Robert's Comments

Matt,

Excellent article! Applying a long-term financing model to solar is brilliant. Moving to scale (gigawatts) on PV cell production may also drive down the installed kilowatt costs like when DRAMs and flat screen TVs moved to scale.

Bob

There is no need to produce hydrogen for power until we have a surplus of electricity from renewable energy...wind/nuclear may be the first to produce a surplus during off-peak demand. Once you have hydrogen, why not burn it in an internal compustion engine for power or electricity. Has ACORE dampened the fuel cell/hydrogen hype in Washington?

Policy can help improve supply and output/btu but I do not believe in having a "mandatory target for an overall national reduction in the level of oil consumption". Price affects supply and demand. Bottom line is we might spend more money talking on the cell phone while driving than burning gas. A gallon of gas is cheap, just try pushing your car for 20 miles.

From the perspective of Wall Street, the energy bill was a non-event. I support Scott in asking for stronger political leadership in renewable technologies but reality is....banks, brokers, investors own more traditional energy. Coal, oil and gas dominate investment dollars and demand political attention. Scott is right to complain about the short term PTC and lack of a federal RPS. At least the MBTE liability still rests with the private markets. These traditional investors may eventually realize oil companies are just annuities with marginal net returns whereas energy technologies like PV and wind offer growth. This energy bill allows the natural market progression of the global decarbonization trend...that has been in existence for over 100 years! We are on this track and only bad politics could stop it. Maybe we are fortunate to have an energy bill that does not obstruct the global trend in sustainable energy