"There is no doubt that the actions of the Obama administration pose a real challenge to Canada," said Robert Hornung, president of the Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA), whose members include Toronto Stock Exchange-listed Canadian Hydro Developers Inc, Algonquin Power Income Fund and Innergex Renewable Energy Inc. "The U.S. has sent a very strong signal that renewable energy is going to play a central role in both energy-environment and economic recovery strategies. We don't have the same signals here federally," he told Reuters. Hornung said he had started "hearing stories" of international companies shifting business away from Canada to the United States. Some U.S. companies in Canada were also pulling back, he said, without mentioning any names. The United States plans to invest $59 billion of its $787 billion economic stimulus plan in green energy to help create jobs, double America's supply of renewable energy and reduce its dependence on foreign oil. That comprises $39 billion for projects at the U.S. Department of Energy and $20 billion in tax incentives for industries such as solar energy, wind power and geothermal. [1]
Southwest Airlines Co.' s Houston and Dallas operations have been recognized for their green power by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Both of the locations together purchased nearly 16 kilowatt-hours of green power as of July 7 -- enough to meet 30 percent of the facilities' purchased electricity use. Dallas-based Southwest (NYSE: LUV) buys renewable energy certificates for the Houston and Dallas operations from Houston-based Reliant Energy to cover the rest of their energy use. Southwest received the award as a result of its participation in the government agency's Fortune 500 Green Power Challenge, a program which encourages the country's largest corporations to collectively exceed 10 billion kilowatt-hours green power purchasing by year-end 2009. The City of Houston continues to lead in the local government category, using 438 million kWh of wind energy as of July 7, or 34 percent of its total energy use via Reliant Energy.[2]
VANCOUVER, British Columbia (Reuters) - The Obama administration's titanic $60 billion spending plan for the U.S. clean energy sector is luring investors away from green businesses in Canada, threatening the industry's growth here. Already battered by recession and tight credit markets, Canada's renewable energy and clean technology companies must now compete for investment with their U.S. peers, who have an unprecedented cache of federal cash grants and tax incentives.[1]
The Canadian government's centerpiece clean energy plan is the C$1.5 billion ($1.4 billion) ecoENERGY for Renewable Power program, which was introduced in 2007. Hornung said it will have allocated all its funding this fall. "For investors who are looking at North America, they look to the U.S. and they see some policy certainty and a strong incentive. They look to Canada they see an incentive that is in essence shutting down and no certainty going forward. That is where our challenge is at the moment," he said.[1] The 2009 Canadian budget also included a C$1 billion five-year Green Infrastructure Fund for clean electricity generation and a C$1 billion Clean Energy Fund to support research and development of new renewable technologies -- a help but not enough to compete with Canada's heftier neighbor.[1] There were some panelists endorsing energy projects outside of solar or wind. Mary Powell, the CEO of Green Mountain Power, expressed her company's support for the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, saying officials there hope it is relicensed if there are no safety concerns. "We support relicensing of the plant, which has a carbon profile similar to renewable resources, but we will ramp down our purchases over time as we ramp up renewable resources," she said.[3]
Q. I'd like to know the relative electricity cost of utility scale solar and wind plants versus rooftop residential solar. A. Making such a determination is complex, but you could start with "In My Backyard," a new online tool by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.[4] The costs to install renewable energy systems vary greatly by location, warn researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, supported by the Department of Energy.[4]
Five employees are assigned to Baker Renewable Energy full-time, with another 15 or so Baker Roofing employees trained and available to help on "green" projects. The subsidiary is led by Jason Epstein, who joined Baker in April when his company, Outer Ring, was purchased by the roofing giant.[5] Baker Roofing Co., the third largest roofing and sheet-metal company in the country, has launched a "green" subsidiary. Baker Renewable Energy focuses on sustainable-building systems such as rooftop gardens and solar panels.[5]
Australia's Parliament passed a law Thursday that set the country???s renewable energy goals for the next 11 years: the country must draw 20 percent of its electricity from renewable sources (for example, sun and wind) by 2020.[6] Today, with considerably more renewable energy sources coming online or about to do so in quantum-leap measures -- and at much greater efficiencies than can be achieved privately -- the best bet may well be to forego the "go it alone" path and support your utility's efforts to generate green power, not just for your own household but for everyone.[4] By contrast, the renewable energy legislation - targeting a 20 per cent renewable energy target - has widespread support.[7] 'We are safeguarding our Renewable Energy Target legislation, so it can come into effect even if the Liberal party continues to block the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme,' Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard told Channel Nine on Sunday.[7]
SYDNEY - AUSTRALIA'S government said on Sunday it would split planned legislation to promote renewable energy from its controversial proposal for carbon trading, giving in to a key demand by the conservative opposition.[7] The Public Service Commission has given an auction the go-ahead to distribute the money to new wind, solar, biomass or other renewable energy plants.[8] The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, or NYSERDA, is running the auction. It takes bids for contracts from renewable energy power plant developers.[8] New York State is investing another $95 million in renewable energy.[8]
The money comes from a surcharge on customers' utility bills. A state mandate requires that New York get 25% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2013.[8] Currently, Australia derives just 8 percent of its energy from renewable sources.[6] "Our objective is to provide practical and realistic energy options that make good business sense with the explosion of renewable 'green' technologies," said Prentiss Baker, chairman and chief executive officer of Baker Roofing.[5]
"However, we are very busy focusing on renewable energy technology and other sustainable energy systems in the institutional, Defense Department and other governmental sectors. As this renewable energy business continues to grow, along with our traditional roofing business, we expect our overall business to be comparable to 2008."[5] "We're demonstrating that our renewable energy expertise complements the reputation built over the past 90 years as Baker Roofing." The subsidiary was launched earlier this year, but its Raleigh-based parent didn't formally announce its creation until this week. That gave Baker time to complete several projects it could tout.[5] MONTPELIER ? Consumers have a strong interest in renewable energy and efficiency projects, but lack the money to take advantage of such efforts even when they pay off very quickly, a panel of experts told U.S. Sen. Bernard Sanders Thursday.[3]
Imperial County has been slated as the Renewable Energy Capitol of the world.[9]
RANKED RECOMMENDED SOURCES
(9 source documents numbered in order of appearance in text)
Shame on Mary Powell, the CEO of Green Mountain Power to express her company's support of Vermont Yankee as a low carbon energy surce. She should be held accountable for perpetuating nuclear industry lies and lack of full disclosure of the true costs of nuclear fuel production and lifecycle which not only produces lots of carbon emissions but also leaves widespread toxic and radiocontamination on site whereever uranium is mined. Is her support of VY really about the big money coming her way if this aging dinosaur lives past 2012. Entergy is reneging on its signed 2002 agreement to leave the site as a greenfield nor has the funds for minimal decommissisioning required by the Nuclear regulatory Commission. The NRC is the industry's best cheer leader as 90% of its budget is bank rolled by the nuclear industry. The nuclear industry exists only because of the enorous government subsidies and their cleanup coming at taxpayer expense. [1] Among the Vermont projects touted during the hearing was Middlebury College's $12 million biomass gasification system, which will save the college $700,000 a year in fuel costs; Green Mountain Power's plan to install 10,000 solar panels in 1,000 days, and the Vermont Energy Investment Corp's plan to retrofit 12,000 Vermont homes by the year 2020.[1]
Despite some pessimism over how the recession is affecting clean energy projects, many of the panelists said Vermont has a lot to be proud of, especially in the area of energy efficiency. Blair Hamilton, the co-founder of Efficiency Vermont, said that since the program began, Vermont had reduced its energy needs by about 10 percent ? and he thinks that trajectory will continue. It's cheaper to improve efficiency, he pointed out, noting that the cost of these programs is three-quarters less than the cost of additional sources of energy on the market. "Another way to look at the savings is consider the cost of extra energy to Vermont if we were less efficient," he said. [1]
The group's February 2005 report calculates that a large wind farm can deliver electricity at a nearly 40 percent lower cost than a small one. It also can take advantage of economies of scale in lower operational and maintenance costs. The bottom line is this: Decades ago, when widespread use of alternative energy was still only a dream, building one's own private source of home power was the only way to get off the carbon-intense grid and ensure that your own energy needs left little footprint.[2]
A February 2009 report summarizing the costs of PV from 1998 to 2007 concluded that larger systems averaged a 25 percent lower cost than the smallest ones. The same is true for wind power, says the American Wind Energy Association.[2]
1.3. ENERGY SECTOR
The Solar Energy Industries Association spent $540,000 on lobbying in the second quarter of this year, which is more than it spent on lobbyists in all of 2007. Solar representatives believe that they can create more jobs than other alternative energy sectors, so they should get a bigger slice of that pie. [3]
Chevron Corp. spent $6 million in the second-quarter alone. The oil and gas industry spent $44.5 million lobbying Congress and federal agencies in the first three months of this year. Lobbyists for fossil fuels have been a mainstay in the halls of Congress for generations, and they've secured millions in government subsidies as well. They also justify it by delivering most of the power on the American electrical grid. They offer higher paying jobs as well. The solar industry's pitch is that they can spread jobs more evenly across the entire country compared with the traditional energy sector, including coal. "The coal industry only employs a couple hundred thousand people in this country. They make pretty good salaries," he said.[3] Developers also have signed contracts to build massive energy farms around the country that will funnel nearly 7.5 gigawatts of sunshine onto the electrical grid - about 16 times what's currently available - in the next few years. That would power the equivalent of about 2.5 million homes.[3]
Tony Mitchell, chairman of Polaris Geothermal Inc, a Canadian-based energy company, said President Barack Obama's focus on renewables has raised the profile of the once little-known geothermal industry, which generates power through tapping heat from deep underground.[4] The risk is that we lose the jobs and the innovation," said Jonathan Rhone, chief executive of Nexterra Energy, a small Vancouver-based company making gasification systems that convert waste fuels into clean heat and power.[4] As a Chairman of the Environment and Public Works, I am pleased to know that the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 559 and the National Electrical Contractors Association San Diego Chapter are working together to train Imperial County's workforce to fill clean energy jobs in Imperial County.[5] I am thrilled to see the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 569 and the National Electrical Contractors Association opening a Training Facility here in Imperial County. This is a win-win for working people, the local community and green energy businesses.[5]
1.4. CLEAN ENERGY
Congressman Bob Filner noted, "I am thrilled to see IBEW Local 569-NECA opening a Training Facility here in Imperial County. This is a win-win for working people, the local community and green energy businesses. [5]
The facility is training a local, skilled workforce to support Imperial County's emerging green energy economy and offering pathways out of poverty by creating family-wage careers with healthcare, retirement, benefits and lifelong training opportunities.[5] IBEW Local 569, NECA and the skilled trades are essential in that effort. This new Electrical Training Center is a true asset as we prepare a skilled workforce to meet the exciting challenges of the green energy economy here in Imperial County."[5]
That would give you the relative costs and return-on-investment. That's still not the whole picture: Another question is whether your home system can continue to produce energy more cost effectively than your utility, as it brings more green energy sources into its mix.[2]
The Senate and House of Representatives were able to pass the bill after reaching the following deal with the main opposition party: the government will provide greater assistance to heavy electricity-using industries and create safeguards for existing coal mining industry investment. This deal was met with criticism by some: the minor opposition party maintained that it gave heavy-hitting polluters too much support and that the target should be higher (30 percent). Other critics??? feared that the deal will cost households and small businesses; reaching the target will not curb CO2 emissions; and reaching the goal will deprive Australia of profits from its plentiful coal resources. (Even if Australia does reach its goal, its CO2 emissions will still be 20 percent higher than its 2000 levels.)[6] "We all want to create jobs," said Elizabeth Salerno, director of industry data and analysis at American Wind Energy Association.[3] We need to create millions of clean energy jobs. You are leading the way with this training program.[5] People will not only learn important job skills, but will help to create new, clean energy technologies that will create economic growth.[5]
Proponents believe the target could draw in as much as 31 billion Australian dollars ($26 billion) in clean energy investment while creating some 26,000 jobs.[6] Imperial County is positioned to be not just a regional leader, but a national model for the clean energy economy.[5] Reaching the 20 percent goal would allow Australia to provide enough clean energy to power all 21 million Australians??? households, the San Francisco Chronicle reports.[6] The American Wind Energy Association more than tripled lobbying budget, spending $1.83 million in the second quarter.[3] The stimulus package included $118 million for wind energy and $400 million for geothermal companies.[3]
"You get the best bang for your buck by investing in residential solar," said Rhone Resch, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association.[3] From standard electrical work to energy efficiency retrofits and solar, our members are ready."[5]
Providing incentives for clean energy is a win-win solution for our country -- it helps to address the threat of global warming and it builds the foundation for long term recovery and prosperity.[5]
RANKED RECOMMENDED SOURCES
(6 source documents numbered in order of appearance in text)