Here’s the New York Times:
Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio), the presumed new House Speaker, may have already etched out the blueprints for a GOP energy bill with the "American Energy Act." That legislation, which he introduced last year, calls for ramping up nuclear energy and offshore drilling as well as creating incentives for renewable energy.
But the Times’ sources think that Republicans’ disdain for large bills will favor “small ball” bills that tackle aspects of an issue, in this case energy and climate change, rather than the whole issue at once:
If comprehensive climate bills -- like the one current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) pushed through two years ago -- are the way of the past, some think the Republican path forward may be going "small ball."
Jim Collura, a former staffer for New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg (R), thinks Boehner will dispense with thousand-page bills in favor of piecemeal moves, like a stand-alone bill for clean energy incentives or a bipartisan renewable electricity standard.
And of course, there are bills from both sides of the aisle that zero in on nuclear energy. These may find new life in Congress.
---
Think Progress notes that half the incoming group of Republicans do not think global warming is occurring (or, if it is, that human activity is not exacerbating it). But that means half do think it is occurring and requires action. Additionally, of course, a number of members who retained their seats on both sides of the aisle also consider it an important issue:
– Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R- Florida): “Global warming is real and man-made.”
– Rep. Judy Biggert (R-Ill.): “The science behind climate change is sound.”
– Rep. Jim Gerlach (R-Penn.): “Congressman Gerlach believes we have a responsibility as legislators and citizens to reduce our imprint on the Earth and reverse the effects of science-based climate change for both current and future generations.”
– Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Virginia): “I believe that global warming is real. The National Academy of Sciences has presented evidence that the Earth’s surface is warming because of human activities, including increased worldwide industrial development, over the past several decades.”
Nuclear energy, of course, answers to this issue. Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) is quite explicit about this:
"Through a greater commitment to nuclear, we have a unique opportunity to cut greenhouse gases, provide stability to our electrical supply and create jobs," Upton told Reuters.
All true. And although President Obama will be proceeding with a different governing dynamic, his consistent support for nuclear energy could well increase as a way to find common ground.
“There’s been discussion about how we can restart our nuclear industry as a means of reducing our dependence on foreign oil and reducing greenhouse gases,” Obama said during a speech the day after the midterm elections. “Is that an area where we can move forward?”
We vote yes.
---
All elections provide elation and hope for some and despair for others. That’s as true for those in the nuclear energy sphere as in any other. But I prefer hope, especially as the fluid nature of American politics makes it very difficult to really make sure predictions.
In that vein, let’s let Alternate Energy Holding’s CEO Don Gillispie have the last word:
When the history of nuclear power is written, Nov. 2, 2010 will be a major turning point for the industry," said Gillispie. "It will mark the beginning of a dramatic resurgence for nuclear power."
He may be right, he may be wrong. But there’s no quibbling with his right to hope and elation.
A weapon that comes down as still; As snowflakes fall upon the sod;
But executes a freeman's will; As lightning does the will of God;
And from its force nor doors nor locks; Can shield you,'tis the ballot-box.
By John Pierpont (1785-1866)
Comments
His shameless fear mongering commercials indicate that his attitude is not likely to change.
Why should this be surprising? It sounds to me like the Republicans have the pulse of the nation -- which, I suppose, is why they won so big this week.
If Think Progress would just pull its head out of its hole, it would realize that
- Almost half (48%) of Americans believe that the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated
- Almost half (47%) are not willing to say that global warming is real and that the effects of the problem have already begun
- Two-thirds (67%) think that global warming will never affect them
- Only half (50%) believe that any temperature increases are due to human activities
- Almost half (48%) of Americans do not think that most scientists believe that global warming is occurring
(source)
Global warming is not a winning issue.
It is just as ironic that now one of Obama's olive branches to these new fiscally "conservative" Republicans represents tens of billions of dollars in more deficeit spending for toxic loans to a supposely mature nuclear industry.
No doubt, in stark contrast to the Republican campaign sloganeering for federal fiscal austerity, these new negotiations will now focus on eliminating the "credit subsidy cost" so as to shift all of this high risk financing onto the federal taxpayer.
This is no different than handing a shovel to the man stuck at the bottom of a deep hole so he can get out. But Obama appears to be desperate enough to take up the shovel.
That's a loser, everytime, particularly with the nuclear power financing track record.
I beg to differ with anon, the global money backed by entreprenuers and business is on renewable wind energy, both offshore and land based turbines.
Far more wind energy is coming online globally each year quicker and cheaper than new nuclear. Wind capacity is about to competitively blow nuclear away over the next two decades and that's according to DOE documents.
This only underscores the mistake to invest another dime in new reactors.
How is it you continue to pretend that renewables don't receive help from governments?
Have you never heard of a solar feed-in tariff? Loan guarantee programs for renewables? Renewable energy standards - which mandate investment in renewables? Production tax credits for wind energy? Tax credits for installing solar panels at your house?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed-in_tariff
http://www.windtoday.net/articles/AWEA_Reports_Renewable_Energy_Tax_Credits_Keep_Americans_Working-100174.html
http://lpo.energy.gov/
http://www.energy.gov/taxbreaks.htm
What say you to this?
Also, please quit talking about wind capacity as if it is a meaningful comparison. Wind power is severely limited by its intermittent nature, which is ignored during discussions of capacity alone. Check out Bonneville Power Administration's wind generation statistics -- in any given week there are usually two to three days of negligible output from their wind farms:
http://transmission.bpa.gov/business/operations/wind/baltwg.aspx
At the time I'm posting this, the data for 4-6 November is visible: three days at below 10% capacity factor for wind. The best performance is 7-8 November which is an average capacity factor of around 66%. Then it drops down to about 3% the next day. Yet gunter's talk of wind capacity implies BPA's 3011 MW of wind capacity is a meaningful number. I challenge anyone to look at the BPA graphs and tell me that "3011 MW capacity" is a useful way to look at wind generation (blue line).
The "permanent financing platform" with federal money that NEI seeks for nuke federal loans is more akin to a permanent umbilical cord.
Will wind and solar energy have to go hat in hand year by year to ask for tax credits from a Congress still in the pocket of dirty fossil and fissile power?
Yes, I see what you mean. Let's take a look at what these "entrepreneurs" are doing:
Italian Mafia Gets in the Wind Farm Business
The Italian Mafia is Making Money with Wind Power
Mafia 'Hits' EU Wind Subsidies
Italian Mafia Cleans Up with Wind Energy
Mafia 'Wind-Leader' Busted
I guess these wise guys found a deal that they couldn't refuse. ;-)
Wind is a scam, pure and simple. Even the biggest crooks in the world realize this, and they're making a killing from the naivete of EU bureaucrats, who buy into the BS that people like gunter are shoveling.
Apparently, the only thing "renewable" about wind is the fraud and waste of government money.
Let's hope that the new US Congress is not stupid enough to get taken in by the scams and fraud that have robbed Europe of millions, perhaps billions, of euros.
Isnt this comment a little out there on the fringe of reality?
Here, I'll tell you. It used to be known as Enron Wind.
Yes, that Enron -- not quite the Mob, but pretty damn close.
I'm quite comfortable with my earlier comment. Thanks for asking.
Isnt that like the that the Grassy Knoll in Roswell? They are not even around in a business of any sort.
CNN.Money sums it up today in "No Money, No Nukes" that "the problem is, of course, there is no money."
And, hmmm, they seem too say that investing in new nukes is very risky business.
They fail to mentiom the most recent example of Constellation's cut and run on UniStar and the EPR fiasco over several hundred million dollars of their own money for an unacceptable risk.
So we have the Italian Mafia and corporate scammers of epic proportions. That's the global money that has been chasing wind.
By the way, speaking of examples of "cut and run," have you looked at the recent news in the wind industry?
Here are some additions for JD's list:
Vestas to close five wind turbine plants - Vestas, the Danish wind turbine manufacturer, will cut 3,000 jobs as a result of the closures.
For Wind Turbine Manufacturers, the Layoffs Begin - North Dakota-based D.M.I. Industries, which manufactures turbine towers, is laying off 20 percent of its workers across three plants - in Tulsa, Okla.; Stevensville, Ontario; and West Fargo, N.D.
Wind Layoffs Continue: Acciona Cutting a Third of Workers at Iowa Plant Layoffs continue to blow through the wind industry, even despite recent government efforts to build up the sector and spur green job growth. Acciona Windpower's workforce has taken the latest hit.
Pipestone wind-turbine factory idled; 110 layoffs - Suzlon Group's Pipestone factory, which once employed 500 people, will lay off most of its remaining workers as U.S. demand for wind power sits becalmed for now.
And this is after government has thrown massive amounts of subsidies at this industry.
Let's not kid ourselves about why investors would want to invest in wind. They're going after the government subsidies. It makes them some money, but it hurts the taxpayer and the consumer. An example from Spain is quite instructive:
Spain Said to Save $1.5 Billion on Wind Power Cuts -- Spain will save consumers at least 1.2 billion euros ($1.5 billion) through 2013 by cutting the subsidies they pay to wind farms and solar thermal plants, a person familiar with the government's analysis said.
We can point to examples of the renewable energy renaissance, just look at Google laying down the first vertabrae of the Eastern Seaboard offshore HVDC transmission line for deepwater wind.
However, a tanking economy only accentuates the irony of sinking more deficeit spending into high-risk toxic nuclear ventures.