Energy Bill Can't Afford to Wait, Says Oil State Senator Begich (D-AK)

June 2nd, 2010 by Susan Kraemer

With eighty wildfires raging across Alaska due to hot dry weather, lightning and erratic winds and smoke from the fires spreading across the state – but there is no climate change, oh no, it’s never climate change; it’s always going to be “unprecedented” – Senator Begich(D-AK) made some comments in favor of moving forward on the American Power Act, over the Memorial Day recess.

[social_buttons]

He told Alaska public radio listeners that he was one of those pressing for energy to be considered as soon as congress returns after the Memorial Day break. (It actually couldn’t have been be considered till late June, anyway, after the CBO and the EPA have finished the six week review of the bill which was sent to them May 13th) and had positive words for the new bill.

Some deals that Begich liked in the bill were higher revenue sharing for states that get oil money, a partial nationalization of oil revenue, which works well to keep Norway’s North Sea Oil exploration more careful than ours. Alaska already relies on oil money to fund government services. Begich gushed that this climate bill will lead to “billions” for Alaska.

But he also liked the push to incentivize renewable energy. He clearly favors a Renewable Energy Standard, but in the next breath revealed why it needs to customized for each state, as it is now.

He is hopeful that South Western Alaskan hydro power could be developed.

However, some states do, and some do not include any size hydro power as renewable (among the states that have Renewable Energy Standards). The old style of huge dams – no longer possible anyway, in today’s era of bathtub-sized government – have effects on the environment. New micro-hydro is allowed in state standards, but again, each state allows different amounts. California’s maxes out at 30 MW of micro-hydro, but Vermont allows up to 200 MW systems.

Alaska has abundant hydro resources, but states on the drought side of the nation also have another reason to not count hydro in an RES. The Southwest will have less water from snow melt in future decades so hydro is discounted because of a newly “unrenewable” aspect. But, in the regions likely to see increased precipitation, new forms of clean hydro-power is included in renewable energy standards. Oklahoma included hydro in their brand new RES. Every state has different standards because of the differences in future regional climates.

Begich is a supporter for a RES. In the show, he mentioned the Bingaman bill (that does include a national RES) and the Dorgan bill as two that he likes, that will likely be morphed into the final version.

The Collins-Snowe CLEAR act (cap and dividend) has already been “morphed into” the climate bill. About 82% of the proceeds from the carbon pollution-limiting cap in APA go to consumers, and the trade is limited to just the 7,500 covered polluters, eliminating Wall Street from trading; two items that came from the Collins-Snowe CLEAR Act.

With even an oil state Senator on board, this gives new impetus to our last chance to curb climate change: the American Power Act.

Image: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.

About the Author

Susan Kraemer writes at CleanTechnica, CSP-Today, PV-Insider , SmartGridUpdate, and GreenProphet. She has also been published at Ecoseed, NRDC OnEarth, MatterNetwork, Celsius, EnergyNow, and Scientific American. As a former serial entrepreneur in product design, Susan brings an innovator's perspective on inventing a carbon-constrained civilization: If necessity is the mother of invention, solving climate change is the mother of all necessities! As a lover of history and sci-fi, she enjoys chronicling the strange future we are creating in these interesting times. Follow Susan on Twitter @dotcommodity.

Kathy

Hi – Just wanted to follow up on a comment you make – the CLEAR Act (the Cantwell-Collins cap and dividend bill) has NOT been morphed into the climate bill. First, no one knows what the climate bill is. Second, it doesn’t seem like the latest Kerry-Lieberman draft includes a full auction, a ban on speculative trading or international offsets (key components of the Clear Act). They are still big on giveaways to industry. Finally, the Kerry-Lieberman draft doesn’t give direct returns to consumers but allows utility companies to “pass through” savings, a pretty vague system that I’m not sure all of us trust. Would love to share more about the bill let me know if you’re interested you can contact us at http://www.supporclearact.com
- http://cleantechnica.com/author/susan Susan Kraemer
  
  Hi Kathy; I am going on the Stavins summary, since he was instrumental in creating the cap and trade part of the climate bills. He says 82% goes to consumers (essentially offsetting any energy cost rise) which is more skewed to making consumers whole (cap-and-dividend concept) than the last climate bill (Boxer’s CEJAPA) was. I think that shows that her idea has been “morphed” into it.
  
  http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/analysis/stavins/?p=643
  
  At 82%, that amounts to “cap-and-dividend” to every American.
  
  See Kerry’s bill online here: http://kerry.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/APAbill3.pdf
  
  See Sec. 2101. Disposition of allowances for global warming pollution reduction
  
  program.
  
  That said, just from listening to Cantwell in energy hearings, she is clearly the most innovative thinker in the Senate, totally committed to clean energy, and I expect we’ll see more great ideas from her. But climate bills incorporate lots of amendments (sort of sub bills: RES standards, building codes, PTC, etc) (that’s how they get to be 1,000 page affairs!). It is not a choice; hers is one of many contributions.