NEWS: Bush Signs New Energy Bill

A new energy bill was signed into law by President Bush on Monday which, among other things, gives away nearly $12 billion in tax subsidies to energy companies, and will extend Daylight Savings Time by one month, and provides loan guarantees for nuclear technology, wind energy and clean coal.




The problem is, in reality, the bill does nothing to extend our resources or eliminate dependence on foreign oil. It would be different if tax subsidies were given away to companies that equaled the amount of money they spent on research and development for alternate energy sources, or a tax-break for every transport vehicle they used that didn't use fossil fuels. But it doesn't. All it will do is extend DST so that people will go to bed an hour earlier, and turn their lights off earlier. However, they will get up the next morning earlier, so I really don't see how this will help anything.

[edit on 8-8-2005 by RockerDom]

[edit on 8-8-2005 by RockerDom]

This bill had so much more potential to fix a whole host of problems the United States faces with regard to energy.

It's a real shame that the highlight of the bill is the DST stuff... talk about wasting an opportunity.

Well, the bill does include loan guarantees to build new things, but loan guarantees are not the same as tax-breaks, and don't truly encourage anything. That's the problem, we need energy companies to want to build these things, but we have to give them proper incentive to do so.

Quote:"A new energy bill was signed into law by President Bush on Monday which, among other things, gives away nearly $12 billion in tax subsidies to energy companies, and will extend Daylight Savings Time by one month, and provides loan guarantees for nuclear technology, wind energy and clean coal. "

What do you all think. Where did Mr Bush get his millions of dollars on the first and second election entry. BIG BUSINESS. And I say he had certain things he had to do for Big Business. Ask former New Jersey Governor C. Whitman Todd. Who quit his office.

Dallas

To expect an oil man to lessen the grip of the oil barrons, is absurd to say the least.

Time to maybe acknowledge we all use more energy than we should. But that would require change and that seems to be too hard for too many people.

Wait, Exxon(or one of those oil companies) made 7.6 BILLION DOLLARS IN PROFIT!!!!! IN 3 MONTHS!!!!!! Now we are giving them 12 billion dollars we don't have? Wha?????

Eh.

This is hardly a Bush only issue. Generations of politicians have ignored our dependency on foreign oil sources, democrats and republicans.

They've all proven quite happy to take take take from the powerful oil companies and their lobbying bodies. Believe me, this is more long term than Dubya. Blaming only one 8 year resident of the white house is stupid. Try more long term thoughts.

[edit on 8-8-2005 by Djarums]

I'm not blaming Bush, and I'm not centering it on him, I apologize if I came across that way. My problem with the bill is not Bush, it's the ongoing lack of leadership when it comes to lessening our dependence on foreign oil. Bush is in a long line of politicians which have done this, but it is not only his fault, nor the fault of only this administration. We, as Americans, need to stand up and say "No more!". When something like this passes it is an insult to all of us, regardless of the Administration's political policy or allegiance.

The blame is on all of us, not one man, one Administration, or one political party. The only way it changes if we make a concentrated effort to do so. However, when something like this passes, it is important that all of us make sure our Congressmen know we do not agree.

quote from source:

Also, beginning in 2007, the measure extends daylight-saving time by one month to save energy.

How does this save energy?
This obviously is benefitting someone, although I'm not sure which lobbyist it would be, but I cannot see how this is going to save me anything on my utility bills.

This bill is nothing but daylight robbery of American tax dollars. Billions given to the energy corporations (who are extremely profitable) in corporate welfare that come from the hard earnt money of the US worker is disgusting and its disgraceful that this bill was allowed to pass.

thanks,
drfunk

How could Bush sign an Energy Bill if he was on vacation?



Anyway, an Energy Bill without ANWR and more production in the US is not good enough.

More subsidies to corn farmers... when are they going to learn that ethanol is not a solution? The only solution is more drilling and more refineries.

I'm not blaming Bush, and I'm not centering it on him, I apologize if I came across that way. My problem with the bill is not Bush, it's the ongoing lack of leadership when it comes to lessening our dependence on foreign oil. Bush is in a long line of politicians which have done this, but it is not only his fault, nor the fault of only this administration. We, as Americans, need to stand up and say "No more!". When something like this passes it is an insult to all of us, regardless of the Administration's political policy or allegiance.

The blame is on all of us, not one man, one Administration, or one political party. The only way it changes if we make a concentrated effort to do so. However, when something like this passes, it is important that all of us make sure our Congressmen know we do not agree.

All I hear is variants on the same thing: "...ongoing lack of leadership when it comes to lessening our dependence on foreign oil."

But I don't hear any advice on how to do it.

If you truly don't understand the engineering and technical aspects of alternate energy, of course, it's easy to say "invest in alternate energy", but inasmuch as energy sources like solar energy, wind energy, biomass, and ethanol simply aren't cost-effective means that talking about alternative energy as though it's going to be some sort of magic whizzbang is a waste of time.

If you want to lessen our dependence on foreign oil -- which is one of the reasons we keep getting involved in these adventures in Israel, Iraq, Kuwait, Egypt, etc. -- then we are either going to have to get more of our own oil out of the grount, or develop a energy producing system to replace oil.

Well, isn't that what the bill is supposed to address?

If you want to get more domestic oil, the government will help subsidize it by giving you as an oil company weenie tax breaks.

If you want to build a nuclear plant (Did you know that 20 percent of our electricity comes from nuclear power and we haven't built a nuclear plant since the esrly seventies?), then the government will subsidize that by providing you as a nuclear company weenie loan guarantees, a cap on liability claims, and relief if you can't finish your project on time.

You get, as a consumer, a tax break if you buy a hybrid car.

So why aren't any of you people coming up with any real alternatives to this bill if you think it's so bogus?

The bill is supposed to address these things, but read these two paragraphs from the story:

"This economy is moving, and what this energy bill does is that it recognizes that we need more affordable and reliability sources of energy," Bush said. "This bill launches an energy strategy for the 21st century and I've really been looking forward to signing it."

But even the bill's sponsors acknowledged the legislation will have little, if any impact, on today's energy prices or less dependence on oil imports.

So, oil prices are going up, and I get a discount on a hybrid car? Is that his solution?
As far as "real solutions", you obviously didn't read my first post, so here it is again:

The problem is, in reality, the bill does nothing to extend our resources or eliminate dependence on foreign oil. It would be different if tax subsidies were given away to companies that equaled the amount of money they spent on research and development for alternate energy sources, or a tax-break for every transport vehicle they used that didn't use fossil fuels. But it doesn't. All it will do is extend DST so that people will go to bed an hour earlier, and turn their lights off earlier. However, they will get up the next morning earlier, so I really don't see how this will help anything.

edited cause i can't spell

[edit on 8-8-2005 by RockerDom]

.
Bush is aligned with the evil interests of Big malignant oil companies.

Sh*t in, Sh*t out.

'FREE!' With every gallon of gas you get a few drops of pure soldier's blood.

What a sad place America is under the NeoCons.
.

Why doesn`t he push for solar energy? each day , enough solar energy reaches the earth to power the world for a year.

If everywhere with a flat roof had a 1 kilowatt solar panel (9M²) and a warm water solar heater , then the power problems would be addressed!

[edit on 9-8-2005 by Harlequin]

like the AWB, another worthless bit of lawmaking.

It locked down the Alaskan oil reserves, now we can't use them. You think the Chinese will be considerate of the area when they roll over us in a few decades when we can no longer fuel our military? At least if we did it there would be some marginal concern for the area's ecosystem.

And I still am totally confused why anyone is wasting time with DST. Electrical power consumption for light, in the short time adjusted, is seriously small. Industrial uses, business uses, will remain exactly the same. The big power draws will be totally unaffected.

But, the environmental luddites will be appeased, and that's all that matters.

More partisan talk that ignores *decades* of the exact same problem.

Except it's a good thing when foreign oil dependency exists under a Democrat, right?

Here's a little tidbit to think on. If it was all about profit, why was the Alaskan oil reserves not opened? If you're an oil company, and you have a chance to get practically free land, and huge oil reserves that are easy to drill, and much much cheaper to ship than from offshore or overseas, you go for it.

More profit is made from selling more product, than by raising prices on a diminished supply. More product easily obtained equals more profit, so if it was all about the ridiculous supposition of it all being Bush and Texan oil interests, then Alaska would have just been cracked wide open and the tundra echoing with the sounds of power drills.

Who benefits from restricted drilling? OPEC. Yes, the friendly middle eastern organization with such prominent members as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, and formerly Iraq. The same group all presidents have knelt down to for as long as I've been alive.

Focusing on the partisan attack doesn't do anything but allow the problem to continue, when your chosen party alignment comes into power. Then the attacks come from the other side, until it reverses. Meanwhile the root problem remains unadressed.

For those wanting a solution, research biodiesel. The seeds for the oil can be grown here, the ethanol and methanol components can be grown and manufactured here, about all that is needed is lye (potash, etc). Hell, you can make this stuff yourself. the waste product is mostly glycerine (soap)

Germany's already doing it, and IIRC new Volkswagen TDIs can use it and not violate the warranty. Anyone running diesel can tell you of the almost unbelievable mileage even older engines get. So you get a renewable fuel source AND better mileage. I just need to figure out how to convert a carbureted 4 cylinder 16-valve motorcycle engine over to diesel.

But the Liberal Masters desire the status quo just as much as the "neocons". No one wants to piss in the punch. They only care about being in charge of the bowl.

Originally posted by slank
.
Bush is aligned with the evil interests of Big malignant oil companies.

Sh*t in, Sh*t out.

'FREE!' With every gallon of gas you get a few drops of pure soldier's blood.

What a sad place America is under the NeoCons.
.

harlequin says:

Why doesn’t he push for solar energy? each day , enough solar energy reaches the earth to power the world for a year.

If everywhere with a flat roof had a 1 kilowatt solar panel (9M²) and a warm water solar heater , then the power problems would be addressed!

Harlequin, there's no doubt that solar energy is a great and good approach, but your comments over-simplify things.

Given that, at "full sun" there is about 1kW of insolation per square meter of area, and given that eleven percent is a good conservative number for consumer-grade photovoltaic (PV) arrays, then your comment about a 1 kW solar panel on 9 m^2 of flat surface is technically correct.

But that's 90W/m^2 is at “full sun” conditions, i.e., equivalent to summer noontime in the desert. Where I live, in the middle of the Sonoran Desert in Arizona, we average 4.6 sun-hours/day in the winter and 6.35 sun-hours/day in the summer (with the annualized graph showing a sine curve). This means that a single 9-m^2 array will produce 4.6 kW/day in the winter and 6.35 kW/day in the summer. I doubt seriously that the average single family detached home in the United States uses less that 20kW-hr/day, so we’re looking at about four of those 9 m^2 arrays per household.

And it gets worth, because you need electricity available when the sun isn’t shining, which means that your array has to produce even more than before, to provide you with electricity during the day and additional electricity into batteries for no-sun conditions. Of course, your system must be sized for winter usage, because if you design your system for average annual insolation, you’ll run out of electricity come October (or April, if you’re in the southern Hemisphere).

You can figure that the BOS (Balance of Systems, i.e., everything but arrays, including support structures, batteries, wiring, voltage regulating equipment) doubles the price of your system, and then, of course, there’s the cost of cutting over to the more efficient direct current (DC) appliances. A good estimate for the initial outlay for a system like that would be about $45,000 including installation; a hefty chunk of change.

And to add insult to injury, you’d have to replace your storage batteries every five years or so, which is, in addition to a four or five-thousand dollar expense per year (annualized), a whole lot of lead and sulfuric acid in the landfill!

Finally, since there is no infrastructure and a stand-alone system, you the homeowner have just become the finance manager and chief engineer of a full-scale power-generating plant, something I would certainly not want to do – and I spent three years working in the Systems Engineering department of a PV company!

By the way, if anyone’s interested, I have written several articles, as well as a couple of interactive systems to determine your energy budget and provide cost data for a photovoltaic system (you’d need Microsoft Excel 5 or later). If you want to see some of this, feel free to e-mail me at [email protected] , and I’ll send it back to you.

Originally posted by Djarums
This bill had so much more potential to fix a whole host of problems the United States faces with regard to energy.

It's a real shame that the highlight of the bill is the DST stuff... talk about wasting an opportunity.

The leadership in this country is so far out of touch with reality and their clueless leader will sign just about anything they put in front of him. I doubt he even reads this stuff. It probably gets too confusing after page 1.