The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Saturday, May 25, 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! ×

Renewable Energy Industry Weighs In On Obama Victory

Vince Font, Contributing Editor
November 07, 2012  |  33 Comments

With the 2012 election over and President Barack Obama's re-election secured, U.S.-based renewable energy producers are already looking ahead to what they expect will be four more years of continued support for their endeavors.

A Collective Sigh of Relief

According to Ed Feo, co-founder of USRG Renewable Finance (USRGRF), last night’s Obama win brings “a continuation of policies that are favorable to renewables.” Feo also sees one of the chief issues at hand, the impending expiration of the wind energy Production Tax Credit on December 31, as one that will likely receive robust support as a consequence of the election results. “I think the Obama administration will push for that,” Feo said.

Feo isn’t the only one who’s perceiving Obama’s victory as a new breath of life for a group of industries whose futures may have seemed in question during certain points throughout the 2012 election season. For Scott Sklar, President of The Stella Group, the Obama re-election has “significant and consequential positive impact on growth and development of the U.S. energy efficiency and renewable energy industries.”

“The President has made clean energy one of the top three planks of his administration,” Sklar said in a press release issued today. “The President has supported extension of the wind energy production tax credit, whereas his opponent opposed that extension and called green jobs ‘fantasy’.” Sklar also predicts double-digit growth in the overall renewable energy market as a result of continued procurement for energy efficiency on the part of federal and state governments, and points to this year’s REN21 Renewables Global Status Report, which announced $282 billion of global private sector investment in 2012, as evidence of massive worldwide interest in renewables.

Industry Experts Convey Renewed Hope

Rhone Resch, CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), shares Sklar’s optimism and calls Obama “a tremendous supporter of solar energy.” Resch foresees a continuation of support for solar power from the Obama administration, which he says has been greatly instrumental in the industry’s job growth. “Today, the solar industry employs more than 119,000 Americans at 5,600 companies, mostly small businesses, across all 50 states – this is more than double the number of Americans working in solar in 2009,” Resch said in a press release published today.

Resch added that since Obama’s election in 2008, “the amount of solar powering homes, businesses, and military bases has grown by 400 percent – from 1,100 megawatts in 2008 to more than 5,700 megawatts today. The Administration enacted a policy allowing solar installations for the first time on public lands and set a goal to permit 10 gigawatts of additional renewable energy projects on public lands by the end of 2012, which has been a great driver of this growth.” Resch also cited figures that show U.S. solar power installations in 2012 will be “another year of record growth” for the solar industry.

Noting support from both sides of the political aisle, Denise Bode, CEO of the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) who recently reported 2012 was the strongest year on record for the U.S. wind industry, pointed to last night’s re-elections of House representatives Dave Reichert (R-WA), Steve King (R-IA), Tom Latham (R-IA), and senator Dean Heller (R-NV) as positive steps for the wind industry. All four have offered support of wind energy initiatives and may be critical players to ensuring the extension of the PTC. “We saw in the election results that Americans overwhelmingly approve of wind energy, and they vote for politicians who support it,” said Bode.

Addressing certain hurdles that still stand in the way of the wind energy PTC’s extension, including a lack of engagement among leadership in the House of Representatives and suggestions that the PTC may only be extended if an agreement to eventually phase out the tax credit is reached, Bode said, “Wind energy won’t need a tax credit forever.” Bode added that “if the Production Tax Credit for wind expires, wind will be the only energy source without federal tax support, and that would be bad public policy.” Still, Bode and the AWEA remain optimistic that Obama’s re-election will provide the necessary leadership to ensure continued governmental support.

Linda Church-Ciocci, Executive Director for the National Hydropower Association (NHA), said that while the hydropower industry has been “highly supported by both parties for some time,” certain gains have been made possible during the last four years that may otherwise not have been possible without the appointment of Steven Chu, Obama’s United States Secretary of Energy. “Secretary Chu understands the value of hydro,” Chuch-Ciocci said. “That has been a very important development with this administration.”

Meanwhile in biofuels, experts are predicting that the Obama administration will likely double its efforts with respect to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), which was signed into law by George W. Bush in 2005 and later revisited by Obama. Calls to rid the U.S. of its dependence on foreign oil has caused rapid growth in the biofuels industry, accounting for a 182 percent growth in ethanol and biodiesel production between 2006 and 2011, according to Biofuels Digest.

'We've Got More Work To Do'

In echo of Obama’s words during his victory speech in Chicago last night — where the President told supporters, “We’ve got more work to do” — Feo indicated that although gains are being made, there are still more to be made in support of renewable energy initiatives. “We have to expand financing tools, which are available to other sectors — such as Master Limited Partnerships — to include renewable energy,” Feo said.

In addition, Feo stressed the need to incentivize investment in renewables through the extension and continued support of tax credit regimes like the PTC and the Investment Tax Credit (ITC) — the latter of which is scheduled to see a significant drop in percentage return at the end of 2016. “I think the Obama administration will push to extend it or to have some continued level of support,” Feo said.

Perhaps as a sign that it’s not just the renewable energy sector that's taking Obama seriously on his intent to further the pursuit of more clean energy initiatives, coal stocks took a steep plunge on Wednesday following the election results. This news comes as no surprise to those aware of Obama’s plans to bring more stringent regulations to oil and coal producers in his second term, including new EPA-enforced limits on carbon dioxide emissions for coal-fueled power plants, and even tighter restrictions on mercury and sulfur dioxide, which are expected to cause a sharp rise in the cost of burning coal.

Editor’s Note: This article will be updated as more renewable energy companies offer response and reaction to the 2012 election results.

Lead image: Spirit of America via Shutterstock

33 Comments

Register To Comment
Phil Manke
Phil Manke
November 14, 2012
Did everyone miss that the Rep/Dem Corp that owned the script for the 'debates' did not allow any other parties into them? Is it a democracy when viable and legally entered parties are kept out of the mix of ideas and questions? Yes, I know the 'big two' have circulated their reasons why third parties are bad ideas (for them) but their 'are' those options. Reporting on Green Party, Constitution, or Libertarian votes is non-existant for example. These options should be in awareness for others to consider, but are 'machine washed' off the table. Seems to me that Obama could trade the 'cross country pipeline' for a National RES with a mandate for a 'solar carve-out and stiff SACP, and both sides of the energy issue could be gratified and with the chance for fossil fuel to fall away from dis-use over time. Electric autos will never become mainstream with Obama's mileage mandates allowing mfgr's to charge premium prices for continued ICE production. I'd like to see that coupled with a cash rebate for PIV's, not tax credit, that is doubled for E-cars charged from homeowner solar sources. Two RE venues are thus rewarded in one rebate!
ANONYMOUS
November 13, 2012
'...Over time the pendulum swung back and forth on environmental policy pro and con depending on whether there was a Democrat or Republican in the White House. Reagan trashed environmental policy and sacked the EPA....' GeraldR- Wow! You sure do seem to have a rather fanciful version of the history of US federal government environmental policy, and what the various Republican/Democrat office holders have done about it. Your most glaring error is that the EPA itself was created in Dec. 1970 by President Nixon (a Republican) entirely on his own, via an executive order. The legislation regarding the EPA was then sent to the 91st Congress, where the Democrat-controlled House voted it down, and the Democrat-controlled Senate did not even bring it up for a vote. Next time please try to do better.
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
November 12, 2012
Cautious optimism is in order. Historically, the environmental movement as an artifact of federal government started with Kennedy. Over time the pendulum swung back and forth on environmental policy pro and con depending on whether there was a Democrat or Republican in the White House. Reagan trashed environmental policy and sacked the EPA. G H W Bush took a similar shot. G W Bush, in spite of oily connections, took a more moderate dim view, as far as Republicans go. Romney said he wanted to eliminate the EPA - all can breath a sigh of relief as long as air is moderately safe to breath. The Republican mantra is that, if you let rich people just do their thing, everything will be swell. The icon of unfettered enterprise is the 43 year old burning of the Cuyahoga River: to everyone's surprise, it got a lot of press, perhaps reinforcing Kennedy's words 'Our story has been peculiarly the story of man and the land, man and the forests, man and the plains, man and water, man and resources. It has been the story of rich and varied natural heritage shaping American institutions and American values; and it has been equally the story of Americans seizing, using, squandering and, belatedly, protecting and developing that heritage.' The Cuyahoga in Cleveland OH, caught fire June 22, 1969. Previously, it caught fire many times; few paid any attention as rivers, canals and harbors in the US, including Buffalo, Baltimore, Houston, and Detroit, regularly caught fire. When these fires were in the news at all, the story was the (in)adequacy of fire services. But, the 'times are a'changin'. The hippies questioned a man's right to trash our 'space' just to make a buck. Bill O'Reilly says 'it's not a traditional America anymore'. Thank God! But don't confuse Obama with hippies nor Romney with Reagan. Romney's gubernatorial record on the environment was never so terrible although his choice of campaign talking points might be questioned.
Brad Snipes
Brad Snipes
November 11, 2012
Patent Application # 12/930,506 is published.
Disclosed is a collector which utilizes Boeing-Spectrolabs CPV, (CSO-150-IC), Dense Array Solar Cells in a novel manner. The Bradford Collector uses a two phase optical concentration system to focus very high solar concentrations onto a dense semi-cylindrical array of the Dense Array Cells which is positioned at the focal line of a multi-segmented conical reflecting concentrator. A transparent cylinder encasing this cylindrical array serves as a secondary refracting concentrator so that all incident solar radiation is concentrated and focused onto the solar cells. With this two-phase optical concentration system solar concentration exceeding 1000 SUNS are easily attained. The design of the dense cylindrical array has been evaluated through NASA's SATOP Program. See RTA 3633. Visit www.zenithsolar.com. Their Z20 collector was introduced in December 2010. It is the first Combined Heat and Power Solar Collector. They have proven efficiencies of 72%. My design, the Bradford Collector is the second CHP Collector. It surpasses the Z20 design because the solar projected area is made of reflecting sheet like parabolic trough solar thermal collectors. The Bradford Collector also produces steam which can be used for Multiple Effect Distillation of seawater or brackish groundwater.
I have also designed a Multiple Effect Distillation system specific to the thermal output ( about 45% of available solar energy )
I am working on an ammonia absorption air conditioning system.
And, yes I will use the electrical output for the electrolytic production of Hydrogen. Commercial electrolyzers are available that produce 1 kg of hydrogen with about 55 kwh of electricity. I believe it will be more economical than battery storage.
The Bradford Collector is specifically designed for Off-Grid applications. I am not interested in tieing to the grid. Sandy, Katrina, Alicia, etc have shown us the unreliability of the Grid.
KIMBERLY (KIM) KING
KIMBERLY (KIM) KING
November 11, 2012
@larry. Don't get me wrong. I'm not whining, per se. I've been creating my own opportunities for the past two years. As a matter of fact, thanks to the recent 'indifference' of Mother Nature, Hurricane Sandy, I secured a new opportunity to actually take my conceptual, hybrid RE designs to the next level for an audience here in Oakland, CA. This organization has a directive to shore-up and diversify it's emergency/disaster response energy portfolio. I think as long as Mother Nature continues to dispatch and dispense her 'inconveniences' to the human race, RE technologies should move up in everyone's queue. Silly reactive humans. We can do better...
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
November 11, 2012
@kimgerly

In case you did not notice we spent 2 billion (1000 million or average annual salary of 44444 median level wage earners) dollars just last week so that additional soldiers can be killed or maimed in Afghanistan and for absolutely no redeeming value but residual costs in additional billions for the rest of the life of those maimed for life .

Obama is held captive by both the War Machine he must answer too and also the millions who voted for Romney who felt spending another 2 trillion in ten years on this endless black hole of crony capitalism and corruption would be a great additional investment.

Until we all get angry enough to put a stop to this madness all the crying and gnashing of teeth over the USA poor support for RE is an effort in futility.

Of course until there is positive movement on this front we could wake up tomorrow morning and decide that "today I put my own money where my mouth is and change the way I produce and consume the energy I consume each day." All while the government ignores your demands for assistance. Think of just doing it to spite the government and assert your independence.

You are already on the correct web site.

Lots of vendors advertising here are just waiting for your call.
KIMBERLY (KIM) KING
KIMBERLY (KIM) KING
November 11, 2012
In the bigger scheme of matters, industry has not caught up with the notion that while we work on overcoming the storage conundrum, hybrid RE systems, conservation and decentralized generation should be afforded more attention. Solar, wind, energy efficiency are NOT panaceas on their own and will never match the energy rich density of fossil fuels. We need a strong, national feed-in tariff policy--this is one primary reason why Germany is leaps and bounds ahead of everyone. But this ain't gonna happen in the USA. I look to the states, the Dept of Defense, and private industry to lead the way? NB: Robin Moulder makes good points about externalities and LTAs (long term agreements), too. On the former point, REs are by not stretch of the imagination a clean/green technology--all one has to do is look a solar manufacturing. That being said, we have to do better to address this, so the RE industry can indeed tout it's 'cleaner' and 'greener.' At least Carnegie-Mellon U has developed a good EIO-LCA starting point tool. http://www.eiolca.net/ And on the latter point, most folks do not understand it typically takes 10-15 years for a new technology to come to fruition, because of the ebb and flow of new prime movers, innovative clusters and business development cycles. I think the leadership in the USA fails to adequately inform the public on this timeline.
KIMBERLY (KIM) KING
KIMBERLY (KIM) KING
November 11, 2012
"A Collective Sigh of Relief.", "...a tremendous supporter of solar energy", please…

I might have quasi-agreed to the latter comment, if Obama had re-installed a symbolic solar array on the roof of the White House when presented by this opportunity back in 2011. A missed opportunity much to demonstrate his 'tremendous' support. http://www.350.org/en/node/27574. And, how about some sobering numbers on the USA policy toward RE technologies…

Back in 2009, there was this read, "South Korea to spend billions on energy efficiency"

http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?src=nl&id=16657

and a follow-up

http://www.intellasia.net/korea-to-spend-70-billion-won-to-finance-energy-saving-projects-197533

The most salient point here is the government of South Korea announced a spending programme worth over $84bn to improve energy efficiency in the country. S. Korea is a nation of ~48mil. Today, the USA is contains a population of just over 304mil. S.Korea's government is earmarking $84bil. to improve energy efficiency–just energy efficiency! Yet back in 2009, the USA ONLY forked' over $66bil for all RE technologies.

Not sure what was earmarked since then--perhaps one of the REW denizens can post an update. Seriously, I understand it's going to cost $8-$9+bil to install a high-speed railway in between Los Angeles & San Francisco, CA, USA. Do the math…

If you're a salesperson, business developer, entry level installer, sure there have been jobs in wind or solar. But for those of us who are of the R&D ilk and of a peripheral, outlier on the curve, generalists skills set, we're just not attractive hires, yet; our round pegs do not fit in many square holes.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
November 11, 2012
@texansolar

"Can I teach it to you"?

Question is, what is "it"?

Sorry Bradford but it appears your sir name says it all.

Snipes?

Had you not "Snipped" at me I would probably make at least some attempt to have a rational discussion here.

"My methods are not secret."

That's is declaring the obvious.

Trying to make hydrogen a viable alternative fuel has been tried almost as long as the ancient alchemists attempted to turn lead into gold.
I'm certain they were as convinced of success no less than you.
Brad Snipes
Brad Snipes
November 11, 2012
Commercial electrolyzers are available which produce 1 kg of hydrogen with about 53 kwhrs of electricity. The grid is unreliable and is indeed contolled by the government. Obamacare is government control of health care, it is ideousy to think otherwise. The banking industy is a branch of the government. I invite you to visit Zenith Solars website.
My methods are not secret. The patent application is published but I doubt that you would be able to understand it. If you like I could dumb it down for you.
I invite any competent Engineers to evaluate my work. I will reveal all. Our country will be gone before I recieve a patent. Time is running out. It will be my gift to God's people. Are you a Christian? e-mail me at bradfordjsnipes@gmail.com I will explain all.
I have indeed spent years studying this. I am not a Professional Engineer but I have successfully passed both EIT and Principles and Practice Exams for Professional Engineering Registration in Texas. I have 45 years of Engineering experience. I know this subject very well. Can I teach it to you.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
November 11, 2012
Bill you are correct in your evaluation of the word fuel vs energy carrier but that is splitting hairs.

I felt my calling hydrogen an energy carrier and including electricity was easier for the average person to understand as other than lightning and a few other sources,electricity also must be produced from some source to be practical and useable as 'fuel'. The original fuel was 'carried' in effect.

I'm so glad that our solar friend from Texas @texansolar has discovered secret methods that are necessary to overcome all the limitations that the laws of physics has imposed on the manufacture and use of hydrogen.

Sorry Texan but if you are disassociating water to hydrogen using electrolysis you already start out in the EROI hole and you can only keep digging deeper from there.

As an engineer who has spent far too many hours pursuing the mythical hydrogen fairy (google H2 Nation Magazine if you like)I suggest you also take a turn and pursue something that actually has a future.

Sorry but without some breakthrough far beyond where science is now in thirty years or even fifty hydrogen will still be a 'future energy source'

I agree solar PV should see more widespread use in 'off grid',applications and not just by backwoods survivalists or save the world hippies.

More specifically we need to begin implementing extreme efficiency micro grids and bio fuels based only on a permaculture model serving small communities (sanctuaries beyond the REAL Matrix)of folks who choose to move beyond the 19th century model the rest of the world seems to be in love with.

And Texan?
"They already contol the health care industry, the banking industry, etc. We are going socialist at a very fast pace."

Who is the mythical "they" who controls health care industry. Is it the massive profit making industry itself? Certainly not the government. And be aware. A country (USA) speeding toward Fascism cannot be both Fascist (corporate government) and socialist.
William Fitch
William Fitch
November 11, 2012
Hi: One small point Larry, electricity is not an energy carrier. It IS energy. The easiest way to know if something is energy vs fuel is this: When you add it to a system, does the system's mass increase. If yes, then fuel, if no, energy. Hydrogen is an energy carrier and as you note, not a fuel due to its lack of freely existing in nature. It is this fact that enables the Nuke industry to promote H2 production using already super heated water to perform electrolysis which reduces the electrical energy needed to break apart the water molecules. They will do anything to promote their toxic endeavours.... .....Bill
Brad Snipes
Brad Snipes
November 10, 2012
Drock & larryofgalaxy - hydrogen is a true fuel. Hydrogen automobiles are already available. Hydrogen is easily produced by electrolysis of water. It can be used in a fuel cell to produce electricity producin no emmissions, only water as a by-product.
Subsidies and Cap and Trade will turn control of the energy sector of our economy over to our government. do we really want that?
They already contol the health care industry, the banking industry, etc. We are going socialist at a very fast pace.
I am a Solar (Mechanical) Engineer at odds with the rest of the solar energy industry.
My Combined Heat & Power Concentrating Tracking Photovoltaic Collector design, the Bradford Collector, is more efficient and economical than any other collector in the market. It is specifically designed for OFFGRID or MICROGRID applications. I have no desire to feed into the Grid. My systems will use 32% of available solar energy to provide for a home or community's electrical needs, electolysis of water will produce hydrogen for fuel and long term storage hydrogen and provide for the electrical requirements of a home or community. About 45% of available energy will desalinate seawater with Multiple Effect Distillation and/or air conditioning with ammonia absorbtion refrigeration.
Feeding power into the Grid is not the only option.
The Bradford Collector and associated systems will economically provide for all of the energy and water requirements of a home or community. No grid connection needed ( or desired )
I have perfected this design indepently with no help from the government. Design is complete I'm trying to build the prototype.
Utility Patent Application # 12/930,506 was recently published.
I wish to share the technology with the rest of the solar energy industry. I offer my services as a consulting engineer for individuals and OFFGRID communities. I offer energy self reliance and energy security during the looming economic collapse. Time is running out.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
November 10, 2012
@Drock

Hydrogen does not exist in a free form anywhere in nature except for tiny quantities unless you include our sun.

Therefore hydrogen must be produced by breaking its bonds to all the long list of elements it bonds too.

This bond is quite tight and hard to crack

That translates into hydrogen having the poorest EROI ratio of any 'fuel'

Note the quotes as hydrogen cannot be called a true fuel

Only an energy carrier just like electricity
Derrick Rockosi
Derrick Rockosi
November 10, 2012
Granted renewables are an important part of solving our energy and GHG reduction goals, but a comprehensive energy plan and a restructuring plan for our energy grid should be high priorities to coordinate the public and private sector. Also what about Hydrogen? It's very unrealistic that PV and wind will be able to support the country's energy demand without storage or some type of fossil fuel support. Frankly natural gas and hydrogen have greatly reduced carbon emission compared to coal and oil. They must be part of a realistic solution to our energy plan, whoever the energy secretary will be in the next term..
Rematog - The Original
Rematog - The Original
November 9, 2012
Gerald,

I have agreed that the social cost of fossil power, i.e. externalities, is not fully included in the power cost. NOTHING WE DO INCLUDES ALL EXTERNALITIES. Yes, I shouted that. Education, roads, even defense could be included in externalities if you want.

Regrading NOX,SOX ROX (particulate) and CO2, I've again agreed that increasing controls and/or taxes are justified. My point is that they be applied gradually to so not to give the economy "a flat tire". Just as I've read numerous times about not having the Wind energy production credit stop suddenly, but be gradually and predictably phased out. Same logic.

You mention loan guarantees for clean coal projects. Again, R&D first of their kind plants. REA loan guarantees were/are a social program going back to the Roosevelt administration to aid the economic development of rural areas. The same program could be used to fund RE projects.

Black lung is most common in underground mining. Today, almost all underground mining is for metallurgic grade coal for steel production. It has nothing to do with electric power production. Solar power uses toxic rare earths, but that's ok, they are mined and smelted in China, so the health of the miner's doesn't matter.

Railroad, river and road transportation subsidies benefit all kinds of industries, including RE.

Is coal subsidized, yes. Is RE subsidized more that coal, yes. Do I believe both subsidies should be reduced, yes. My belief is subsidy should be directed towards R&D, not production activities, For both Fossil and RE.

Do I believe emissions should be regulated and reduced, yes.

Do I think we should shut down coal, i.e. half of the United State's power production tomorrow, No. Duh.

Will coal be phased out, Yes. Duh. The question is the time table and cost.
Fred Linn
Fred Linn
November 9, 2012
Provide a good product, that solves problems and provides what people want and need, in an economical way.

No amount of political or legal infighting or anything else will keep it away.

When the need is there, the product is good, and the price is right-----------anybody or anything standing in the way will get trampled.

Concentrate on making your product the best that it can be, and everything that people want and need----and at an attractive price. Your product WILL sell, no subsidies or anything else needed.

KISS----new does not mean "better". Most of the RE technology has been around for a long time---use what is appropriate and adequate to get the job done well. If that means using old technology, use old technology. If new technology solves a problem or improves performance, use new technology---but remember to balance cost with improvement.
Sandy Caruso
Sandy Caruso
November 9, 2012
Dr.A.Jagadeesh Nellore, Before you break your arm patting Obama on the back you had better read an article you obviously missed.

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/10/abound-solar-under-criminal-investigation-by-colorado-da

May I quote from that article:
"Obama added, "These are decisions, by the way, that are made by the Department of Energy. They have nothing to do with politics." Since this statement, emails have surfaced on the website of CompleteColorado.com that point to a possible greater involvement by White House officials to ensure approval of DOE loans to Abound Solar."

It's another Solyndra and once again the American taxpayer is stuck with the bill. Also a question? I wonder how much money from the 'guaranteed' loan was funneled back to Obama for his campaign? Like I said, it's another Solyndra, same candybar, different wrapper.
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
November 9, 2012
'existing coal fired plants get zero subsidy'. In fact there are hundreds of tax payer funded mechanisms in play plus externalities such as attributed health care costs of 17.8 cents per kWh. Start with tax free loans and interest subsidies. Tax-exempt financing is a federal tool used by states and local public authorities to provide billions of dollars in subsidies to build new coal plants and extend the life of existing coal plants. According to the GAO, this costs the taxpayers ~$20B per year. Investment tax credits (or, given that solar investment task credits are called subsidies, lets call these subsidies) for advanced coal e.g. the Advanced Coal Project Investment Credit ($1.25B) and the Coal Gasification Investment Credit. Then $20/ton for CO2 sequestration in secure geological structure. Then rates for emissions of SO2 and NOx well below the attributed cost. Then tax free emission of mercury and heavy metals. Government loan guarantees are yet another form of subsidy which enables developers of coal plants to borrow money at a lower rate. DOE loan guarantees alone amount to more than $10B. Then funding for control and abatement of ash as well as emergency aid for ash spills. Clean coal investment credit. Subsidies for dedicated rail lines and rolling stock. And there's still more before we even walk off the property of a coal power plant. At the overall tax level, these operators routinely make money while achieving near 0% tax on their operations. From there, there is a trail of subsidies leading all the way back to coal leases sold at less than market value. Tax treatment of royalty payments ~$1B per year. Tax treatment of medical benefits ~$400M/a (this is just the PIT on benefits to black lung sufferers so take a guess at the total medical costs of this cohort). Depletion subsidies (~$320M/a). Federal contributions to the Black Lung Disability Fund ($13B in 2008). etc. etc. etc.
Rematog - The Original
Rematog - The Original
November 9, 2012
As surprising as it may be to hear, I agree with the Mr(s?) Bruderly that externalities are not included in the cost for fossil energy sources. But, they are not included in the cost of RE either. Certainly the emissions externality of fossil power is higher, but by how much, who gets to set it, and what is their agenda. We ALL have agenda’s.

Per my prior post, a system of cap and tax could be used instead of cap and trade. But I would highly suggest that two things be kept in mind. One, the taxes will, in the end, be paid by the consumer. Two, whiplash is Bad.

Taxes: Anyone that thinks the utilities and or power generators will pay the taxes and not increase the price they charge needs to quit taking the Soma. (Brave New World). Therefore higher externality taxes will result in higher power prices. Not good for an economic recovery.

Whiplash: Make change slow and predictable. The power industry is a long term business. I am sometimes amused by comments that imply 20 years is a long time. Power plants are designed for a 30 year life, and virtually all run for 50 years or more. We are just starting to see fossil plants built in the late 50’s early 60’s begin to be retired. Hydro plants built when my 86 year old father was toddler are still in service with no issues and no plans to retire.

If Cap and Tax were used, again, start with a small tax and increase it in a slow, predictable manner.

Oil prices, yes supply and demand control cost, but, this the cost is upset, and I believe increased by the financial futures market. You don’t need government “executive action and legislation” to stimulate not petroleum vehicles. Fuel prices rising thru supply and demand with a small and slowly increasing CO2 tax, will stimulate it quite well. I saw a CNG power pick-up on the way home yesterday, and the local bus company is looking into CNG buses
David Bruderly
David Bruderly
November 9, 2012
There is a lot of fuzzy economic logic and technology gobbligook on this web site as well as in the media and in the GOP platform. Today there are no 'free' markets for any form of energy; fossil fuels are cheaper than wind / solar because the cost of pollution created by the use of coal / natural gas / oil and other externalities are not reflected in the price of electricity or refined fuels made from these energy sources. Under current policy profits are privatized; costs are socialized. This policy is NOT free market Capitalism; powerful interests / big money in cahoots with any government entity is called Fascism. With respect to oil, American oil markets (supply and price) are controlled by OPEC, not American consumers. OPEC is a supply-side oligopoly; a cartel controlled by foreign governments ruled by dictators. Obama should propose to create competitive markets for motor fuels. He can do this with policy that empowers consumers to take control of energy markets; i.e. level the playing field. Crude oil is 6 times more expensive than natural gas; diesel is 2 times more expensive than CNG and electric motor fuels are 3 times cheaper to use than gasoline. Use the market power of these domestic energy sources wisely and efficiently to restructure automotive / motor fuel markets. Empower consumers to break the OPEC cartel with executive action and legislation that stimulates demand for mass production of affordable natural gas and electric vehicles that use these cheaper, cleaner, domestically produced motor fuels. At the same time internalize external costs to make markets more efficient and transparent; impose pollution fees / taxes on lifecycle pollution from production and use of fuels. Monetize taxpayer subsidies for military security currently provided to OPEC producers at no cost. It's 'We the People ...' not corporate cartels.
Rematog - The Original
Rematog - The Original
November 9, 2012
Continued:

CO2 – On vehicles, the gas tax is the CO2 tax. On stationary sources, again, Cap and Trade. I know that to those for whom Environmentalism is a religion (Larry?) Cap and trade is a SIN as it is seen as a “right to pollute”. But a defined Cap and Trade program can achieve the goal of reduced emission for the least cost by using market forces. And it does it without the regulatory whiplash that is damaging to industries and the economy. The RE community has experience that same whiplash, so should understand whereof I speak.

With the amount of CO2 the permit allows being reduced a few percent each year, the plant owners could again make rational economic decisions on how much to run, if CO2 capture makes sense, and when to eventually shut down. Note that unless RE steps up to the plate, higher power prices would make continued operation and CO2 capture more attractive. But, by it’s nature, the Cap and Trade would reduce CO2 emissions by the desired amount each year.

But, in all of the above, a critical issue is making the rules consistent and known for the reasonable future, say 10 years out. Then, each year, make the change for the new 10th year out.

Beats regulatory whiplash, eh?

And, with cost of production increasing for fossil fuels, in a steady predictable manner, the RE industry would have the opportunity to take up the slack, without regulatory mandates.
Rematog - The Original
Rematog - The Original
November 9, 2012
Rich,

You mention the “$900 million in fossil fuel research funds”. Note that this is subsidy for research, not production.

If coal plant’s received subsidy’s at the level wind does, i.e. 2.2 cents /kw-hr, then just 9 typical utility scale units (600 MW, 90% capacity factor) would get $900 million per year.

The existing coal fired plants get zero subsidy and pay large amounts of property and sales taxes to their communities and states. The research subsidy goes to clean coal, which today is directed primarily to reduced CO2 emissions.

If you’ve been in the power industry for a while, you’ve experienced regulatory whiplash before, so I understand the issues with the production tax credit vanishing overnight.. I would recommend the wind production tax credit be renewed for 10 years, the amount decreasing by 10% of the original amount each year, so that I reaches zero at the end of that time. Predictable.

I also agree with the increase in gasoline tax (heck, I campaigned for Ross Perot both times).

Gas tax, increase by 5-10 cents per year for, well, forever. Starting with one-time 15 cents as you suggest would work. Do this instead of subsidizing electric cars. Let people decide when the EV makes sense for them.


So, how about this for pollution controls:

SO2 & NOX. Set up national cap and trade. Issues emission permits based on average tonnage emitted 2005-2010, or is less history is available, based on air permit issued. Then reduce the tonnage the permit allows by a small percentage each year. It is important to make them tradable. Why?, As they ratcheted down in a predictable manner, plant owner’s can make a rational decision to add controls reduce operations or shut-down. A very good reason for making them tradable is it means owner’s have an incentive to add controls. As scrubbers are step functions, i.e. they remove 90% if you install, zero if you don’t, then the owner can be paid by the market to over-control.
ANONYMOUS
November 9, 2012
President Obama and his administration have been and will continue to be the single biggest handicap to the solar industry. Rather than let the free market determine the winners and loosers the administration's continued participation in crony capitalism have seen inferior technologies brought to the forefront based on who was scratching who's back, only to leave the taxpayer holding the bill at the end of the day
More importantly, however, is not the issue of government's intrusion into the private sector but rather the massive debt being amassed to support outrageous entitlement programs. Debt and a weak economy are the biggest threat to the cleantech sector. A robust economy that recognizes the value of all technology whether green or fossil fuels will make for a more successful cleantech industry. Unfortunately for the next for years we can expect more debt, higher spending, and more cleantech business failures. Think about it, can you run your business the way the government is operating? The govermnemt goes to the taxpayer when they overspend. Where is your business going to go?
Gottlieb Keller
Gottlieb Keller
November 9, 2012
Gratulations to the President and his team. Yes, we finally need change.

It is time to act now by addressing a U.S. Sustainable Infrastructure Investment Challenge.

We must form strong partnerships between business and government to lead the transition to a greener economy ...

The U.S helped the banking industry. It is time for them them to step up to Social Responsible Investing (SRI) to form Partnerships for Triggering Finance at Scale.

The rapid scaling of public and private investment into green infrastructure project and programme activities is crucial.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
November 8, 2012
The other day I was listening to a talk radio show where the listeners were being asked "SO WHY DID YOU VOTE FOR OBAMA".

Without fail all callers answered in some manner where they praised him and rightfully denigrated the Ken Doll and his companion wooden dummy.

I was going to call and spoil the mindless 'collective think' party by stating that I voted for Obama simply because our so called democracy only allows choosing one bought and paid for politician over another. Can anyone remember the name of the other well qualified candidates who also ran?
Don't include the long list of Republican Carnival Barkers and Circus Fat Ladies in the 'debates'. It's more the one's who were not allowed into the 'debates'.

I could have voted for two who made it on the ballot here in Oregon but odds are if you asked 10,000 voters who either of them was 9999 of them would not even have heard of them yet alone seen them stand toe to toe with the Ken Doll and Obama.

Out of all the so called western Democracies I would have to say the USA is the least democratic of all.

Is that what passes for 'American Exceptionalism'?

Seems a more appropriate word would be "American's Acceptionalism"
William Fitch
William Fitch
November 8, 2012
Hi: I agree that the "O" man was the lesser of two evils. After all, this country has been voting for the least worse candidate since the 80's..... nothing new. I give Keystone XL approval in less than 6 months...

.....Bill
Rich Hessler
Rich Hessler
November 8, 2012
Boehner indicated the deficit reduction process is going to start from the Simpson-Bowles recommendations and also looking for new tax revenue.

A couple I like are:

Raising the federal gas tax by 15 cents per gallon.
Cut $900 million in fossil fuel research funds.

New tax revenue Mr. Boehner? Carbon tax

No bridge.

Simpson-Bowles Recommendations:

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2012/11/simpson-bowles-national-commission-on-fiscal-responsibility-reform-recommendations
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
November 8, 2012
'Support' translates into "theft from the taxpayers".

Without having access to a copy of the New Republican Bible and Accompanying Verses Version 2 as regards proper 'talking points' when referring to renewable energy I cannot verify that this quoted comment came from that source.

But I can say that if I have a choice between a party that supports renewable energy and all the accrued benefits that support translates into,or support a party whose explicit as well as implicit goal has been and always will be, is to see to it that fossil fuels,their inherent environmental damage, and integral economic enslavement remain our primary 18th century source of energy as we enter the 21st century I will choose the former.

Even in a country whose electorate is as intellectually challenged as ours they still were able to see through the fog and haze of silly and almost criminal rhetoric coming from a political party that clearly had its head handed to it in the recent election.

Now let's see if the rhetoric from the victors measures up to reality.
Not really holding my breath over that one.

One thing is quite certain though.

No amount of failure on the part of the losing party will have any effect on future positions and policies.

Their choice of living in a cultural and intellectual bubble, reinforced with a thick armor of delusion and fundamentalism insures no logic or reasoning will ever make a penetration.
CHARLES REESE
CHARLES REESE
November 8, 2012
I think the renewables industry should hold off on the victory dance until after the debt reduction agreement.
Will Deliver
Will Deliver
November 8, 2012
@m-simon: Get over it, you fossil fuel terrorists took a loss.
The world needs Mr. Obama's leadership in encouraging renewable energy. The petroleum and coal industries have been receiving government subsidies for a long time. Those industries are mature and need no more help. The fossil fuel industries have been polluting our environment without consequence. It is time to switch to clean, sustainable energy!
M. SIMON
M. SIMON
November 8, 2012
'Support' translates into "theft from the taxpayers".
Anumakonda Jagadeesh
Anumakonda Jagadeesh
November 8, 2012
We, Energy and Environmentalists salute you Barack Obama on your reelection as President of US. You initiated some progressive policies in your first term as President in the areas of Renewable Energy. We are confident in the coming years there will be a quantum jump on Renewables under your Presidentship in US and other countries. Long live Barack Obama.

Dr.A.Jagadeesh Nellore(AP),India
E-mail: anumakonda.jagadeesh@gmail.com

Add Your Comments

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

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Vince Font

Vince Font

Vince Font is a professional freelance writer specializing in the fields of renewable energy, high tech, travel, and entertainment. Read his blog at www.vincefont.com or follow him on Twitter @vincefont.
  • 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

  • 8
    San Antonio Solar Fans Delay Introduction of SunCredit Program
  • 6
    Renewable Energy Research Initiative Launched in UK
  • 3
    Texas Legislature Passes Commercial and Industrial PACE Bill
  • 3
    French and German Ministers Call for 2030 Renewable Energy Targets

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • The Interstate Renewable Energy Council, Inc.
  • CivicSolar
  • Fairtrade-Messe
  • Panasonic Eco Solutions North America
  • AEG Power Solutions
  • AR Power Company, Ltd.
  • Northern Lights Solar Solutions
  • Prudent Living, Inc.
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