tax - The Environment Report

Billions Down the Yucca Hole

Without the Yucca mountain site, companies like Exelon have to pay extra to safely store spent fuel in pools or in concrete casks. (Photo courtesy of Lester Graham)

The federal government had one place in mind to store the country’s most hazardous nuclear waste.

It was at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.

President Barack Obama recently killed that project, even though the country had spent more than nine billion dollars on it.

Shawn Allee found that figure is just the beginning:

Transcript

The federal government had one place in mind to store the country’s most hazardous nuclear waste.

It was at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.

President Barack Obama recently killed that project, even though the country had spent more than nine billion dollars on it.

Shawn Allee found that figure is just the beginning.

The Yucca Mountain project claimed more money than just the nine billion that’s on the books.

It also tied up cash from electric rate payers, power companies and taxpayers.

Let’s start with the first group – rate payers.

CHA-CHING

Yucca Mountain was supposed to store the radioactive spent fuel left behind in nuclear reactors.

The U-S government charges power companies a fee to cover costs.

Power companies pass it on.

“Everybody in the state of Georgia that uses electricity and pays an electric bill is paying into this Yucca Mountain trust fund.”

This is Bobby Baker.

He’s serves on Georgia’s public service commission.

Baker says now that President Obama took Yucca Mountain off the table, the federal government should return the money.

Georgia’s share of fees and interest is more than one point two billion dollars.

“We were supposed to be shipping our spent nuclear fuel out to yucca mountain back in 1998 they were supposed to be receiving shipments at that time. The only thing that’s been done is the fact that Georgia ratepayers are continuing to pay into that trust fund and getting nothing from that trust fund other than a big hole in Nevada.”

So far, the federal government’s collected a total of 31 billion dollars in fees and interest for the nuclear waste fund.

The next group who paid extra for Yucca – power companies.

CHA-CHING

By law, the federal government’s supposed to take away radioactive spent fuel from nuclear power plants.

But without Yucca, it stays put.

John Rowe is CEO of Exelon, the country’s biggest nuclear power company.

Last hear he complained to the National Press Club.

“My mother used to say, somebody lies to you once that’s his fault … lies to you twice and you believe it, that’s your fault. I don’t know what she would have thought about somebody lying to you for fifty years.”

Rowe is especially mad because his company and others like it have to pay extra to safely store spent fuel in pools or in concrete casks.

They sue the federal government to recover costs.

The US Government Accountability Office figures the government will lose these lawsuits and owe power companies twelve point three billion dollars within a decade.

The last group that paid extra for Yucca – taxpayers.

CHA-CHING

Yucca Mountain was supposed to handle nuclear spent fuel from civilian power reactors, but it was also supposed to handle decades-worth of the military’s radioactive waste.

That includes waste from former weapons sites, like Hanford in Washington state.

Washington’s Senator Patty Murray brought it up in a recent hearing.

Here, she’s looking straight at Energy Secretary Steven Chu:

“Congress, independent studies, previous administrations pointed to, voted for and funded yucca Mountain as the best option as the nuclear repository.”

The Congressional Budget Office estimates the federal government chipped in at least three point four billion dollars to cover military costs at Yucca Mountain.

But the tab’s bigger than that.

Murray says without Yucca, Hanford has to store its waste on-site. it’s not cheap.

“Billions of dollars have been spent at Hanford and sites across the country in an effort to treat and package nuclear waste that will be sent there.”

The Obama administration’s getting complaints from states and industry and taxpayer groups.

The Administration hasn’t responded publicly, but Energy Secretary Steven Chu mentioned the financial fallout from Yucca Mountain during a U-S Senate hearing.

He said the administration’s convinced Yucca Mountain just won’t work …

So, no matter how much money people have paid so far, it makes no sense to send good money after bad.

He didn’t mention paying any money back.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Automakers Push a Gas Tax

These Suzukis at Ken Butman's dealership, which were in high demand last year, are now sitting unsold (Photo by Samara Freemark)

Chances are, you haven’t bought a new car this year. Auto sales are down across the board – including in the small car and electric-gas hybrid markets. Now some dealers and automakers are proposing a way to move some of those cars: increase the gas tax. Samara Freemark explains why the same people who sell cars might want to make driving them more expensive:

Transcript

It was almost exactly this time last year that Ford dealer Ken Butman
traded in his pickup for a Suzuki hatchback.

His Ann Arbor, Michigan
dealership had been selling Suzukis for a couple of years. But they got
really popular last spring when gas prices jumped. Butman ordered a big
shipment to keep up with the demand.

“These are the Suzukis. These little cars get good gas mileage. And
they’re so cute. Look at them. Look at this one here. It’s got a little
rack for your skis. Look at
that.”

But those cars – the ones Butman ordered a year ago – most of them are
still here. They’re still sitting on his lot. Not moving.

“It was strange because they were so hot. For awhile there you couldn’t
give a big car away. And everybody was rushing to the small cars. And then
just as quickly, about when the price of gas came down again, we saw a
complete reversal. Like a light switch. That’s how fast it cut off.”

It’s been like that all over the country. Dealers who last year had
waiting lists for hybrids and small cars suddenly have a lot of extra
inventory. Sales of hybrids are way down from last April, mostly because
gas costs about half what it did last year.

Brett Smith is an auto analyst with the Center for Automotive Research. He
says consumers only really care about fuel economy when gas prices are
high. When gas hits about 4 dollars a gallon, consumers switch to fuel
efficient cars. When prices drop again, so do sales of efficient cars.

“Look at what’s happened every time we’ve had an energy crisis. We’ve
gone to smaller cars for a couple of years, and then the consumer has gone
back to larger cars. Why? Because at that fuel price they can get away with
it, they can justify it.”

It’s a real problem for dealers. It also worries auto manufacturers who
have poured money into developing hybrids and have a lot of new models due
to come out this year.

And that’s why some people who sell cars have begun to push for
increasing the gas tax.

Dealers and auto executives might not seem like the first bunch to line up
behind a tax hike. Traditionally they’ve lobbied hard against anything
that makes driving more expensive.

But a high tax – and therefore, higher gas prices – could get all those extra
hybrids moving again.

Michael Jackson is the CEO at AutoNation. That’s the
nation’s largest chain of dealership.

Jackson wants to see gas at four
dollars a gallon – the figure at which many analysts say consumer behavior
changes. And he thinks the government can keep prices at that magic number
with a floating tax.

Auto makers have been a little more cautious. But some top executives at
American companies have called Jackson’s ideas ‘smart’ and ‘worth
looking into’.

Smith says they believe that higher gas taxes could
stabilize the market for fuel efficient cars – making investment in new
technologies a safer bet.

“The car companies will rarely come out and loudly say, things like, ‘we
think there needs to be a gas tax.’ But almost all of them will say on the
side, if you want people to drive more fuel efficient cars, the best way to
do it is a gas tax.”

For now, though, it might not take a big tax to bring gas prices back up.

Oil trader Anthony Grisanti is the president of GRZ Energy. He says an
economic recovery would do pretty much the same thing.

“Shouldn’t be any doubt about it, once the economy picks up, say,
beginning of next year or year after that, you’re going to start to see oil
prices go higher.”

And that means prices at the pump would go up too.

Proposing higher gas taxes – especially of a couple of dollars a gallon – can
mean career suicide for politicians. So a big hike in the gas tax seems
iffy. But if gas prices rise as the economy recovers, dealers might see
those fuel efficient cars move off the lot again.

For The Environment Report, I’m Samara Freemark.

New Climate Bill in Congress

Congress is debating whether a carbon cap-and-trade program would kill jobs or save money in the long run. (Photo courtesy of aoc.gov)

Congress will be considering an energy and climate bill. Lester Graham reports the legislation would shift the American economy from reliance on fossil fuels to greater reliance on renewable energy and energy efficiency:

Transcript

The fight over what –if anything– should be done about climate change will center on this legislation.

Coal companies, big oil –and industries that use a lot of energy say this is a jobs killer and our energy bills will go through the roof.

Environmental groups and green businesses say ‘no, actually this will create jobs in a new green economy and in the long run our energy bills will be lower.’

A carbon cap-and-trade scheme included in the package would limit greenhouse gas emissions and put a price on them. Those against it call it cap-and-tax.

Liz Perera is with the environmental group the Union of Concerned Scientists. She says doing nothing about climate change would cost more.

“That’s definitely the most expensive thing we can do: just ignore this and then suffer these consequences of global warming.”

Those consequences are uncertain and will be among the many arguments we’ll hear in Washington this summer.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Tapping Into Tax Savings for Your Home

Insulating your home is one of the things the Alliance to Save Energy says you can do to save energy and earn up to 1,500 dollars in tax credits. (Photo courtesy of the EPA)

Tax credits have been extended and expanded for people who want to make their homes more energy efficient. Lester Graham spoke with Ronnie Kweller about that. She’s with the Alliance to Save Energy:

Transcript

Lester Graham: Ronnie, this stimulus package offers people a chance to save some money if they decide to insulate their home, or replace their heating or cooling system. How much is available?

Ronnie Kweller: Right now, up to $1500 – which is three times the amount that was available under earlier legislation. They also expand the percentage of the cost that can be covered, from 10% in the case of some of the items under the old law to 30%. The other good thing is that the tax credits have been extended through 2010. Originally, they were only for this calendar year. So I think that gives folks some opportunity to save and budget for some of these higher-ticket items, and get them in place between now and 2010, and still get that $1500 off their taxes.

Graham: Now, let’s say I want to replace my old water heater. How much could I get back in tax credit next year?

Kweller: 30%, up to $1500 – that’s if the water heater cost $5000, which probably it’s not that expensive.

Graham: This is a tax credit, not a tax deduction. What’s the difference?

Kweller: That is correct. A tax deduction means you take the amount off your taxable income and then you’re taxed on a lower amount of income. A tax credit is worth more, because once you have calculated the tax that you owe, it’s a dollar for dollar reduction in that tax bill.

Graham: What kind of energy efficiencies make the most sense for a home? If I’m looking at my house, where should I start making changes first?

Kweller: The thing that we usually recommend as the first step is to seal and tighten up the house with sufficient insulation for your climate region. And then sealing leaks and cracks around doors and windows with sealing product, such as caulking, weather-stripping, and foam sealants. And the good news is that all those types of products are now eligible for these tax credits. Again, assuming that they meet the standards that are in the law.

Graham: We tend to think of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Energy Star program as an assurance we’re buying an energy efficient product, but I understand not all Energy Star labeled products qualify for these tax credits.

Kweller: That’s correct. The one change that makes life a little bit more complicated for consumers is that under the old law, all energy star windows qualified for a tax credit. Now, there are certain additional requirements for the windows, as well as for the heating and cooling equipment. So, you can’t just go buy the Energy Star label, you really have to look at the very specific energy efficiency levels that these products must meet.

Graham: So, if I need details on that kind of requirement, where’s the best place to find them?

Kweller: One of the best places would be the Alliance Energy’s website at ase.org/taxcredits. We’ve made a great effort to have a user-friendly website that spells out the criteria in very clear language. The Energy Star website at energystar.gov is always very helpful in general on energy efficiency, as is the Department of Energy’s Energy Saver’s Booklet, which is at energysavers.gov.

Graham: Alright, thanks for joining us.

Kweller: Thank you.

Graham: Ronnie Kweller is with the Alliance to Save Energy. I’m Lester Graham.

Will Green Collar Jobs Pay Off?

Obama delivering the American Recovery and Reinvestment speech on Thursday, January 8, 2009 (Photo courtesy of the Obama Transition Team)

Some top business leaders
expect there will be only one growth
sector during this recession: energy
efficiency. Some call it the dawning
of the ‘green economy.’ Lester Graham
reports many are calling on the
government to invest heavily to get
the economy going again. But some are
worried that billions will go to ‘make
work’ projects with no long-term gains:

Transcript

Just as computers and the information age defined the economy many business leaders believe alternative fuels and energy conservation will define the green economy.

During a recent speech at George Mason University, President-elect Barack Obama indicated he wants to encourage that growth in green collar jobs.

“Jobs building solar panels and wind turbines, constructing fuel-efficient cars and buildings and developing the new energy technologies that will lead to even more jobs, more savings and a cleaner, safer planet in the bargain.”

There’s no doubt that much of President-elect Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan is green.

The AFL-CIO has its own Green Jobs for America Program. The union wants 100-billion dollars of government money to be invested in the kind of jobs Mr. Obama talked about.

Pat Devlin is with the AFL-CIO’s Michigan Building Trades Council. He says he hopes Congress moves on the Obama plan soon.

“We’re hoping ASAP. Were looking to get something kicked off in the next six months. And like I said, we’ve got the projects. We just need the infusion of the investment behind it and we’re ready to go. We got to be smart when we do get the dollars, too. That they’re spent in the right place to get people back to work, get our economy headed in the right direction.”

The AFL-CIO has been talking to the Obama administration… and the union likes what it’s hearing.

President-elect Obama says making buildings and homes more energy efficient will mean jobs now and save billions in natural gas and oil in the future making us less dependent on foreign fossil fuels… and reducing greenhouse gas emissions causing global warming.

But the government has a nasty habit of screwing these things up. Members of Congress want the money for their states even if they don’t have the kind of shovel-ready plans that will mean those kind of long-term benefits and that could sabotage the effort.

“You just can’t throw money at the problems and somehow magically it’s going to work.”

Eric Orts directs the Initiative for Global Environmental Leadership, part of the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. He says the investments should go to projects that mean more energy and economic efficiencies in the future have long-term benefits that will benefit the economy. Otherwise it’s wasting an opportunity.

“You might create short-term jobs for some time, but that’s not going to lead to the long-term foundation growth that I’m talking about. That’s going to require some intelligent allocation of the funds so you get the payoffs.”

The Obama administration will have to be picky the jobs, very cautious about how the taxpayer money is invested if we’re going to see those payoffs.

For The Environment Report. I’m Lester Graham.

Electricity From Factory Farms

Methane is one of the worst greenhouse gases contributing to global warming. (Photo by Bill Tarpenning, courtesy of the USDA)

Lots of people who live near big livestock farms complain
about the stench of manure. One of the by-products of all
that manure is methane gas – which can be used to create
electricity. More states are starting to offer tax breaks to
factory farms to make energy from their waste.
Julie Grant reports:

Transcript

Several states around the nation are offering tax breaks to
encourage factory farms to capture the methane from their
cow manure – and to convert it into usable electricity.
Methane is one of the worst greenhouse gases contributing
to global warming.

You might think environmental groups would support the
idea. But Ed Hopkins of the Sierra Club says taxpayers
should not subsidize manure-to-energy projects.

“We see factory farms as a business. And like any business,
they should pay the costs for their pollution control
equipment – not the public.”

Hopkins says taxpayer money for manure to energy projects
will only encourage more factory farming and the other
pollution problems associated with those big operations.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Grant.

Getting Consumers to Want Greener Cars

The Editor of Car and Driver Magazine suggests that customers will demand gas guzzlers as long as gas is cheap. (Photo courtesy of the US Department of State)

Some members of Congress called
for GM, Chrysler, and Ford to make more
fuel efficient and less polluting cars
and trucks during the debate over federal
loans for the Big Three. Lester Graham
reports one industry observer thinks that’s
not helpful:

Transcript

Csaba Csere is the Editor of Car and Driver magazine. He says those forcing the
Detroit automakers to build greener cars is not the solution. He says customers will
demand gas guzzlers – as long as gas is cheap.

Csere suggests if the government really wants to change the kinds of cars Detroit
builds, it’ll have to give car buyers a reason to buy more fuel efficient cars.

“If we really wanted to have an energy policy in this country, the solution is not to
force the carmakers to build more efficient vehicles, it’s to force the consumers to
buy them. And a gas tax is a way to achieve that.”

He’s not advocating that policy. And a whole lot of people don’t like the idea – at all.
Members of Congress would rather pressure the troubled automobile manufacturers,
than to tell the voters at home, ‘hey we’re voting to raise taxes on gasoline because
it’s good for the environment.’

For The Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.

Energy Tax Credits for Next Year

Tucked away in the bailout package were energy tax cuts for Americans (Source: Man-ucommons at Wikimedia Commons)

We’ve all heard about the 700-
billion dollar bail-out for Wall Street.
Getting a lot less attention was another
17-billion dollars for energy tax credits.
Lester Graham reports you can take advantage
of some of that money for your house:

Transcript

Starting in January you can earn as much as $500 in tax credits for home
improvements that save energy. The credit will be taken right off the top of taxes you’ll
owe for 2009.

Ronnie Kweller is with the group Alliance to Save Energy. She says the credits can
cover a lot.

“Energy Star windows. It also includes lower-cost products like additional insulation,
sealing and caulking and weather-stripping – all those kind of things to tighten up your
home and make it energy efficient. As well as highly-efficient heating and cooling
equipment.”

Kweller says her group has details on the new consumer tax credits on its website:
ase.org.

Keep your receipts, and you’ll have to remember to file the right IRS form to take
advantage of the tax credits.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Candidates’ Promises for Great Lakes Cleanup

Both Obama and McCain say they support fixing the Great Lakes (Photo by Lester Graham)

Barack Obama and John McCain
are greening up their effort to win
some battleground states in November.
The Obama campaign has released a five
point plan for protecting the Great Lakes.
Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

Barack Obama and John McCain
are greening up their effort to win
some battleground states in November. The Obama campaign has released a five
point plan for protecting the Great Lakes.
Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Great lakes advocates have been urging Washington to approve a 20 billion dollar restoration package for the lakes.

Illinois senator Obama says he’s willing to come up with an additional 5 billion dollars. He’d get the money by rolling back tax breaks for oil and natural gas companies.

Michigan Democratic senator Debbie Stabenow is helping promote Obama’s plan. She says it goes well beyond the Bush Administration’s unmet promises to pay for lakes cleanup.

“What we are seeing through this plan is actually putting the dollars into a trust fund so the dollars would be there.”

Senator Obama also wants a coordinator of Great Lakes programs to tackle toxic hot spots, invasive species and enforcing a compact to protect the lakes from large water withdrawals.

The McCain campaign says Senator McCain supports fixing the Great Lakes, but he’s not
ready to commit to an amount yet.

For The Environment Report, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Wind Tax Credit Blowing Away?

Wind companies want taxpayer help (Photo courtesy of the Department of Energy)

The wind power industry has been growing.
But to keep growing, wind companies want more
taxpayer help. Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

The wind power industry has been growing.
But to keep growing, wind companies want more
taxpayer help. Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Some of the recent growth in wind generation is being fueled by a national
production tax credit. It’s due to expire at the end of this year.

The American Wind Energy Association is asking the public to encourage Congress to renew the
credit.

Association spokesman Jeff Anthony says, without the tax break, there’d be a slow down in new
wind projects and a potential loss of jobs.

“The longer it takes, the more in danger we’re putting the jobs in the wind industry at risk from a
drop-off in activity, both in project installations and in new manufacturing installations in this
country. So we need the PTC extended as soon as possible.”

Anthony acknowledges there’s a dispute in Congress over how to pay for the credit. Some
critics call the production tax credit ‘corporate welfare’.

For The Environment Report, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Tag: tax

Billions Down the Yucca Hole

Transcript

Related Links

Automakers Push a Gas Tax

Transcript

Related Links

New Climate Bill in Congress

Transcript

Related Links

Tapping Into Tax Savings for Your Home

Transcript

Related Links

Will Green Collar Jobs Pay Off?

Transcript

Related Links

Electricity From Factory Farms

Transcript

Related Links

Getting Consumers to Want Greener Cars

Transcript

Related Links

Energy Tax Credits for Next Year

Transcript

Related Links

Candidates’ Promises for Great Lakes Cleanup

Transcript

Related Links

Wind Tax Credit Blowing Away?

Transcript

Related Links