|
Click here to go back to News and Information Guide |
|
|
|
|
Article Links CONGRESSIONAL SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REPORT CARD GRADES PROGRAMS 1.TAX CREDITS FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY & RENEWABLE ENERGY ESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT & DEMONSTRATION 3. CUTTING DOE's PORK
BARREL NUCLEAR R&D PROJECTS 4. EPA's CLIMATE TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS & CLEAN AIR PARTNERSHIP FUND 5. ELECTRIC UTILITY RESTRUCTURING: CLEAN ENERGY BUSINESS,
ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS CRITIQUE REP. ARTON'S UTILITY RESTRUCTURING BILL |
SUSTAINABLE
ENERGY COALITION Washington, DC CONGRESS SCORES "D" ON
MID-YEAR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REPORT CARD
For Release: Thursday, September 2, 1999 - 10:00 am Contact: Carol Werner
202-662-1881 Ed Osann 202-429-8873 Anna Aurilio
202-546-9707 Washington DC -- In a mid-year
report card issued today, the Sustainable Energy Coalition gave the U.S.
Senate and U.S. House of Representatives each an overall grade of
"D" for their handling of sustainable energy issues thus far this
session. Neither congressional
chamber received a grade of better than "C-" in any of the six
legislative programs graded but each was awarded one or more failing grades
in several areas. The report card reflects Congress' handling of sustainable
energy tax Issues as well as
funding for the U.S. Department of Energy's renewable energy and energy
efficiency programs and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Air
Partnership Fund and highly successful energy efficiency and climate
protection programs. It also
considers how Congress has dealt to date with both
climate change and electricity utility restructuring issues as well as
subsidies for dangerous and polluting energy technologies. "The nation continues to sizzle with
record-setting temperatures and weather extremes that have left large
portions of the United States parched, hundreds of citizens dead, and
billions of dollars in crop losses and other property damage," warned
Ken Bossong, executive director of the SUN DAY Campaign. "Yet Congress
has not only failed to address the problem of climate change but to worsen it
by increasing taxpayer subsidies for the dirty energy sources contributing to
global warming while slashing support for those clean energy
programs that can serve as solutions." "Congress' failure to promote energy efficiency
and renewable energy has made America ever more dependent on imported oil and
eroded its leadership role in the international energy marketplace,"
added William Holmberg, executive director of Global BioRefineries, Inc. "Its poor performance poses real danger to
our national security." Although the report
card acknowledges positive action in support of sustainable energy issues by
individual members of Congress, the grades awarded primarily reflect final
floor action on each of these issues.
Hence, an "Incomplete" was given in several instances where
legislation has yet to reach either the
House or Senate floor. The Sustainable Energy
Coalition is a coalition of 35 national business, consumer, environmental,
and energy policy organizations (list available upon request) founded
in 1992 to promote increased support for energy efficiency and
renewable energy technologies. This
report card was issued as part of the Sustainable Energy Coalition's
contribution to the Earth Day 2000 campaign and its Clean Energy Agenda. CONGRESSIONAL SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
REPORT CARD
GRADES A - Excellent; B - Above Average; C- Average; D - Poor;
F-Failed; I – Incomplete PROGRAMS 1.TAX CREDITS FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY
& RENEWABLE ENERGY
House: F Senate: C- House - The House tax
bill included more than $600 million in cuts for the oil and gas industry for
domestic oil producers and overseas oil refiners as well as millions of
dollars in additional tax breaks for the nuclear power industry for reactor
decommissioning according to an analysis done by Friends of The Earth. However, notwithstanding efforts by
individual members such as Reps. Bill Thomas (R-CA), Matt Salmon (R-AZ),
and Wally Herger (R-CA) to secure tax
support for sustainable energy programs, absolutely no incentives for any
energy efficiency or renewable energy applications, as had been recommended
by the President and both Republican and Democratic members of the House,
were included. Senate - Due to the
efforts of members of the Senate Finance Committee, the Senate tax bill
included an extension of the existing production tax credit for wind energy
as well as for biomass systems.
However, the Senate included no other tax credits for investments in
solar or geothermal energy or energy efficiency technologies, as had been
recommended by the President and both Republican and Democratic members of
the Senate. The Senate tax bill also includes $450 million in fossil energy
tax breaks. 2. DOE's SUSTAINABLE ENERGY RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT &
DEMONSTRATION
House: D+ Senate: D- House - The House
accepted the $30 million Salmon/Udall add-on amendment which raised FY'00
funding for the U.S. Department of Energy's renewable energy programs to $309
million which is still 8% below the FY'99 appropriation and 23% below the
Administration's FY'00 request of $399 million. Moreover, it has inflated the reported funding levels for
renewable energy programs by earmarking funds for renewable energy RD&D
in DOE's Office of Energy Research;
however, those funds are likely to be siphoned off to
support basic research projects with questionable connection to renewable
energy. It also provided $687 million
for DOE's energy efficiency programs -- a level roughly 1% below the FY'99
appropriation of $692 million but fully 18% below the Administration's FY'00
request of $838 million. Senate - Even though
54 Senators had earlier signed a letter of support for increased renewable
energy funding, the Senate voted 60-39 to sustain a parliamentary maneuver by
Senators Pete Domenici (R-NM) and Harry Reid (D-NV) to block a floor vote on
the Jeffords/Roth/Allard amendment which would have brought funding levels
closer to the President's request for
the U.S. Department of Energy's renewable energy programs. The Senate ultimately approved a FY'00
budget of $302 million for DOE's renewable energy programs -- 10% below last
year's levels ($336 million) and 22% below the Administration's request of
$399 million. The Senate Interior
Appropriations bill currently provides for a FY'00 budget of $694 million for
DOE's energy efficiency programs -- roughly equal to the FY'99 appropriation
of $692 million but 17% below the Administration's request of $838 million;
the full Senate has yet to act on this bill. 3. CUTTING DOE's PORK BARREL NUCLEAR
R&D PROJECTS
House: F Senate: F House - The House
increased funding for the U.S. Department of Energy's nuclear fusion RD&D
program to $250 million -- an increase of $27 million -- and funding for
so-called "termination" costs for assorted nuclear power programs
at $10 million higher than the budget request. While it did reduce overall nuclear fission RD&D funding
for FY'00 by $18 million below the FY'99 level, funding for wasteful commercial
nuclear R&D has increased by $1 million over FY'99. Senate - The Senate
approved a small ($4 million) increase in FY'00 funding for the U.S.
Department of Energy's commercial nuclear energy programs to $288 million and
provided essentially level funding ($220 million) for the agency's fusion
energy program. 4. EPA's CLIMATE TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS
& CLEAN AIR PARTNERSHIP FUND
House: I Senate: I House - In the VA/HUD
Appropriations bill, yet to be voted on by the full House, the Appropriations
committee cut funding for EPA's highly successful climate change and
pollution prevention programs -- providing only about half the funding
requested by the Administration and less than actual FY'99 funding. However,
the committee did approve $36.5 million for the new Clean Air Partnership
Fund although that amount is more than $5 million below the subcommittee
recommendation and well below the $200 million requested by the
Administration for FY'00. On the
other hand, Rep. Joe Knollenberg (R-MI) is threatening to attach a rider
blocking an EPA rule reducing smog pollution when the bill reaches the House
floor. The House bill also includes report language directing the EPA to
further support renewable energy programs. Senate - The Senate
has not yet acted on this issue. 5. ELECTRIC UTILITY RESTRUCTURING:
CLEAN ENERGY
House: I Senate: I House - There have been no committee votes or
floor action yet on utility restructuring.
Progressive restructuring bills have been introduced by Reps. Dennis
Kucinich (D-OH) and Frank Pallone (D-NJ).
However, a draft bill by Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), chairman of the House
Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Energy & Power, includes no
comprehensive provisions that would promote renewable energy and energy
efficiency programs. Senate - There have
been no committee votes or floor action yet on utility restructuring. Senator Jim Jeffords (R-VT) has introduced
a bill with strong renewable energy and energy efficiency provisions. However, draft outlines for utility
restructuring legislation developed individually by the Democratic and
Republican leadership include no comprehensive provisions that would promote
renewable energy and energy efficiency programs. 6. CLIMATE
CHANGE
House: F Senate: D- House - The House once
again accepted riders to the VA/HUD, Agriculture, Energy & Water, Foreign
Operations, Interior, and Commerce/Justice appropriations bills introduced by
Rep. Joe Knollenberg (R-MI) that essentially act as a "gag order"
and prohibit the expenditure of funds on any actions that could
be construed as implementing or preparing to implement the Kyoto Protocol
prior to ratification. In a similar
vein, the House also accepted a CAFE rider for the fourth straight year to
the Transportation Appropriations bill introduced by Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA)
that prohibits the expenditure of any funds to even
consider an increase in fuel efficiency standards for cars, SUVs, and other light
trucks. Senate - The Senate
has continued to maintain a similarly hostile climate towards potential
consideration of the Kyoto Protocol thereby discouraging the White House from
submitting the treaty for a vote. As one example, the pending Senate Interior
Appropriations bill includes a rider introduced by Senator Thad Cochran
(R-MS) that, while milder than originally proposed, could interfere with
funding for federal energy savings programs generally and the
Administration's new executive order to increase energy efficiency at federal facilities
in particular. On the other hand, if the Transportation Appropriations bill
comes to the floor, Sens. Slade Gorton (R-WA), Diane Feinstein (D-CA), and
Richard Bryan (D-NV) reportedly will offer a sense of the Senate resolution,
as an amendment, that would instruct conferees not to recede to the House
CAFE rider that precludes funding for efforts to raise auto fuel efficiency
standards; 31 Senators earlier signed a letter to the White House urging it
to oppose the CAFE rider . SUMMARY: House: D Senate: D
FINAL REPORT -
Congress' performance thus far this year on a range of sustainable energy
funding and tax issues has been poor and it has completely failed the
American public in its handling of the threat posed by climate change. Even a
minimalist strategy of cost-effective, no-regrets policies and programs to
promote energy security, reduce air pollution, and deal with climate change
would have required far more than this Congress has delivered. If Congress does not begin now to bring up
its grades by supporting programs to promote clean energy options, it risks
eventual expulsion by the voters. SUSTAINABLE
ENERGY COALITION Washington, DC BUSINESS, ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS
CRITIQUE REP. ARTON'S UTILITY
RESTRUCTURING BILL
For Release: September
1, 1999 Contact: Eric
Wesselman 202-332-0900 WASHINGTON DC --
Today, sixteen member groups of the Sustainable Energy Coalition sent
a detailed critique of the draft electric utility restructuring legislation,
the Electricity Competition and Reliability Act, to its primary
author Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), chairman of the House Commerce Committee's
Subcommittee on Energy & Power. The groups warned that
"unless restructuring is carefully crafted, negative impacts on environmental
quality and human health are likely to be one of the unintended
consequences" noting that "the draft is missing a number of
critical provisions that we believe are essential for inclusion in a final
bill." The groups further called
for a redraft of the bill to include the following: - Public Benefits Trust (PBT) - "The
PBT is designed to restore industry investment in energy efficiency, low
income energy services, renewable energy, and environmental research and
development. The PBT is not a new fee
as these investments have been embedded in the rate structures of most
states." - Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) -
"The RPS, which has been adopted in seven states including Texas, uses
market mechanisms to ensure that a small but growing percentage of the
nation's electricity is produced from renewable sources." -
Emissions -
"To ensure a competitive market, and necessary environmental
improvement, any restructuring legislation should: (1) require all power
plants, regardless of age or location, to meet minimal environmental
standards for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides met by new plants built
today, allowing cap-and-trade
compliance mechanisms where appropriate; and (2) set stringent caps on power
sector emissions of carbon dioxide
and mercury." -
- Net Metering - "We appreciate
inclusion of the net metering provision." The letter goes on to note that the
inclusion in the draft bill of an expanded Renewable Energy Production
Incentive (REPI) alone "will not provide enough certainty for renewable
energy investors or developers." The full text of the
letter and list of signers follows. The Sustainable Energy
Coalition is a coalition of national business, environmental, consumer, and
energy policy organizations founded in 1992 to promote increased use of
renewable energy and energy efficient technologies. The letter below was prepared as part of the Coalition's
contribution to the Earth Day 2000 campaign and its Clean Energy Agenda. September 1, 1999 The Honorable Joe
Barton Chairman House Commerce
Subcommittee on Energy and Power United States House of
Representatives Washington, DC 20515 Dear Chairman Barton: We, the undersigned
business, consumer, environmental and energy policy organizations are writing
to respond to your request for comments on the Discussion Draft of the
Electricity Competition and Reliability Act which was released on August 4,
1999. A decision to
restructure the electric utility industry is likely to bring unintended
consequences for American society.
Unless restructuring is carefully crafted, negative impacts on
environmental quality and human health are likely to be one of the unintended
consequences. Environmental issues
are inextricably linked to industry restructuring. The electricity industry generates two-thirds of sulfur dioxide
(SO2) emissions and over one-fourth of nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions, which
produce acid rain and smog and have been linked to increases in respiratory
and heart disease and hospital admissions for people with asthma. In addition, power
plants produce more than one-third of the total carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions and are a major source of mercury emissions. Should restructuring
move forward in this Congress, it is imperative that environmental issues be
addressed. We are pleased to have the opportunity to
make comments on the draft bill, especially since the draft is missing a
number of critical provisions that we believe are essential for inclusion in
a final bill. We encourage a redraft
of the bill to include the following: Public Benefits Trust
(PBT) - The PBT is designed to restore industry investment in energy
efficiency, low income energy services, renewable energy, and environmental
research and development. The PBT is
not a new fee as these investments have been embedded in the rate structures
of most states. Over the last two decades, these investments have delivered
literally billions of dollars of economic, environmental, reliability, and
equity benefits to U.S. electricity customers. With the arrival of
electric-industry restructuring,
however, these investments have declined dramatically, as utilities have been unsure that they
would continue to be recovered in rates. The Administration's bill and other
bills currently pending in the House and Senate include a PBT, which would
help restore these critical investments using the same mechanism that has
been used in years past: the public investment would be recovered in electric rates paid by all customers. Without the PBT, the United States will
lose the lion's share of these widely dispersed public benefits. This provision would simply retain in
electric rates some of our nation's most productive and affordable
environmental and equity solutions, while relieving pressures to meet these
urgent needs through new taxes or regulatory initiatives. Renewables Portfolio
Standard (RPS) - The RPS, which has been adopted in seven states including
Texas, uses market mechanisms to ensure that a small but growing percentage
of the nation's electricity is produced from renewable sources. Currently,
about two percent of U.S. electricity is produced by the four energy
sources (wind, biomass, geothermal and solar) that are covered in RPS
proposals. It would provide the
greatest amount of clean power for the lowest price and an ongoing incentive
to drive down costs. The RPS would also ensure steady, predictable growth of
the nation's renewable energy
industry. It would enable the industry to obtain lower-cost financing
and achieve economies of scale and production that would make the
technologies more competitive. The RPS would ensure that the lowest cost
renewables are developed by creating competition among renewable developers.
The RPS would also have low administrative costs, since the market would decide
what kinds of renewable energy would be produced. The PBT would complement an
RPS by targeting emerging higher cost renewable energy technologies that would not benefit under an RPS, but have
enormous long-term potential. A 1999 study by the
Union of Concerned Scientists found that the U.S. could increase the share of
electricity generated from renewable sources to about 10 times current levels
over the next 20 years, and still see a 13 percent decrease in electricity
prices. Expanding renewable electricity use to these levels would
also freeze power plant emissions of carbon dioxide at about year 2000
levels. (see A Powerful Opportunity: Making Renewable Electricity the
Standard, enclosed.) The Renewable Energy
Production Incentive Program alone, included in the draft bill, will not
provide enough certainty for renewable energy investors or developers.
Furthermore, by relying on funding through the annual appropriations process,
the renewables industry can not rely on the REPI as a stable, long-term
source of funding for attaining favorable financing. In fact, current appropriation levels have
not provided adequate funding given public power's demand for the Renewable
Energy Production Incentive Program. We also note that the
House-passed tax bill included hundreds of millions of incentive dollars for
domestic oil producers, overseas oil refiners and nuclear
decommissioning. Under this tax cut
program an RPS is even more critical. The RPS would help renewable technology
compete on a more level playing
field. We urge inclusion of a
market-based RPS, coupled with the Public Benefits Trust, as the best way to
maximize the potential for clean renewable energy. Emissions - A real competitive market for
electricity must eliminate significant barriers to entry by competitors. One
major barrier to entry is the anti-competitive subsidy enjoyed by older,
grandfathered power plants that do not meet the environmental performance
requirements required of, and achieved by, new plants built today. As a consequence,
older plants are allowed by law to emit some pollutants at 4-10 times the
rate of new market entrants. This market distortion could also result in
increased reliance on older, more polluting plants; for example, a recent
study by the U.S PIRG Education Fund and the Environmental Working Group
showed that generation from these older plants rose by 16% nationwide from
1992-98. To ensure a competitive
market, and necessary environmental improvement, any restructuring legislation
should: (1) require all power plants, regardless of age or location,
to meet minimal environmental standards for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen
oxides met by new plants built today, allowing cap-and-trade
compliance mechanisms where appropriate; and (2) set stringent
caps on power sector emissions of carbon
dioxide and mercury. Net Metering - We
appreciate inclusion of the net metering provision, which insures the
"plug and play" concept, which was developed when
telecommunications was deregulated. Representatives
Bartlett, Ehlers and Inslee have crafted a similar net metering approach that
is very comprehensive. We would
appreciate your review of their bill. Representatives of the
organizations signing this letter are available to assist you and your staff
with further refinements of the legislation.
Please contact either Ron Sundergill or Eric Wesselman at the Union of
Concerned Scientists (Phone: 202.332.0900) for further information or
assistance. Thanks again for the opportunity to
relay our suggestions to you. Sincerely, Alliance to Save
Energy American Council for
an Energy-Efficient Economy American Solar Energy
Society Clean Fuels Foundation Environmental and
Energy Study Institute Fuel Cells 2000 Geothermal Energy
Association Global Biorefineries
Inc. National BioEnergy
Industries Association Natural Resources
Defense Council Pellet Fuels Institute Physicians for Social
Responsibility Public Citizen Solar Energy
Industries Association SUN DAY Campaign Union of Concerned
Scientists US Public Interest
Research Group |