Tag: dteenergy

Windmills Generate Jobs and Power

  • A windmill blade nearly 150 feet long is slung gently onto a flatbed at the Duluth port. A modified trailer is needed to transport the blade. (Photo courtesy of Stephanie Hemphill)

U.S. demand for clean energy is growing fast. In fact, wind energy developers are ordering so many windmills, they’re running into a supply problem. Windmill manufacturers overseas have been shipping their products to the booming U.S. market. That’s already created some jobs, and now there are plans to build factories to produce windmills here. It’s all happening in spite of inconsistent federal support. Stephanie Hemphill reports:

Transcript

U.S. demand for clean energy is growing fast. In fact, wind energy developers are ordering so many windmills, they’re running into a supply problem. Windmill manufacturers overseas have been shipping their products to the booming U.S. market. That’s already created some jobs, and now there are plans to build factories to produce windmills here. It’s all happening in spite of inconsistent federal support. Stephanie Hemphill reports:


At the Duluth Port Terminal, the BBC India is tied up to the dock. Two giant cranes slowly lower a silvery propeller onto a waiting truck. The blade is half as long as a football field. The extended bed of the eighteen-wheeler isn’t long enough to hold the entire length. A padded steel structure cradles the narrow end above the ground. There are 66 blades on the ship, three blades for each of twenty-two towers.


“The three blades will bolt into a hub, and then the hub attaches to the nacelle, the generator package, that’s the actual turbine, and the nacelle sits on top of the tower.”


Andrew Holdrup is the port captain for the shipping company. He was here in Duluth a year and a half ago, when the port handled its first ever shipment of windmills.


Holdrup says the demand for windmills is huge in the U.S.


“We have four ships; all they do is run from Denmark to Houston with Siemens windmills. We discharge them in Houston, the ship sails back empty to go pick up the next lot. Multiply that by all the other ports, and all the other windmill manufacturers, and it’s a huge business.”


It’s great business for Duluth’s port. Unloading the windmills requires iron workers to cut the steel where the pieces have been welded to the ship, and crane operators, and longshoremen. And truckers are staying in town waiting to pick up their loads. They’ll haul the windmills to wind farms being built in Mower County, Minnesota, and Oliver County, North Dakota. The port has also handled equipment for wind farms in Manitoba.


The boom in wind was primed in the early 1990s, when Congress set up a production tax credit for wind power. It allows a 1.9 cent-per-kilowatt-hour tax credit over ten years, for electricity produced by wind.


But the tax credit only runs for two years at a time. Ron Johnson is in charge of marketing for the Duluth Port Authority. He says that on-again, off-again approach has made it hard for businesses involved in wind energy to plan and grow.


“It’s kind of start up again, stop, start up again, stop. If you’re a trucking company with these specialized trailers, you don’t want to go out and buy fifty more of them if there’s a chance your whole fleet’s going to sit until Congress decides what to do.”


Johnson says there’s a lot of support in Congress for the tax credits, and he expects them to be renewed.


Steve Stengel works for FPL Energy, the company building the wind farms where these windmills are headed.


“It is part of the business, we understand that. And it does cause kind of starts & stops, if you will.”


But he says it’s possible to work around the periodic breaks in the tax credit because it takes a long time to plan a wind project anyway.


“Permitting issues, land lease issues, transmission issues. We have to plan as if the tax credit is going to be there.”


In fact, wind is growing dramatically in spite of the iffy nature of federal support. Several states now require utilities to invest in renewable energy, or offer incentives for wind power development. And as the cost of fossil fuels goes up, the relative cost of wind goes down.


It all adds up to a lot of demand, and recently, tight supplies.


The American Wind Energy Association’s Susan Sloan says orders are already in place for 2008 and beyond.


“Because of this boom and bust cycle but also because of this new acceptance of wind, we are seeing a tighter supply, and we need to have the manufacturing capabilities catch up.”


And that’s what’s happening.


It took two weeks for the Siemens windmills to sail from Denmark to Duluth. Now the company is building a factory in Fort Madison, Iowa. Siemens says it will employ 250 people, and start producing in the first half of 2007.


And in Pipestone, Minnesota, Suzlon, a company based in India, is about to start producing three blades a day, and the nosecones to go with them. The company plans to manufacture the electronic controls, and eventually employ up to 300 people. Suzlon says it has orders for the next two to three years.


For the Environment Report, I’m Stephanie Hemphill.

Related Links

Windmills Generate Jobs and Power (Wrap)

  • A windmill blade nearly 150 long is slung gently onto a flatbed at the Duluth port. A modified trailer is needed to transport the blade. (Photo courtesy of Stephanie Hemphill)

US demand for clean energy is growing so fast, supplies of generating systems are getting tight. Stephanie Hemphill reports on a challenge that could lead to more jobs in the US:

Transcript

US demand for clean energy is growing so fast, supplies of generating systems are getting tight. Stephanie Hemphill reports on a challenge that could lead to more jobs in the US:


Overseas manufacturers of wind generating systems are shipping them here as fast as they can. Now, several companies are building wind generator factories in the US.


Siemens is building a plant in Iowa. Suzlon is about to start production in Minnesota. Plants in Texas produce blades and towers.


It’s all happening in spite of inconsistent federal support. A production tax credit is in place, but it expires every two years.


Ron Johnson is with the port of Duluth, which handles windmill imports. He says the on-again, off-again support makes it hard for companies to plan and grow.


“Well, the deadline’s coming at the end of next year, and people are planning their projects, so we’re all anxious to see what Congress does.”


The American Wind Energy Association says producers are installing enough wind power this year to power the entire state of Rhode Island.


For the Environment Report, I’m Stephanie Hemphill.

Related Links

Pros and Cons of Offshore Wind Farms

  • While the tower is around 3 miles north of Cleveland's shore, a viable wind farm would need to be at least 6 times farther out in Lake Erie. The wind monitoring tower measures the speed, direction, and height of Lake Erie's wind to determine if wind power generation on the lake is economically viable. (Photo courtesy of Lisa Ann Pinkerton)

Proposals for offshore wind farms, from the coasts of Texas to New England have the potential to generate more electricity than land turbines do. Lisa Ann Pinkerton reports these projects face various hurdles to becoming reality, but they’re not completely insurmountable:

Transcript

Proposals for offshore wind farms, from the coasts of Texas to New England have the potential to generate more electricity than land turbines do. Lisa Ann Pinkerton reports these projects face various hurdles to becoming reality but they’re not completely insurmountable:


Over the past few months, whenever the weather is favorable, Aaron Godwin of Green Energy Ohio rides a power boat several miles out into Lake Erie. Out on the on the city of Cleveland’s century old water intake structure he’s built a tall wind monitoring tower.


“The upper part of the tower is about 168 feet above the water, so we’re measuring at about 30, 40 and 50 meters, and dual instrumentation at each level, anemometers that measure wind speed and vanes that measure direction.”


Godwin’s got almost a year of wind data and today he’s installing a small wind turbine to confirm what he’s discovered: that the lake’s wind is roughly twice as strong as wind on land. So to Godwin offshore wind farms are inevitable, especially since 75 percent of the nation’s energy use is near coastal cities.


However, proposed projects everywhere face a number of hurdles. One of them is bird and bat migration. Some land turbines have killed creatures that flew too close. But in Denmark, where offshore wind is 15 years old, extensive water foul surveys show little change in bird behavior. Charlotte Boesen is an environmental planner for Dong Energy in Denmark.


“These birds, they do fly around the wind farm. They do not like flying over land you can say and maybe they in some sort they perceive the turbines or wind farm as a similar object.”


Even so, no wind project in the US will ever get off the ground without a full assessment of potential wildlife impacts. That’s why 60% of Lake Erie has already been ruled out by a preliminary study conducted by the wind consulting firm AWS True Wind. Its Executive Director Bruce Bailey says that leaves most of eastern Lake Erie still available, with the best wind about 15 miles northwest of Cleveland.


“That’s where the strongest winds would be found. With water depths still being under say 70 feet.”


Bailey adds the shallow depth of Lake Erie combined with its solid lake bottom and fresh water makes it more friendly to offshore wind generation than oceans.


“You wouldn’t have to deal with the corrosion or the extra cost to safeguard your hardware from corrosion if you’re sighted in a fresh water lake.”


Bailey adds designing against hurricanes makes ocean projects more expensive. On the flip side, Lake Erie’s been known to freeze.


“There are ways to deflect the ice from actually pushing too strongly against or lifting out a turbine foundation. Some of them have already been deployed already in offshore projects in Northern Europe, and some of them are located in locations where you might even get icebergs.”


Another concern is whether these turbines will ruin the natural beauty of America’s Coastlines, even though on the horizon a turbine might only look a big as a thumbnail. Walt Musel of the US Department of Energy says this worry is unfounded.


“It’s worth noting there are no projects in the United States, so most people who object to offshore wind have never seen one.”


Fifteen years ago, projects in Denmark faced the same prejudice. Today tourists rent boats to go see them.


Above all, perhaps the largest impediment to offshore wind power is its high cost. Installation in water is expected to be double the cost of on land construction. However, once farms are producing power, electricity companies are open to buying it.


Out on Lake Erie, Aaron Godwin is packing up his tools for the day. He says there is an up side to those high capital costs. He says in the future, turbines will be so large it’ll make more sense to manufacture the parts locally, giving America’s manufacturing industry a ray of hope.


“Energy is a guaranteed growth market. Wind power is the fastest growing energy sector in the entire world. Why would you not want to get involved in that guaranteed growth market? It just does not make sense.”


Godwin says if the US can clear these hurdles of public perception, engineering, and environmental impacts, he thinks the US economy might find a pleasant surprise: consistent, green energy, built and harnessed off the blue coasts of America.


For the Environment Report, I’m Lisa Ann Pinkerton.

Related Links

New Furnace Standards Too Weak?

The Department of Energy is proposing new efficiency standards for furnaces. Rebecca Williams reports critics of the new rule say it won’t save consumers money:

Transcript

The Department of Energy is proposing new efficiency standards for furnaces. Rebecca Williams reports critics of the new rule say it won’t save consumers money:


The new rule would be just a two percent increase from what’s currently mandated. The rule would require new furnaces to be 80 percent efficient. That means 80% of the energy is used to heat your home while 20% is vented up the flue.


Energy groups say it’s basically no change, because most of the new furnaces on the market are already 80 percent efficient, or better.


Ketari Callahan is president of the group Alliance to Save Energy.


“It really only puts in place and codifies what the market is doing today. So it really is just far too weak and it keeps people from saving the money they otherwise would.”


Industry groups say a stronger standard isn’t needed. They say consumers in colder climates already tend to buy the most efficient furnaces.


Three states have passed their own laws for furnace efficiency that are stricter than the federal standard.


For the Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Harnessing Energy From Food Scraps

Leftover broccoli, unfinished hamburgers, wilted salad… sounds like a stinky mess… but it also has the potential to generate electricity. A new power plant fired up this week and you won’t find any coal or natural gas fueling its generators. This plant is powered by leftovers. Tamara Keith reports:

Transcript

Leftover broccoli, unfinished hamburgers, wilted salad… sounds like a stinky mess… but it also has the potential to generate electricity. A new power plant fired up this week and you won’t find any coal or natural gas fueling its generators. This plant is powered by leftovers. Tamara Keith reports:


The Biogas Energy Project on the University of California Davis campus is the first real-world demonstration of a new technology that could change the way we think about trash.


Food scraps from San Francisco restaurants are loaded into large sealed tanks where bacteria go to work, converting the food into fertilizer and releasing hydrogen and methane gas. That gas can then be used to fuel cars, or create energy using a generator.


Dave Konwinski is CEO of Onsite Power Systems Incorporated, which operates the plant.


“We’re burying all this organic waste in landfills, but every one ton has enough power to provide the heat for 10 homes, so the numbers are staggering how much energy we can make.”


Konwinski says he hopes to make the trash to power system commercially available early next year.


For the Environment Report, I’m Tamara Keith.

Related Links

Tailpipe Inspection Programs Lack Oversight

A federal study is raising questions about the effectiveness of tailpipe testing programs. The programs are supposed to help reduce air pollution from cars and trucks. Chuck Quirmbach has details:

Transcript

A federal study is raising questions about the effectiveness of tailpipe testing programs. The programs are supposed to help reduce air pollution from cars and trucks. Chuck Quirmbach has details:


The inspector general at the EPA says many of the 34 states that do tailpipe tests are failing to file reports on the effectiveness of those programs. So, the EPA watchdog says it’s not sure about claims that those states are reducing emissions.


The American Lung Association is also concerned about the report. Association spokesperson Paul Billings says the findings cast doubt for the public.


“We want to make sure we’re not seeing gross emitters, vehicles that are polluting way too much, because we all suffer the consequences of too much air pollution in our cities.”


Billings urges the EPA to step up its effort to get information from the states, but he says staff cuts at the federal agency may be hampering enforcement. The EPA has to respond to its inspector general within a few months.


For the Environment Report, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

Part 1: Carmakers Push for More Ethanol

  • Switchgrass is an easily grown biofuel crop, which can be used to make ethanol. (Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

This summer, drivers got a crash course in the dangers of fossil fuel. Gas prices shot above three dollars a gallon, concerns about global warming surged, and instability continued to plague areas of the world where oil is produced. We’ll be taking a look at some of the technologies that could help the US kick its fossil fuel habit. We’re starting with an alternative fuel that’s been sprouting up in gas stations across the region. Dustin Dwyer has this look at the promise, and the limitations of ethanol:

Transcript

This summer, drivers got a crash course in the dangers of fossil fuel. Gas prices shot above $3 a gallon, concerns about global warming surged, and instability continued to plague areas of the world where oil is produced. We’ll be taking a look at some of the technologies that could help the US kick its fossil fuel habit. We’re starting with an alternative fuel that’s been sprouting up in gas stations across the region. Dustin Dwyer has this look at the promise, and the limitations of ethanol:


This summer, Misty Childs found a way to do something positive about the fossil fuel problem. She says that she and her husband realized their Chevy Silverado pickup could run on E-85, a blend of 85 percent corn-based ethanol and 15 percent gasoline.


E85 burns cleaner than gas alone, so it’s good for the environment. And the ethanol is made from corn grown in the US. As she tops off her tank at a gas station, Childs says that makes a difference.


“It means a lot that we’re doing something for our country here, and not having to rely on others.”


Detroit’s Big Three automakers have been making a big push for E-85 in the last year. E-85-capable vehicles get the automakers a credit on federal fuel economy standards. So, even if drivers put regular gas in the vehicles instead of E-85, Detroit still gets a credit for doing better. And this summer, as more buyers became aware of the problem with fossil fuels, E-85 was just about the only alternative Detroit had to offer.


But ethanol as it’s currently made has limits. Jason Hill is a researcher at the University of Minnesota. He recently published a study on the long term outlook for corn-based ethanol.


“What we found is if you convert every corn kernel we produce in this nation to ethanol, we would be able to offset only about 12 percent of our national gasoline usage. So that’s not that large.”


That’s every corn kernel, including what we currently use for food. Which brings up another problem with ethanol: if E85 jumps in popularity, will that mean less corn for animal feed and grocery stores?


Maybe. Corn originally became popular because it was already being grown around much of the country, with help from federal subsidies. And ethanol processors, such as Archer Daniels Midland, also got tax breaks for making corn-based fuel.


But there’s another option for ethanol. Inside a lab at Michigan State University, researchers are working on the next generation of the fuel. This is what’s called cellulosic ethanol. Instead of using grains like corn kernels, cellulosic ethanol is made from the starches in plant cell walls. It can be made from pretty much anything that stands up straight – wood, prairie grasses and corn stalks.


That offers the possibility to increase the ethanol output for every acre of land devoted to the crops, and those crops don’t require fossil fuel-based fertilizer. They also don’t require planting every year by gas or diesel burning tractors the way corn does.


Professor Bruce Dale heads research into cellulosic ethanol at MSU. He says the current problem with cellulosic ethanol is finding a cheap way to break down the stiff materials. His lab uses ammonia to do the trick.


“The idea is to make cheap sugar. And the plant cell walls potentially could give you the cheapest sugar on the planet, if we could figure out how to get at that sugar easily. That’s what our ammonia process does in combination with the enzymes.”


It turns out that, much like a teenager eating pop-rocks, cars and trucks get a whole lot of energy from fuels based on sugar. Dale says most woody plants have plenty of sugar, but it’s really hard to get that sugar out.


Dale says some cellulosic ethanol could be on the market in the next few years, and the fuel could eventually sell for about 60 cents a gallon.


Right now, ethanol is still hard to find at the pumps. And one study says, even with major investment over the next decade, cellulosic ethanol might only equal half of our current oil useage by 2050.


That’s still a lot. But to really eliminate the need for gas, many experts say it’ll take more than just one technology.


For the Environment Report, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

Part 2: Upgrading Electric Hybrids

  • A concept car powered by a lithium-ion battery. (Photo courtesy of hybridcars.com)

Hybrid cars have become almost a symbol of environmentalism on the road. Powered by a gas-electric hybrid motor, these cars get up to 60 miles per gallon or better. Those gas savings come largely thanks to a battery. Now, people in the auto industry are looking at the next generation of battery that could push the gas savings even higher. Dustin Dwyer has this look at how batteries are cutting down on the need for oil:

Transcript

Hybrid cars have become almost a symbol of environmentalism on the road. Powered by a gas-electric hybrid motor, these cars get up to 60 miles per gallon of gas or better. Those gas savings come largely thanks to a battery. Now, people in the auto industry are looking at the next generation of battery that could push the gas savings even higher. Dustin Dwyer has this look at how batteries are cutting down the need for oil:


For about a hundred years now, the auto industry in the United States has been associated with a certain kind of vehicle – a vehicle that’s big, powerful and chugs a lot of gas. It’s all been based on the internal combustion engine.


Now, that model is being challenged. It involves a number of technologies, but the first to really break through has been the hybrid. Hybrid cars and trucks still have an internal combustion engine under the hood, but the engine is paired with a battery. Of course, it’s not just a battery like the batteries that have always been in cars. The batteries in hybrids are called nickel metal hydride batteries (NiMH).


One company that makes them is Cobasys. On a factory floor a little less than an hour north of Detroit, Cobasys engineer Scott Lindholm explains what makes these batteries different.


“Basically the big advantage of nickel metal hydride in a hybrid vehicle environment is it can do millions of charge and discharge cycles. Where, if you buy a battery for your flashlight or your radio, you really just charge it once as your primary battery. This will accept charge and give you power multiple times.”


That ability to be recharged, and emit energy from a battery that weighs less than in previous generations has made all current hybrid vehicles possible. For hybrid owners, that’s meant better gas mileage, and lower emissions.


The battery itself isn’t exactly new; the technology was first introduced in the early 1980s. It’s taken almost until now for car companies to realize the full potential of nickel metal hydrides, but this isn’t the final step. Bradley Berman is editor of hybridcars.com. He says the next wave of batteries is coming from the world of iPods and laptops.


“It’s already out there in small electronic devices, and the big question is can it scale up for an automotive application? And the race is on to make that happen.”


Many say these lithium-ion batteries have the potential to be cheaper, lighter and more powerful than today’s nickel metal hydride batteries. The problem with them right now is safety. You might remember hearing something recently about batteries in laptop computers exploding. Well, those were lithium-ion batteries, and bigger, more powerful batteries in cars could mean a higher chance of catching fire for lithium-ion batteries.


Berman is confident that problem can be overcome, and he says we could see these kind of batteries in cars within 4-8 years. And that could mean big changes in gas mileage for hybrid owners. Berman says while the current generation Prius gets 60 miles per gallon in the city, lithium-ion batteries could get the next generation up to 80 miles per gallon. And the next step, a new plug-in car.


“If one of these carmakers comes through with some limited capacity for plugging in, which means you could charge more of it up, and you could use more of the battery on a regular basis, you’re starting to approach maybe triple digits.”


Some argue that plugging in just moves the environmental harm elsewhere. Instead of using gas to power your car, you’d generally be using coal or nuclear power from your local energy company. But supporters say that still leads to lower overall emissions.


Also, hybrid technology for cars doesn’t come in a vacuum. It can be combined with new biofuels, or eventually hydrogen. That could mean significantly cleaner cars – even cars with zero emissions. But just like the development of the nickel-metal hydride battery, these technologies could take a number of years before they’re ready.


For the Environment Report, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

Part 3: Zero Emission Hydrogen Future?

  • Underneath the hood of a hydrogen powered car. (Photo courtesy of US Department of Energy)

You’ve probably heard that the auto industry is looking into hydrogen as a possible fuel for future cars and trucks. Hydrogen offers the potential for cars with close to zero harmful emissions, but those cars won’t be on the roads in big numbers anytime soon. Dustin Dwyer has this look at what’s being done now to get ready for a hydrogen future:

Transcript

You’ve probably heard that the auto industry is looking into Hydrogen as a possible fuel for future cars and trucks. Hydrogen offers the potential for cars with close to zero harmful emissions, but those cars won’t be on the roads in big numbers anytime soon. Dustin Dwyer has this look at what’s being done now to get ready for a hydrogen future:


To many people, hydrogen-powered cars might sound about as legitimate as flying cars. They both seem like really good ideas. Hydrogen could lead to cars that have basically no harmful emissions. Flying cars are just cool. For flying cars, the technology hasn’t come through. That’s despite all the promises of countless sci-fi movies.


But people in the auto industry insist hydrogen cars are the real deal, and they’re backing it up with real investment money. General Motors, the world’s biggest car company, has spent more than $1 billion already to develop hydrogen fuel cells.


Julie Beamer is GM’s director of fuel cell commercialization. She says things such as biofuels and gas-electric hybrid technology are important in the short term.


“But ultimately, you are back to what is the long-term sustainable solution? We believe very strongly, it is hydrogen and fuel cell technology.”


At GM, hydrogen fuel cells represent a complete reinvention of the automobile. The internal combustion engine, which has powered nearly every car for the past century, is out. And there’s a lot of other high-tech gadgetry in GM’s prototype hydrogen vehicles.


But Hydrogen doesn’t have to be a revolution. You can actually use existing engines.


Jeff Schmidt is an engineer with Ovonic Hydrogen Systems in Michigan. He’s hooking a hydrogen pump up to a modified Toyota Prius.


“You can hear the fuel is pushing through the nozzle, there are orifices and it just whistles as it’s fueling up.”


This is a pump that looks like any other gas pump you see. It has a few extra tubes and wires, but basically it works the same as gas pumps you use all the time. As Schmidt jumps behind the wheel, he says that was the idea with the prototype car, as well.


“The car is very similar to standard Prius in function and drivability. Simply a matter of getting in the car, seat belt, push the power button to start.”


Essentially, Ovonics just pulled out the standard gas tank, and put in a tank that could safely store Hydrogen. That tank is a little bit heavier than a normal gas tank, and you lose some horsepower from an engine that was originally built for gasoline. But Schmidt says for the most part, this hydrogen powered car works the same as your car does. It just uses a cleaner fuel.


And the technology is pretty much ready to go. Schmidt says the car could be mass produced and put on the roads right away. The problem is nobody would know where to fill up.


“That has to be worked out. I mean, we see a gas station on every corner right now.”


Gary Vasilash is editor of Automotive Design and Production magazine. He points out there are already problems with just getting biofuels such as ethanol into gas stations, and he says getting Hydrogen to filling stations will be much worse.


“People are talking about, ‘Well, gee it’s so difficult to get ethanol,’ you know, and ethanol’s from corn, right? Well, where is there free hydrogen? Nowhere.”


The most talked about way of getting hydrogen at least in the short term, is from a process involving fossil fuels, but that process would create heavy CO2 emissions on the production side. So the total measure of pollution from cars, what’s called the well-to-wheel impact, might only be cut in half compared to current levels.


So GM’s Julie Beamer says the ultimate goal is using renewable wind or solar electricity to pull Hydrogen out of water through electrolysis.


“Those sources obviously, while they’re near term not as economically attractive as what natural gas would be, but the renewable-based options do represent to completely eliminate greenhouse gas emissions through the total well-to-wheel basis.”


That could be a big, big improvement for the environment. But no one can really say how long it might take. In the meantime, auto companies and researchers continue to work on the incremental steps, while the rest of us wait for the era of truly clean automobiles to take flight.


For the Environment Report, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

The Direction of U.S. Energy Policy

  • Jamie Juenemann invested in equipment to produce energy at his home in northern Minnesota. He says the government should offer more consistent incentives for renewable energy. (Photo by Stephanie Hemphill)

Americans are thinking more about energy. We’re facing higher prices. There’s worry about climate change, and there are questions about whether our need for foreign oil is forcing the country into wars in the Middle East. Even former oilman President Bush says we have to kick our addiction to oil, but what’s the government doing about it? Stephanie Hemphill looks at our national energy policy and its priorities:

Transcript

Americans are thinking about energy more. We’re facing higher energy prices, there’s worry about climate change, and there are questions about whether our need for foreign oil is forcing the country into wars in the Middle East. Even former oilman President Bush says we have to kick our addiction to oil, but what’s the government doing about it? Stephanie Hemphill looks at our national energy policy and its priorities:


This winter, a handful of people around the country won’t have to worry about oil or gas prices. Jamie Juenemann is one of them. He lives out in the country in northern Minnesota, and he’s installed his own energy plant.


Behind the house, there’s a pole reaching above the trees. At the top, a modern windmill turns as it catches the wind. There’s also a solar hot water heater, and a geothermal heat pump, that brings underground heat into the house.


“This was the final phase in our goal to become carbon neutral; essentially producing as much energy as we’re consuming.”


Carbon neutral means not using fossil fuels that emit carbon dioxide, believed to be a greenhouse gas, and warming the planet.


Of course these systems aren’t cheap. Juenemann took out a second mortgage to pay for them. It was a big decision, but he says he’s doing what he can to make sure his young daughters will inherit a livable world.


“It’s all about choices. We have the choice to either purchase a Chevy Suburban, or we can use that same outlay, that same expense and put in some renewable energy systems.”


Eventually these systems will pay for themselves, and the Juenemann family will have free hot water, electricity, and heat.


The government helps pay for some of these systems; as much as three-quarters of the cost can be covered by tax-breaks and rebates. The trouble is one of the major federal subsidies ends next year, and others are limited to the first few buyers in a fiscal year. Businesses that sell renewable energy systems say that on-again, off-again subsidy approach by the government makes it difficult to stay in business to provide the alternative systems.


Politicians have been sending mixed messages about energy. Last year’s energy bill offered subsidies for nearly every energy source, without sending a clear message favoring one over another. Congress even offered subsidies for fossil fuels.


And that makes sense to John Felmy. He’s chief economist at the American Petroleum Institute. He says the country depends on traditional sources — including the 40% of our total energy budget that comes from oil. He says the government should subsidize exploration and research on fossil fuels.


“You have to say where can you get the biggest impact from encouraging additional supplies, and those numbers of 40% clearly dwarf what you have from the alternatives.”


He says to keep the economy strong, the government should make it easier to drill for oil and gas, and to bring energy to where it’s needed.


Another government approach to the challenge of energy is to reduce the demand. Some groups predict conservation could cut energy needs as much as thirty percent.


J. Drake Hamilton is a scientist with Fresh Energy, a non-profit organization. She says conservation is cheaper and cleaner than producing more energy.


“Every time you cut energy use, you cut pollution. Every time you increase it, you increase pollution.”


And some people regard pollution as a hidden cost of traditional fuels. They say if consumers directly paid for the environmental and health costs of burning coal and oil and gas, the prices would be a lot higher. Economists call these “external costs,” and they argue over how to set a price on them.


Environmentalists say we should start charging an extra tax on fossil fuels because they contribute to global warming. At the same time, we could reduce the income tax, so the shift would be revenue-neutral, but the idea is still likely to be politically unpopular. A higher tax on fossil fuels would mean higher prices, which would make renewable energy systems more competitive.


There’s nothing new about taxing things that are bad for us, and subsidizing things that are good. But so far, when it comes to energy, Congress hasn’t been able to agree on what to discourage, and what to encourage.


For The Environment Report, I’m Stephanie Hemphill.

Related Links