The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Wednesday, May 22, 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! ×

Senate Rejects 1603, PTC Amendment

Steve Leone, Associate Editor, RenewableEnergyWorld.com
March 13, 2012  |  54 Comments

The renewable energy industry's hope of extending a slew of federal programs was easily defeated on the Senate floor Tuesday.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., had introduced an amendment to a transportation bill that would have, among other things, extended the Production Tax Credit for one year and revived the expired 1603 Treasury grant.

But that amendment fell far short of the 60 votes required as Senators split 49-49, according to a message sent by the Solar Energy Industries Association on Tuesday afternoon. A separate amendment from Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., that called for an end to all federal energy subsidies failed handily, 72-26.

"We are disappointed that tens of thousands of American jobs are being put in peril by partisan gridlock in Washington," said American Wind Energy Association CEO Denise Bode. "Despite the partisan vote on these broader energy amendments, the fact remains that the wind Production Tax Credit enjoys bipartisan support in the House and Senate."

Bode continued to warn about the implications of letting the PTC expire. There's been lots of discussion within the industry, and in the halls of Congress, about what such a move would do to future developments and domestic manufacturing.

“The clock is ticking and the stakes for a timely extension of the PTC could not be clearer," said Bode. "We stand to lose one of America’s best new sources of American manufacturing jobs. With every day that goes by, layoffs are occurring and further job losses and even plant closings will accelerate with each month we near expiration in December. Economic studies have shown that Congressional inaction on the PTC could kill 37,000 American jobs, shutter plants and cancel billions of dollars in private investment.

We’ll continue to follow this story as it develops.

54 Comments

Register To Comment
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 26, 2012
mark-haggerty. Tell us more! Way back at the end of 2008, the actor in Arachnophobia did a commercial that Michigan was retooling themselves. Your state was sooo hard hit.

I agree with you 100%. I actually thought the renewable energy bill was tied to American jobs, but it's not. Panels and turbines are made everywhere except the U.S. The investor are companies like Marubeni, a Japanese giant, Barclay's Bank and foreign manufacturers. All this time, Americans are sitting on their thumbs. From what I see, many of the U.S. jobs are technicians and construction positions, and not in significant numbers either. The sick part is that the people are totally confused and lied to about the realities of our planet heating up. It's not a pretty picture. Those lies are coming from big oil, coal the rich.

"The Chinese dumping of panels has bugged me enough that my company, Michigan Solar & Wind Power Solutions, has refused to do jobs if the customer insists upon Chinese panels. We design, sell and install solar electric systems. I am from Michigan. With our proximity to Hemlock SemiConductor and Dow, we are poised to be the renewable manufacturing hub of the world if we have a level playing field. The percents you referred to are just part of it. The second portion, the Anti-Dumping portion, should be announced in May. That is the one that should be larger. What else we need to factor in is the markup of the importer and the reseller. Their markup will also be applied to their new cost so that will increase the import duty by about 20% to 25%. Every bit helps. It is nice to some else looks at the big picture and not accept anything as long as it drives down the price of panels. It amazes me that with the way the Chinese have put lead in the paint of kids toys, antifreeze in our pet food, mis-graded bolts that snap, drywall that eats copper pipes and wire, etc., etc., that people would trust them with such a large purchase of an item that has a 25 year warranty?!?!"
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 26, 2012
redeldorado. The area I'm referring to is a forest community. I've only been there a few times. I didn't see unsightly equipment there. Solar panels were on roofs. The wind mill were on individual properties. Batteries were on an enclosed porch. What I did see were flocks of turkey vultures!...had never seen them before in the sky.

I don't doubt that solar panels and turbines are ugly. I see and hear 100s of industrial turbines plus California requires red beacons on structures 200 ft or higher. Hundreds of acres of solar panels may as well be compacted oil wells. The solar on posts are real nasty. They can be seen for 20 or more miles on flat land.
roy ken
roy ken
March 25, 2012
If we are starting to count "visual" pollution I really think that some people might look in a mirror and really see what comes back at them, FFS there are plenty of places that are on grid that can be used, large estuaries (google Rotterdam) as for what counts air pollution that kills people that I recon is a tad more important. Every country has it and for the sake of our children I personally do not give a rats arse about what something may look like I do care that the rates of Asthma are so high now it it almost the norm.
Jack Wu
Jack Wu
March 25, 2012
The over charge of electricity is created by those greedy rich company. It is unfair. Those top rich people in Wall Street bring the disaster to normal American people. That's true. But it is not the good reason of stopping the development of renewable energy. In my opinion the large wind or solar farms have to be very cautious when built, because of the possible ecosystem problem. But they are still a major direction for the future energy development, maybe they can be built in desert and off shore. Small renewable energy is a good idea for the future energy development like Germany. China is leading in solar hot water utility, why American do not learn from them? We can always be able do something for this planet, for our children!
Doug Jones
Doug Jones
March 25, 2012
Excellent source given by sandcanyongal (for uctv lineup per Post 39 and the Seagrave interviews). Incredible!

Penny is right on the tip speed. There are certainly bird and bat kills. I don't know how it's monitored in CA, but here there are independent auditors that are required to be hired by the operators. Beech Ridge, the closest farm to my location, shuts down at night because a single Indiana Bat (endangered) was found dead at one of the turbines. Although Beech Ridge shuts down during one of its most productive times, the farm is still productive enough during the day to be a viable source of renewable energy. Beech Ridge is located on Meade Westvaco forested property, miles away from residential areas, an example of good siting. Tehachapi Pass is pretty much an abomination and example of the worst visual pollution that wind energy can produce.
William Lange
William Lange
March 25, 2012
So Penny, There is a small "off the grid" community just north of Searchlight, Nevada. There are wind turbines and solar panels galore adorning some really quaint homes. Before all these folks set up their eco-friendly abodes, that part of the desert used to be beautiful.
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 24, 2012
wja63. What is Germany doing? I believe all renewable energy changes and subsidies should be called to a halt until such time generation of energy that is free is developed. If companies need industrial level energy let them subsidize and pay the cost.

Here is my Edison bill this month:
Delivery charges
$ 6.98 Transmission charge
53.35 Distribution charge
.07 Nuclear decommissioning charge
13.42 Conservation adjustment
11.65 Public purpose program charge
1.73 New system generation
Generation charges
7.33 competition transition charge
Overall energy charges
1.37 franchise fees
Total: 95.81

Electric was $64.98 and $95.81 were for all of the above itemized charges. This is ridiculous! Over 40 million people are on food stamps in the U.S. because our jobs have been moved to other countries that don't have pollution laws and/or are communist countries and use child labor. This country is hanging it's hat on destructive "supposed" renewable energy that isn't renewable - the wind doesn't shine every day, the wind doesn't blow 24 hours a day. What is not renewable are our wildlands. Either America needs to evolve and demonstrate some level of maturity and pulls the plug on profiteers making their fortune off the backs of life support systems or the people will take into our own hands to stop it.
Jack Wu
Jack Wu
March 23, 2012
I consern very much what kinds of energy could be used by my grandchildren, grandchildren's grandchildren...if we have no any action to protect our resources now. We can see what German people are doing now. They are indeed excellent!
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 23, 2012
Jack, my understanding is that they spin at between 150-200 mph at the tips. This is not slow. Another consideration is that many birds migrate at night. They cannot see in the fog, that is common in the mountainous areas, any better than you or me. Raptors, owls, burrowing owls and most other birds have no idea what spinning blade can do to them. There are pictures of them sitting on idle blades. It's difficult to accurately know the upper numbers of birds and bats that die because the wind farms are fenced off and/or in inaccessible areas.
Jack Wu
Jack Wu
March 23, 2012
The blade of wind mill usually rotates slowly, it rarely hurts birds. Who saw that? It should not be a main reason of objection to wind energy! Gas is not reneable, it should be used in necessary.
Doug Jones
Doug Jones
March 23, 2012
sandcanyongal, you are quite right that GE sells gas-fired turbines and operates them alongside some of their wind turbine farms. But you tell only part of the story. There is a reason for this seeming silliness.

When turbines are not producing, due to lack of wind, the grid they feed, needs adequate saturation in order to fulfill the demands of its customers. There are a number of possible solutions, but the one GE came up with in Texas was to install a gas turbine which is brought on line when the wind turbines run below a certain production level. That way, an expensive coal-fired power plant does not need to be built to offset the low-production phases of the wind farm. The gas turbine is very efficient and although its fuel is more expensive than wind, still a less expensive solution than a coal-fired plant. All in all, it's a hybrid solution that really does make sense. Just sounds weird.
Doug Jones
Doug Jones
March 23, 2012
Anonymous, you parrot the fossil fuel industry talking points perfectly. Here's what I think about what you said:

1. Noise: Small turbines are much noisier (comparatively, sound output to energy output) than utility-scale turbines. Their aerodynamic engineering is less refined as are pitch controls notably absent in the small wind arena. Thus, more noise per kW output.

2. Efficiency: Small wind turbines rarely deliver over 23% of the energy in the wind; much less efficient than modern utility-scale turbines, which all deliver well over 30% and most approach, and a few exceed 40%... not too far from the theoretical limit of 59%. So if you're an efficiency nut, you should not favor small over utility-scale, which are extremely efficient machines.

3. Health Effects: Cite one proven example of wind turbines harming an individual, please! If you want to see harmful effects, look to fossil fuel energy producers. Let me invite you to read a number of National Academies of Science reports. Here's one: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12794 You can download the free PDF.

4. Property Values: again, cite, please!

5. If you drive a car, you participate in a much greater annual slaughter of birds and bats than wind turbines cause.

There's always a tiny grain of truth in all these inflated claims, but they are exaggerated to the extreme and, most importantly, to the benefit of the industry that wants to perpetuate their own existence and stifle that of the emerging renewable power industries. It really ticks me off when I hear this b.s. because it's often voiced by well-meaning but poorly-informed people, and the insidious underlying source of the misinformation is inherently evil and motivated by greed.
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 23, 2012
gaucho. I agree 100% with you!

I talked with my husband today about his take on gas turbines. "Because the turbines are so intermittent, GE sells both regular and gas powered turbines that are run by huge jet engines. The fracking is being pushed to bring down the price of natural gas to fit the structure for big business." He is both a satellite scientist, an MITer and an attorney.
ANONYMOUS
March 23, 2012
Roy 2, I have no problem with solar roof panels, or some kind of small wind turbine that a homeowner buys, providing it is not noisy, and by that I mean no louder than 5 dBA above ambient sound at a neighbor's property line. My complaint is with the huge inefficient industrial wind turbines that slash birds to pieces, destroy the piece and quiet of rural areas, cause health effects for near by residents and as a kicker, lower property values. It seems that when looking at renewable energy, we can be smarter than that when developing viable alternatives.
roy ken
roy ken
March 23, 2012
@ ANONYMOUS COMMENTS 8, 10 24 mate there are 915+ trillion kW per day that comes down to this earth so not to use this stuff is not good (unless you are an oil company or nuke of course)

so while the efficiency of panels is increasing, the gearing of wind generators is getting better you want to winge but give no alternative.

We have solar on our family roof and it works just fine, the wind generator down the road works just fine, the power station up the road also works so I guess in the short term we are good.

Long term I would like to get a bigger roof. the stuff works and well. It does create jobs, at many levels, so now you can go to bed and realize that you have been listened to well done
Ralph allen
Ralph allen
March 23, 2012
I do not think you guys get it. Look at the lop sided vote. The Republicans' are against any alternative fuels cause they are whores for the carbon industry. Their position is that Global warming does not exist was adopted to support the carbon industry. With that understanding you can see why they killed the bill. The alternative energy industry is just catching on and now they will pull out all stops to kill it or at least slow it down substantially.

Given Globl warming and the future impacts the Republicans are committing crimes against humanity
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 23, 2012
Maybe some of you don't have the time to read. There are some good sources like going to w w w uctv dot tv and click on the Science icon. Then click on Climate Change and Global Warming. Watch some of the presentations to become more familiar. Look for the Charles Revelle series. Start with Eyewitness to Global Warming. Will Steger is an explorer.

Another good place is to look for A Scientist, his Work and Climate Reckoning. It's about Charles Keeling - the Keeling curve, an article from the New York Times 2010 12 20 date.

I'm spreading out how to find links because the last link I provided previously comes out as spam.
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 23, 2012
So William, Since the desert has already be touched to keep going and to ruin it? Put the equipment in the cities that are already ruined. People won't even notice solar panels or they'll make it a media sensation.

Please, go into the desert. It is not barren or lifeless. To the contrary. Are any of you aware that the great Mojave Desert is the only desert in the entire United States? Why are any of you so ready to wreck it? Guys. You, me, we only live about a maximum of 80 years. We can't do anything about past but if we don't band together your children won't be able to reverse what is coming. This is settled.
Doug Jones
Doug Jones
March 22, 2012
I don't think the answer is purely in the single viewpoint of sandcanyongal, redeldorado or in mine. We'll find it in the wiggly line between all the opinions that weighed in here in this thread. Can we all agree at least that wind and solar, in whatever form factor and scale, are preferable to fossil fuels? If so, we can move ahead on that basic agreement to more detailed plans that offer reasonable solutions and viable alternatives to the way we're doing things now. And if I'm getting it, for all of us who are posting here, we're not happy with the way we're doing things now.
William Lange
William Lange
March 22, 2012
sandcanyongal I'm sorry you havn't noticed this, but the desert has already been touched. When you really get to spend some time in the desert you will be surprised by the number of power transmission lines that cris-cross the desert in every direction. So I'm suggesting that these remote rights of way are already allocated to the power companies so why not locate low profile turbines on them? The milky way will still be crystal clear and just as awesome, but not if we don't slowly pull away from fossil fuels. Like alot of folks, I love the desert. I'm a geode and meteorite hunter that uses that as an excuse just to be out there.
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 22, 2012
There is a community called Old West Ranch in the unincorporated area of east Kern County that is gridless. They use solar panels and small wind mills on their properties. They use what appear to be car batteries, like 12 or more of them to capture energy. They run all of their household appliances on them. Are you ready for this! They are being inundated with wind turbines around them. If you want to Google them, the community is in southern California, each of the City of Tehachapi, south of the 58 freeway and west of the 14 freeway, south of Highline Road and east of Tehachapi-Willow Springs Road. If you pan in you will see the hundreds of turbines around that grid-free community. Now the former senator, Phil Wyman, who owns much of Tehachapi Mountain wants to put in his own wind farm.
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 22, 2012
redeldorado. The desert should not be touched. Period. Who cares about the public eye! Seriously. I lived for 25 years never seeing a star. I didn't even know what the Milky Way was until my husband pointed it out when we moved to Tehachapi. Did you know that you can see satellites zooming across the sky at dawn and dusk then get on the web and figure out which country owns it? Being a city girl, it took years of living on the edge of the desert to cherish the rhythm (sp) of life that occurs. On a city property with grass covering the land, most people are oblivious to life, except our own.
William Lange
William Lange
March 22, 2012
sandcanyongal-Solar doesn't work well at night either. The reason wind turbines aren't turning is that they're positioned in windy passes near highways big enough to accomodate the large cranes and transport trucks. Windy passes are mostly windy during changes in atmospheric pressure in the region. There are big changes coming regarding energy storage in terms of super capacitors. Solar and wind energy haven't hit their pace because conventional generators have to still run "low state" to fill in during interruptions of the "green sources". Oh, getting back to wind...there are many remote locations where the wind blows most of the time but these areas don't lend themselves to the installation of conventional turbines because it's too hilly and the dirt roads don't accomodate large trucks. Suppose you had a turbine where the blades spun on a horizontal plane (like a helicopter) and performed nicely on 30 ft. towers, and the generator and maintenance were at ground level. Now suppose clusters of that turbine design were positioned in remote areas near large power transmission lines that cross the California desert out of the public eye but linked to the grid. You'd have something, wouldn't you?
Mark Hagerty
Mark Hagerty
March 22, 2012
Sandcanyongal - The Chinese dumping of panels has bugged me enough that my company, Michigan Solar & Wind Power Solutions, has refused to do jobs if the customer insists upon Chinese panels. We design, sell and install solar electric systems. I am from Michigan. With our proximity to Hemlock SemiConductor and Dow, we are poised to be the renewable manufacturing hub of the world if we have a level playing field. The percents you referred to are just part of it. The second portion, the Anti-Dumping portion, should be announced in May. That is the one that should be larger. What else we need to factor in is the markup of the importer and the reseller. Their markup will also be applied to their new cost so that will increase the import duty by about 20% to 25%. Every bit helps. It is nice to some else looks at the big picture and not accept anything as long as it drives down the price of panels. It amazes me that with the way the Chinese have put lead in the paint of kids toys, antifreeze in our pet food, mis-graded bolts that snap, drywall that eats copper pipes and wire, etc., etc., that people would trust them with such a large purchase of an item that has a 25 year warranty?!?!
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 22, 2012
Does it bother anyone that a measly 2.9-4.73% tariff has been placed on imported Chinese solar panels? Our renewable energy components should be 100% made in America. This was the original job creation structure put in place. Yet, communists have your and my jobs and I is wrong on every level. The tariff should be 50-100%.

The story line is that they are made cheaper there. On this end it appears to be more expensive to have our hard working American men and women sitting on our thumbs with 46 million citizens on food stamps, loosing their homes, on unemployment, with only minimum wage jobs available so developers can get cheap labor somewhere else. This doesn't jive. When manufacturing goes to another country, so do the secrets, research and development, design engineering, manufacturing engineering, IT, customer service, management, AR, AP, payroll, GL and all the rest of the position that Americans used to hold.
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 22, 2012
redeldorado. Wind is intermittent, therefore, not so free. I see hundreds of turbines outdoors. They are idle much of the time, like 50-60% idle. Wind blows at night, when the energy isn't needed as much.

When a turbine has a mechanical problem or quits working the equipment can be down for months because of the danger of going up 350 feet. Maintenance is carefully timed.

So is water (hydro), solar (sun), geothermal (steam), gas (fracking), oil (drilling), coal (mining) free once the energy source is captured.

Sun is free while it shines
Jack Wu
Jack Wu
March 22, 2012
Yes, EV must use LOCAL RENEWABLE ENERGY to fuel their batteries, not grid electricity which is dirty! That is exactly green!
Michael Grish
Michael Grish
March 22, 2012
Renewable energy is a LOCAL issue, and as such, the federal gov't. is impotent in moving it forward as we would like to see it. Rooftop solar, small wind turbines, geothermal heating and cooling, microhydro, biogas, energy efficiency improvements, and other technologies such as plug-in cars are renewable solutions that are viable NOW. But these are not being taken seriously by the gov't. Look what is happening to the PACE project nationwide. Look at how the feds ended the tax credits for energy efficiency improvements and rooftop solar. The federal government's ear is tuned to Big Business. We must institute real renewable energy at the local and state levels. Thank you REW for the excellent forum.
William Lange
William Lange
March 22, 2012
The wind is free! No need to drill mile deep holes and come up dry. No need for pipelines, refineries, huge tankers, and dealing with folks that hate us. Why then, the need for subsidies for wind? The answer: Current wind turbines are patterned after the old Dutch type wind mill. Exotic, and expensive, "lift" blades struggling to move at right angles to the wind flow. 3 million $ plus per turbine! These turbines require lots of transportation, installation, and maintenance costs! Yet the folks that shout the loudest about the need for more funding and subsidies have no clue about the details of how turbines work and why they are so expensive. They just love the money and the power to dole out that loot to their ever growing list of cronies! There is a better way to extract energy from wind. Instead of studying and talking the subject to death, I've actually done something to allow the industry to stand on it's own two feet and step away from the food trough! I have a patent pending on a common sense turbine design that addresses every negative surrounding current turbine designs. Interested?
Jack Wu
Jack Wu
March 22, 2012
We can have new way to encourage wind energy forward. Small wind turbines with high efficiency and small size could be widely used by home like rooftop solar panel. It can work 24h a day and produce more power to families. Distributed renewable energy always become the first choice to the green power sector.
ANONYMOUS
March 22, 2012
Donalwmayfield. Shame on you for working to perpetuate the myth that wind energy does not cause serious problems. Do you live within a mile and half of wind turbines? Do you live with the noise day in and day out? See the flashing red lights in your night sky? I had a lot of better things to do before they build the turbines near my home. Now I work full time to change state noise regulations and get out the word that wind turbines ruin lives. Go see the documentary Windfall and begin to educate yourself on the impact of wind turbines. It is ignorant people, such as yourself, that have gotten us in this untenable position.
ANONYMOUS
March 22, 2012
Thank you sandacanyongal for speaking the truth!Wind energy is a destructive, inefficient technology and due to inadequate noise regulations and inadequate setback laws in the US, grass roots groups who have been forced to live with these gigantic machines are fighting back! Those of us who live near wind turbines have no other choice! It is about time that the wind industry lose their subsidies for the destruction they have wreaked. Industrial sized turbines do not belong in neighborhoods and in beautiful scenic areas. Next, they want to dig up the country putting in transmission lines! People in the wind industry need to wake up to the fact that they are ruining the environment as well as the lives of people who live near these things. For each job the wind industry creates, the trade off is lower property values, serious health effects, and lower quality of life for those who live within a mile and half of them. Unless the wind industry does a better job of siting turbines, it is never going to get anywhere in the US. If we really want to save money on energy, put solar panels on people's roofs and provide funds to make buildings more efficient! These are technologies that actually WORK. For those people who have not seen the documentary Windfall, I suggest you do so and begin to understand what the wind industry is doing to small rural towns and American citizens who make the mistake of believing wind is "green."
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 22, 2012
electric38. You are singing to the choir. It would warm my heart to hear that Bush & Cheney were indicted for acts of treason. You will definitely appreciate this audio that you can listen to right on the web. Sometimes it helps to review the bad actors of past to better to better target in, on who the bad guys are: http://spitfirelist.com/audio/audio-600-699/
FTR #689 Inter­view with Ster­ling and Peggy Sea­grave Side 1
FTR #689 Inter­view with Ster­ling and Peggy Sea­grave Side 2
Ralph Perez
Ralph Perez
March 22, 2012
No doubt the same aforementioned group will claim responsibility (check the recent $650 billion military budget votes) for the 9 innocent Afghan children shot in the head recently to help our efforts to secure oil pricing in the mid east. These women and children are heroes in the deepest sense of the word. Whoops, there goes another increase in the price of gasoline. Iranian children are next. Can we get some close up shots of these kids missing eyes, ears, legs and arms on the national 5 o clock news? Oh, I almost forgot, the Pentagon censored these types of stories once the Viet Nam war profiteering and political manipulation was exposed. Out of sight, out of mind. Go wikileaks!
Ralph Perez
Ralph Perez
March 22, 2012
Oil & gas money talks (a few examples) ... Our children and grandchildren will suck down pollutants for many years to come.
These well paid makers of todays laws will make sure

ORep. Steven Pearce [R, NM-2] Republican $370,020
Rep. Mike Pompeo [R, KS-4] Republican $333,156
Rep. Bill Flores [R, TX-17] Republican $266,184
Rep. Cory Gardner [R, CO-4] Republican $205,124
Rep. Dan Boren [D, OK-2] Democrat $201,800
Rep. John Sullivan [R, OK-1] Republican $179,200
Rep. Jeff Landry [R, LA-3] Republican $176,050
Rep. Tim Griffin [R, AR-2] Republican $164,709 $164,709
Rep. James Lankford [R, OK-5] Republican $156,760
Rep. Rick Berg [R, ND-0] Republican $151,561 $151,561
Rep. Michael Conaway [R, TX-11] Republican $136,850
Rep. Tim Murphy [R, PA-18] Republican $133,700
Rep. Dennis Rehberg [R, MT-0] Republican $133,152
Rep. Steve Scalise [R, LA-1] Republican $125,335 $125,335
Rep. Francisco Canseco [R, TX-23] Republican $121,767
Rep. Pete Olson [R, TX-22] Republican $106,400
Rep. Tom Cole [R, OK-4] Republican $103,400
Rep. Cynthia Lummis [R, WY-0] Republican $97,750 $97,750
Rep. Doc Hastings [R, WA-4] Republican $97,171
Rep. Kevin Brady [R, TX-8] Republican $94,900
Rep. John Culberson [R, TX-7] Republican $91,550
Rep. Kay Granger [R, TX-12] Republican $79,850
Rep. Ted Poe [R, TX-2] Republican $79,700 $79,700
Rep. Glenn Thompson [R, PA-5] Republican $73,600
Rep. William Thornberry [R, TX-13] Republican $68,425
Rep. Blake Farenthold [R, TX-27] Republican $67,600
Rep. Doug Lamborn [R, CO-5] Republican $39,750
Rep. John Fleming [R, LA-4] Republican $203,400
Rep. Mike Ross [D, AR-4] Democrat $141,450
Doug Jones
Doug Jones
March 22, 2012
I will try to do just that, sandcanyongal. Thanks for the serious and thoughtful words. It sounds like we're talking now. I like that.
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 21, 2012
dojo. Good catch on wording. I meant that depending on the grade that 50 and even 60 acres can be graded. The actual pad size varies. The use of the word "gas" for gas turbines does mean natural gas.

I started out open minded about the benefits of wind energy. It is no longer my opinion. You are too kind if you refer to me as a whiner or obstructionist. My suggestion is that you spend some time, where there are multiple clustered wind facilities. Poll a few of the people living in the community you visit for their opinions.
Doug Jones
Doug Jones
March 20, 2012
A 50-acre pad. Amazing! That's roughly the same size as 50 football fields. For a wind turbine. Utter nonsense! And gas turbines don't run on gasoline. They're fueled by natural gas, which is metered in cubic feet, not gallons. Check your so-called facts.

I thought this forum was a place for like-minded environmentally conscious people to pool their efforts. Seems there's always a cadre of negative, obstructionist whiners that make things unpleasant enough for the good people to bail out.
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 20, 2012
You minimize the effects on the environment with wind turbine development. I actually live with turbines every day of my life and see the complete destruction they cause. First, the material for the turbines are mined, manufactured and transported. This is not a clean process. 10% of destruction is for roads,some of the pads are up to 50 acres, depending on their position, the turbines are intermittent and will require gas turbines to fill the gap. In the case of North Sky River project in Jawbone and Kelso Valley, 88 million gallons (estimated only) will come out of a wetland, with the expectation that the level will drop by 9 or more feet. Please tell me where the destruction stops, long and short term? The wind plants kill flying creatures that happen thru their blades within the bounds of 21.4 sq miles, just on this single facility. Further exfoliants are used to keep the brush under control. There is nothing in the eir about the brands, amounts or effect that will going into the water table over the course of 20-25 years.

The fact is that this is old Enron crap that was bought by GE and sold to congress as the only solution available today and they bought it. We are paying a full 30% as stakeholders in technology that should be on our rooftops. It is political. That money should be spent on developing rooftop solutions at their source and made in America. I contend that Edison, PG&E and CPUC can be disbanded permanently with free solar if adequate R&D is conducted. This is my answer to your previous post.
Doug Jones
Doug Jones
March 20, 2012
sandcanyongal, it would appear from your reaction that you think I was advocating clean coal. Not sure how you transformed my post into that, but it couldn't be farther from my intent or reality. Clean coal is not real. Further scrubbing to clean up coal fired plants is possible, but difficult and costly.

How am I "b.s.ing?" and how am I suggesting we replace one destructive tech with another? More importantly, what is your solution for solving our dependency on fossil fuels? Turning trash into gold is a wonderful dream, but not at all a viable solution. It's fine to criticize, but when you do, you ought to have a realistic alternative solution, not just lip service to the zero impact ideal. I would argue that everything we do has an impact on our planet, and as such, everything can be positioned as a "destructive" technology. Some people are advocating a return to the cave. Is that a realistic approach? I think not.

What I did say was that a comparison of mountain top removal to wind farms is a dramatic one. Our mountains are being ground up for fuel, with the effluent polluting our rivers and streams, and poisoning our people. Wind farms do none of that. I'm not saying wind farms have no impact, I'm arguing that, while nothing is perfect, wind farms and solar technologies are vastly preferable to continued reliance on fossil fuels.
Mark Hagerty
Mark Hagerty
March 20, 2012
Anonymous - You have a few fact completely wrong. In fact crystalline panels, depending on their manufacturer, will produce enough power to offset the power used in their creation within the first year to eighteen months, and the power it takes to install and monitor is negligible maybe adding another year. How long does coal take? As far as their life expectancy high quality domestically made solar panels will last over forty years. The first solar electric panels produced by SolarWorld and Sanyo are still producing power over thirty-five years after they were put into service. Solar also has the ability to create their power at the time of day the power companies need it. So with their ability to shave peak demand it makes the grid much more stable and secure. What I am the most mad about is how solar is marketed by the industry, and the way the government thinks they know better then the private markets which company and technology will last. If we would have had substantial tax breaks for investment dollars into renewable energy companies it would have saved taxpayers almost a trillion dollars. If it was marketed the way I see it solar electric would be a platform for even the most conservative person, like me.
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 20, 2012
dojo. You suggest to replace one destructive technology with another destructive technology! Further. There are NO plans to get off of coal or oil. "Clean Coal" advertisements. Have you seen them on TV, in magazines and on the news sites? Every oil company has lobbyists in Washington pressing Congress and the energy department to the point that the energy department has opened up more drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and the Arctic.

Who are you b.s.ing? It's in our faces every day about the realities.
Doug Jones
Doug Jones
March 20, 2012
I'm at a loss as to the negativity about solar and nearly complete lack of comment on wind. If you argue that these industries are incapable of surviving without subsidy help, take a look at the century of handouts the fossil fuel and half century of nuclear subsidies that got those energy technologies off the ground. Coal is replete with negative impacts... from severe and measurable health costs to REAL environmental problems and harm. And natural gas is no innocent child of fossil fuels either. To the comment about the "complete and total destruction of our pristine mountains," how would you compare a wind farm along a ridge line to mountain top removal, which we live with for real here in Appalachia. Is there any debate here as to which is more destructive?

The reason these specious arguments are made is because the entrenched industries behind them are so powerful. Why? Because their coffers are stuffed with cash from many decades of government subsidies, and those subsidies continue on today. It's made, and continues to make their execs and stockholders very rich, and they will keep the pressure on in Washington DC and state capitals to ensure the status quo. As we say here in Virginia, "Coal owns Richmond." You can bet they don't want that to end, nor do they want that fact made known to the public.

To the comment about the desirability of distributed renewables, I agree. I believe that power use at the production source is certainly an important practice for the future. But to think that utility scale wind and solar are not viable is to ignore the facts.

The USA is behind other countries in adopting these technologies because of the unfair advantage and SIGs behind the fossil fuel and nuclear industries. That fossil fuels will continue to become more and more expensive as years go by is logical. That wind and solar will become less expensive as their technologies advance is also logical. Decide which way you want to go.
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 15, 2012
Anonymous. Thanks for your sanity. Peace.
Penny Melko
Penny Melko
March 15, 2012
I live in the Tehachapi Pass. The only jobs are for people who move here from other states! There are very few local jobs. I'm not a bit against people working but the industrial turbines and industrial solar are destructive monsters and we don't want it. We don't buy into the complete and total destruction of our pristine mountains, farmland that should remain farmland considering there is only 1/2 acre of arable land per person on earth and we don't want our Mojave desert decimated. This is our final decision. To bring jobs back to the U.S. put a 50% tariff on all good imported into the U.S. Start rebuilding America as a sustainable country by recycling, reusing and remaking every single piece of post consumer/post commercial product and only mine or drill when it is absolutely necessary. We want rooftop solar at the source where it will be used. Then we will get rid of the (California) CPUC, Edison and PG&E monster monthly bills that none of us can afford. The average electric bill/mo $387. There are other jobs for renewable energy. We the people want to subsidize something we agree with and can buy into, not the Enron junk being pushed down our throats.
ANONYMOUS
March 15, 2012
There are opportunities for jobs that are better than solar subsidies. It is a fact that the energy to create, install and monitor solar panel will not be replace by the solar panels life time of electrical production; even if the panels reach their expected live.......which they will not! As far as jobs 'created and worth' we can have the out of work solar workers make Portable Fox Holes or some other worthless products and stop the production of worthless solar panels/
Donald Wagner
Donald Wagner
March 15, 2012
What is somewhat surprising is that both Arizona senators voted against it when solar can make such a big difference for the better in thier state.

McCain R-AZ N
Kyl R-AZ, N

In Nevada it was split
Heller R-NV N

Not surprising, all Hawii, California and New Mexico Senators voted for it. It looks like these senators are NOT doing what is in their state's best interest just to follow party lines. A two party system does not work very well, especially when the minority party is just are just obstructionists. Anyone have good ideas on how to make it a three or more party system?

By not renewing the 1603, to take the tax credit, often times the companies buying the solar need to make deals with other companies that need the tax write off. I believe that it incereases the financing cost by about 10 to 15%. The irony is that it costs the government the same amount either way.
ANONYMOUS
March 14, 2012
IT WOULD HAVE MADE NO DIFFERENCE IF TEH PTC WOULD HAVE PASSED

REMEMBER IT AFFECTS STATES AND TAX S CORPS.

MOST STATES ARE STRAPPED FOR CASH NOW SO TAKING AWAY TAXES ON PART TIME ENERGY MAKES NO SENSE
GOD MORAL LAWS/NATURE WIN AGAIN

NEWER ALTERNAITVE ENREGY SOURCES ARE ON THE HORIZON SO BE PATIENT

AS LONG AS 45 TO 50 MILLON AMERICAN ARE OUT OF WORK ON FOOD STAMPS ENERGY PRODUCTION WILL DECLINE
john e johnson
john e johnson
March 14, 2012
Don't be too hard on the Dems who voted "no" YET. They probably knew it would fail and they wanted to save face during this election year.
All of them are up for election except for Warner - D-VA. His "no" vote doesn't make a lot of sense to me. He may need to be reminded who butters his bread.
Tom Davies
Tom Davies
March 14, 2012
Sorry, 4, not 2, Ds N:

Warner D-VA N
Webb D-VA N
Manchin D-WV N
McCaskill D-MO N
Tom Davies
Tom Davies
March 14, 2012
Rs Y = 0, Ds N = 2

Akaka D-HI Y
Alexander R-TN N
Ayotte R-NH N
Barrasso R-WY N
Baucus D-MT Y
Begich D-AK Y
Bennet D-CO Y
Bingaman D-NM Y
Blumenthal D-CT Y
Blunt R-MO N
Boozman R-AR N
Boxer D-CA Y
Brown D-OH Y
Brown R-MA N
Burr R-NC N
Cantwell D-WA Y
Cardin D-MD Y
Carper D-DE Y
Casey D-PA Y
Chambliss R-GA N
Coats R-IN N
Coburn R-OK N
Cochran R-MS N
Collins R-ME N
Conrad D-ND Y
Coons D-DE Y
Corker R-TN N
Cornyn R-TX N
Crapo R-ID N
DeMint R-SC N
Durbin D-IL Y
Enzi R-WY N
Feinstein D-CA Y
Franken D-MN Y
Gillibrand D-NY Y
Graham R-SC N
Grassley R-IA N
Hagan D-NC Y
Harkin D-IA Y
Hatch R-UT Not Voting
Heller R-NV N
Hoeven R-ND N
Hutchison R-TX N
Inhofe R-OK N
Inouye D-HI Y
Isakson R-GA N
Johanns R-NE N
Johnson D-SD Y
Johnson R-WI N
Kerry D-MA Y
Kirk R-IL Not Voting
Klobuchar D-MN Y
Kohl D-WI Y
Kyl R-AZ, N
Landrieu D-LA Y
Lautenberg D-NJ Y
Leahy D-VT Y
Lee R-UT N
Levin D-MI Y
Lieberman ID-CT Y
Lugar R-IN N
Manchin D-WV N
McCain R-AZ N
McCaskill D-MO N
McConnell R-KY N
Menendez D-NJ Y
Merkley D-OR Y
Mikulski D-MD Y
Moran R-KS N
Murkowski R-AK N
Murray D-WA Y
Nelson D-FL Y
Nelson D-NE Y
Paul R-KY N
Portman R-OH N
Pryor D-AR Y
Reed D-RI Y
Reid D-NV Y
Risch R-ID N
Roberts R-KS N
Rockefeller D-WV Y
Rubio R-FL N
Sanders I-VT Y
Schumer D-NY Y
Sessions R-AL N
Shaheen D-NH Y
Shelby R-AL N
Snowe R-ME N
Stabenow D-MI Y
Tester D-MT Y
Thune R-SD N
Toomey R-PA N
Udall D-CO Y
Udall D-NM Y
Vitter R-LA N
Warner D-VA N
Webb D-VA N
Whitehouse D-RI Y
Wicker R-MS N
Wyden D-OR Y
ANONYMOUS
March 14, 2012
Lets all get the list who the 49-49 vote included. The industry as a whole has doubled since 2008 according to Steven Chu. Every
emerging industry has needed governmental help since the 1950's until private investment feels comfortable.

The PV , wind and battery storage will become viral soon with or without Congress.
$5.00 dollar gas prices and .20 per kw/hr electricity rates will change the votes.
Congress will take no position on anything till Nov.
NOTHING HAS CHANGED
sound familiar !!!!!!!!!
ANONYMOUS
March 14, 2012
To correct comment #2, the amendment needed 60 votes to pass, as stated in the article...Dems don't control 60 seats, so it does need bipartisan support...
Mark Hagerty
Mark Hagerty
March 14, 2012
Partisan Politics???? Last time I checked the Senate was controlled by the Democrats. If they wanted it they could have passed it without a single Republican vote.

Add Your Comments

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

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Steve Leone

Steve Leone

Steve Leone has been a journalist for more than 15 years and has worked for news organizations in Rhode Island, Maine, New Hampshire, Virginia and California.
  • About
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • America's Real Problem with Solar Energy
  • US, Australian Companies Taking Giant Steps for Global EGS Geothermal
  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • Wind Power — Even without the Wind
  • Massachusetts Resets Its Solar Energy Bar, Four Years Early

Most Commented

  • 15
    Fracking and Solar: Friends, Foes or the Bridge to Clean Energy Adoption?
  • 12
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 7
    San Antonio Solar Fans Delay Introduction of SunCredit Program
  • 6
    Renewable Energy Research Initiative Launched in UK

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • Northern Lights Solar Solutions
  • AR Power Company, Ltd.
  • SolarReviews
  • SMA America, LLC
  • REC Solar
  • GoGreenSolar.com
  • Panasonic Eco Solutions North America
  • 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