovery Act funding sunsets on September 30, 2011, or before Congress re-appropriates the funds towards other purposes. Already, Congress has redirected $3.5 billion of the funds towards cash for clunkers and other urgent funding priorities.

The advisors note that conditional commitments would need to be finalized by March to close before the overall program sunsets. They further note that OMB review is taking an average of 28 days on top of the extensive due diligence and negotiated changes in the financing structure required by DOE, plus policy review by the White House and Treasury has “occasionally extended the amount of time a project is under review.”

With Republicans intent on enforcing strict, pay-as-you-go financing restrictions, Democrats fear that the untapped loan guarantee funds will prove too tempting a target for Congressional initiatives that will require offsetting budget cuts in order to progress towards passage.

The loan guarantees were developed to assist in proving out the feasibility of transformational projects in order to unlock the availability of traditional project finance, which traditionally avoids first-of-kind technologies. Instead, the DOE has been able to deploy only 2.5 percent of the $2.5 billion in funds, and have given conditional commitments to nine other programs which would obligate another $500-$900 million, according to the brief.

100-200 Staff Closing 4 Loans

The policy background penned by Browner, Summers and Klain paints a picture of organizational gridlock in the execution of the loan guarantee process. The 1603 tax credit program involved a 4-6 week review period, closed 3851 projects and required a staff of 20 full-time employees at Treasury and DOE.

By contrast, the 1705 Loan Guarantee program involves a 6+ month review period, has closed four loans, and requires a staff of “100-200 FTE DOE staff and contractors,” according to the White House memo.

Former Obama Administration official, DOE Director of Minority Impact Joe Garcia, described the loan guarantee process as “A disaster. Nothing could get through. I would get them on the phone and beg people to move these projects along. You have my OK  – just get going. We need the jobs.”

The Digest’s Take

The Browner memo is a classic study of a government project that choked on a lethal combination of high ambition and inexperience. Among the factors they cite are an overly consultative process of review, an aversion to risk, and a bloated bureaucracy.

We agree that the Section 1705 program has gone off the tracks, but Vice-President Biden is right: the program requires streamlining, not abandonment. Going back to the legislature, in this uncertain environment, could have disastrous implications.

As far as the option to combine restructuring of clean energy policy with the tax extenders package, we have seen all year defeat after defeat of the tax extenders when it is combined with anything. How many defeats will convince the White House that the tax extenders should not be used as a sweetener for other, more controversial actions?

The President does not need an Act of Congress to bail out the loan guarantee program; an act of leadership will do. By engaging broadly, quickly, decisively with industry and other stakeholders, and streamlining the Administration’s review process, clean energy can accelerate.

A copy of the memo is downloadable, here.

10 Comments

Register To Comment
ANONYMOUS
November 19, 2010
The DOE had a number of "breakthrough" technologies that either individually or combined would have put us all this time ahead in commercialization. Company A's technology was ready to go and fit the bill perfectly. It was a demonstrated technological ignorance for what comprised the basic functions of what the government had asked for from the newer companies who actually had the technology. These governmental know-nothings destroyed some very dedicated Americans when they simply gave up out of stupidity, short-sightedness and their devotion to business as usual awarding huge sums of tax dollars to obvious pigs that sure looked good to to an ignorant bureaucrat on paper,

Basically it comes down to faith in a large, campaign contributing corporation is easier to come by than faith in a smaller business where personalities are unknown. I think it's for this subjective "reason" that the American "Can Do spirit" was vacated by the Federal Government to line the pockets of corporations with nothing to offer but more research. Had they given $100mm to a friend and insider, I believe he would be hiring by the hundreds per month by now. What a deal! Why pay for such piss-poor performance? I won't. I'm done supporting my friends being tossed in the trash by the Federal Government on a whim. The GOP has exactly 2 years to make several miracles or I say we scratch both partys and create from nothing two new ones without the corruptedness.
They had the diamond in their hands, several of them. But chose the turquoise instead.

Last chance for th eGOP.
Andrew W
Andrew W
November 18, 2010
The DOE had $2.5 billion for "breakthrough" technologies and they couldn't find any. That's very telling.

I bet if they simply made it "prize money" for clean, affordable electricity maybe they'd find some breakthroughs.
Donna Napolitano
Donna Napolitano
November 18, 2010
To anonymous (where did you get your information??): NABCEP means: The North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners (NABCEP) and is the "gold standard" for PV and solar thermal installation certification. Designed to raise industry standards and promote consumer confidence, NABCEP offers certification and certificate programs to renewable energy professionals throughout North America.
After installing solar energy here in Michigan for 30 years I'm ok with there finally being a standard for solar installers. Especially one that covers North America. I'm tired of competing with fly by nighters that show-up every time a rebate comes around. Solar works well as an energy source and needs have solid credentials and a skilled workforce. Yes, many of the newer inverters make it a simple plug and play but there is a lot of design involved, working with utility companies, financing options, repair, service and support over time required. Many installations are not flashed right and can rot a roof at the footings - only trained true professionals know the small details that make a quality installation. I'm ok getting properly certified after all these years and adding dignity and credibility to a great field of clean energy that I want to see grow. Certification plus solid references and hundreds of not thousands of installations sounds golden to me.
Rich Barbarics
Rich Barbarics
November 18, 2010
NABCEP isn't needed. It's only another layer of administration with little purpose. Most installers I've dealt with as an employee or consultant are very competent and safety conscious and aren't certified. I did have a state certified contractor do some work recently - lousy job. I had to do the refixes myself to get it right.
Lawrence Carroll
Lawrence Carroll
November 16, 2010
It is obvious that inverter technology has been advanced enough that it is allowed "guerilla" solar operations to occur without mishap for the past ten or more years (inverter "plug and play" has been around for awhile). Thus over-regulation is quite possible. HOME POWER magazine used to have monthly stories of those who did these "underground" projects safely, though they were quite small in power and size.

While I have nothing against inspection before the "switch" is pulled, I would bet that government is overdoing it a bit in the regulation department . . . like the old joke about "the department of redundancy department."
JD Polk
JD Polk
November 12, 2010
Brian, I am a 20yr veteran of the Solar Industry and I have just mixed my AE Methodologies with the first of its kind low cost Solar Powered "Micro Housing" Kits starting @ 30K...
Almost all Major Metropolitan Areas in North America the top 3of there biggest concern's is still not enough affordable Housing. Let alone one that cost less upfront and cost less to live in as well...
Taking orders now…

SolarmanJD
Brian Herndon
Brian Herndon
November 10, 2010
I'm not on either side here but I think with so many "remodeling" companies now advertising solar pv systems, some sort of strong regulatory presence is needed. Although here in CA there are plenty of rules and regs already in place.
And by the way, unless they've changed it recently, NABCEP is actually North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners (this to include Canada I believe where one of the first directors was from).
ANONYMOUS
November 10, 2010
Funny how soooo many people believe they can install solar w/o any REAL qualifications or experience. IF you find the NABCEP exam too difficult, then you should not be installing solar--anybody owning a "white van" thinks they can enter to solar market--these entrants are simply giddy at the prospect of duping unsuspecting consumers.
1705 should be killed off and the money transitioned into 1603--Biden is an idiot and only trying to protect the administrations floundering from becoming obvious to the public (Solyndra is the poster child for this).
Admit your mistakes and move the money to where it is needed: (PROJECTS!)
Thomas M
Thomas M
November 10, 2010
Ditto, I bet all these solar lawmakers do not have a system installed at their house. Think of all the time and tax payer's money going into policy that the tax payer could of used to purchase and install a system for themselves and be independent of the grid. The products are readily available to purchase just as any other product. But do we have policy for toilet paper. We should with all the S#*% their pushing. They've already ousted thousand of small guys who got this business going and are pushing their own agenda, once again. Kills me we can let politicians make engineering decisions. As engineers, we should cut them off and do what is right as we were taught to do. Let them design and install their own systems and war machines, if they can.
ANONYMOUS
November 10, 2010
The same gridlock occurs in State Govt. When they will not allow qualified solar and wind project installers to "Install" because they now want NABCEP training as part of the qualifications. This is nuts! I know a dozen companies and contractors that have hundreds of installed and inspected systems working just fine with out NABCEP training. Take a hint From the title.. National Board of Certified (ENERGY) Practitioners,. This includes, OIL and Coal and Nuke, industries. The same people hampering Solar Industry efforts.

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Jim Lane

Jim Lane

Editor & publisher of Biofuels Digest, the most widely-read biofuels daily and newsletter. The Digest covers producer news, research, policy, policymakers, conferences, fleets and financial news. It is home to the Biofuels Digest Index™,...
  • About
  • Articles
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • The Future of Solar in Latin America
  • Fighting Blackouts: Japan Residential PV and Energy Storage Market Flourishing
  • The Economic Case for Divesting from Fossil Fuels
  • Are Run-of-River Hydroelectric Systems Ready to Ride US Currents?
  • Moniz Unanimously Confirmed As New DOE Chief

Most Commented

  • 12
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 10
    No Easy Fix for Broken Wind Turbine at US High School
  • 6
    Renewable Energy Research Initiative Launched in UK
  • 3
    Wind Turbine Lubrication and Maintenance: Protecting Investments in Renewable Energy

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • Canadian Clean Energy Conferences
  • AllEarth Renewables
  • DNV KEMA Energy & Sustainability
  • EnergyDreams LLC
  • Navigant
  • Arena Solutions
  • Renewables Academy AG (RENAC)
  • Fairtrade-Messe
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen 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 Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information