Skip to main content

Sen. Bingaman Announces Clean Energy Standard Act of 2012

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) unveiled the Clean Energy Standard Act of 2012 today to steer the country in a direction of reducing overall carbon emissions. The bill aims for large power companies to begin increasing their electricity output from low-carbon sources like wind, solar, nuclear energy and natural gas by 2015, with the overall goal of producing 84 percent of their overall electricity from low-carbon sources by 2035.

The chairman explains:
“The goal of the CES is ambitious – a doubling of clean energy by 2035. But analysis has shown that the goal is also achievable and affordable. Meeting the CES will yield substantial benefits to our health, our economy, our global competitiveness and our economy,” Bingaman said.
A fact sheet on the bill says the CES will only apply to retail utilities, not small utilities, and will be measured by the number of credits given to generators of clean energy. In other words, the higher the number of credits a utility has, the less emissions per unit of electricity. The fact sheet says:
This flexible framework naturally allows a wide variety of sources (solar, wind, nuclear, natural gas, coal with carbon capture and storage, etc.) to be used to meet the standard; allows market forces to determine what the optimal mix of technologies and fuels should be; and makes it easy for new technologies to be incorporated.
Emission Free Sources 2009Each energy source, depending on its emissions, would receive varied levels of credits. For instance, Platts explains:
Under [Sen. Bingaman’s] proposal, electricity generated by zero-carbon sources, such as wind, solar, geothermal, hydropower and nuclear, would get full credits.
Whereas, Platts continues:
Electricity from coal-fired generation with carbon capture and storage or coal co-firing with biomass would receive partial credits if they emit fewer carbon emissions than 0.82 mt/megawatt-hour, the equivalent of new supercritical coal generation.
The Platts article also points out that the credits could be accumulated and banked indefinitely, or transferred, traded or sold through an Energy Department trading system that would be set up as part of the legislation.

Sen. Bingaman, who is retiring at the end of this Congress, acknowledged that it may be difficult to get the legislation through both houses of Congress and to the president’s desk during this session. However, the White House’s spokesman Clark Steven praised today’s announcement as a step in the right direction:
“As the president has said consistently, a CES will drive innovation and investment in a range of clean energy sources — including renewables like wind and solar as well as nuclear, efficient natural gas and clean coal. A CES will also help America remain a leader in the clean energy economy, with all the jobs that it will bring. We look forward to working with Congress as the bill moves forward.”
Several organizations today also publicly expressed similar views to the bill, including NextEra Energy’s Chairman and CEO Lew Hay:
“Senator Bingaman's bill provides the right incentives for the nation's electric utilities and equipment manufacturers to create good, high-paying jobs for American workers and for private capital to accelerate investment in innovative energy technologies. The bill's market-oriented standard would allow many different types of fuel sources to be competitive, while rewarding innovation, early action, efficiency and project execution.”
For more information on the CES, see the Senate committee’s website for links to the press release, bill text, two-page summary, and section-by-section summary.

Photo: Sources of Emission-Free Electricity in the United States (2010).

Comments

All utilities should produce at least 50% of their electricity from carbon neutral resources by 2020, IMO,(some US utilities already achieve this standard) and at least 90% by 2030 with a 15% sin tax on all energy produced by any utility that fails to reach these goals.

This would be a powerful incentive for companies to start investing and building carbon neutral electric power plants both nuclear and renewable.

Marcel F. William

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...