MegaVote: MO 3rd, 10/4/2010

On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 6:28 PM, <megavote@mailmanager.net> wrote:

presented by: Solar Nation

October 4, 2010 In this MegaVote for Missouri's 3rd Congressional District: Recent Congressional Votes Senate: Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 House: NASA Authorization Act of 2010 House: Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 Editor's Note: The House is in recess until Monday, November 15, 2010. The Senate will hold a series of pro forma sessions over the next month. Recent Senate Votes Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 - Vote Passed (69-30, 1 Not Voting) The Senate passed this measure funding government operations through December 3, 2010. The 2011 fiscal year began on October 1, 2010 with none of the annual spending bills completed. The House passed the measure a short time later and President Obama signed it into law on September 30. Sen. Christopher Bond voted YES......send e-mail or see bio Sen. Claire McCaskill voted YES......send e-mail or see bio Recent House Votes NASA Authorization Act of 2010 - Vote Passed (304-118, 10 Not Voting) The House gave final approval to this bill authorizing $58.4 billion in NASA spending over the next three fiscal years. The president is expected to sign the bill which largely follows the administration's plan for NASA. Rep. Russ Carnahan voted YES......send e-mail or see bio Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 - Vote Passed (228-194, 10 Not Voting) The House gave final approval to this measure funding government operations through December 3, 2010. The 2011 fiscal year began on October 1, 2010 with none of the annual spending bills completed. The president signed it into law on September 30. Rep. Russ Carnahan voted YES......send e-mail or see bio

--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com

Taking Advantage of Expiring Fed Tax Incentives

This is the year. If you've been sitting on home fixes, waiting for the right time, it's 2010. Lucrative federal tax incentives are set to expire at the end of 2010, meaning these projects will never be more affordable. The government will cover 30% of the costs, in most cases, and investments in energy efficiency generally pay for themselves over time, since you'll be paying for less wasted energy year after year. (Except where noted, taxpayers can qualify for no more than $1,500, regardless of the total cost of multiple qualifying projects were performed in 2009 and 2010.)

Measure twice, cut once. A professional home energy audit can help you target the most critical fixes first, or do your own energy audit to identify the most cost-effective fixes. Before you do the work, check this database of state incentives, so you're sure to take advantage of the full range of credits, which in some states require energy audits or installation by accredited professionals.

One of the most cost-effective home improvements, good insulation can save up to 30% on heating and cooling costs, since you won't be paying for heating or cooling air that slips out through poorly insulated walls, floors and ceilings. If you choose approved insulation (meeting International Energy Conservation Code standards), you can have 30% of the cost, up to $1,500, taken off your 2010 income tax bill. If you have the wherewithal, install the insulation yourself, because the cost of labor does not qualify for the tax credit.

If your home has old windows and doors, you're paying a premium for them as hot air in the winter, and cool air in the summer, escapes to the outdoors. But replacing doors and, especially, windows, is an expensive fix that won't pay itself off in energy savings for years. If you do the work in 2010, though, you can get 30% of the cost reimbursed at tax time, up to $1,500. You just have to choose energy efficient equipment that meets standards. Be aware that the federal government will not reimburse for any of the cost of labor.

Whether it's a refrigerator, a furnace or an A/C unit, chances are good that 2010 will be the best year to replace an old clunker with a new efficient model. Efficient furnaces, central air conditioners, water heaters and other HVAC standbys qualify for a tax credit equal to 30% of the cost, up to $1,500.
A home "cash for clunkers" program is also gearing up at the state level, so look for local incentives to defray the cost of buying certain Energy Star appliances like clothes washers, dishwashers, freezers, refrigerators and small A/C units). Furnaces and water heaters are the biggest energy users overall, while refrigerators are typically the biggest electricity hogs.

Both Energy Star-rated metal roofs with "pigmented coatings" and asphalt roofs with "cooling granules" will cut down on cooling costs in the summer by reflecting more of the sun's heat. It's also a dark horse solution to global warming, since cities absorb so much heat through dark roofing materials. If your roof is ready for a replacement, then go with one of these materials, and the government will reimburse 30% of your material costs, up to $1,500. Sorry, labor not included.

Unlike the energy efficiency projects, home solar tax credits extend beyond 2010, to 2016. So plan now to take advantage of generous tax credits that will pay 30% of the cost of home solar projects, including solar water heaters. Unlike other credits, these credits are not capped at $1,500. Additionally, communities in at least 15 states are beginning to offer so-called PACE loans that are paid off incrementally at tax time by whomever owns the house. The annual cost -- typically less than the energy savings provided by the investment -- is shared by successive owners of the home.

A smart meter makes realtime energy usage data available so you can easily cut out waste. Before long, the meters will automatically cut waste by flipping on appliances to run only when the cost of electricity is low. Ask your local utility if it's offering smart meters, and look for government incentives soon. The Obama Administration has set a goal of increasing the use of smart meters five-fold to 40 million American homes by 2015.

Read more: http://www.thedailygreen.com/green-homes/latest/resolutions-new-years-2010?click=getstarted#ixzz11QrhtcIR

:

--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com

What Will It Take to Achieve a US Renewable Portfolio Standard?

What Will It Take to Achieve a US Renewable Portfolio Standard?

I was keeping a tally sheet at last week's Renewable Energy Finance Forum, so I could let readers know the issue that was brought up most often and granted the most overall prominence. The clear winner: China is eating our lunch in the migration to renewables. Inexplicably and tragically, the US is content to drop further and further behind in the development of energy technology with each passing week. While China is hiring, researching, developing, importing, exporting — and dominating the world of 21^st Century energy, we seem to be content to argue and point fingers at each other.

As Winston Churchhill observed, "America will always do the right thing — after it has exhausted all other options."   But can anyone see this moving anytime soon — for any reason — least of all because it's "the right thing?"   None of the promises of renewable energy: jobs, national security, addressing concerns about peak oil and the climate issue — seem to motivate action on our part.

Perhaps the most visible proof of our nation's abdication of technology leadership is the absence of a federal renewable energy portfolio standard (RPS). What are we to make of the fact that we seem to be a million miles from such a piece of legislation? Clearly, it's the result of leaders' pandering for votes, while scrupulously avoiding areas of controversy that might be used against them.

And now, with the recent Supreme Court decision enabling corporations to provide unlimited funding to anonymous entities that can, in turn, spend millions of campaign advertising dollars to defeat perceived enemies, our leaders need to be even more careful than they were when their enemies had to identify themselves and use their own money to slander opponents.  This, of course, is another true disaster for those of us who care about free and fair elections and continue (foolishly?) to hold out hope for the effectiveness of the democratic process.

But enough about that. What about the federal RPS? Is there any hope that we can re-establish ourselves as the leader in energy technology? Here's another tidbit from the conference: Adding nuclear power into the mix of renewables might provide the political muscle to pass a federal RPS.  After all, it IS carbon-free.  Proponents claim, "Nuclear energy presents a safe, clean, and inexpensive alternative to other methods of producing electricity. Nuclear waste can either be reprocessed or disposed of safely."

But is any of this true? No. Do most renewable energy supporters believe that nuclear should be included in the list of clean energy technologies? Of course not.  

But who cares?  In the 10-or-so years it takes to plan and permit the next nuclear reactor, the cost/benefit of photovoltaics, wind, concentrating solar power, geothermal, and biomass will have improved to such a point that nuclear will be completely irrelevant.

Go on; invite them to the party. Give them all the political support they've worked so long and hard to purchase.  In the end, it won't matter. Despite the rhetoric, you'll never see another nuke deployed in the US.

Scotty: I hope the Authors correct in his thinking that: "...you'll never see another nuke deployed in the US"  I worry about the:

1. Waste of Nuclear Plants and the supposed: reprocessing or disposed of safely.
2. Nuclear Silos being Targets for Terrorism
3. The Overall Costs of a Nuclear system. 
   

--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com

# RENEWABLE SOURCES NOW PROVIDE 11.14% OF U.S. ENERGY PRODUCTION AND 10.91% OF NET GRID-CONNECTED

U.S. Energy Information Administration most recent review.

• RENEWABLE  SOURCES  NOW PROVIDE 11.14% OF  U.S.  ENERGY  PRODUCTION AND  10.91%  OF  NET  GRID-CONNECTED  ELECTRICAL GENERATION 
• RENEWABLES NOW NECK-IN-NECK WITH NUCLEAR POWER

Washington DC -- According to the most recent issue of the "Monthly Energy Review" by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), renewable energy sources (i.e., biofuels, biomass, geothermal, hydroelectric, solar, wind) provided 11.14% of domestic U.S. energy production during the first six months of 2010 – the latest time-frame for which data has been published.  

 

This continues the steady growth trend for renewable energy.  Renewables accounted for 10.71% of domestic energy production during the first six months of 2009 and 10.35% during the first six months of 2008.   

 

Renewable energy sources provided 4.106 quadrillion Btus between January 1, 2010 and June 30, 2010 - an increase of 4.91% over the first half of 2009 and an increase of 8.37% over the first half of 2008.  The largest single renewable energy source was biomass (including biofuels) which accounted for 50.66% of renewable energy production, followed by hydropower at 32.56%. Wind, geothermal, and solar sources provided 10.91%, 4.53%, and 1.32% of the total renewable energy output respectively.     

 

Moreover, renewable energy's contribution to the nation's domestic energy production is now almost equal to that provided by nuclear power. Nuclear power accounted for 11.19% of domestic energy production during the first half of 2010 - compared to 11.14% from renewables. But while renewable sources continue to expand, nuclear output in 2010 dropped - declining by 1.3% from its comparable 2009 level.

 

"When Congress resumes its debate on pending energy and climate legislation in the post-election lame-duck session, it would do well to take note of the clear trends in the nation's changing energy mix," said Ken Bossong, Executive Director of the SUN DAY Campaign.  "Renewable energy has proven itself to be a solid investment - growing rapidly and nipping at the heels of the stagnant nuclear power industry."

 

And according to EIA's latest "Electric Power Monthly," renewable energy sources provided 10.91% of net U.S. electrical generation for the same time period. Non-hydro renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass, geothermal, solar, wind) provided nearly 4.07% of domestic U.S. electrical generation during the first half of 2010. Hydropower provided an additional 6.84% of net U.S. electrical generation for the same time period.

 

Moreover, electrical generation from non-hydro renewable sources continues to grow rapidly. According to EIA data, electricity from biomass, geothermal, solar, and wind during the first six months of 2010 increased by 13.0% over the amount generated during the first half of 2009. Wind-generated electricity increased by 21.4%; electricity from solar thermal and photovoltaics rose by 16.4%; wood & other forms of biomass rose by 4.5%; and geothermal output increased by 0.8%.

 

The U.S. Energy Information Administration released its most recent "Monthly Energy Review" on September 30, 2010.  It can be found at:  http://www.eia.gov/emeu/mer/contents.html .  The relevant charts from which the data above are extrapolated are Tables 1.2 and 10.1.  EIA released its most recent "Electric Power Monthly" on September 15, 2010; see:  http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html. The relevant charts are Tables ES1.A, ES1.B and 1.1.A.

Source: Sun Day Campaign

--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com