Log in | Jump |

CEJournal

News & Perspective from the Center for Environmental Journalism
This item was posted on October 26, 2010, and it was categorized as Energy, carbon capture and storage, fossil fuels.
You can follow comments through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and trackbacks are closed.

Just as the prospects for solar energy are looking up, could the new Congress wind up promoting a new vision of “renewable” energy that includes nuclear power and even coal? Read on . . .

Solar power costs are dropping, returns on investment for commercial rooftop solar systems are increasing, and the overall picture for the technology is improving, according to Bloomberg News, quoting a report from Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

According to the report, solar power could generate more than 4 percent of electrical demand in the United States by 2020.  Today, it generates just 1,400 megawatts in the United States. With investments of $100 billion over the next ten years, that total could be boosted to 44,000 megawatts, according to the report.

Meanwhile, Politico is reporting that Republicans are gearing up to push for an “all of the above” energy policy in the new Congress. It would emphasize increased domestic production of oil, gas and coal, and tax breaks and other incentives for nuclear power, so-called “clean coal,” and renewable energy.

From Politico:

One thing is certain: Republican leaders probably won’t have to worry about being called overly ambitious.

“I wish I had some real great novel stuff, but this is all Riggins up the middle,” said a former House Republican energy staffer, referring to former Washington Redskins running back John Riggins.

And there could be one other thing: In the name of “bipartisanship,” they might agree to a “Renewable Energy Standard” — a policy requiring that a specific percentage of the nation’s electrical demand be met by renewable energy — but possibly with a twist:

Scott Segal, an industry lobbyist, said the next Congress will have several ideas to work with that were held over from Obama’s first two years in office, including a renewable electricity standard that expands the definition of what energy types count toward the thresholds, namely, in nuclear power and clean coal.

Uranium and coal as renewable energy resources? DOH!

Conservatives have supported a rebranding of  RES as a so-called “Clean Energy Standard,” or “CES,” that would include nuclear, along with coal technologies that reduce pollution and carbon emissions. So perhaps the Politico story got it wrong, or maybe Segal actually meant to say that nuclear and “clean coal” would be part of a new Clean Energy Standard, not a Renewable Energy Standard. If so, at least it’s debatable.

But who knows? If Republicans retake one or both houses of Congress, might they instead push an Orwellian vision that would include non-renewable sources of energy in a Renewable Energy Standard?

I’d like to think not. But at this point in what is the nuttiest political season I can remember (and today I feel like 125 years old . . .), I think I just might be able to believe it.

Share
This item was posted by .


You can follow comments through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and trackbacks are closed.

This thing has 4 Comments

  1. spyder
    Posted October 26, 2010 at 11:17 am | Permalink

    In full disclosure, i live downwind, but upwater, from Hanford nuclear facilities (an as still yet radioactive site leaking both air and water particulates into the environment). Thus, i am not at all a fan of the pressure to push for new nuclear programs for energy production. The once esteemed vanguard of environmental literacy, Stewart Brand, came out in his new book to promote nuclear development as a must-be-done-now approach to reducing the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. I simply cannot fathom the rhetoric that suggests that we will find a way to store nuclear waste, but that we must put more effort into nuclear energy now. For me, the biggest problem in the environmental movement is the compromise induced postponing of so many little problems that become so much greater and more dangerous later.

  2. spyder
    Posted October 27, 2010 at 11:47 am | Permalink

    Juan Cole put up a post today linking global climate change to national security issues in the future.

    http://www.juancole.com/2010/10/a-north-south-global-climate-war.html

  3. Steve Bloom
    Posted October 27, 2010 at 5:04 pm | Permalink

    To point out the bleedin’ obvious, this does not bode well for the Breakthrough plan.

  4. spyder
    Posted October 28, 2010 at 12:49 pm | Permalink

    For the record, Hanford goes on and on and on:
    http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2010/10/27/1225390/judge-signs-hanford-consent-degree.html

Comments are currently closed