Larry's Comments

Not that I agree with everything Bush does on renewable energy (especially recent opposition to PTC), but why turn RE into another political us vs. them?  There is a lot of good stuff happening:

- Since 2000, biofuels are booming.  Ethanol production capacity started growing an order of magnitude higher than 1999 since early in this administration.  Biodiesel production growth is measured in triple digit % growth.  Midwest (often R) politicians and renewable fuel standards in both the 2005 and 2007 energy bills have helped.

- US has moved to #1 in the world in new wind installations for the last 3 years, and solar PV installations are growing 30-50% annually.  Both industries (especially utility-scale wind) are sold out.

- The White House got solar panels in 2002.

- Crawford Ranch (1999) uses solar heating and geothermal.

- Texas (1999) was the first successful RPS and is now #1 in wind. 

Agree our desire for more RE clearly is idealogy.  However, we're not in the minority.  After Governor Schwarzenegger accelerated the California RPS, the California Energy Commission did a study and > 85% agreed.  A Pew Research poll in April, 2006 found ~ 80% wanted more research and deployment of renewables.  On the other hand, few are willing to pay evidenced by the percentage of folks buying wind or other renewable energy from their local utility.  Something will be signed as both parties and Bush are on-board the renewables bandwagon.

It's also interesting that not only is Senator Kennedy against it, but Sen. John Kerry is against Cape Wind as well.  On the other hand, Bush was Texas Governor in 1998 when Texas passed the first successful state RPS and Texas is now #1 in wind energy.  Also in 98/99 time frame, Bush installed geothermal and solar heating at Crawford Ranch.  Hmmm.

I don't quite understand the Bush bashing at the end of the discussion.  The US has moved to #1 in the world the past two years in new wind installations,  the PTC was extended in the 2005 EPAct, he has publicly called for 20% of our energy from wind, and was governor of the first successful RPS in Texas, which is now the #1 state in wind energy production and the model for the 20 state RPS's that have gone into effect since he became president.

On the other hand, leading opponents to Cape Wind are Democrats Kerry and Kennedy.

It's quite puzzling that the authors want to swipe at a proponent for the policy they are in favor of. 

I find it curious that it is not reported or commented upon when:
- solar PV goes in the white house in 2002
- Bush Geothermal installation at Crawford Ranch, TX
- Bush's 1/24/07 Executive Order which calls upon all federal agencies to:
* "ensure that at least half of the statutorily required renewable energy consumed by the agency in a fiscal year comes from new renewable sources."
* "improve energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions of the agency, through reduction of energy intensity by 3% annually through the end of fiscal year 2015, or 30% by the end of fiscal year 2015, relative to the baseline of the agency's energy use in fiscal year 2003"
* reduce fleet fuel consumption by 2% annually through fiscal year 2015, increase use of non-petroleum fuels by 10% annually and use plug-in hybrid vehicles when they are commercially available and reasonably priced.

Bush looks pretty good in renewable energy in policy and results. In addition to this:
- He installed geothermal system and catches rainwater at Crawford Ranch
- As governor in 1999, Texas passed the first successful state renewable portfolio standard (2000 MW by 2009) that has propelled TX to #1 in wind
- 2005 EPAct's renewable fuels standard (7.5 billion gallons by 2012)
- The recent state of the address call for 35 billion gallons of renewable fuel by 2017
- US moved to #1 in world production capacity of ethanol in 2005
- US was #1 in new wind installation capacity in 2005
Effort and results are impressive.

With all the Bush-bashing, the dude needs some props for his renewables resume. Ethanol has boomed since he took office with the US passing Brazil as #1 in the world. The US has become #1 in new wind installations the last couple years due to the PTC (extended in 2005 and again in 2006) and state renewable portfolio standards (RPS). Bush passed the first successful RPS in 1999 as then Governor of Texas, and Texas passed California last year as #1 state in wind energy capacity. The updated renewable fuel standard (20X17) in the state of the union is the second in his tenure as the 7.5 billion gallons RFS from 2005 EPAct will be passed far before 2012.

While hopeful the Dem's improve upon existing renewable energy policy, it's interesting and counter-intuitive:
- The boom in ethanol (quadrupling production, renewable fuels standard, passing Brazil as #1 in world production) happened during the Bush Administration and was led primarily by red states and their representatives.
- A failed provision to strip the renewable fuels standard from 2005 EPAct came from Senators Schumer (D-NY) and Feinstein (D-CA).
- A failed attempt in June, 2005 by NY, CA, and CT requesting a waiver from the EPA that gasoline contain an oxygenate after MTBE was banned. Senator Schumer's quote "with gas prices already through the roof, it is unconscionable for the EPA to play ethanol politics"
- US was #1 in new wind energy installations in 2005, 2006, and will likely retain that ranking in 2007.
- Bush, as then governor of Texas in 1998, passed the first successful renewable portfolio standard in our country.

George Pataki is in an elite class of governors including Schwarzenegger, Rendell, and Vilsack in his efforts to promote renewable energy. He had to negotiate with the NY legislature to keep money in the budget for this cellulosic ethanol demonstration, has written executive orders for biofuels and renewable energy mandates by state-owned facilities, pushed through a 25% renewable portfolio standard, and has helped develop NYSERDA into one of the premier state energy offices. New Yorkers can only hope newly-elected governor Spitzer maintains and builds upon his efforts.

It's not clear that there is a difference between the Democrats and Republicans on the business of renewable energy. In fact, the boom discussed in biofuels, wind, and solar has accelerated under the Bush years and consider:

§ Then-Governor George Bush in 1999 passed the first successful renewable portfolio standard (state mandate for minimum percentage of renewable energy) in Texas in 1999. 19 other states have followed suit and Texas is now number 1 in wind capacity.

§ The US was #1 in the world in new wind energy installations in 2005 and passed Brazil as # 1 in ethanol production.

§ Senators Kerry and Kennedy in Massachussets have not been friendly to wind energy in their back yard (Cape Wind project).

§ 2 democratic senators (Chuck Schumer (NY) and Diane Feinstein (CA)) attempted to strip the renewable fuels standard (7.5 billion gallons of biofuels by 2012) out of EPAct 2005.

Renewable energy support is not a partisan issue! The first successful state RPS was in Texas under then Governor Bush. Texas is now #2 in the nation in wind production. The 2005 EPAct has a significant (~ 20%) renewable energy component. The ethanol, biodiesel, solar, and wind (with a renewed PTC) industries are growing at 25% - 35% annually under this administration. There has been since 1998 to be a bipartisan US Senate Renewables and Energy Efficiency Caucus. It is one of the few forums you cannot tell a Republican from a Democrat. Review the sponsors behind the 10X10, 20X20, and 25X25 bills to see for yourself if this is a partisan issue. Let's (especially the press) get over trying to make this a battle and move forward with the best ideas. As an example, Republicans need to latch onto the Democrat proposal to actively reduce subsidies for traditional fossil fuel sources.

Although the articles don't give specific details, NREL layoffs were reported a month or two ago siting increased congressional earmarks. Congress reduces available DOE budget by shifting funds to home projects and constituencies (some say pork), reducing available budget for DOE priorities. Give Bush some credit...he was the first governor with a successful RPS in Texas in 1999 (which many states have subsequently followed), ethanol production has boomed in his tenure, biodiesel is on the cusp of taking off, and he is promoting energy (including renewable) far more than recent administrations (e.g. 2005 EPAct, 2006 State of the Union, etc.).

There is no difference between D's or R's on making the other side look bad above all other goals. This article states..."They (Democrats) obviously decided to sand bag any initiative Governor Schwarzenegger supported." See Diane Feinstein (D) and Chuck Schumer's (D) attempt to strip the renewable fuel standard from the energy bill as additional evidence.

In fact, Republicans may have taken the lead passing legistation important to renewable energy. Many of the earliest (Gov. George Bush, TX) and most ambitious (Pataki, NY, Schwarzeneger CA) renewable portfolio standards came from the R's. In NY, Pataki has led the charge via NYSERDA and a recently formed Center of Excellence for Efficiency and Energy Systems. Also see midwest (primarily red state) leadership in biofuels.

Renewable energy by and large has bipartisan support. However, the politics of smearing the other side is a more important goal to dem's that cannot stand to see Republicans get credit on this issue.