Rumors have the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) abandoning the Kerry-Yournamehere-Lieberman climate bill in favor of a clean energy-only bill. Moderate Democrats, led by Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), believe the best foundation is the American Clean Energy and Leadership Act, S. 1462, a bill that passed the Energy & Natural Resources Committee last summer on a bipartisan vote.
By now, it's become gospel truth that environmentalists cringe at ACELA. But why? Is the bill that bad?
Actually, yes. Short summary (2 pg pdf) of bill here; analysis below the fold.
- Renewable Electricity Standard of 15%
The bill requires electric utilities to get 15% of their power from renewable sources (solar, wind, etc) or through energy efficiency by 2021. That's a low goal. The much-derided House climate bill had a 20%-by-2020 RES. Also, note the "or energy efficiency" loophole: if a coal plant is suddenly an efficient coal plant, does that make it better?
Further, the RES has so many loopholes (small utilities, the state of Hawaii, certain nuclear plants, certain carbon capture & storage technology, pay off the Department of Energy on the cheap, etc.) that the Union of Concerned Scientists believes it'll increase total carbon emissions (1 pg pdf), compared to business-as-usual.
- Clean Energy Deployment Administration
The bill would create a CEDA: a lender within the Department of Energy that would give out loans for research and development of energy technologies. "Enviros criticize the CEDA provision for not adequately taking into account the greenhouse-gas emissions of technologies it would fund, and for not limiting funding for a particular technology. They worry this could mean large amounts of public money going to nuclear power" and other pricey, not-so-green technologies, wrote Kate Sheppard at Grist.
- Expansion of Offshore Drilling
The official summary reads: "Open the Eastern Gulf of Mexico to leasing and exploration for oil and gas, making over 3.8 billion barrels of new oil resources and 21.5 trillion cubic feet of new natural gas resources available." Uh, thanks but no thanks?
- Random Stuff
The bill has a grab-bag of flotsam, jetsam, and pork. It'll aid island territories in updating their action plans on energy. It'll require the Senate to approve appointment of a new Minerals Management Services director. Quite a lot is devoted to development of a "smart grid." A desalination facility in New Mexico will study brackish groundwater (because there's so much brackish water in New Mexico?). "The bill establishes industry‐led partnerships to develop industry‐specific roadmaps to identify the breakthrough technologies necessary to reduce energy intensity and greenhouse gas emissions. It also stimulates, through competitive grants to industry and small businesses, the development, deployment and commercialization of innovative energy efficient technologies and processes."
-
Costly Giveaways to Not So Clean Technology Responsible Production of Somewhat Traditional Energy Sources
The bill authorizes the federal government to indemnify (guarantee) up to 10 carbon capture & sequestration projects. It facilitates new natural gas pipelines No wonder that the neutral CBO estimates it'll increase deficits nearly 14 billion dollars/year (21 page pdf).
David Roberts at Grist notes that ACELA dumps a bonanza of subsidies on offshore drilling, nuclear power, tar sands, oil shale, and natural gas. (Tar sands? WTF? What on earth are dirty tar sands doing in a supposedly clean energy bill?) He concludes:
It's important to state this bluntly: ACELA sucks.
ACELA has some good points regarding the low hanging fruit of energy efficiency, but plenty of other bills do too.
- Political Notes
The bill passed out of the E&NR committee last July on a bipartisan 15-8 vote. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) opposed it because it didn't go far enough toward a clean energy future, and Mary Landrieu (D-La) opposed it because it didn't permit states to share federal offshore oil lease revenues, her single-minded quest. Ever since then, moderate Democrats such as Bingaman and Byron Dorgan (D-ND) have lobbied for passage of ACELA only rather than a ACELA being merged into a climate bill.
Four Republicans (Brownback, Corker, Murkowski, and Sessions) voted in favor of ACELA in committee, meaning either that they're fair-minded, bipartisan, reasonable people who only want the best for their country and who might vote in favor of Reid's monster bill, or that the bill sucks as much as the Republican party does.
Let's hope that Reid can cobble together a truly clean energy bill. ACELA goes off the rails.