May 24, 2005 Photo: GE Energy |
"The level of ignorance in Sen. Alexander's
speech is remarkable."
- Willett Kempton, Associate Professor, College of Marine Studies, Senior Policy
Scientist, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy at the University of
Delaware.
The innocuously-named "Environmentally Responsible Wind Power Act of
2005" introduced by U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Senator John
Warner (R-VA), which could be rolled into a comprehensive energy bill currently
under consideration in Congress, would have an immediate and devastating effect
on the U.S. wind power industry, according to experts and industry sources.
When introducing the bill in a Senate floor speech delivered on Friday, May 13,
Sen. Alexander attacked wind power, saying that "wind produces puny amounts
of high-cost unreliable power," and that "Congress should not
subsidize the destruction of the American landscape."
The bill takes aim at wind power's coveted Production Tax Credit (PTC), the
on-again, off-again tax credit that is the federal government's primary support
mechanism to level wind power's playing field with the traditional energy
industries. The bill would wipe out the availability of the PTC to any wind
project located within 20 miles of a coastline, military base, national park or
other highly scenic area. It would also allow a neighboring state to veto any
wind project proposed within 20 miles of that state's border.
Experts believe it unfairly singles out wind power and would bring the
burgeoning clean energy industry to a grinding halt.
"The level of ignorance in Sen. Alexander's speech is remarkable,"
said Willett Kempton, Associate Professor, College of Marine Studies, Senior
Policy Scientist, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy at the University
of Delaware. Kempton, along with a number of colleagues and graduate students at
the University, recently completed a comprehensive study on offshore wind power,
and particularly the public perceptions and reactions to it.
Much of Sen. Alexander's obvious ire towards wind power appears centered on the
chance that the U.S. Congress might someday pass a national Renewable Portfolio
Standard (RPS), a national requirement that utilities source 10 percent of their
electric power from renewable energy technologies. Wind power is likely to play
the largest role of all the renewable energy technologies at satisfying a
national RPS. The Senator's speech, according to Professor Kempton, serves to
substantiate that wind power is the most commercially viable renewable energy
technology and that the Senator's main problem is with wind power taking the
lion's share of new renewable energy developments and experiencing continued
strong growth.
"In essence, Sen. Alexander's speech, argues that wind power is the most
cost-effective, largest renewable energy resource, therefore it stands to gain
the most from current and proposed policies to encourage renewable energy (the
existing PTC and the proposed federal RPS)," Kempton said. "However,
the Senator says, wind power is visually intrusive and large. Therefore, the
bill prohibits the current PTC to be used for wind power in many locations,
including all offshore locations (that's where most of the wind is on the East
Coast).
Kempton also questioned the timing of the Senator's remarks, citing General
Electric's recent forays into wind power. The company sold $1 billion of wind
turbines this year, will sell $2 billion next year and just announced a 300
percent increase in their revenues in 2004 over their first year of operations
in 2002. In a speech on May 9th, announcing a new campaign from GE focused on
increasing commitments to clean energy technologies, Jeffrey Immelt GE's CEO
mentioned possible future 'carbon constraints', which GE is trying to build
technologies to prepare for.
"Four days later, on May 13th, Sen. Alexander gives a speech blasting the
wind industry, and introduces a bill removing subsidies for all offshore wind,
the area which GE's technologies lead the world," Kempton said. "It is
either very odd timing, or the fossil fuel lobbyists are quick at running their
bills and speeches through friendly Senators' offices."
Representatives of the U.S. wind power industry also alluded to there being more
at play.
The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) pointed out that Sen. Warner is an
original co-sponsor of the bill and in the past has teamed up with Sen. Ted
Kennedy (D-Mass.) to oppose the Cape Wind project, a wind energy project
proposed for offshore Nantucket, Mass. AWEA said that both Senators families
have vacation homes near Nantucket and that Sen. Alexander maintains a vacation
home near Tennessee's Great Smoky Mountains.
Jaime Steve, AWEA's legislative Director, said Sen. Alexander's bill
unreasonably singles out wind energy with ill-advised restrictions on future
wind development.
"By severely limiting new wind energy development, Sen. Alexander's
anti-wind bill would result in more air pollution and more acid rain from
burning fossil fuels while also eliminating thousands of American jobs, many
located in rural America," Steve said.
And about 100 of these jobs are located at the Aerisyn wind tower manufacturing
facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee, in Sen. Alexander's own home state.
Some information for this article was courtesy of AWEA
Copyright © 1999 - 2005 - RenewableEnergyAccess.com
Please visit www.RenewableEnergyAccess.com for great coverage on energy today!!