Tax Credits! Passed! Finally!

Published on April 11, 2008 by Dave Llorens.
Categories: Solar Trends.

Similar versions of this bill were shot down three times in the Senate.

-from Solar Nation

If you’ve been wondering what happened to the bill introduced last week by U.S. Sens. Cantwell and Ensign that would, among other measures, extend solar investment tax credits for residential and commercial use, here’s some up-to-the-minute news.

By a vote of 88-8, the Cantwell-Ensign language was successfully added as an amendment to the Senate’s comprehensive housing bill (HR 3221). This bill passed the Senate on Thursday with an estimated $6.6 billion in tax credits allocated to renewables, and including a lifting of the $2000 cap on residential solar installation credits. (You’ll find details of how your senator voted below).

This is a landmark development on Capitol Hill, since attempts to get the Senate this far have failed three times in the last year. Of course, on those occasions the initial impetus came from the House, and the stumbling block for the Senate was always the source of funding for the tax credits–reducing some of the government subsidies enjoyed by the oil and gas industry. In this case it’s a Senate-originated bill, with no identified source of funding, and that means that the problem this time around may be with the House. Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), head of the Finance Committee’s Energy Sub-committee, has said that the House is unlikely to agree to the provisions without spending offsets.

Sponsors of the energy amendment and Senate leadership have started to work with Representatives and the White House to find a way out of the looming impasse. And Maria Cantwell has not dismissed the idea of paying for the incentives in a tax extenders bill.

“I’m happy to look at any vehicle that’s going to move quickly,” said the Washington Senator. “I think we have a few more weeks before these (renewable energy) projects get cancelled.”

Cantwell and her co-sponsor, John Ensign (R-NV), have argued that since the incentives would stimulate the economy, Congress should approve them without offsets. But this argument is unlikely to sway the House, so senior Finance Democrats and the Bush Administration continue to try to find an agreeable set of offsets that would allow the renewable energy credits to be included on a larger tax extenders bill.

We don’t yet know when, or in what form, the bill will be brought before the House, or what kind of fight it will face there or at the White House. But with Senate passage at least, a step that has been impossible for a year has finally been taken.

Many of you phoned or e-mailed your senators to urge them to vote for clean energy, and 88 of them did! To all of you, thanks for making your voices heard.

And now it might be a good time to thank (or spank) those senators who voted.

The eight holdout senators who voted against the Cantwell-Ensign amendment were:

Alexander (R-TN), Bunning (R-KY), Byrd (D-WV), Carper (D-DE), Dodd (D-CT), Kyl (R-AZ), Sessions (R-AL) and Voinovich (R-OH)

And the four who did not cast votes at all? They were the three presidential candidates (who may well have been otherwise occupied), and Elizabeth Dole (R-NC).

Why not TAKE ACTION NOW and send thanks ‘n’ spanks to your senator(s)? All you have to do is enter your ZIP code below and GO!

If you're gonna make solar subsidies, make them last!

Published on April 5, 2008 by Dave Llorens.
Categories: Solar Trends.

Most markets are fluid. Supply and demand tango and everything runs like one of those musical Visa commercials. However, the market for renewable energy is heavily subsidized, so everything gets all….. screwy. In this article I explain the screwyness and propose a solution that may actually happen if we get Barack Obama into the white house.

Different states offer different incentives for solar energy, while some offer zip…nada. For example, in California, the state credit for solar steps down over time as more and more people install it (which is a fine design). Some states like South Dakota have more or less – bupkis. And then, sometimes, this happens (the following quote is from Perry Leitner of Blue Chip Solar and Wind):

“The Governor of Ohio, Ted Strickland, has ended the Residential renewable energy grant, which has virtually pulled the rug out from under us. The cost of Solar/Wind is prohibitive without a rebate. We are concentrating our efforts to commercial businesses, farms and small rural businesses for now. “

As you may know, I sell solar power here in San Francisco. Daily, I hear things like this:

“I heard the tax credit might get better in 08, we’re gonna wait and see how that pans out.”

“Well, let’s see who the next president is and if there is a national subsidy, we aren’t gonna make a decision on solar today, we’re gonna wait and see how the election pans out.”

“I heard the funds for the San Francisco incentive are locked up at the moment. Let’s see how that pans out, that’s $4000 we’re talking about!”

Here’s the point I’m trying to make:  The same incentive programs intended to increase people’s interest in solar are instead making them freeze and lock-up… waiting… waiting… waiting. Not only does it seem the stock market is at the whim of politicians, but the future of renewable energy in our country is as well.

The bottom line is that if you want to call something an incentive, it should actually work like one instead of being counter productive.

MAKE SOLAR INCENTIVES NATIONAL, MAKE THEM UNIFORM, AND MAKE THEM LAST MULTIPLE YEARS, SO THERE IS NO EXCUSE TO “WAIT AND SEE HOW THINGS PAN OUT.”

We lost

Published on December 14, 2007 by Dave Llorens.
Categories: Solar Trends.

I’ll keep this short and sweet. The senate voted yesterday 59-40 to remove the renewable energy tax credits from the energy bill. That means, at the end of 2008, barring some new legislation, the sweet 30% tax credit for solar energy (with a cap of $2000 for residential and NO CAP for commercial) will be gone.

Nothing else in the bill hugely mattered for solar. This tax credit will be a deal breaker for mega corporations who would have paid to have all their stores installed with solar power. It is NECESSARY to make it work financially.

From solar nation:

“Republican Senators Voting ‘Nay’ on Cloture Vote for Energy Bill Tax Title
Stevens (AK), Sessions, Shelby (AL), Kyl (AZ), Allard (CO), Martinez (FL)
Chambliss, Isakson (GA), Craig, Crapo (ID), Brownback, Roberts (KS)
Bunning, McConnell (KY), Vitter (LA), Bond (MO), Cochran, Lott (MS)
Burr, Dole (NC), Hagel (NE), Gregg, Sununu (NH), Domenici (NM), Ensign (NV) Voinovich (OH), Coburn, Inhofe (OK), Specter (PA), DeMint, Graham (SC)
Alexander, Corker (TN), Cornyn, Hutchison (TX), Bennett (UT), Warner (VA)
Barrasso, Enzi (WY)

Republican Senators Not Voting on Energy Bill Cloture Vote: McCain (AZ)

Democratic Senators Voting ‘Nay’ on Cloture Vote for Energy Bill Tax Title:  Landrieu (LA)

Congressman Ron Paul's Stance on Solar Power

Published on October 18, 2007 by Dave Llorens.
Categories: Solar Politics.

digg_url = ‘DIGG_PERMALINK_URL’;

Yesterday I saw all the Ron Paul people holding signs down the street from me so I figured I’d jump on his website to find out his stance on renewable energy and solar power. Admittedly I’m ashamed I don’t already know.

So I Googled Ron Paul. I found his site and headed straight for the “issues” page. Dude!

It’s all right-wing-hot-topics. WTF! Energy concerns MATTER! Why the F isn’t it on here?! It matters! Haven’t you seen “An Inconvenient Truth?” You can’t home school children, arm them with handguns, and defend their low-tax jobs from Mexicans if they’re under water, Ron, can you? CAANNN YOUUU!!!???? Speaking of hot-topics… I’ll be right back I want a hot pocket.

Ok, yum. Well, then, as I click a few more links… It looks like Ron Paul’s got some seemingly not so shabby views on the environment and solar power… and some that are, we’ll say, idealistic. LET’S GO THROUGH THE POSTITIVES AND NEGATIVES (as I see’um) SHALL WE?

• MAYBE NEGATIVE: He said this on the Dennis Miller Show (here’s the clip): “the environment is better protected under private property rights… We as property owners can’t violate our neighbors’ property. We can’t pollute their air or their water. We can’t dump our garbage on their property…. Too often, conservatives and libertarians fall short on defending environmental concerns, and they resort to saying, ‘Well, let’s turn it over to the EPA. The EPA will take care of us…. We can divvy up the permits that allow you to pollute.’ So I don’t particularly like that method.” huh? That makes me think of him as an old codger in a rocking chair on his porch, telling kids to “Get the hell off my property!” or he would shoot them with rock salt. Only the kids are pollution?

• POSITIVE: But then Wikipedia (so it MUST be true) says that he “has voted against federal subsidies for the oil and gas industry, saying that without government subsidies, alternative fuels would be more competitive with oil and gas and would come to market on a competitive basis sooner.” Well, that sounds pretty awesome and coherent, although it’s not a quote. I reckon the quote probably had a “I reckon” or two in it.

• POSITIVE: Also, he seems to be pro hemp biofuels and pro nuclear power. Sweet.

• POSITIVE: I just ate a hot pocket, and it so delicious I stabbed my cat.
• NEGATIVE: Ron Paul is a nutjob?
• MOSTLY NEGATIVE:

Voted NO on criminalizing oil cartels like OPEC. (May 2007)
Voted NO on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jan 2007)
Voted NO on keeping moratorium on drilling for oil offshore. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on scheduling permitting for new oil refinieries. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy. (Jun 2004)
Voted NO on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy. (Nov 2003)
Voted NO on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels. (Aug 2001)
Voted NO on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR. (Aug 2001)
Voted NO on starting implementation of Kyoto Protocol. (Jun 2000)
Repeal the gas tax. (May 2001)

So the bottom line is pretty simple. Ron Paul wants the government to stay out of yo ‘biness, and to stay the hell off yo propertay. Unfortunately, when the government stays entirely out of your business, people F up the environment.