Renewable Energy Incentives Stalled in Senate
by Matthew McDermott, Brooklyn, NY on 06.11.08
photo by Scott Jones via flickr
As San Francisco passes a new incentive program for solar, the Senate stalls. Yesterday, by a vote of 50-44 the Senate blocked H.R. 6049, the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008, from advancing to the floor for consideration. In doing so $18 billion in tax incentives for investment in renewable energy, carbon capture and sequestration projects, energy efficiency improvements and conservation efforts have been put at risk. The House passed its version of the legislation on May 21.
So, what exactly is inside this act and what’s at stake?
Renewable Energy Incentives
- Production tax credits to be extended through 2009 for wind facilities. Biomass, geothermal, hydro, landfill gas and waste-to-energy facilities have their place-in-service dates extended through 2011.
- Extension of the 30% investment tax credit for solar and qualified fuel cell properties, and the 10% microturbines through the end of 2014. Residential solar property credits would also be extended to 2014 and the annual cap increased from $2000 to $4000.
- An additional $2 billion of Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBs) to finance certain renewable facilities.
Carbon Capture & Sequestration
- Tax credits of $1.5 billion for carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) as “advanced coal electricity projects and certain coal gasification projects”. These credits would only be available to facilities that can demonstrate that the their CCS projects will capture at least 65% of CO2 emissions.
Transportation
- The 50% write off of facilities construction costs for cellulosic ethanol plants is extended to all cellulosic biofuels. This will go until 2013.
- The $1/gallon biodiesel production tax credit is extended for another year and is extended to any feedstock and process as long as the fuel can be used as home heating oil, in vehicles, or as aviation fuel.
This is just the start of what’s in this bill and I heartily encourage readers to nit pick through this one. You can download a PDF summary of the bill from the House Ways and Means Committee website.
If there’s one thing that is sure to sabotage investment in renewables it’s uncertainty in incentive programs. Even if there are aspects of this that don’t suit everyone—It’s politics, right? You’re bound not to like parts of the legislation—unless there’s some mid-term predictability in incentives/subsidies/promotions programs you’re just not going to have steady investment.
Renewable Energy Incentives
Solar Energy Incentives Approved In San Francisco
California May Tinker With Solar Subsidies
End The Perverse Incentives Effect On Renewable Energy
Senate Votes Down Green Incentives
If this upsets you, take a look here to see how your Senator voted. They needed 60% Aye votes to move the bill to the floor, and only recieved 50%. If your Sentor voted No, or didn't vote, be sure to call or write to let them know that this is an important issue.
http://www.opencongress.org/roll_call/show/4743
Bob M: I should've added your comment to the post in the first place.
Yes, look how your senator voted and if they voted no make sure to tell them how you feel about that.
Thanks, M
Hi,
With all the problems due to the recent oil prices, which we all know part is cause from speculation, the goverments keep putting barriers to the development of alternative energies.
Moreover, the ability of the richest and biggest poluters being abble to by emission quotes, grants them the "right" to continue to ruin our planet.
Now it's the oil, tomorow will be food and water.
Lets see what people will have to say when they won't have water to drink.
Kind regards,
José
Over here in Europe we (some of us) are busting a gut to try to tackle this issue of climate change.
With the US representing a huge proportion of the world's emissions and the US Senate so divided what is to be done?
We all know that climate change is now a demonstrated global issue. If 50 voted to bounce HR6049 while 44 were in agreement, what does it say about the ethics of the 50 who voted "no"?
Wake up ladies and gentlemen.
The voting record is here: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00205
NAYs ---2
Carper (D-DE)
Conrad (D-ND)