Congress unfairly picks winners (nuclear reactors) and losers (renewable energy)
US Congress picks winners and losers
When talking about energy policy in our nation’s Capitol, you can hardly visit a U.S. Senator or Representative’s office without hearing that they supposedly support an “all of the above” energy strategy. President Obama jumped on the bandwagon early on, as well. In theory, an “all of the above” energy strategy would benefit all sources of energy production (wind, oil, solar, nuclear, hydropower, coal, and so on), not just the most politically popular.
Last week, the House of Representatives voted on the Energy and Water Appropriations bill. Stuck within the bill was a provision to add $10 million to a permitting authority (in this case, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission) for a proposed nuclear waste storage facility in Nevada. Also under the bill was a provision to eliminate the Department of Energy’s Wind Powering America Program. How does this constitute an “all of the above” strategy?
Our nation has already thrown billions of dollars toward developing the proposed Yucca Mountain radioactive nuclear waste storage facility over the course of several decades. The flawed geologic repository isn’t anywhere close to being completed, has rightfully been abandoned by the Obama Administration, has estimated costs of nearly $100 billion and its capacity would be woefully small compared to the massive amount of radioactive waste lying around at the more than 100 nuclear reactors currently operating in the U.S. Yet, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to dump another $10 million of your taxpayer dollars into an essentially “dead” project. To get this $10 million without raising taxes, Congress has come up with a new term – “pay fors.”
Simply put, “pay fors” are budget cuts from other federal programs to come up with the money to expand existing programs or pay for new programs (but let’s be honest, most of the money is already borrowed anyway). If the Senate doesn’t act, one of those sacrificial lambs for the never-going-to-happen Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository could be the successful Wind Powering America Program.
Unlike the Yucca Mountain boondoggle, where billions of dollars have been spent but to no avail, Wind Powering America has seen huge successes since its inception. Wind Powering America has had a positive influence throughout the country – especially here in the Southeast. Anemometer loan programs, Wind for Schools, state wind working groups, maps and data – all invaluable tools introducing and promoting wind energy to our region. Since the 1999 inception of Wind Powering America, wind power deployment around the country has increased from 2,400 megawatts to over 47,000 megawatts today—a twenty fold increase. Even though the program has been wildly successful, more work still needs to be done.
Here in the Southeast, we are just beginning to see major interest in onshore wind development. Each onshore wind farm can represent investments of hundreds of millions of dollars in local communities, yet misconceptions about wind energy can stall projects indefinitely. Because of the strong Wind Powering America network, we in the Southeast can learn from our peers’ successes and avoid making the same mistakes they did when getting wind projects off the ground.
Since the challenges to offshore wind farms and the stakeholders involved in the process are radically different than those of onshore wind projects, in some sense, stakeholder involvement and engagement has to be restarted. Many of the lessons learned from onshore wind are not applicable to the offshore context and thus some of the processes are starting anew. With dozens of near-term gigawatts of offshore wind power and the billions of dollars of investment they will bring in to our region, it is more critical than ever to have programs such as Wind Powering America in place to facilitate and speed the deployment process along.
Apparently in Washington, the “all of the above” talking point has been flipped on its head; if a program is wildly successful (such as Wind Powering America), the House of Representatives will vote to eliminate its funding. But if a program is woefully over budget, behind schedule and unlikely to ever succeed (such as the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump), what’s another $10 million down the drain?
Do you think it’s fair to steal money from successful renewable energy programs and give it to nuclear boondoggles? If you think it is unfair, contact your member of Congress.
SACE has worked with Wind Powering America and has previously received funding to work on wind energy issues throughout the Southeast.
Tags: all of the above, appropriations, Congress, Department of Energy, energy and water appropriations, house of representatives, Nuclear, nuclear reactors, offshore wind, offshore wind farms, pay fors, Senate, wind, wind energy, wind farms, wind power, Wind Powering America, Yucca Mountain
7 Comments
Comments RSS
TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
Face it the Nuclear Fascists* are running our country, pun intended! Our Leaders are all receiving Nuclear Payback** yet they all are in Nuclear Denial*** and will not explain how the USA would pay for a Trillion Dollar Eco-Disaster like Fukushima if it happened in the USA…
With the price of Solar (of all flavors) dropping monthly and the cost of Nuclear Reactors (construction , repairs and decommissioning) spiraling ever upward by the time many of these reactors get finished the energy will have to be subsidized by the Government!
America better start doing some future cost analysis or they will be digging a nuclear “hole” for themselves at the very time other major Countries are shifting to Solar (of all flavors) as the modern safe Energy Alternative!
If the USA wanted to become true World Leaders, they would Champion Solar from Space and then lead the World toward a safe new future; these books explain how:
The High Frontier by Gerard K. O’Neill,
Colonies In Space by A. Heppenheimer.
The Third Industrial Revolution by G. Harry Stine
The Space Enterprise by Philip Robert Harris
Mining the Sky by John S. Lewis
* http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nuclear+fascism
** http://is.gd/XPjMd0
The illogical belief that Nature cannot destroy any land based nuclear reactor, any place anytime 24/7/365!
*** http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Nuclear+payback
Those that support nuclear power because nuclear power somehow supports them; no matter what the health implications or other “costs” are for others.
Comment by CaptD on June 13, 2012 10:39 am
Lets review the basics, We now know:
1. Nuclear reactors can Meltdown.
2. Nature can destroy any land based nuclear reactor, anyplace anytime!
3. Solar (of all flavors) vs Nuclear Benefits:
✔ Less costly to build
✔ ZERO RISK OF A MELTDOWN
✔ No Trillion Dollar Eco-Disasters
✔ Faster to construct
✔ CLEAN from start to finish.
✔ No radiation worries or leaks
✔ No foreign dependency
✔ Prices are dropping yearly
✔ Creates large number of green jobs
✔ No nuclear cleanup expenses
4. Nuclear reactors leak radioactivity
5. Nuclear reactors are VERY expensive to de-commission
6. Nuclear Fallout can spread quickly and last “forever”
7. America cannot afford a Trillion Dollar Eco-Disaster
8. Nuclear waste storage is an BIG Expensive problem
9. America has the land mass to go Solar (of all flavors)
Comment by CaptD on June 13, 2012 10:41 am
From RahSolar on Huffington Post
Some informational graphics on powering the planet with renewables.
According to the United Nations 170,000 square kilometers of forest is destroyed each year. If we constructed solar farms at the same rate, we would be finished in 3 years.
There are 1.2 million square kilometers of farmland in China. This is 2 1/2 times the area of solar farm required to power the world in 2030.
The first link contains the science behind all the others.
http://www.landartgenerator.org/blagi/archives/127
http://www.flickr.com/photos/25541021@N00/3895429285/
http://www.landartgenerator.org/blagi/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/AreaRequired1000.jpg
http://landartgenerator.org/blagi/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/SolarVsShaleLR.pdf
http://www.landartgenerator.org/images/PosterCO2trees.pdf
http://landartgenerator.org/blagi/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/SolarVsTarLR.pdf
http://landartgenerator.org/images/SOLARSTIMULUS.pdf
http://www.landartgenerator.org/blagi/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/AreaRequiredWindOnly.jpg
Comment by CaptD on June 13, 2012 10:43 am
I see this as Energy Warfare between the Nuclear Industry, what I call the Nuclear Fascism* and the Solar Industry. Their goal is to take back the market share that Solar (of all flavors) is “robbing” from the Nuclear Industry and return Nuclear’s control of Energy generation….
Since Fukushima (3/11/11) Global Nuclear has not only lost much of its market share but the entire Industry is now feeling threatened by the increasing public awareness that nuclear is not only expensive but it carries with it the RISK of causing a Trillion Dollar Eco-Disaster like Fukushima.
The unasked question is what Country can afford that huge RISK or to even be downwind from a similar meltdown if one were to occur in Europe? The answer is none of them, so what we are seeing is that they are spending huge amounts of money now trying to shore up their RISKY technology and are using all their Gov’t. contacts to hinder development of all other forms of Energy production. Germany will be their test case, because now Germany is showing the World that they can begin to phase out nuclear and still grow their economy!
The Web has allowed people from all over the Planet to cut through their Nuclear Baloney** and see nuclear reactors for what they are, the BIGGEST RISK mankind faces… Ask The Japanese!
* http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nuclear+fascism
** http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Nuclear+Baloney
Comment by CaptD on June 13, 2012 10:43 am
The World now looks to Germany for Eneregy Leadership:
Perhaps we should take notes of how they are doing it?
http://www.volker-quaschning.de/datserv/ren-Strom-D/index_e.php
http://www.spiegel.de/international/crossing-the-20-percent-mark-green-energy-use-jumps-in-germany-a-783314.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/may/30/germany-renewable-energy-revolution
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-05/german-renewable-power-cheaper-than-fossils-in-2030-study-shows.html
Comment by CaptD on June 13, 2012 10:45 am
Check this out: A turbine that makes water from the desert air:http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/intelligent-energy/a-turbine-that-makes-water-from-the-desert-air/14701?tag=nl.e660
and this: Israeli device takes the thirst out
…http://is.gd/8tPLTM
Now put the two together and imagine a new “future” Multi-Functional Wind Turbine (MFWT™) that could “shift” from producing electricity to making water or even Hydrogen (in liquid form) as the grid load or water “need” changed!
Maybe I’ll get the first Solar O’Neill (SON) award for the idea!
Comment by CaptD on June 13, 2012 10:52 am
When folks think Location, Location, Location, one of the most important things is:
“How close am I and or are we downwind from a potential Nuclear Reactor Meltdown”
Lets use Southern California as an example:
What would happen to property values in SoCal if SORE, (San Onofre Reactor Emergency) suffered a meltdown like Fukushima for ANY reason, like an EQ (Earth Quake), terrorism, Tsunami, operator error or just “because it can”?
Per the NRC: Fact Sheet on Nuclear Insurance and Disaster Relief http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/funds-fs.html
In short, if there is more than $12 Billion in damages, residents are left holding a empty radioactive bag! This is only a tiny fraction of what it will cost in Fukushima, which is estimated to be about a Trillion Dollar Eco-Disaster!
What is the value of all the homes and Commercial property downwind of SORE?
Probably at least several TRILLION dollars…
Here is a great graphic that will help everyone visualize what is downwind of any of the US reactors! NRDC Nuclear Fallout Map: http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/fallout/
Just click on a reactor and zoom in…
Where will the US Government get the REST of the money if it happened at SORE (or a reactor where you live) next week, probably from Social Security and or Medicare? Where will people relocate to and for how long? Ask your Leaders!
In reality, ALL those affected are doomed! Tens of thousands are still living in nuclear refugee camps in Japan and it has been over a year and a half since their triple meltdowns which are BTW still sending radioactive pollution Globally!
Comment by CaptD on June 13, 2012 10:54 am