The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Tuesday, May 21, 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? ×

Weighing Obama's SOTUS Proposal: More Oil Drilling to Fund Clean Energy?

Jim Snyder, Bloomberg
February 14, 2013  |  17 Comments

President Barack Obama's proposal to fund clean-energy research with fees paid by oil and gas producers is renewing a debate over whether the promise of innovation tomorrow is worth expanding drilling today.

Obama's "Energy Security Trust" -- which he announced this week in the State of the Union address -- would redirect about $200 million in royalties for drilling on federal lands to pay for the development of biofuels, electric batteries and cars and trucks powered by natural gas, the White House said yesterday. The trust would operate for 10 years and spend a total of $2 billion.

While Obama's plan doesn't open new areas to producers, clean-energy advocates say the idea of an oil-backed fund could ensure further support for fossil fuel alternatives even in an era of austerity and federal budget cuts.

"There is a lot of logic to it," said Mark Muro, a clean-energy expert at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "It resonates to a broad segment of the population that we should make the best of fossil fuels while accelerating the effort to transform our energy system."

Drillers have lobbied to open areas off the Atlantic Coast and put more acreage in the Gulf of Mexico up for leasing, as well as in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge on land. Companies including Anadarko Petroleum Corp. in The Woodlands, Texas, and Continental Resources Inc., which is based in Oklahoma City, are already active on U.S. lands and could benefit from efforts to expand drilling. Companies like Exxon Mobil Corp. and Royal Dutch Shell Plc may benefit if more offshore territory is made available to drillers.

Past Versions

Similar proposals have floated in Congress for years. In 2009, Republicans led by now House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio introduced an energy bill that would have directed money from oil and gas lease sales to pay for clean-energy programs as a counter to a climate-change legislation Democrats were pushing.

A White House spokesman who asked not to be identified said Obama's proposal, which requires Congressional approval, wouldn't add to the debt because money would be shifted from other programs. Oil and gas production, and therefore revenue, is expected to increase over the next decade, the spokesman said.

The proposal is similar to an idea offered by Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, the top Republican on the Energy Committee, with one key difference: hers requires the revenue come from projects on lands where drilling is now off-limits, such as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. Nevertheless she said the president's proposal is a potential area for compromise in Congress, which hasn't passed a major energy bill since 2007.

'Same Thing'

The "contours" of Obama's proposal sound similar to her own, Murkowski said in an interview. "I think we're all talking about the same thing."

Energy development and mineral mining on U.S. lands and offshore raised about $12 billion for state and federal governments in fiscal year 2012, according to the Office of Natural Resources Revenue, a division of the Interior Department. That was about $1 billion more than the previous year as advances such as hydraulic fracturing are giving oil and gas producers more access to reserves trapped in shale-rock formations.

The idea of an energy security trust funded by royalties is backed by Securing America's Future Energy, a Washington-based group that included the proposal in a report released late last year on U.S. energy security.

'Unique Opportunity'

"The oil boom has created a unique opportunity to have our cake and eat it too," Robbie Diamond, the chief executive officer of the group, said in a statement. The group, known as SAFE, includes business executives led by FedEx Corp. Chief Executive Officer Frederick Smith and retired military officials who want to reduce U.S. dependence on oil.

"If a non-partisan coalition of CEOs and retired generals and admirals can get behind this idea, then so can we," Obama said in his address. "Let's take their advice and free our families and businesses from the painful spikes in gas prices we've put up with for far too long."

Obama said his administration would work to accelerate permits to oil and gas producers to increase production, which would raise more revenue for the government in the royalties, lease sales and bonus bids.

One obstacle will be whether taking money from oil and gas revenue to pay for clean energy projects will leave budget holes elsewhere, said Robert Dillon, a spokesman for Murkowski. "We don't go for deficit spending," he said.

Production Growth

In his first term, Obama promoted clean energy as a source of millions of new jobs. The 2009 economic stimulus provided about $90 billion for clean energy loans, grants and tax breaks to improve the electric grid, develop wind and solar power, and promote energy efficiency.

About $16 billion of the money went to an Energy Department loan-guarantee program under which Solyndra LLC won a $535 million award in 2009. The Fremont, California-based solar panel maker went bankrupt two years later, prompting complaints from Republicans that Obama was trying to pick winners and losers among energy companies.

The approach Obama endorsed this week is a more modest plan that focuses on research and emphasizes energy security more than green jobs.

Tight Budgets

Clean-energy advocates who fear tight budgets could dry up support for wind, solar and other programs said oil and gas revenue may offer a solution.

"Conceptually, there should be broad support for it," said Joshua Freed, vice president for the Clean Energy Program at The Third Way, a Washington-based group that says it promotes public policies that can attract bipartisan support. "The desire for America to be less dependent on oil and less susceptible to wild swings of global oil prices is a non-partisan issue."

The plan would face resistance from environmental groups if they perceive it to be a promotion of oil and gas development.

"We don't want to see any incentive to open up new areas for drilling at all," Athan Manuel, director of land protection for the San Francisco-based Sierra Club, said in an interview.

Copyright 2013 Bloomberg

Lead image: Alternative oil exploration, via Shutterstock

17 Comments

Register To Comment
terry hallinan
terry hallinan
February 23, 2013
Anonymous,

"Terry: Long trips in electric cars can be accomplished easily if we had stations to switch out depleted batteries for charged ones."

So if I want to get to Paradise Valley (Nevada) from the Adel, OR, all-purpose store/post office/metropolis in my electric mobile, there was a rough grub shack of sorts that had a gas pump I think after about 140 mi. of road built for the convenience of jack rabbits. In the midst of that lonely sojourn, there is a small rough wooden sign indicating one might get black opal wholesale with a path stretching off into the distance.

Unlucky black opal isn't a big seller because it is associated with death and the old mine may not be open.

We decided not to try our luck.

Anybody taking that trip in an electric mobile would be well advised to take along a tame burro even with the extra load because the wild burros that road signs warn you about in Nevada might be hard to catch and harder to ride.

If you don't mind, I will wait on an all fuel rankine cycle engine like the one powering this guy whenever DARPA gets around to building his brain:

http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/875/eatr2.jpg

We wouldn't want DARPA's EATR (Energetic Autonomous Tactical Robot) that forages on bits of dead, dry vegetation eating people would we?

Lots of sagebrush around for us in a pinch but not much else.

This romance with electric vehicles is for city folk - and a hoot to boot.

Best, Terry
Gerard Vaughan
Gerard Vaughan
February 23, 2013
Fossil-fuel energy needs to be invested in SELF-sustaining energy-providing/saving/storage systems. NOT used forday to day living - Agriculture and Transport. E.g's include Sensible wind-energy, as opposed to the current "Negawatt" designs that have cost so much. No typo involved above. Canals, Lakes, and for "offshore wind" read "sails on ships". Solar - both hot water and PV will, I believe, fullfill the above requirements. Then "Bio-gas". A double whammy for the reduction of methane input to the atmosphere.
What wew are likely to see, though, will be further investment in systems which can't be sustained without the fossil-driven systems which they are supposed to replace.
ANONYMOUS
February 18, 2013
Terry: Long trips in electric cars can be accomplished easily if we had stations to switch out depleted batteries for charged ones. It would take less time than filling up with filthy gasoline. Another option would be taking along an extra battery pack on the trunk, in the trunk, on the roof or on a tiny trailer. That way you could get in a full days worth of driving and charge the batteries overnight.
terry hallinan
terry hallinan
February 18, 2013
Just facts, jwitmyer. No sarcasm.

"batteries aren't enough run forklifts"

Sure seem to. Maybe you are thinking of people dining. We are powered by biomass, oxygen, and only very tiny amounts of bio-electricity - no batteries included.

Electric cars may be dandy for short trips but for long trips...

A horse might be better though a bit slow and tiring and requiring lots of fueling and rest stops for both horse and rider.

Best, Terry
Jane Twitmyer
Jane Twitmyer
February 18, 2013
Terry
Your sarcasm does not move your argument forward ...
And yes ... batteries aren't enough run forklifts or 18 wheelers, that shoudln't rule out electric cars.
And yes the DOD is doing a magnificent job of testing the varieety of green options and working to NZ bases.
terry hallinan
terry hallinan
February 17, 2013
jtwitmyer,

"seen that electric car movie?"

Have no idea what it is and don't care.

Electric cars are a very bad joke IMO.

Even one advanced fork lift purveyor has contracted to go for all fuel power over batteries. That surprised even me.

Some very big organizations - you can't get much bigger than the U.S. Defense Department - are opting for clean green power as a matter of urgent necessity.

Never heard tell of it?

Not surprising at all.

Best, Terry
Jane Twitmyer
Jane Twitmyer
February 17, 2013
Not quite sure what you mean Terry. The road has been littered by bad choices for years and years ... seen that electric car movie? Then there was that town in Washington state 20 years ago that didn't want the EPA to require that the only game in town stop spewing arsenic into the town's air. Their jobs were at stake and the company said it would close the plant if it had to stop the arsenic discharges.

My point is that renewable technology cannot compete with fossil energy as long as the fossil companies wield enough power to give themselves $6+billion annually from our budget in the form of lost revenue. And that doesn't include the health and environmental costs that are not included in fossil prices. What I suggest is just a carbon tax from another angle.
terry hallinan
terry hallinan
February 16, 2013
Hi jtwitmyer,

"Let's level the playing field and phase out those fossil tax give-aways instead! We can afford to help those individuals hurt by the increased prices as the new carbon tax bill provides."

Oh indeed but helping the fossil fuel monopoly bites deeply into consumer pocketbooks in the longer run beyond threatening their extermination in the more distant future.

Ever hear of a rankine cycle engine that will burn any fuel and require far less complexity and cost than current engines in vehicles? Here's one:

http://www.uslandsteamrecord.com/

The effort to set a new land steam speed record is supported by donations and contributions of facilities and manpower by a tiny start-up that needs no extra diversion of funds from various initiatives, most notably including military projects hidden behind high walls. Besides a blackout on news of innovative, there is the detriment of association with the old steam engines. The effort is many years behind schedule, naturally.

But is it just a pipe dream? The U.S. Navy, Army, NASA and DARPA don't think so. Even Detroit is beginning to show some slight whiffs interest finally.

But DOE?

Forgetaboutit. They might as well be proposing burning mummies for fuel as Mark Twain reported long ago about the Trans-Egypt Railroad or battlefield corpses as FoxNews falsely claimed more recently.

Best, Terry
Jane Twitmyer
Jane Twitmyer
February 16, 2013
$200,000,000? That is peanuts!

According to the Pew Trusts report, "The federal government heavily relies on the tax code to implement policy in the energy sector. In fiscal year 2009, the estimated revenue loss in the sector from tax expenditures totaled nearly $6.3 billion."

Let's level the playing field and phase out those fossil tax give-aways instead! We can afford to help those individuals hurt by the increased prices as the new carbon tax bill provides.
David Coles
David Coles
February 15, 2013
TECHNICAL PAPER
Using Solar Thermal Energy in HVAC Systems

Solar Energy, the energy generated by the sun. This energy is in the form of electromagnetic radiation and travels to the earth in waves of various lengths. Some of the radiation becomes evident as heat, some as visible light. All life on earth depends ultimately on the sun's radiation. It warms the earth and provides the energy that green plants use to make their food. (Without plants, there would be no animals, since all animals must feed on plants or on plant-eating organisms.)

Since ancient times attempts have been made with varying successes to put the energy from the sun to practical use. In the third century B.C., the Greek mathematician and physicist Archimedes is said to have used the sun's rays reflected from mirrors to set fire to an invading Roman fleet. In the 19th century, John Ericsson, designer of the ironclad warship Monitor, built an engine that was powered by the sun's energy.

Solar Heat

Solar heat supplies energy for a variety of uses. The preservation of fruits, vegetables, meat, and fish by sun drying has been practiced for centuries. Some industrial products are also dried by the heat of the sun. In some warm, arid regions, the heat of the sun is used to evaporate seawater or brines to recover salt and other minerals.
Water for domestic use can be heated by solar energy by the use of roof-mounted devices consisting of heat collectors through which water pipes pass. As the water is heated it flows into storage tanks. Heat collectors can also be used to heat homes and other buildings. The sun's heat is transferred to a fluid usually water or air, which then heats the interior of the building. For heating at night and on cloudy days, some form of heat storage is necessary. A common storage system consists of an insulated tank to hold solar-heated water. In many regions, additional heat from a conventional heating system is required for extended cloudy or cold periods.
terry hallinan
terry hallinan
February 15, 2013
Philip Haddad,

"Terry, 80% of our energy demand is met with fossil fuels. Until truly renewable sources are available..."

If what you mean by sources is infrastructure that provides the fuels, that is true.

"when fossil (and nuclear) energy sources are phased out, wouldn't it be good if those hydrocarbon resources could still be used to make consumer goods?"

If you mean mined or pumped out, I think it would be best to leave them be.

If you mean by sources the origin of power you are using, it is not true.

I don't think anyone can really deny that geothermal has vastly more potential than all other sources combined. Any argument is over how much can be accessed and utilized efficiently.

There would still be hydrocarbon resources above ground and in that we have agreement.

Phoenix Power Group sells furnaces that burn used oil such as that coming from oil changes.

http://www.phoenixpowergroup.com/

Such is more than a little tricky since the oil is very dirty and to burn it cleanly requires considerable technology. Others use grease from burger outlets, etc. but grease we will always have with us. :-)

I know of no reason a suitable lubricating oil derived from biological sources could not be burned in the Phoenix furnaces so there would be no need for transition.

I think you are onto something. Cleaning up after fossil fuels will no doubt be a monumental task.

Best, Terry
Philip Haddad
Philip Haddad
February 15, 2013
Terry, 80% of our energy demand is met with fossil fuels. Until truly renewable sources are available we must depend on fossil fuels or do without most of how we live. But when fossil (and nuclear) energy sources are phased out, wouldn't it be good if those hydrocarbon resources could still be used to make consumer goods?
terry hallinan
terry hallinan
February 15, 2013
Philip Haddad,

"How about using the money to fund research in liquefaction of coal with natural gas"

How about leaving them sequestered below ground where the will not contribute to global warming?

I grant you, Philip, your idea would have great merit if there were a shortage of carbon above ground and suitable substitutes but there is not.

Best, Terry
Philip Haddad
Philip Haddad
February 15, 2013
How about using the money to fund research in liquefaction of coal with natural gas. That is one way of converting both from fuels to chemicals to produce consumer goods. That helps to reduce the risk for companies willing to increase domestic production to offset imported oil, knowing that as fuels both must be phased out.
ANONYMOUS
February 15, 2013
20 year plan: Phase out the fossil fuel subsidies over the next 10 years and transfer them to alternative energy. At that point, phase out the subsidies for alternative energy over the next 10 years. At the end of 20 years, with a more level playing field, which do you think will be the better value?
terry hallinan
terry hallinan
February 15, 2013
Laughable.

Most telling is to have clean-energy money directed to vehicles powered by natural gas. Natural gas is a fossil fuel that may be even more damaging to the environment than coal through escape of unburned methane - methane is a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.

By all means make the fossil fuels pay for as much of the harm they do as possible instead of subsidizing them but we are fooling no one if we think that puts us on the side of the angels.

Best, Terry
ANONYMOUS
February 14, 2013
"...would redirect about $200 million in royalties for drilling on federal lands to pay for the development of biofuels, electric batteries and cars and trucks powered by natural gas, the White House said yesterday...."

That $200M would not even cover half of the taxpayer losses from the Solyndra debacle alone. The federal government collects tens of billions each year in excise taxes on fuel sales. I doubt they are ready to give up that reliable source of income any time soon.

Add Your Comments

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

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • America's Real Problem with Solar Energy
  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • Massachusetts Resets Its Solar Energy Bar, Four Years Early

Most Commented

  • 17
    The Economic Case for Divesting from Fossil Fuels
  • 12
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 11
    Fracking and Solar: Friends, Foes or the Bridge to Clean Energy Adoption?
  • 4
    China Solar Update: Trina Improves, Suntech Scores Extension, Beijing Awaits EU Tariff Decision

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • Fairtrade-Messe
  • Demand Energy
  • GreenBrilliance
  • Enecsys
  • Festo
  • Array Technologies
  • Able Energy Co.
  • Enphase Energy
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