Conventional wisdom says that it will be exceedingly difficult for the United States Congress to pass energy legislation in its next session. For those who are waiting on signals that demonstrate our government's willingness to incentivize investments in clean energy, this has been a depressing period. But while I understand the frustration expressed from nearly every faction of the energy sector, I am optimistic about the potential to capitalize on this seemingly-lost opportunity in the next Congress. In the past several weeks there has been a notable shift in media coverage of the politics of energy reform. What began as a message of shock and despair, has now turned to one of acceptance and genuine desire to start with a clean slate, and try once more for an improved, cleaner, and more efficient energy economy.
The recent coverage of the Coalition for Green Capital (CGC), a non-profit organization based in Washington, DC, exemplifies this shift. As a member of its Board of Directors I appreciate the media coverage of the CGC's positive efforts to produce a road map for the clean energy future of the United States.
The New York Times article, "A Climate Proposal Beyond Cap and Trade", by David Leonhardt, describes the view of a prominent environmental economist who "should be despondent over Washington's failure to pass a climate bill." However, according to Leonhardt, MIT Professor Michael Greenstone, is not despondent. Rather, "he thinks the benefits of the bills that died in the Senate -- which would have raised the cost of carbon emissions, through a system known as cap and trade -- were sometimes exaggerated." Leonhardt notes that after all the necessary compromises had been made the bills would not have raised the price of carbon enough to have any meaningful impact, and would also have done little to address the increasing emissions from the developing world. Leonhardt goes on to recognize Reed Hundt, CEO of the Coalition for Green Capital, and the Coalition's efforts over the past two years to create a federal financing entity that would make clean energy cost competitive with carbon intensive energy.
The New York Times is not alone in recognizing the value in creating such an entity. A recent article by HuffPost's Dan Froomkin titled "A Convenient Truth: Gearing up for Climate Change Could Supercharge the Job Market", also focuses on a silver lining in the dark cloud over the clean energy sector and reinforces the need for a clean energy economy as envisioned by the Coalition for Green Capital. Froomkin writes:
Could one major crisis be solved by solving another? If we're talking about the nation's desperately poor job market on the one hand, and the dire threat of climate change on the other, then the answer is: Quite possibly, yes.
The solution to both would be an enormous investment in green technology and green jobs - creating a "clean energy economy" while reducing carbon emissions; putting millions of Americans back to work while increasing our energy independence; rebuilding our manufacturing base while saving consumers money on their energy bills; and saving the planet. It certainly sounds a heck of a lot cheerier than the alternative.
These media outlets have called attention to the fact that reflecting the true cost of clean energy is, and will continue to be, unpopular -- a completely logical fact given the current state of our economy. This means that the time is now for the creation of a federal clean energy financing institution (a "Green Bank") which would lower the cost of clean energy. We do not need to take the unpopular route of making carbon-intensive energy more expensive. Instead we can make clean energy sources more affordable. The energy sector has huge potential for new investment and widespread expansion, and this potential can only be realized if this sector is provided with the proper incentives.
On November 16th, the Coalition for Green Capital will be holding a public conference in Washington, DC entitled "The Future of Energy Reform." We will lay out our Coalition's road map for a clean energy future in the US. I encourage anyone interested to visit our website for further information: CoalitionForGreenCapital.com, or to reach out via email to sarahdavidson635@gmail.com
In fact, this is a deficit reducing plan that ultimately puts Americans in a position to have more disposable income that increases sales tax revenues at the state and local level and reduces taxes for all of this, I failed to mention that local, state and federal governments should be eligible for the lending program. Retrofitting government buildings with energy efficiency upgrades will lead to lower taxes once the retrofits have been paid off these three levels of government due to lower energy bills.
The number of articles coming through this section of Huff. Post supporting alternative energy over energy efficiency has to be about 15 to 1. The only way to drive the cost down on wind, solar, biomas to electricity, is to cut demand at every building and home in America before we make the investment in alternatives. We currently have 236,000 megawatts of surplus capacity in the U.S. Adding more capacity at this time doesn't make sense except at the residence or building after it has had a complete energy efficiency retrofit.
Establishing a National Energy Efficiency Lending program for residential and business property owners makes the most sense. The alternative energy investment tax credit should be converted to a energy efficiency investment tax credit to be used in conjunction with the energy efficiency lending program to speed the retrofits.
The lending program should be designed to encourage the replacement of all lighting systems with super efficient LED's and OLED's, to replace all outdated HVAC systems with highly efficient geothermal heating and cooling and all non-energy star appliances should be replaced with ultra efficient appliances.
The loans will be repaid with energy savings through loans at the nation private lending institutions at a rate of 3-4 percent because of the low risk nature of the loans. All loans will be preceded by an energy audit to determine the savings potential.
Remember, this Energy Efficiency Lending Program is based on property owners to repay the loans with the energy savings. The fly in the ointment, is the Investor Owned Guaranteed Rate Of Return Utility Model (GROR). For any energy efficiency lending program, electricty prices have to remain fairly constant. Under GROR, utilities have a guaranteed rate of return in 48 states. If demand falls due to the energy efficiency retrofits, then they can apply to the their respective Public Utility Commission and get a rate increase. This would have an impact on the energy savings generated by the efficiency upgrades if the utilities were able to seek rate increase.
Therefore, it is incumbent on the federal government to eliminate the GROR utility model and replace it with an Independent Service Operator model (ISO). The ISO charges it rates based on supply and demand at any given point in time. Lower demand, via energy efficiency and conservation efforts, means lower rates.
Continued
The GROR encourages waste by discounting rates to commercial users of energy. There is no incentive for energy efficiency or conservation this absurd discounting program. Whereas. the ISO coupled to energy efficiency, conservation and decentralized energy production encourages people to maximize their profits on selling power into the grid at market rates though energy efficiency.
This is a free market system except for the tax credits for energy efficiency and alternative energy. The boom in jobs will more than pay for the tax credits through an increase in payroll taxes. We will now know what our demad is once the retrofits are completed over a 5 year period of time. No structure should be eligible for alternative energy tax credits until a an energy efficiency retrofit has been completed. Cutting demand by 50 percent in the U.S. means a substantial savings on our alternative energy investment which could be financed under a similar lending program.
Do we need another government program giving away money with little hope of being repaid?
Isn't that what got us into the current mess?
these are a slam dunk, so where are our PACE loans? fannie and freddie have hijacked them. where are our FITs? Big Energy has hijacked them. now we are stuck with paying cash and "net metering" which is PATHETIC, or way worse, Big Solar stealing our money and killing our wilderness - it's disgusting.
Article: http://www.grist.org/article/2010-05-07-home-star-energy-retrofit-bill-passes-house-broad-coalition-rule
Biden's Middle Class Task Force has come up with a plan to enable a retrofit process for businesses and homeowners in http://pacenow.org/documents/Recovery_Through_Retrofit_Final_Report.pdf that precisely spells out both the public and private roles that creates a market through which private sector jobs are created.
Further information on PACE bonds http://www.pacenow.org
A path beckons beyond controversy!
An 11 year sunspot cycle recently began. So far, two solar threat events missed earth. NASA suggests, if either had hit earth's geomagnetic field, 130 million Americans might lose power for many weeks. The cost the first year might equal that of both current wars!
See: http://www.aesopinstitute.org
The steps necessary to rapidly reduce dependence on the power grid can accelerate development of little known, slowly emerging, extremely inexpensive, green systems.
This opens a politically workable way to accelerate the development of cheap green power.
Focus on that objective. Why would anyone fight it? There is likely to be widespread support for what needs to be done.
Cheap green power can supersede the fruitless debate over climate change.
And effectively fight Global Warming, goose the economy, generate lots of jobs and reduce dependency on fossil fuels and unstable areas of the globe.
The website outlines presently hard-to-believe, very low-cost, alternatives that are expected to power homes, businesses, automobiles and trucks.
Future vehicles might become power plants when suitably parked. No wires needed. They will be alternatives to coal and nuclear plants. Even better, they could pay for themselves!
Imagine what could be accomplished once there is widespread understanding of a way to help prevent the little recognized threat of massive power failures!
Cheap green energy can use a Green Bank!
Potential victims of massive power failures may want to move even faster!
What if I make sufficient political contributions to a sufficient number of congressmen and/or hire lobbyists to have a law passed to require that only "US Made Products" be installed on all of the federally funded "Green Energy" projects, then I will be able to sell these wind driven electrical generators at any price that I desire, and the US unemployment statistics will not improve.
If the US government objects, then I will have the wind driven electrical generators delivered to my factory without nameplates and then they will be parts for final assembly in the USA by Americans when US citizens add only the nameplate to each of these Chinese made wind driven electrical generators.
I will pay the Chinese with US dollars for these wind driven electrical generators, and the Chinese will then use my US dollars to buy title to more privately owned businesses, factories, casinos, hotels, farms, land, ports, breweries, refineries, forests, ports, breweries and other privately owned wealth and other assets located in the USA that were created by previous US generations.
Add The Ecology to Adam Smith's Equation : Smith saw in the division of labor and the extension of markets almost limitless possibilities for society to expand its wealth through manufacture and trade. Wealth consists of the goods which all the people of society consume; note all - this is a democratic, and hence radical, philosophy of wealth. Gone is the notion of gold, treasures, kingly hoards; gone the prerogatives of merchants or farmers or working guilds. We are in the modern world where the flow of goods and services consumed by everyone constitutes the ultimate aim and end of economic life.