Follow this blog:
RSS

Oil, wind subsidies on the chopping block in U.S.

By | February 16, 2012, 9:43 PM PST

President Obama's budget shifts billions away from fossil fuels over the next ten years.

President Obama's budget shifts billions away from fossil fuels over the next ten years.

Election year posturing in Washington has the parties locked into competing energy policy priorities with President Obama favoring a multi-billion dollar reduction in oil subsidies and Congressional Republicans content to allow wind energy tax credits expire.

The Presidential budget request, while not the actual U.S. budget, is required by law and outlines the administration’s spending requests to persuade Congress to act. President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2013 budget outlines a ten-year plan to achieve greater energy independence.

Obama would shift monies from fossil fuels to support renewable energy and conservation programs. The budget proposes cutting more than US$40 billion in oil, coal, and natural gas subsidies. Funds would transfer to raise alternative energy and energy efficiency spending by 25 percent.

Department of Energy research to discover safer ways to obtain natural gas from shale formations would receive more support. Other focus areas include carbon capture, pipeline safety, and more funding for nuclear safety.

The President called for an “all of the above” approach to domestic energy production in his annual State of the Union address that included expanded natural gas production and offshore oil drilling.

“We need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil by ending the subsidies for oil companies and doubling down on clean energy that generates jobs and strengthens our security,” the President told a crowd at Northern Virginia Community College in Annandale, Virginia. Several environmental groups applauded the President.

But the American Petroleum Institute was perturbed by the President’s proposal, telling reporters on a call afterward, “The president’s 2013 budget plan returns to the well of bad ideas and back tracks on his State of the Union commitment.”

Congressional Republicans are far liklier to ally with fossil fuel producers and are adverse to renewing renewable energy subsidies. An effort to extend an income tax credit for wind energy failed yesterday in Congress, leaving the industry bracing for job losses after a boom period.

The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) found that slightly over 6,810 megawatts (MW) were installed domestically in 2011, an increase of 31 percent for the year. 8,300 MW are under construction this year, it says.

“The stakes here could not be clearer. Economic studies have shown that Congressional inaction on the PTC will kill 37,000 American jobs, shutter plants and cancel billions of dollars in private investment,” AWEA CEO Denise Bode said in a statement.

“Congress needs to understand that, with PTC uncertainty, layoffs have already begun and further job losses and even plant closings will accelerate with each month we near expiration in December.”

(Image credit: Whitehouse.gov)

Related on SmartPlanet:

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

David Worthington

About David Worthington

David Worthington is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

David Worthington

David Worthington

Contributing Editor, Energy

David Worthington has written for BetaNews, eWeek, PC World, Technologizer and ZDNet. Formerly, he was a senior editor at SD Times. He holds a degree from Temple University. He is based in New York.

Follow him on Twitter.

David Worthington

David Worthington

David does not have financial holdings that would influence how or what he covers. Occasionally he consults for other companies; should David cover a topic in which a client is involved, he will disclose this fact in his writing. His views do not represent those of ScaleOut Software.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
9
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
+1 Vote
+ -
Frustrating
{bad word} it's frustrating how the R's are standing in the way of the future. There is far more employment available in renewable energy than in fossil fuels but they don't care. Their top priority is to make the current President a one termer. {bad word!!!}
Posted by riverat1
Updated - 17th Feb
+1 Vote
+ -
True
But, there also D's who do the same. It is more of a quandary that politics is too much a part of policy, we hear mostly posturing but nothing with any substance from the majority of the politicians.

The future of oil is going to be increasing costs to produce decreasing amounts of oil. We should be trying alternative energy, the future for alternative energy is going to be a mix with some being dead ends and others could lead to decreasing costs to produce increasing amounts of energy.
Posted by sboverie
17th Feb
+2 Votes
+ -
Money's the problem.
Considering that most senators and congress critters have to spend half their time dialing for dollars to fund their reelection campaigns they have to keep those people funding them happy.
Posted by riverat1
Updated - 17th Feb
0 Votes
+ -
Stop subsidizing everything.
Don't you get it? Subsidies build political constituencies and a feedback loop that is almost impossible to break. In 100 years, everything could be running on cold fusion, and yet they'll still be subsidizing ethanol.

Speaking of stupid, the President's fantasy budget increases the subsidy for a Chevy Volt up to $10,000 per car. And who is buying the Volt? People who on average make over $140,000 per year. (AKA, the 1%-ers) Perhaps this is an issue that even the Tea Party and Occupy folks can agree on...
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
17th Feb
0 Votes
+ -
And internalize the externalities
In the US the cost of fossil fuels don't include most of the externalities. The cost of excess health care from the pollution they produce, the cost of maintaining the worlds largest military (the US spends more on the military than the next 15+ countries combined). If we paid what it really costs us gasoline would probably be around $8/gallon and coal would double in cost.
Posted by riverat1
18th Feb
+1 Vote
+ -
That is true.
It is very difficult to cost the externalities. However, your military argument is mostly non-sequitur.

Basically, we spend more than the next 15 countries because since WWII, the US has taken over the role as "global police". (Most of the other world powers willingly ceded to us their role in order to focus on domestic socialism) This would be the case even if it were not for the resources required to police the flow of oil.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
20th Feb
0 Votes
+ -
stop criticizing everything.
1, the point of increasing subsidies on the volt would be to lower cost per unit and make it more affordable to more prospective middle-income car buyers (dunno how you could miss that, though it seems all right-wing bloggers also have missed that obvious endpoint). Is it really that hard to understand that the people buying the car are the people that can afford it? Lower the price and more people can afford it, leading to more sales in the middle class. Simple econ.
2, cold fusion has essentially already been declared a 'dead' project, no sense in bringing that up.

in conclusion, think more, type less.
Posted by imachainsaw
18th Feb
+1 Vote
+ -
Might I request a little more typing?
Do tell me. Can you provide an example of where subsidies have provided a desirable long-term result?
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
20th Feb
+1 Vote
+ -
Stunning atitudes.
It is amazing how people bash the rich for getting free taxpayer support, until it is justified by being in support of a favorite cause of theirs like solar or wind.

Would you like a side of crow with that serving of hypocrisy?
Posted by Hates Idiots
Updated - 20th Feb
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!