It's about renewable energy sources and rightwing dumbasses

Regularly one of our resident rightwing dumbasses posts an article
telling us how renewable energy sources don't work. Here's an article
guaranteed to have them gnashing their teeth and resurrecting all
sorts of lies and bull***.

----------------------------

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/17/AR2008081702193.html?wpisrc=newsletter

Renewable Power's Growth in Colorado Presages National Debate

By Peter Slevin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, August 18, 2008; A01



DENVER -- When Colorado voters were deciding whether to require that
10 percent of the state's electricity come from renewable fuels, the
state's largest utility fought the proposal, warning that any shift
from coal and natural gas would be costly, uncertain and unwise.

Then a funny thing happened. The ballot initiative passed, and Xcel
Energy met the requirement eight years ahead of schedule. And at the
government's urging, its executives quickly agreed to double the
target, to 20 percent.

In Colorado -- a state historically known for natural gas and fights
over drilling -- wind and solar power are fast becoming prominent
parts of the energy mix. Wind capacity has quadrupled in the past 18
months, according to Gov. Bill Ritter (D), and Xcel has become the
largest provider of wind power in the nation.

The politics and economics of energy are shifting here in ways that
foretell debates across the country as states create renewable-energy
mandates and the federal government moves toward limiting carbon
emissions. One advocate calls Colorado "ground zero" for the looming
battle over energy.

Despite a continuing boom, oil and gas companies here are on the
defensive. They are spending heavily as they try to prevent the repeal
of as much as $300 million in annual tax breaks that would be shifted
to investment in renewables and other projects.

The industry, already facing a rebellion among some longtime
supporters angered by its toll on the environment, also finds itself
in a fight against new regulations designed to protect wildlife and
public health from the vast expansion in drilling. Beyond the merits,
the proposals reflect the strengthened hand of environmentalists and
their friends who feel that the fossil-fuel companies have held sway
too long.

"Now is a terrific time for renewables to launch. I hope they get all
the capital they need, and all the great minds and talent. But I don't
want it to come at the expense of the oil and gas industry," said Meg
Collins, president of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association. "As goes
Colorado, so goes the West, as far as this energy policy debate."

State leaders are thrilled with the economic benefits that have come
with the hundreds of new research and manufacturing jobs in pursuit of
alternative power. Yet the fledgling renewables industry is also
facing challenges, from a desire for tax credits of its own to a need
for a stronger transmission grid that will make power more portable.

"The future in Colorado is building wind farms in wheat fields," said
Ritter, a former Denver prosecutor, recalling the 2006 campaign pitch
that helped carry him into the governor's office. "Quite frankly, it's
how we should have been thinking for 10 years."

Ten years ago, Xcel began offering wind-generated electricity, but it
was a niche market for eco-conscious customers willing to pay extra.
That changed in a significant way after 2004, when Xcel lost the
referendum fight.

After legislative efforts failed, proponents of renewable energy
turned to the ballot that year. The initiative, Amendment 37, required
the state's biggest utilities to generate 10 percent of their
electricity from renewable sources. Advocates found themselves facing
off against Xcel, which said it feared for its bottom line.

"We ended up opposing that amendment. In retrospect, I wish we
hadn't," said Frank Prager, Xcel's vice president for environmental
policy. He said utility companies are inherently conservative, yet
find themselves facing a transformation in an industry that, as he put
it, has changed little since Thomas Edison's time.

Voters rejected the utility industry's arguments and approved the
measure, making Colorado the first state to mandate renewable-energy
use at the ballot box. Today, legislatures in more than 25 states have
set prescribed levels, known formally as "renewable portfolio
standards."

"It was one of those cases where the public was ahead of the
politicians," said Tom Plant, Ritter's top energy strategist.

Once Xcel executives began to come to terms with the new rules, they
discovered that federal tax credits made wind power affordable,
especially in relation to rising natural gas prices. The cost of wind
power is relatively constant and provides a hedge against future
emissions regulation, such as the cap-and-trade approach favored by
presidential candidates Barack Obama (D) and John McCain (R).

"It was good for the system," Xcel's Prager said, referring to the
utility's mix of energy sources, "and it was good for the customer."

By the end of 2007, Xcel had met Amendment 37's goal and endorsed
Ritter's request to double it to 20 percent by 2020. That measure
passed the Colorado legislature easily: With the utility on board and
public sentiment clear, the bill collected 50 sponsors in the 65-
member House.

Executives at publicly traded Xcel stress their twin desires to make
money and to insulate the company from the risks of unproven
technology. As Prager put it during an interview in the company's
downtown Denver headquarters: "It's absolutely essential that the
state offer us something that makes it worth our while to be green."

Amendment 37 allows utilities to collect a fee from customers to
invest in renewable fuels; it averages $12.72 a year for a typical
homeowner with a monthly bill of $73. When the renewables goal doubled
last year, so did the fee. Prager said the fee has provided Xcel $37.6
million between March 2006 and July 2008 for capital investment in
wind and solar.

Colorado is adding wind-power capacity at a higher rate than any other
state, its hundreds of turbines delivering one gigawatt of generating
power at the end of 2007. That is triple the total of 12 months
earlier. Six states produce more than one gigawatt with wind, with
Texas far in front and California second.

Solar power remains a small part of the equation in Colorado, in part
because concentrated solar generation is expensive. Xcel is sponsoring
an 80-acre field of photovoltaic panels in the San Luis Valley, a
project expected to provide 8.2 megawatts of electricity, enough to
power about 1,500 homes. But only 4 percent of Xcel's renewable
megawattage is required to come from solar.

Meanwhile, Xcel's latest plan, filed with the Colorado Public
Utilities Commission, calls for retiring two of its aging coal-fired
power generators.

"We've reached this critical point where we're seeing the deployment
of these technologies accelerate," said John Nielsen, an energy
analyst with the nonprofit environmental group Western Resource
Advocates. "There was slow progress over the last decade, and you're
now seeing this tipping point."

Among the signs is the arrival of Vestas, a Danish wind turbine
company, which announced Friday the construction of two more
manufacturing plants and 1,350 new jobs, bringing the company's total
in Colorado to 2,450. ConocoPhillips announced this year that it will
locate its alternative-fuels research operation in the state. The
Colorado-based National Renewable Energy Laboratory is adding 100
jobs.

Colorado's growing political and economic commitment to renewables is
causing fear in the oil and gas industry, which is fighting to keep
its tax breaks and its influence over state rulemaking.

"We're not feeling very cherished," said Collins, whose oil and gas
association represents more than 30 companies. The group objects to an
initiative on the ballot in November; it would eliminate the
industry's 87.5 percent property tax exemption, estimated to cost the
state treasury $230 million to $320 million a year.

If the ballot rule passes, the tax money will be channeled to
renewable fuels, wildlife conservation and education. The industry
also objects to proposed rules that would require greater public
health and environmental protection in areas where drilling takes
place.

"It could have been done in a different way, and things wouldn't have
gotten so heated," Collins said.

Alice Madden, the Democratic majority leader in the Colorado House,
looks at the oil and gas industry today and recalls Xcel before the
passage of Amendment 37. She has little sympathy for Collins's
arguments, especially at a time when oil and gas profits are soaring.

"It's Chicken Little all over again: 'The sky is going to fall,' "
said Madden, who also chairs Western Progress, an advocacy group. "The
oil and gas companies see the writing on the wall, the shift to
renewables. They want to make as much money as they can, right now."

Looking ahead, supporters of alternative fuels are counting on
securing some advantages their fossil-fuel predecessors have enjoyed.
One request is the renewal of a federal tax credit set to expire this
year. Another, Prager said, is "some clear rules on the national
level, especially on climate policy."

With 34,000 active gas wells in Colorado and 28 new permits issued
each day, there is no chance that the oil and gas industry will fade
away soon. And, as powerfully as the wind blows and the sun shines,
the transmission grid for renewable energy is limited and the strength
of the current is unsure.

"Unlike a coal plant or a gas plant," Prager said, "you can't flip a
switch and make the wind blow."

------------------------------------------------------------------------

So we all know the conventional wisdom on energy:
renewables = expensive/unreliable/untested
fossil fuels = cheap/reliable/proven

So why then did Xcel Energy completely change course after being
forced to invest in renewable energy? First and foremost, the
government of Colorado gave them an incentive, allowing them to charge
a small fee (about $12 a year) to be used for capital investment in
renewable energy. This has raised about $37 million over 2 years,
still quite small compared to the approximately $300 million in annual
property tax breaks currently given to oil and gas companies in
Colorado. They get an 87.5% property tax exemption currently,
although this may soon be eliminated. Colorado does have other
incentives for renewable energy, but I sure don't see an 87.5%
property tax break on that list.

Second, only after being forced to invest in renewable energy did Xcel
realize that it made economic sense for them. Renewable energy
provides a way for them to diversify their fuel supply. Solar and
wind power are also convenient in terms of prediction of cost. The
price of sunlight or wind will never go up, unlike the currently
rising prices of natural gas and coal which are used extensively for
large scale electricity generation. Thus, investment in renewable
energy insulates the company from price fluctuations, shortages, or
delivery disruptions of their other fuels. Companies can also more
accurately predict the return on investment they can expect for a
renewable energy project. Critically, they can predict the worst case
scenario with much greater precision. Prices of fuels could
theoretically become infinitely high, or unavailable due to a number
of geopolitical factors including war, trade disputes, increased
demand, or natural disasters. Only local natural disasters could
seriously affect solar or wind energy production, and something like a
drought could potentially provide a temporary boost to solar power
production.

One other important reason why Xcel and energy companies in general
should be looking very hard at adding green capacity is the potential
(and quite probable given the positions of the two presidential
candidates) introduction of a cap and trade carbon credit system.
This looms on the horizon, and companies who can avoid buying carbon
credits or can even sell their own could make billions. Basically
another incentive on a national scale to reduce pollution, but one
that can be predicted and prepared for in advance.

So what lessons should be taken from the current state of renewable
energy in Colorado?

I think the most important lesson is that intelligent public policy
can re-incentivize energy companies in ways that break our addiction
to polluting fossil fuels while still actually helping the bottom line
of the energy companies. Oil, natural gas, and coal are cheap because
billions and billions of dollars of government money have subsidized
the infrastructure and capital investment that makes them cheap.
Public policy has given energy companies the incentives to encourage
the use of fossil fuels. Luckily, our government can change that.
Just as they encouraged fossil fuels, so can they encourage renewable
energy. Colorado is proof of that. All it takes is political will.
In Colorado, that came in the form of the will of the people.



.