Green Energy Infrastructure Investment Bill of 2008

[Ebowed]

Green Energy Infrastructure Investment Act of 2008

Whereas the revenue expected from the FY 2009 component ($5 per metric tonne of a total $10 per metric tonne tax) of the domestic Carbon Tax is expected to be an estimated $30 billion, and;

Whereas the Atlasian Senate finds that this environmental-based impact fee is best spent through investment in new mass transit options and research into alternative energy, and;

Whereas significant investment into "green energy" will lead to improvement of clean technologies and better "economies of scale" in private sector power generating;

Therefore be it resolved that:

1.   Funding Allocation. Atlasia shall dedicate 50% of the FY2009 carbon tax component ($2.5 per metric tonne), or $15 billion ($15,000,000,000), as a one time grant towards the new construction of renewable energy power generating plants.
Said funds shall be apportioned as follows:
Hydroelectric Power, $2.5 billion
Geothermal Power, $2.5 billion
Wind Power, $5 billion
Solar Power, $5 billion
2.   Construction Locations. The generator locations funded by this bill shall be, as best possible, divided evenly across the regions according to logistics, population, need, and cost effectiveness.
3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $20 per MWh for hydroelectric, $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 3.01 × 10⁸ MWh of electricity, or approximately 1.03% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 10¹⁰ MWh.


Sponsor: Conor Flynn

[CultureKing]

I would like to offer up the following amendment:
----
Green Energy Infrastructure Investment Act of 2008

Whereas the revenue expected from the FY 2009 component ($5 per metric tonne of a total $10 per metric tonne tax) of the domestic Carbon Tax is expected to be an estimated $30 billion, and;

Whereas the Atlasian Senate finds that this environmental-based impact fee is best spent through investment in new mass transit options and research into alternative energy, and;

Whereas significant investment into "green energy" will lead to improvement of clean technologies and better "economies of scale" in private sector power generating;

Therefore be it resolved that:

1.   Funding Allocation. Atlasia shall dedicate 50% of the FY2009 carbon tax component ($2.5 per metric tonne), or $15 billion ($15,000,000,000), as a one time grant towards the new construction of renewable energy power generating plants.
Said funds shall be apportioned as follows:
Nuclear Power, $1.5 billion
Geothermal Power, $2.5 billion
Wind Power, $5.5 billion
Solar Power, $5.5 billion
2.   Construction Locations. The generator locations funded by this bill shall be, as best possible, divided evenly across the regions according to logistics, population, need, and cost effectiveness.
3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $20 per MWh for hydroelectric, $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 3.01 × 108 MWh of electricity, or approximately 1.03% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 1010 MWh.

-----

While Hydroelectric is renewable it is not necessarily eco-friendly (in fact in some areas such as on the Snake river there is some serious consideration of removing existing dams). Nuclear power if done correctly is a great source of energy.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

I'm a bit hesitant about swapping in nuclear power, if only because this bill was designed to cater to renewable energy sources.  I do not believe that nuclear is a good long-term investment.  (Though I will still sign the bill if the amendment passes.)

[minionofmidas]

The be-all and end-all of all Energy planning must be reduction in energy spent, not alternative sources. While some sources are better than others, none are strictly speaking *good things*.

[Verily]

I echo the President's concerns. While hydroelectric is really not a viable alternative for the most (the most reasonable dam locations having already been constructed), nuclear is not a long-term solution. I would rather see the funds redistributed across the other three categories.

[CultureKing]

I echo the President's concerns. While hydroelectric is really not a viable alternative for the most (the most reasonable dam locations having already been constructed), nuclear is not a long-term solution. I would rather see the funds redistributed across the other three categories.

Great! I am completely fine with that, I just thought the bill would have more support if nuclear power was included as an option. In that case I withdraw my previously proposed amendment and instead offer up this new one:

----------------------------------
Green Energy Infrastructure Investment Act of 2008

Whereas the revenue expected from the FY 2009 component ($5 per metric tonne of a total $10 per metric tonne tax) of the domestic Carbon Tax is expected to be an estimated $30 billion, and;

Whereas the Atlasian Senate finds that this environmental-based impact fee is best spent through investment in new mass transit options and research into alternative energy, and;

Whereas significant investment into "green energy" will lead to improvement of clean technologies and better "economies of scale" in private sector power generating;

Therefore be it resolved that:

1.   Funding Allocation. Atlasia shall dedicate 50% of the FY2009 carbon tax component ($2.5 per metric tonne), or $15 billion ($15,000,000,000), as a one time grant towards the new construction of renewable energy power generating plants.
Said funds shall be apportioned as follows:
Geothermal Power, $3 billion
Wind Power, $6 billion
Solar Power, $6 billion
2.   Construction Locations. The generator locations funded by this bill shall be, as best possible, divided evenly across the regions according to logistics, population, need, and cost effectiveness.
3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 3.01 × 108 MWh of electricity, or approximately 1.03% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 1010 MWh.

-----
The numbers for section 3 need to be updated though, that is the only thing that I can see necessitating change.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 3.01 × 108 MWh of electricity, or approximately 1.03% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 1010 MWh.

-----
The numbers for section 3 need to be updated though, that is the only thing that I can see necessitating change.

Here are the updated numbers per the amendment:

3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 2.12 × 10⁸ MWh of electricity, or approximately 0.72% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 10¹⁰ MWh.

[Torie]

Why not levy a tax on disfavored energy sources (what sources are disfavored and why?), and let the market decide what to pursue as alternatives? Government is not the best vehicle for parsing what alternatives are most reasonably calculated to generate the most bang for the buck , from either research or production. I have a bias against overnment micro management.

[Torie]

3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 3.01 × 108 MWh of electricity, or approximately 1.03% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 1010 MWh.

-----
The numbers for section 3 need to be updated though, that is the only thing that I can see necessitating change.

Here are the updated numbers per the amendment:

3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 2.12 × 10⁸ MWh of electricity, or approximately 0.72% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 10¹⁰ MWh.

What is the source of all of those numbers?

[CultureKing]

3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 3.01 × 108 MWh of electricity, or approximately 1.03% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 1010 MWh.

-----
The numbers for section 3 need to be updated though, that is the only thing that I can see necessitating change.

Here are the updated numbers per the amendment:

3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 2.12 × 10⁸ MWh of electricity, or approximately 0.72% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 10¹⁰ MWh.

What is the source of all of those numbers?

I don't know, perhaps you should ask Conor as he is the original sponsor of the bill.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 3.01 × 108 MWh of electricity, or approximately 1.03% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 1010 MWh.

-----
The numbers for section 3 need to be updated though, that is the only thing that I can see necessitating change.

Here are the updated numbers per the amendment:

3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 2.12 × 10⁸ MWh of electricity, or approximately 0.72% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 10¹⁰ MWh.

What is the source of all of those numbers?

I don't know, perhaps you should ask Conor as he is the original sponsor of the bill.

I'm actually the author; Conor just introduced it for me.

I'll try to find the source of the data, but it was found by just doing a Google search for the per megawatt cost of various energy sources.

Which brings us around to the reason for this bill: While I agree that the free market typically does a good job with this stuff, one of the major obstacles to wider scale wind and solar use is economies of scale.

Only with significant-sized investments such as the ones made in the bill can we bring down the cost of electricity per megawatt down to the levels specified in the bill.  In other words, we risk having a sub-optimal return on an investment, but the trade off is making renewable energy less expensive on the whole.

[CultureKing]

3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 3.01 × 108 MWh of electricity, or approximately 1.03% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 1010 MWh.

-----
The numbers for section 3 need to be updated though, that is the only thing that I can see necessitating change.

Here are the updated numbers per the amendment:

3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 2.12 × 10⁸ MWh of electricity, or approximately 0.72% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 10¹⁰ MWh.

What is the source of all of those numbers?

I don't know, perhaps you should ask Conor as he is the original sponsor of the bill.

I'm actually the author; Conor just introduced it for me.

I'll try to find the source of the data, but it was found by just doing a Google search for the per megawatt cost of various energy sources.

Which brings us around to the reason for this bill: While I agree that the free market typically does a good job with this stuff, one of the major obstacles to wider scale wind and solar use is economies of scale.

Only with significant-sized investments such as the ones made in the bill can we bring down the cost of electricity per megawatt down to the levels specified in the bill.  In other words, we risk having a sub-optimal return on an investment, but the trade off is making renewable energy less expensive on the whole.

I completely agree, it is the investment in the technologies that will drive down costs and make it more affordable for cheap, clean energy in the future. Basically the government needs to help jumpstart the move to renewable energy.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Cost of Solar Energy:

Shrinking the cost for solar power, 11 May 2007

You must be logged in to read this quote.

$0.11/kWh × 1000kWh/MWh = $110/MWh.


Cost of Wind Energy:

Wind Power (wikipedia)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Cost of Geothermal Energy:

Geothermal Energy Association

You must be logged in to read this quote.

$0.055–$0.075/kWh × 1000kWh/MWh = $55–$75/MWh

[Bacon King]

I'm liking the bill, though would prefer a lack of both nuclear and hydroelectric.

[minionofmidas]

I'm not voting for any additional subsidies for the construction of nuclear power plants. Besides everything else, ample - rather too ample - subsidies for that are already available.

[CultureKing]

Ok, so here is the updated amendment that I would like to introduce:

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

Green Energy Infrastructure Investment Act of 2008

Whereas the revenue expected from the FY 2009 component ($5 per metric tonne of a total $10 per metric tonne tax) of the domestic Carbon Tax is expected to be an estimated $30 billion, and;

Whereas the Atlasian Senate finds that this environmental-based impact fee is best spent through investment in new mass transit options and research into alternative energy, and;

Whereas significant investment into "green energy" will lead to improvement of clean technologies and better "economies of scale" in private sector power generating;

Therefore be it resolved that:

1.   Funding Allocation. Atlasia shall dedicate 50% of the FY2009 carbon tax component ($2.5 per metric tonne), or $15 billion ($15,000,000,000), as a one time grant towards the new construction of renewable energy power generating plants.
Said funds shall be apportioned as follows:
Geothermal Power, $3 billion
Wind Power, $6 billion
Solar Power, $6 billion
2.   Construction Locations. The generator locations funded by this bill shall be, as best possible, divided evenly across the regions according to logistics, population, need, and cost effectiveness.
3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 2.12 × 108 MWh of electricity, or approximately 0.72% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 1010 MWh.

[Torie]

I want nuke plants in the mix. No nukes, no vote.

[Verily]

I want nuke plants in the mix. No nukes, no vote.

Nuclear power is a completely different issue. As the President has said, this bill is designed to promote the improvement of cost efficiency of these industries. Nuclear power already has established economies of scale (created, incidentally, by government spending) that we do not need to subsidize at this point.

You are being irrational.

[Torie]

Well, there is the clean energy issue, and then the economies of scale issues. I don't really see how the economies of scale would work here. It is not that the size of individual locations would be increased. What is the evidence that there are greater of economies of scale to be had by building more solar panels[?] The money is not going to research, but to construction. [is it not]?

On the other hand, if the issue is clean energy, nuclear energy is clean. I don't mind spending some money on research, and demonstration projects with the three listed sources, but if the thrust is construction, to generate more energy, nuclear power should be part of the mix. It is the one proven source as compared to the other three, that has the demonstrated capability generating a lot of energy, and making a really material difference in reducing the use of fossil fuels for power generation.

So with all respect, I don't think I am being irrational.

[CultureKing]

Well, there is the clean energy issue, and then the economies of scale issues. I don't really see how the economies of scale would work here. It is not that the size of individual locations would be increased. What is the evidence that there are greater of economies of scale to be had by building more solar panels. The money is not going to research, but to construction?

On the other hand, if the issue is clean energy, nuclear energy is clean. I don't mind spending some money on research, and demonstration projects with the three listed sources, but if the thrust is construction, to generate more energy, nuclear power should be part of the mix. It is the one proven source as compared to the other three, that has the demonstrated capability generating a lot of energy, and making a really material difference in reducing the use of fossil fuels for power generation.

So with all respect, I don't think I am being irrational.

I completely agree that we need nuclear power. However I think that it should be done in a separate bill (for example something setting a goal of 25 new nuclear plants in the next 25 years or something).

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Bumping for Lewis—an amendment to the bill was proposed here weeks ago but not yet voted on.

[minionofmidas]

Argh. Completely overlooked this one.

[minionofmidas]

The vote is on the amendment to replace the original text with this one:

Green Energy Infrastructure Investment Act of 2008

Whereas the revenue expected from the FY 2009 component ($5 per metric tonne of a total $10 per metric tonne tax) of the domestic Carbon Tax is expected to be an estimated $30 billion, and;

Whereas the Atlasian Senate finds that this environmental-based impact fee is best spent through investment in new mass transit options and research into alternative energy, and;

Whereas significant investment into "green energy" will lead to improvement of clean technologies and better "economies of scale" in private sector power generating;

Therefore be it resolved that:

1.   Funding Allocation. Atlasia shall dedicate 50% of the FY2009 carbon tax component ($2.5 per metric tonne), or $15 billion ($15,000,000,000), as a one time grant towards the new construction of renewable energy power generating plants.
Said funds shall be apportioned as follows:
Geothermal Power, $3 billion
Wind Power, $6 billion
Solar Power, $6 billion
2.   Construction Locations. The generator locations funded by this bill shall be, as best possible, divided evenly across the regions according to logistics, population, need, and cost effectiveness.
3.   Estimate of Impact. It is estimated that the cost of generating capacity is approximately $56 per MWh for wind, $60 per MWh for geothermal, and $110 per MWh for large-scale solar facilities. As provided for in Section 1, this bill will directly lead to the generation of 2.12 × 108 MWh of electricity, or approximately 0.72% of the current Atlasian demand of 2.93 × 1010 MWh.

Please vote aye, nay, or abstain.

[Bacon King]

aye

[minionofmidas]

Aye