Iowa Global Warming

By Dave DeWitte
The Gazette
dave.dewitte@gazettecommunications.com

The $790 million compromise stimulus bill should help get the nation’s wind industry moving again, industry leaders said this week.

The bill included a three-year extension of the production tax credit, which provides an economic incentive to wind developers to invest in new wind farms. It also funds a new grant program to finance up to 30 percent of projects that are not able to benefit from the wind tax credit, and a loan guarantee program.

Backers of the bill include Clipper Windpower, which recently laid off close to 90 employees at its Cedar Rapids wind turbine plant because customers were not able to obtain financing.

Douglas Pertz, Clipper’s CEO, said the three-year extension of the production tax credit is key for the industry’s growth, because previous one-year extensions haven’t provided a long enough window of certainty for project financing.

“We can now plan better,” Pertz said.

The $7.5 billion loan guarantee program should help “prime the pump” for project financing in tight credit markets, Pertz added.

The American Wind Energy Association also praised the agreement.

“The renewable energy provisions in the final bill will stimulate economic and job growth in the wind industry,” said Greg Whetstone, the association’s senior director of governmental affairs. He called the bill a “a critical down payment on long-term policies needed to meet the President’s ambitious renewable energy goals, enhance America’s energy security, grow our economy and reduce global warming pollution.”

U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, sometimes referred to as the father of the wind energy tax credit, reportedly favored an even longer five-year extension of the credit.

Pertz said the stimulus bill doesn’t solve all of the wind industry’s challenges, but certainly helps. He said it could take all of 2009 for the impact of the bill and other federal interactions to begin to thaw financial markets enough that business gets back up to last year’s levels at Clipper.

An energy bill expected to come up before Congress this spring could further improve the prospects for green energy, Pertz added.

Read the article here

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 13, 2009

Recovery Act Invests $9.3 Billion to Expand High-Speed Rail in America

The final version of the Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act now before Congress includes an unprecedented $8 billion investment in high-speed rail. In addition, Amtrak will receive $1.3 billion to rebuild trains and improve its capacity.

“We commend President Obama and Congress for helping to get America moving again with modern trains,” said Howard Learner, Executive Director of the Environmental Law & Policy Center. “Investing in high-speed rail projects will put people to work quickly, create new economic opportunities, increase mobility and reduce traffic congestion and pollution.”

The $8 billion made available through the Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act will be awarded competitively to states to improve passenger rail service, primarily on those corridors where 110 mph service is proposed. Funds can also be used on conventional rail projects that relieve congestion. The Midwest is very well positioned, with federally designated high-speed rail corridors radiating out in a hub-and-spoke network from Chicago to St. Louis, Cleveland, Detroit, Milwaukee, Madison and the Twin Cities.

“The Environmental Law & Policy Center has long called for the development of a Midwest high-speed rail network. Governors and state Departments of Transportation have embraced high-speed rail as modern, fast, comfortable and convenient. We have done the homework and prep work. These projects are now ready to build,” said Learner. “We look forward to working with the states to meet Congress’s challenge to rebuild America with cleaner transportation.”

“Congress has moved on the right track toward economic recovery,” said Learner. “Investing in modern, high-speed rail is an important down payment on America’s transportation future.”

###

NOTE: Due to very high web traffic, the bill itself is difficult to download from Congress’s
website. ELPC has made the documents available on its website at: http://elpc.org/american-recovery-and-reinvestment-information

The Environmental Law and Policy Center is the Midwest’s leading public interest environmental legal advocacy and eco-business innovation organization.

www.elpc.org

There’s much to like in Obama’s plan. But there are two important ways he may have to go further. Most economists agree that what finally pulled the U.S. out of the Great Depression was military spending for World War II. Some liberals argue that if the Roosevelt administration had not abandoned a Keynesian stimulus strategy in 1937-38, the U.S. might have gotten out of the depression without a war. But in 1936, unemployment was still at 16.9 percent; by 1942, after two years of war spending, it was 4.7 percent, strongly indicating that it was war spending that did it. I am not suggesting that the United States start a world war in order to solve the world’s economic problem. But I am suggesting a strategy that could be called the fiscal equivalent of war.

It would consist not merely of updating or repairing the nation’s infrastructure, but in undertaking massive new investments that would expand the scope of American industry, and address other urgent problems in the process: global warming, over-reliance on petroleum, and the need to revive America’s domestic manufacturing capabilities–not just to provide jobs, but also to provide tradeable goods that can reduce the country’s current account deficit.

One area that is ripe for such investment–and that is not, from what I have seen, a declared priority of the Obama administration–is high-speed rail. Amtrak’s Acela trains–the closest thing we have to one–average less than 100 mph between Washington D.C. and Boston, whereas trains in Western Europe and Japan go more than twice as fast. Many of them also run on electricity. They would be the most energy-efficient and quickest means of getting between places like Boston and New York, or Los Angeles and San Francisco. But they would require a massive investment. For instance, installing high-speed rail in the Northeast corridor could cost about $32 billion, while California’s high-speed rail system would require up to $40 billion. A system that would address the other areas of the country could easily raise the cost to the hundreds of billions. The House transportation and infrastructure committee has currently proposed $5 billion in stimulus funds for intercity rail–not even a down payment on what it would cost to convert the U.S. to high-speed rail.

Investing in high-speed rails would be very expensive, but unlike tax cuts–the benefits of which can be siphoned off in the purchase of imported goods–the money spent would go directly to reviving American industry and improving the country’s trade balance. That doesn’t just mean jobs creating dedicated tracks or new rail stations: Though the U.S. abandoned train manufacturing decades ago to the French, Germans, Canadians, and Japanese, this kind of production could be undertaken by our ailing auto companies or aircraft companies–if the federal and state governments were to place orders. And building trains that would run on electricity would be a paradigmatic example of the “green jobs” that Obama often touts.

Excerpt from a larger article – read the full story here

What a day, again. I’m ready to ‘crash’ right now, but the effort expended over the past few days is worth it. Florida is the new college football champion – which wouldn’t be something I’d blog about, other than I was talking about it with Gov. Culver a couple of hours ago. Talking football with the Gov is fun, after all, he knows the sport. But more fun was talking about the future of renewable energy and passenger rail service in Iowa. He’s (obviously, and also thankfully!) a champion for wind energy, and is really positive about extending rail service in the Midwest rail network into Iowa. Nice – but he’ll still need support to get it done. As soon as there’s a need for your help I’ll let you know. Be ready!

The reason I’m so tired, though, is because we’ve continued to work on expanding our network and making new and exciting possibilities a reality – to the point that we’re opening a new office! Our staff and ‘volunteer stakeholders’ (what I like to think of as ‘our superstars’) have got so much going on that we’re moving into a new place right now. Which means we’ve needed a lot of new office gear. It’s a done deal now, the office is full and furnished. And I’m exhausted.

One last thing of note, though. As I write this, I’m watching IPTV political coverage about the economic recovery package. Listening to Pres-elect Obama, Speaker Pelosi, and now Senate Minority Leader McConnell (full disclosure – I went to the McConnell School of Political Leadership in college), there are a lot of opinions about how far to go to help the economy. Most are pretty encouraging. Overall, I think the incoming President has a good grip on how to keep the economy afloat while looking out for our future.

Iowans, especially, seem to ‘get it’ – spending tens of billions on things that don’t ensure the safety of our planet and country OR even ensure we stay competitive in the world’s developing new energy economy would be insanity. Iowans are still keeping it real.

As tough as things look, there’s an opportunity to spend money on not only saving jobs, but also keep us innovating and keep our children’s futures in mind. To do otherwise would be, well, crazy. But we’re going to need your help to make sure the folks we’ve elected to represent us understand… don’t be crazy – be proactive, and be looking out for our future. If not before, now is the time.

Andrew

The scent of fast money in Washington has all manner of corporate interests scrambling to show they can create jobs, especially green ones. The prize is a slice of the Obama Administration’s stimulus package, expected to range from $675 billion to $775 billion in scale. But the President-elect’s transition team is warning interest groups that they won’t see any of the money unless their pet projects meet strict criteria.

First, the projects must be “shovel-ready”—that is, ready to go immediately. “They told us that for business to get anything, we have to prove there’s a short-term job impact—within six months,” explains Brent Erickson, vice-president of the Biotechnology Industry Assn. (BIO), which is pushing for biofuels production incentives. But the projects can’t put Uncle Sam on the hook to spend money for more than a year or two. “They have to be temporary, not creating a permanent need for funding,” says Dow Chemical (DOW) lobbyist Peter Molinaro.
A “Feeding Frenzy” of Proposals

Hiring ditch diggers would get shovels in the ground fast, of course. But Obama’s team is most interested in projects that will speed America toward a greener, cleaner future, reducing both energy dependence and the emissions that cause global warming.

Read the full article here