Barack Obama, our President-elect, can’t win. Since his energy plan proposes carbon cuts before the technology is in place to achieve the goal, the coal associations are not convinced. Environmentalists are cautious as well and argue that his “clean coal” plan does not add up.

Coal will always be an important energy source. Development and improvement of the tools that are required to make it cleaner is not a contradiction to alternate energy production methods. In reality, long-term energy demands will continually grow, making a diversified fuel mix necessary. All resources must be developed fully. This includes coal, which will be subject to increased pressure now that Washington is under Democratic control.

Read the rest of this entry »

Read more about Renewable Capacity Forecasts-1990 to 2010
President-elect Barack Obama’s 30-point energy agenda asks for prominent changes to address carbon emissions, fuel efficiency, renewable power and efficiency.

If Obama acts out the energy plan he laid out during his campaign, American taxpayers will each get a $500 discount check — funded by a windfall profits taxes on big oil companies.

In addition to taxing oil giants more, Senator Obama’s detailed 30-point energy agenda demands big changes to address carbon emissions, fuel efficiency for vehicles, and domestic and renewable power and efficiency.

While many candidates’ platform assures are cast away when political opposition looms, the Obama energy plan seems constitutional to his promise to get the economy restarted, some experts say.

Some of the highlights of Obama’s energy plan includes:

·         Putting 1 million plug-in-electric hybrid vehicles (PHEVs) on the road by 2015 — cars that can get the equivalent of 150 miles per gallon.

·         Creating 5 million new green jobs by investing $150 billion over 10 years to stimulate clean-energy infrastructure and manufacturing such as wind-turbine plants and solar panels carpeting the nation’s rooftops.

·         Cutting US oil consumption, within 10 years, by the amount currently imported from the Middle East and Venezuela combined.

·         Requiring 10 percent of the nation’s electricity to come from renewable energy sources like wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass by 2012. By 2025, raise that to 25 percent.

·         Establishing an economy-wide cap-and-trade program that cuts US greenhouse gas emissions by charging for every ton of carbon dioxide that goes into the sky from coal- and natural gas-fired US power plants.

Can Obama do all that and more — or will governmental and economical obstructions ultimately turn the plan into a much more humble effort? How much was campaign window dressing, and how much energy shift will the US undergo?

Some components of Obama ’s energy plan are costly, but also vital to the rest of the plan. For instance, sales of pollution permits from the cap-and-trade program to limit CO2 emissions across the economy are key to helping fund the plan’s $15 billion per year (for 10 years) expenditure on renewable energy research and development.

But some say rising electric rates — the result of costs involved with greenhouse-gas emissions — could stir political opposition and derail implementation, especially given the economic depression.

While no one has recalculated the cost-benefit for Obama’s official energy plan, some earlier calculations for similar — albeit rosy — plans suggest that the net effect would still be an addition for green jobs and the economy.

The Apollo Alliance, a labor-environmental alignment, has put forward a proposition that contains proposals similar to those in the Obama plan. The alliance calls for a federal investment in clean-energy technology and green building that’s twice as large ($300 billion) as Obama’s. Their analysis calculates more than $1.4 trillion in savings and economic growth.

The pedigree of Obama’s plan also suggests that it is more, not less, likely to be implemented.

Much of the Obama plan accompanies the National Commission on Energy Policy’s (NCEP) 2004 plan, a consensus document in which — as in the SAFC plan — energy-security hawks joined environmentalists and industry. In fact, NCEP director and plan coauthor Jason Grumet is a likely candidate for an energy post in the new administration.

Besides the advantage of having been pre-vetted by energy, foreign policy, and industry experts, the plan also has something of an authorization. Obama often touted the need for a new energy equation during the campaign. Renewable-energy tax credits were blocked regularly in the US Senate this year. So an Obama mandate could help win over a Senate in which Democrats are now just three votes short of a filibuster-proof majority — with three races still in contention.

One of the fastest ways to lower energy costs is efficiency. Obama’s energy plan touts tougher efficiency standards and decries the Bush administration for missing 34 deadlines for improving energy-efficiency requirements for appliances and electrical equipment.

During its term of office, the Bush White House enacted just two new energy-efficiency standards, one for electrical transformers and one for home furnaces, both of which were considered too weak and are now being challenged in court by states and environmental groups.

If all 25 Obama-proposed energy-efficiency standards were acquired, they could economize the yearly equivalent of all the power produced by 57 large power plants.

An early test of the new administration — and its willingness to risk industry displeasure — will come in June. That’s when a new rule on commercial lighting — to improve the efficiency of those ubiquitous four-foot-long fluorescent tubes used in office buildings nationwide — comes up for final approval.

It’s a big deal. If the Department of Energy enacts a tough rule, it could have one of the most significant energy-efficiency impacts in US history, saving the equivalent of $66 billion in power costs over the next 30 years. That’s enough to power every home in the US for one year.

A strong rule could mean that the US could essentially replace 15 large power plants with the energy savings and slash carbon dioxide emissions by 950 million tons. The Bush administration could still propose a weaker rule in its waning days.

Read more about Renewable Capacity Forecasts-1990 to 2010

Read more about Investing in Renewable Technologies: Wind, Solar, Geotherm, Hydro, Biomass

Understandably, many are concerned that if oil prices continue falling, it will have a direct impact on the requirement for renewable energy resources. This caution on behalf of investors is not without good reason when one looks back to the 1980’s, a time when advances in alternative energy technology, were severely sabotaged by falling oil prices.

Barack Obama talks about creating millions of new jobs within the renewable energy sector. This sudden onslaught of financial challenges facing the industry will inevitably result in a greater dependence for government financing at a time when Washington is already under monstrous economical pressure.

Mr Woolard, CEO of BrightSource Energy Company, correctly pointed out that the market for alternative energy, remains promising when talking long term, but right now in the current situation, they are at best, unpredictable. The fact that the last few months have seen numerous Clean Energy projects across the United States delayed or even abandoned through lack of finances, is evidence enough regarding the volatile nature of these markets.

Analysts are now saying that this year’s global share offerings by renewable energy companies could be less than half of that which was accounted for in 2007. Global financing regarding these markets fell at a phenomenal rate, from twenty three billion dollars in the second quarter to seventeen billion dollars in the third quarter. Furthermore, market research suggests that the rate of financing will drop even more alarmingly in the fourth quarter.

With such a vast amount of capital having been allocated at the beginning of 2008, the United States is likely to still see an increase when compared to 2007 but whether or not this growth can continue, remains to be seen.

The fundamental questions facing renewable energy at this point are, for how much longer can the financial drought last, and just how far will oil and gas prices fall. Yes, oil is still expensive but one would do well to take into consideration that the cost of oil is half of what it was a few months ago, and if the economy continues to weaken, the price could continue to decline.

Market analysts warn that unless gas prices are eight dollars or more per one thousand cubic feet, companies and investors will steer clear of renewable energy projects. With gas prices currently at around six dollars per thousand cubic feet, companies will rather direct their attention to gas fired plants through which they can harvest highly attractive profits. With the price of gas being this low, the prospect of wind factories becomes unattractive to investors who rate profits high on the agenda. Likewise, considering the costs involved with solar power, the prospect of such investments become unimaginable.

Fortunately there is already some legislation in place which demands the development of alternative energy and together with certain federal requirements, this can to a limited degree, help to ensure these markets continue moving forward. However, it’s the private sector which faces the toughest times. While there are an abundance of willing and eager companies ready to take on mega projects, without capital their hands are tied. If they are unable to acquire the necessary financing, then they cannot continue with developments.

As a result of a tremendous push, renewable energy now meets seven percent of the energy requirements in the United States. While ethanol is already available across the entire country, legislation is continuing to push for a dramatic reduction of imported oil over the next fifteen years. Remarkable success has already been achieved in some fields and is most noticeable when one considers America has constructed enough wind power plants, to supply four and a half million homes with electricity.

When one considers that the total investment in renewable energy increased to a staggering one hundred and forty eight billion dollars last year, it is apparent just how big this market is. Of course, with the current economical climate as it is, this figure is likely to drop this year.

Like all markets, the renewable energy market is determined by the amount of potential profit investors can make. When oil and gas prices are high, the drive to develop alternative energy increases. Likewise, when oil and gas prices fall, investor interest drops away just as suddenly. This was especially evident in the 1980’s when the oil markets collapsed, taking with them, all interest in renewable energy developments. It was around this time that the very heart of the industry moved to Europe, spurred on by extremely strong government support and it was not until recent years that it has started returning, hot on the heals of rising oil prices.

This latest round of market changes is however slightly different, due to coal prices being high, and of course the environmental complications concerning coal. Perhaps the most important difference can be credited to the general public though, as they have shown far greater support towards clean energy now than they did in early years. Of course, the fact that America is at war and the related risks involved, also have strong influence over developing green energy, which in turn would reduce dependence on imported oil. To emphasize the urgency for development, a further seventeen billion dollars has recently been made available in the form of tax credits, while many states have passed laws governing the compulsory generation of clean energy by utilities.

As some analysts have pointed out, without enough financial resources, goals can’t be met and in most cases, this results in simply changing the initial target.

Read more about Investing in Renewable Technologies: Wind, Solar, Geotherm, Hydro, Biomass

Read more about Assets & Politics in the Oil Industry

Either candidate is going to have a very challenging time encouraging a new alternative (energy) if oil comes back down because it (the price) is not going to be seen by most Americans as a crisis anymore. The price of oil has fallen from its high of 147 dollars a barrel earlier this year to around 65 dollars a barrel recently. The prices are further predicted to fall to about 50 dollars in 2009.

It’s going to be increasingly difficult with lower prices to convince people to stop using conventional fuel and use costlier renewables in the near term.

The difficulty Mr McCain or Obama will have is keeping energy or the environment at the center (of their agendas) when it’s believed by households to be the least of the problems they are confronting compared to losing their retirement, savings, jobs and so on.

Americans vote in presidential elections contended by Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain on November 4.

“If the economy is weak, it will be very hard to make the case for an aggressive policy that puts the economy further in jeopardy,” says Frank Maisano from powerful lobbying firm Bracewell Giuliani.

The law firm represents a number of electricity producers.

McCain and Obama are both committed to putting in place a system of emissions trading and fixing a target for reducing carbon dioxide, ideas opposed by President George W. Bush.

Barack Obama wants to reduce carbon dioxide emission by 80 percent in the next 50 years, while McCain wants a cut of 60-65 percent.

The Democrats, who are expected to increase their majority in the Congress in the elections, are divided on the energy issue.

Democrats from coal-producing states such as Western Virginia or Montana or those from car-producing states such as Michigan will probably oppose environmental or energy measures that damage their industries.

Analysts believe that it will be difficult for the next president to convince Congress to spend money on renewable energy efforts or climate change because of the existing large budget deficits and focus on the economy.

Obama has pledged to spend 150 billion dollars on a program to promote technology for renewable energy, which he hopes will generate thousands of new jobs.

McCain has promised to build 45 new nuclear power stations.

Obama and McCain also support the idea of having a commercially available electric car in the next two to three years with batteries that can be quickly recharged from the mains.

Read more about Assets & Politics in the Oil Industry

Read more about State Energy Profiles

The most important concern in the latest presidential election campaign in the U.S. is the energy policy issue. Both the Republicans and Democrats are addressing this issue and both are keen on cutting down expenditure on foreign oil and also the large scale reliance of U.S economy on the foreign oil.

You may find out what each candidate is saying by taking a look at the following. Democratic candidate Barack Obama as well as Republican candidate John McCain are paying serious attention to energy issues. Analysts have commented on their policies and it is explained for you in lucid terms below.

OFFSHORE DRILLING

Initially Obama was against lifting the congressional moratorium on drilling in federal lands off U.S. coasts. Recently however he has switched to supporting limited expanded offshore drilling as a part of broader legislation to help solve America’s energy problems.

McCain defends expanding the offshore drilling program to tap the projected 18 billion barrels of oil that is present on the outer continental shelf of U.S. He has said that this will be done without harming the environment in any way.

STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

McCain is against opening up the reserved stock pile of oil unless he feels, what he calls, a serious shortage far outreaching the demand or disorder in the supply machinery.

Initially, Obama too opposed releasing oil from the reserve unless there was a critical disruption of supply, but he has recently changed his stance and now supports releasing 70 million barrels of light sweet crude, later to be compensated by heavier crude.

WINDFALL PROFITS TAX

Obama supports a tax cut for middle and lower middle classes. He wants to do this via a five-year windfall tax on profits of large scale oil companies. The burden of high energy prices will thus be compensated by the tax from large oil companies themselves. The middle and lower middle classes therefore can enjoy the benefits of a $1,000 tax rebate under the Obama presidency.

McCain is against burdening the oil companies with new taxes.

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY

Obama wants to give an impetus to alternative fuel usage by means of a $7,000 tax credit for people who buy “advanced” automobiles. He wants over a million plug-in hybrid cars on the go by 2015. Obama also wishes to raise the Renewable Fuel Standard to at least 60 billion gallons of highly developed biofuels like cellulosic ethanol by 2030; create a proper ethanol distribution infrastructure, direct that all new vehicles be “flexfuel” by the time his first term in office ends. He wishes to ensure the production of 2 billion gallons of “cellulosic” ethanol from non-corn sources like switchgrass by 2013.

McCain however is against ethanol inducements and has said that he would abolish the import tariff on sugar cane-based ethanol. Basically, he is against subsidies and tariffs that disrupt market practices; he wants a $5,000 tax credit for buying zero carbon emission cars; He wants a tiered structure that gives highest tax credit to the least carbon emitting car. McCain too, backs the usage of “flexfuel” automobiles.

SPECULATION ON FUTURES MARKETS

Obama has advised government control on trading and regulated exchange. He wants proper information on markets especially on index funds and other similar ventures. He supports legalized sanction and directives issued to the Commodity Futures Exchange Commission to look up proposals which suggest increasing margin requirements in the market; He backs closing up the Enron Loophole.

McCain on the other hand is worried about the speculative nature of the market. He too backs closing the Enron Loophole, looking into probable market exploitation and manipulation and making new laws and regulations regularizing the oil futures market to make them more clear and successful.

NUCLEAR POWER

McCain wishes to create 45 new nuclear reactors by 2030, and finally wants 100 new nuclear plants built in U.S. He backs the storing of nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada desert.

Obama too backs the usage of nuclear power, but feels that nuclear waste disposition and proliferation is an important concern too. He is against the Yucca Mountain plan.

GASOLINE TAX HOLIDAY

McCain has given a proposal of the gasoline tax holiday. In it he would deflect funds from general government revenues compensating for transportation projects funded by the tax.

Obama is against temporarily removing the federal tax on gasoline. He thinks that temporary tax benefit is not the real answer to the problem.

CLIMATE CHANGE

Obama wants to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050; that is take it to the 1990 level by 2020.He wants the reduction of carbon content by 10 percent by 2020.

McCain wants a CO2reduction too, he wants to lower emissions by 30 percent by 2050.

OIL USE

McCain wants U.S to be self reliant by 2025 in its oil usage. Obama wishes to lower down oil usage by at least 35 per cent or 10 million barrels per day by 2030, to reduce the reliance on OPEC nations.

ARCTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

Obama is against Arctic National Wildlife Refuge drilling. McCain wishes to have more offshore oil drilling, does not back ANWR drilling at the moment.

ENERGY RESEARCH

Obama wishes to spend $150 billion over 10 years on low-carbon energy sources, double R&D expenditure on biomass, solar and wind resources; speed up commercialization of plug-in hybrids, encourage low-emissions coal plants.

McCain has proposed giving $300 million to the auto company that invents a car battery that will ensure that U.S is free from oil usage. He wants to spend $2 billion every year to encourage clean coal technology.

VEHICLE FUEL ECONOMY

Obama wants to double fuel economy standards in 18 years; encourage auto makers by giving them tax incentives for making new engines and lightweight materials.

McCain does not have specific Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) targets. He backs increasing fines for auto companies that violate CAFE standards and wants to give tax benefits founded on carbon emissions of automobiles.

ELECTRICITY

Obama wishes to ensure that renewable energy is used by U.S utilities for at least 25 percent of their work by 2025.

McCain wants the government to ensure increased investment to improve and advance the national grid; he wishes to make sure that the grid has the capability to charge electricity run automobiles on a large scale and backs the use of SmartMeter technologies. This SmartMeter technology will ensure that consumers get an accurate estimate of their energy usage and promote cost effective usage of power.

Read more about State Energy Profiles

Read more about Assets & Politics in the Oil Industry

At his four-day fete in Denver, Democratic Presidential contender Senator Barack Obama attempted to reframe the Presidential race around economical issues he believes give him the strongest appeal to constricted middle-class electors. Now, as the limelight turns to the Republican convention in St. Paul-Minneapolis, rival Senator John McCain takes his turn at trying to define the race around the issues on which he hopes he has a winning hand.

A great deal of McCain’s campaign, of course, is based on his record on national security issues. However, with the economy in the cooler, he acknowledges that he has to make the sale on the economical battlefront, as well. So at the top of the Arizona Senator’s Twin Cities To-Do List will be compounded attempts to convince working-class and independent voters that the Republican alternative he’s offering - low taxes, less government, and ambitious energy drilling - will do more to better the economic system and their lives than the spate of initiatives offered by his competitor.

With his surprise choice of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, McCain may just have made that task a great deal easier. Surging oil prices have caused energy to emerge as a fundamental topic in the race.

“Governor Palin has challenged the influence of the big oil companies while fighting for the development of new energy resources,” said McCain. “She leads a state that matters to every one of us - Alaska has significant energy resources - and she has been a leader in the fight to make America energy independent.”

Recently this week, Palin signed a bill into law giving the state of Alaska authority to award TransCanada Pipelines a license to build and operate the $26 billion dollar 1,715-mile pipeline. It will channel natural gas from the North Slope through Canada to the lower 48 states.

In response to high oil and gas prices, and the resulting Alaska budget surplus, Palin has also recently signed legislation providing a one-time special payment of $1,200 to every Alaskan eligible for the 2008 Permanent Fund dividend. The bill also suspends the state’s motor fuel tax on gasoline, marine fuel, and aviation fuel for a year.

Already, McCain has gained ground with voters with his full-throated endorsing for expanded offshore drilling, along with increased expansion of nuclear power, coal, and other energy sources. Analysts say that position, compared with Obama’s stress on a longer-term strategy to boost alternative energy, is one reason McCain was able to even the race out before the conventions began.

The McCain camp will keep that issue front and center in St. Paul, as it believes energy will provide a decisive distinction for voters as the debate over the rival economic policies heats up. Palin could be a cardinal asset in that fight.
At the convention and beyond, the Palin choice should also help McCain’s attempts to win larger support from women voters, which he will need if he hopes to win. Already, his campaign has made a big bid to woo the unhappy Hillary Clinton voters who have vowed not to vote for Obama.

Read more about Assets & Politics in the Oil Industry