The Politics And Potential Of Wind Power
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-08-16/politics-and-potential-wind-power
The role of subsidies for wind energy has become a hot-button issue in the presidential campaign. Governor Romney opposes extending tax credits for the wind industry. President Obama has re-doubled his commitment to them. In a rare show of bipartisanship last week, the Senate Finance Committee voted to extend the credits for another year. The debate over their fate will likely surface again in the fall. Supporters of the extension argue all major sources of energy have received federal help. Opponents say it’s time to let the free market take over. Diane her guests discuss the politics the future of wind energy in the U.S.
Guests
Coral Davenport
energy and environment correspondent for National Journal.
Denise Bode
chief executive officer of the American Wind Energy Association.
Daniel Simmons
director of regulatory and state affairs at the Institute for Energy Research.
John Gimigliano
principal-in-charge of KPMG’s Energy Sustainability Tax practice and former senior tax counsel for the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
What a beautiful picture of fantastic vistas and wind turbines. I wonder if these turbines have piles of rotting migrating bird corpses at their pedestal bases, or are they pulling down warm air creating micro global warming effects upon the surrounding landscape. The technology is not there, building these is a waste of scarce resources to soothe extremist environmentalists who value appearance more than substance.
Are birds, fish and animals exempt from what man is doing to to the world?
If the houses and buildings that use electricity generated by wind power are leaky and inefficient, then the advantage of wind power is minimal. However, if we could start building houses that are 80 to 90% energy efficient (possible with Passive House Standard for more comfortable, safer and durable houses). Then add plug-in hybrids that already can give commuters around 100MPGe that pull charge overnight (which favors wind power generation). With those changes that should be done immediately and start saving billions of dollars and drastically reducing the amount of power needed on the grid, then wind power make a truly significant impact.
This level of efficiency is possible today.
I am a strong believer in the critical necessity of moving away from fossil fuels and to clean energy. I have done many things to my own house to make it energy efficient, from better insulation and CFL lighting to geothermal heating and cooling. Yet, like many Americans, my electricity comes from a coal-fired power plant. Our local plant is one of the oldest in the country, and the Southern Company is considering plans to replace it in the next few years. I would like to think that renewable energy could take the place of coal--for example, a wind farm could replace the coal now supplying our electricity. But is this realistic?
Our real government will determine the outcome of this idea. So far they don't see it as a real money-maker. Until they do, it won't happen.
The recent decline in natural gas prices have priced wind energy right out of the market. Without huge tax incentives, wind is not profitable.
gary k wrote:
"Our real government will determine the outcome of this idea. So far they don't see it as a real money-maker. Until they do, it won't happen."
Were you referring to DOE or Obama's shadow government?
> As a taxpayer, you’ve paid $7.24 toward solar subsidies over te past five years — versus $521.73 for fossil fuels.
> Solar is cheaper than grid power in 14% of the country now – but would be cheaper in 100% of the country if it received an equal subsidy.
> The US has 39 times as much sun hitting it as Germany, but Germany generates 60 times as much solar energy.
Recently drove from Athens Ohio to Boulder Colorado . In one particular county in Kansas (have the county written down in my notes) I stopped counting the high tech windmills when I hit 400. The last time I had driven that route was six years before in 2005. At that point I had counted around 60 in that same area. Huge increase. Where is that energy collected in that region being used?
Drove through Oklahoma a few years ago. Hundreds of windmills. Where is that energy being used?
Can you also discuss the vertical wind turbines out in front of the DC Botannical gardens.
Also decades of billion dollar oil subsidies vs subsidies for wind energy
The Right in this country consistently demonize any government involvement in spurring new technologies. They are stubborn and naive to how other countries are very successful with this. Too bad, we will fall behind and already have!
T Boone Pickens is a pretty bright businessman. In April, he proclaimed that he's lost his a** in wind energy. Doesn't sound like a sustainable plan to me.
I strongly agree with Simmons' comment. Eliminate credits and let the free market decide if and how this can be a viable source of power.
Tax breaks to the energy innovation industries are an expense to the American people. Let the private market place determine the wind powered industry’s evolution including whether we care enough to support it; private initiatives, not public support.
The main oil subsidy I have heard, is the depletion allowance. It is defended as not being a subsidy, but instead, is the same as any other business being able to deduct its expenses. I had also understood that the oil depletion allowance doesn't just count expenses paid, or even exploration costs, but is based on an estimate of the potential amount of oil that is being depleted. If that is so, 1) it is not like other companies expenses and 2) it is indeed a subsidy.
I would like to know the truth in comparing wind to oil subsidies.
Emotional and unsubstantiated by facts.
The fact is tall buildings, cities, bridges impact avian mortality far greater than wind turbines.
The fact is that CO2 and other byproducts from fossil fuel energy generation will increase the mortality of all life.
Fact is that the energy required to produce ethanol from corn only gives you a net energy balance of 33%.
Our children deserve an environmentally clean and energy efficient world.
In 2005 Kansas only had 364 MW of wind energy. This year seven new wind farms will come online - 40% of it will be used in state to fulfill our Renewable Portfolio Standard (which has broad support across the state) the other 60% will be exported. Just like our wheat and cattle, Kansas has the potential to export our wind energy as well. Those seven new farms represent a $3 billion dollar investment in the Kansas economy.
Please discuss the transfer system for wind energy. T Boone Pickens was all about wind energy awhile back and then shifted his focus over to gas. Was that all about money making potential. Tax subsidies?
I missed the first few minutes of the show, but I believe it should be disclosed that the Institute for Energy Research is funded by ExxonMobil and a Koch Brothers Trust. This is important information to have for this discussion. Neither one of these entities is interested in any type or renewable energy and will not be in favor of continuing any tax credits for a renewable energy source.
I missed the first few minutes of the show, but I believe it should be disclosed that the Institute for Energy Research is funded by ExxonMobil and a Koch Brothers Trust. This is important information to have for this discussion. Neither one of these entities is interested in any type or renewable energy and will not be in favor of continuing any tax credits for a renewable energy source.
One of the panelists takes a free-market approach, saying that all energy sources should compete in the marketplace. The government should let the market work. But, of course, as Lester Brown and others remind us, the market does not tell the truth about energy. Burning fossil fuels has many external costs--health issues related to air pollution, climate change impacts, and others. When we pay for gas at the pump, we do not pay for these costs. With renewable energy, there are no such external costs (or relatively very few). The free market, as it now functions, is skewed in favor of dirty energy. Of course coal is cheaper than solar and wind--but it is really expensive when we consider all the costs associated with its use.
The issue of climate change alone gives us good reason to increase our support for renewable energy.
KS Dorothy. Driving on 70 there was one particular county that had tons of wind mills. Thanks for the explanation. Wow "3 billion dollar investment in the Kansas economy" Always so interesting that many of the older farms, ranches had small windmills on them. Love those old wind mills that you can see on farms etc on back roads etc
The 'free market' aspect of this debate is a bit disingenuous. Fossil fuel sources of energy do not have any, or very few, of the economic 'externality' costs factored in. Global warming, reduced air quality, strip-mining our moutainsides and contaminating our ground water, not to mention the billions spent in securing foreign oil sources are all massive costs that we all pay in indirect means and which are not factored into the comparison vs renewable energy sources.
jim davis. Pickens was all over the place pushing wind energy five or so years ago. Switched over to gas usage push. CCCHHINg
Jim Davis wrote:T Boone Pickens is a pretty bright businessman. In April, he proclaimed that he's lost his a** in wind energy. Doesn't sound like a sustainable plan to me.
Jim, Pickens is only interested in investments where he can sell in either the short term or a couple of months to a couple years, for a profit. Wind power, along with solar and other alternative energies is a long term proposition, not some investment vehicle for us to make a profit on. I'm sure 125 years ago owners of kerosene lamps and livery stables thought investing in oil drilling was foolish too.
Diane nailed that man about Koch brothers money. Who subsidizes this oil industry, gas push. She is still on it. First time I have ever heard her push so hard. Asking where the money comes from for pushing oil usage
What will the cost of natural gas be when the gas companies have to buy water for people when they pollute an aquifer?
Why aren't supposedly thoughtful individuals debating this point?
1. Energy sources should compete equally, the consumer should pay the cost of consuming the energy source
2. So in that vein of thought, with carbon fuels, even without an explicit tax credit, the fuels receive an implicit tax subsidy because the consumer is only paying extraction cost for the fuel source.
3. No source but carbon fuels spews the result of consuming the energy source indiscriminately into the environment.
4. To compete equally two things must happen:
a. The consumer of the carbon fuel must capture the products of combustion and return the products of combustion to the producer. The producer must be required to dispose of the products of combustion.
b. A tax on the sale of carbon fuels must be collected to fund the clean up required for 150 years of spewing the products of combustion without regard to the consequences.
I am curious how easy or difficult or easy is it to transport electricity generated. Wind power and solar power are much more viable in certain regions of the US, and fortunately, they are relatively unpopulated areas. Could we build giant solar farms in the Southwest, and giant wind farms in central north, and profitably use that power in other regions of the country?
Diane, today's guests are presented on a grossly uneven playing field. The wind energy advocate is transparently supported by companies in the wind energy industry. However, your "Institute for Energy Research" representative is essentially advocating for the oil and gas industry -- but seemingly from an independent institute. This is misleading.
Unless I missed it, you haven't told the listening audience who supports his "institute". It has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from ExxonMobil, the notorious Koch brothers, and also a Koch front group. I don't know who his "institute's" current major donors are. Why not ask your guest? Perhaps he could be as transparent as your wind advocate.
To weigh his statements and opinions, your audience deserves to know. I myself think he's a wolf in sheep's clothing.
It would be great to have your guests help us laypeople understand why the oil and gas industry considers 90 year old percentage depletion allowance and accelerated write-off of intangible drilling costs not any tax help - yet even the conservative CATO Institute refers to these oil and gas tax breaks/incentives right along side Wind’s Production Tax Credit, only bigger and better disguised.
Ah yes, the Koch brothers, arch villain of the non thinking left. The Koch brothers are Libertarians, they do not support government subsidies for anyone including themselves. They seek a level playing field for all, no government cronyism, let the market decide who wins and who loses.