Comments on: Firms Scramble To Complete Wind Energy Projects Before Year’s End

By: Zachary Shahan

Zachary Shahan — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 01:34:00 +0000

Yes, it’s a pity. But with the change this year (to tax credits for projects started, rather than projects completed), we might be in a good spot. I’m very curious to see how many get started, and how far they take us.

That said, we still have to get passed one of the worst Congressmen in history, Darrell Issa: http://cleantechnica.com/2013/01/04/issa-puts-the-stinkeye-on-wind-tax-credit-extension-biomass-and-geothermal-too/

By: Zachary Shahan

Zachary Shahan — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 01:30:00 +0000

“Funny how the coal, oil, gas and nuclear industries all insist on a minimum of ten years for their various tax credits, exemptions, loan guarantees, etc. for the very same reason – to stimulate long-term investment – and oddly enough, Congress always accedes to these requests.”
-Oy, exactly… horrible double standard.

Your 2nd paragraph — Wow, that’s something… will have to remember to bring that up in an article.

The renewable energy lobbyists do a pretty good job of making the case for their subsidies. However, what they don’t do is spell out the subsidies their competitors are getting (as you just did). They should really focus on that more, I think, to make it 100% obvious how unfair & stupid it is to oppose renewable energy subsidies.

By: Nicholas

Nicholas — Wed, 02 Jan 2013 13:58:00 +0000

Hello. Could you please correct it for me?

By: Bob_Wallace

Bob_Wallace — Wed, 02 Jan 2013 04:20:00 +0000

Apparently a one year extension of the PTC for renewables was part of the legislation that just cleared Congress.

This year at a time stuff sucks. Especially when the Republicans wait until the very last minute. That causes too much disruption for the industry and it is totally unnecessary.

Republicans are job killers.

By: Jim Nelson

Jim Nelson — Tue, 01 Jan 2013 14:31:00 +0000

“as the projects are grinded to a halt…”

Hey Nicholas, thanks for the story, but could you ran a spell checker before posting your stuff? I grinded my teeth just reading this. Was you drank, or doesn’t you knew what verb forms is?

By: Edward Kerr

Edward Kerr — Tue, 01 Jan 2013 13:41:00 +0000

That would make too much sense Photo and the people that we send to DC to oversee the bureaucracy quit making any sense some time ago. I think that legalized bribery might be involved…..no, I mean campaign contributions. Yea, thats the ticket…

By: photosymbiont

photosymbiont — Mon, 31 Dec 2012 23:26:00 +0000

Funny how the coal, oil, gas and nuclear industries all insist on a minimum of ten years for their various tax credits, exemptions, loan guarantees, etc. for the very same reason – to stimulate long-term investment – and oddly enough, Congress always accedes to these requests.

In addition, the 2005 Energy Act gave a 20-year extension of the Price Anderson Act for nuclear liability protection. Note that if Fukushima had been covered by this Act, the federal government would be on the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars in costs, since the P-A fund only amounts to some $13 billion at present. Nevertheless, large nuclear utilities like Exelon are howling about any extension of the wind tax credit – but would they be willing to eliminate the P-A Act in exchange? Of course not – banks and investors would drop Exelon and similar nuclear utility stocks in an instant if they faced such a liability.

Similarly, the DOE’s “Clean Coal Power Initiative” is a 10-year program in which the federal government subsidizes 50% of the cost of ‘demonstrating new technologies’ – i.e. building new coal-fired power plants. Not a one-year program that needs yearly renewal.

The renewable energy industry should get its lobbyists together and demand similar ten-year tax credit / loan guarantee programs for solar and wind (accident liability is not much of an issue here). The fossil fuel and nuclear industries in years past used, as their justification for such programs, the ‘energy security of the United States’ – so why not use the same argument for renewable energy production?