PDA

View Full Version : Tax Credit For Wind Power Looks Like It Is Ending



sappstuf
2/17/2012, 07:38 AM
End of tax credit a blow for wind power industry

The wind power industry is predicting massive layoffs and stalled or abandoned projects after a deal to renew a tax credit failed Thursday in Washington.

The move is expected to have major ramifications in states such as Illinois, where 13,892 megawatts of planned wind projects — enough to power 3.3 million homes per year — are seeking to be connected to the electric grid. Many of those projects will be abandoned or significantly delayed without federal subsidies.

The state is home to more than 150 companies that support the wind industry. At least 67 of those make turbines or components for wind farms. Chicago is the U.S. headquarters to more than a dozen major wind companies that wanted to take advantage of powerful Midwestern winds.

Wind proponents tried to tuck the tax credit extension, which provides an income tax credit of 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour for the production of electricity from wind turbines, in legislation aimed at extending payroll tax cuts. But congressional leaders did not include it in that bill.

There is still a possibility the wind power tax credits could come through as a stand-alone bill or tied to other legislation. But Washington insiders say that is unlikely to happen before the election in November.

By then, the wind industry says, it will be too late to avoid massive layoffs and project delays, because wind projects slated for 2013 should already be far along.

In order for developers to receive the expiring tax credit, they must have turbines up and running before year's end. As a result, 2012 is shaping up to be a banner year as developers race to complete projects.

But few such projects are slated for 2013. Developers say they either accelerated projects to be completed this year or pulled back because of uncertainty about the tax credit. Contributing to the bleak outlook for 2013: competition from cheap natural gas and anemic demand for power as the economy struggles to pick up steam.

"We simply have not see that strong demand for new power generation," said Daniel Shreve, director and partner of MAKE Consulting, a wind energy consultancy with an office in Chicago.

The tax credit, which debuted in 1992, has a history of one- to two-year extensions and years in which it wasn't extended at all. A bill tied to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 extended the program until the end of 2012.

Kevin Borgia, who heads the Illinois Wind Energy Coalition, said several years of stability for the tax credit helped drive down costs for wind generation. Without the tax credit, the market for wind power generation will grind to a halt, he predicts.

Paul Bowman, vice president of development at wind developer E.ON Climate and Renewables North America, which has its North American headquarters in Chicago, said his company had about $1 billion in construction planned for next year, tied to the tax credit extension.

"If we got an extension in the next couple of months, we'd be able to build some or all of those projects,'' Bowman said. "If it gets extended at the end of the year, it is too late."

Bowman said a year's delay can kill some projects, partly because contracts to lease land to host turbines and interconnection agreements with utilities have expiration dates.

Turbine-makers and development companies already are laying off employees, Bowman said.

Even the February deal was too late, said Naomi Lovinger, spokeswoman for Nordex, a wind turbine manufacturer with its North American headquarters in Chicago.

That's because of the long lead time for wind projects. Projects slated for 2013 had been in the pipeline for two to five years because of hurdles that include local and national permitting and environmental testing.

"There is years and years of work that is done before a developer turns to a company like Nordex and says, 'Hey, we're ready to go, and now we want to talk about what turbines to put in and where we want to put them in,'" Lovinger said.

Navigant Consulting expects 37,000 industry jobs to be eliminated within the year.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-0217-wind-ptc--20120217,0,7153601.story

If the business model can’t survive without the credit, it’s not a business but a government sponsored charity.

dwarthog
2/17/2012, 07:49 AM
Interesting. I wonder how much "embellishment" is involved here with regards to the true impacts of the tax credit going away? If the wind industry is truly unable to sustain itself at any level without tax credits, then there are some serious issues with green energy that need to be addressed.

sappstuf
2/17/2012, 08:02 AM
Interesting. I wonder how much "embellishment" is involved here with regards to the true impacts of the tax credit going away? If the wind industry is truly unable to sustain itself at any level without tax credits, then there are some serious issues with green energy that need to be addressed.

I can't speak for the tax credits, but as far as embellishments go.


The move is expected to have major ramifications in states such as Illinois, where 13,892 megawatts of planned wind projects — enough to power 3.3 million homes per year

The 13 megawatts is the capacity not what they would actually generate. A several year study in England showed they were operating on average, at 25% capacity for the length of the study and many times dropped below 10 or even 5%.

Add in transmission losses and those 3.3 million homes might, on average, have enough power to turn on their coffee pots, but for god's sake don't try to make toast at the same time!

REDREX
2/17/2012, 09:47 AM
If the business model can’t survive without the credit, it’s not a business but a government sponsored charity.----A STUPID gov't sponsored charity

dwarthog
2/17/2012, 10:34 AM
I can't speak for the tax credits, but as far as embellishments go.



The 13 megawatts is the capacity not what they would actually generate. A several year study in England showed they were operating on average, at 25% capacity for the length of the study and many times dropped below 10 or even 5%.

Add in transmission losses and those 3.3 million homes might, on average, have enough power to turn on their coffee pots, but for god's sake don't try to make toast at the same time!

Thank you for that tidbit.

Gotta wonder why they just don't put on a mask and grab a gun and do their stealin' like an honest crook would.

okie52
2/17/2012, 11:13 AM
I hate to see wind power struggle because in the long run I think we will need it. Nonetheless, when TBoone was touting wind energy 4 years ago he stated that NG needed to be a $9 an MCF for Wind energy to be viable. NG is about $2.40 now (or last time I checked).

jkjsooner
2/17/2012, 11:19 AM
At what point would you say we're subsidizing oil? I don't think we'd give a darn what happens in the ME if it wasn't for oil.

I'm normally against govt interference but if subsidizing some alternatives is in our national interest then we should do it.

This is where I disagree with many of you. The free market isn't going to necessarily create the energy diversity we need for our own security. No private company is going to spend billions to help us diversify so that we don't have a major economic shock if a war disrupts our oil supplies.

If this type of infrastructure could be built overnight then I'd be happy to sit back and let private industry fill that gap when it's needed but it takes years or decades to build up the infrastructure. This is the exact type of problem that you need governments to deal with.

I'm all for having the government out of the free market but there are certain areas where it is simply needed.

okie52
2/17/2012, 11:33 AM
At what point would you say we're subsidizing oil? I don't think we'd give a darn what happens in the ME if it wasn't for oil.

I'm normally against govt interference but if subsidizing some alternatives is in our national interest then we should do it.

This is where I disagree with many of you. The free market isn't going to necessarily create the energy diversity we need for our own security. No private company is going to spend billions to help us diversify so that we don't have a major economic shock if a war disrupts our oil supplies.

If this type of infrastructure could be built overnight then I'd be happy to sit back and let private industry fill that gap when it's needed but it takes years or decades to build up the infrastructure. This is the exact type of problem that you need governments to deal with.

I'm all for having the government out of the free market but there are certain areas where it is simply needed.

I agree with some of what you are saying. Although the government subsidy of oil is pretty much the same tax breaks it gives every other business/industry in the US. It is only because oil is profitable (now) and not in favor with the dems that it remains a target.

If we are going to have a department of energy then it should have some planning/coordination with our energy needs both short term and long term. Where I would probably differ with you is mandating green energy inclusion when there are no viable green energy alternatives. There is also the cap and trade approach which may be palatable if it was on a global basis and an even playing field. Nothing in Obama's version of cap and trade approached that "level" playing field nor was it even based on actual CO2 damage to the atmosphere. What made it even worse was he would have had the US go it alone and thereby kill our economy and industry with the inordinate energy prices derived from such a program.

R & D for green is good. I support it. Mandated green inclusion is a bankrupt policy.

pphilfran
2/17/2012, 11:45 AM
At what point would you say we're subsidizing oil? I don't think we'd give a darn what happens in the ME if it wasn't for oil.

I'm normally against govt interference but if subsidizing some alternatives is in our national interest then we should do it.

This is where I disagree with many of you. The free market isn't going to necessarily create the energy diversity we need for our own security. No private company is going to spend billions to help us diversify so that we don't have a major economic shock if a war disrupts our oil supplies.

If this type of infrastructure could be built overnight then I'd be happy to sit back and let private industry fill that gap when it's needed but it takes years or decades to build up the infrastructure. This is the exact type of problem that you need governments to deal with.

I'm all for having the government out of the free market but there are certain areas where it is simply needed.

Wind and solar have nothing to do with energy independence...CO2, yes....

Only .71% of of our electrical production is from oil....

pphilfran
2/17/2012, 11:47 AM
At what point would you say we're subsidizing oil? I don't think we'd give a darn what happens in the ME if it wasn't for oil.

I'm normally against govt interference but if subsidizing some alternatives is in our national interest then we should do it.

This is where I disagree with many of you. The free market isn't going to necessarily create the energy diversity we need for our own security. No private company is going to spend billions to help us diversify so that we don't have a major economic shock if a war disrupts our oil supplies.

If this type of infrastructure could be built overnight then I'd be happy to sit back and let private industry fill that gap when it's needed but it takes years or decades to build up the infrastructure. This is the exact type of problem that you need governments to deal with.

I'm all for having the government out of the free market but there are certain areas where it is simply needed.

Chesapeake is putting up a billion dollars into venture capital over 10 years to help finance the transition to ng as a auto/truck fleet fuel source....

dwarthog
2/17/2012, 11:48 AM
IMO, we have little choice but to develop alternative energy sources. "Green" being one of those.

But foisting a "pig in a poke" on taxpayers, to the benefit of deep pocketed backers of the whatever administration is in power, isn't the way to accomplish that.

Sappstuf's numbers are revealing, wind delivers far less than promised and isn't reliable with regards to availability. That isn't a good combination.

sappstuf
2/17/2012, 01:00 PM
There is one group, other than the Greens, that support wind generators wholeheartedly..

http://global.nationalreview.com/images/photoshop_020712_A.jpg

pphilfran
2/17/2012, 01:03 PM
There is one group, other than the Greens, that support wind generators wholeheartedly..

http://global.nationalreview.com/images/photoshop_020712_A.jpg

That is inaccurate...

The early mills in Cali were high speed and were placed in migratory paths and they tended to blend up birds in fast order...

New turbines turn much slower and cause far fewer bird deaths than autos....

badger
2/17/2012, 01:18 PM
Any SimCity 2000 players here?

After doing my usual things to get quick funds (zone empty land as residential, then resell it for example), I just try new things here and there to see what would happen, especially when it came to generating power.

The wind generator seemed like a good option. It wouldn't blow up at 50 years in operation, it didn't pollute and it took up relatively little space.

And then... you see how little power it generates and how costly it was compared to other power generators.

It seem our government is learning what I learned playing SimCity 2000 back in grade school.

sappstuf
2/17/2012, 01:19 PM
That is inaccurate...

The early mills in Cali were high speed and were placed in migratory paths and they tended to blend up birds in fast order...

New turbines turn much slower and cause far fewer bird deaths than autos....

That was more of a joke phil, but considering there are 60 million cars in the US and probably less than 10K wind turbines, I would certainly hope cars cause more bird deaths.

pphilfran
2/17/2012, 01:23 PM
That was more of a joke phil, but considering there are 60 million cars in the US and probably less than 10K wind turbines, I would certainly hope cars cause more bird deaths.

I know...

pphilfran
2/17/2012, 01:24 PM
Any SimCity 2000 players here?

After doing my usual things to get quick funds (zone empty land as residential, then resell it for example), I just try new things here and there to see what would happen, especially when it came to generating power.

The wind generator seemed like a good option. It wouldn't blow up at 50 years in operation, it didn't pollute and it took up relatively little space.

And then... you see how little power it generates and how costly it was compared to other power generators.

It seem our government is learning what I learned playing SimCity 2000 back in grade school.

I like me some SimCity....

Put all the nasty industrial all by itself in the corner and surround it with parks....

jkjsooner
2/17/2012, 05:54 PM
Wind and solar have nothing to do with energy independence...CO2, yes....

Only .71% of of our electrical production is from oil....

Good point. I guess my point was more about the fact that in some cases (and I would limit it to cases we feel are absolutely necessary) government does have a role in subsidizing certain industries. I just don't think private markets favor such investments that are in our long term best interest but not profitable short term. This was not the best case to make that point.

jkjsooner
2/17/2012, 05:57 PM
IMO, we have little choice but to develop alternative energy sources. "Green" being one of those.

But foisting a "pig in a poke" on taxpayers, to the benefit of deep pocketed backers of the whatever administration is in power, isn't the way to accomplish that.

Sappstuf's numbers are revealing, wind delivers far less than promised and isn't reliable with regards to availability. That isn't a good combination.

Are there any viable technologies to store wind energy for use when the wind isn't blowing? (I think I've asked this before but don't remember the answer.) I'm assuming big ol' huge batteries isn't going to cut it but what about pumping water up hill and then turbines to extract the energy when the wind isn't blowing or using the energy to make/store hydrogen?

pphilfran
2/17/2012, 06:03 PM
Good point. I guess my point was more about the fact that in some cases (and I would limit it to cases we feel are absolutely necessary) government does have a role in subsidizing certain industries. Sometimes it's in our long term best interest. This was not the best case to make that point.

I agree...I don't really object to wind or solar...I am not a big believer in man made global warming but I would rather hedge my bets and limit CO2 and other emissions as much as feasible...

As far as wind is concerned we are probably half way to the max that would work within our grid....

I damn near bought a wind turbine cleaning business...watched the equipment operate...went up into the nasal to see how the lift was mounted....they pay 15k to clean one of those suckers...takes two to three days with good weather and the right equipment...I was chased off by the lack of consistent safety regs state to state...that plus keeping a half mile of steel lift cable in perfect condition...

pphilfran
2/17/2012, 06:05 PM
Are there any viable technologies to store wind energy for use when the wind isn't blowing? (I think I've asked this before but don't remember the answer.) I'm assuming big ol' huge batteries isn't going to cut it but what about pumping water up hill and then turbines to extract the energy when the wind isn't blowing or using the energy to make/store hydrogen?

I don't think there is anything large scale...I do know they use a pumping station like you suggest....there has also been talk about using used auto batteries from electric cars...they ain't good enough for auto use but would be capable of storage for the grid...at least I read that somewhere....

okie52
2/17/2012, 06:08 PM
I don't know why batteries aren't the main solution for storage when the wind is down. I know they state that NG plants are necessary for startups when the wind is insufficient which is kind of defeating the purpose IMO.

StoopTroup
2/17/2012, 06:11 PM
I was watching the show "Build it Bigger" and they did a show about Amsterdam I think it was. They have decided to work with the water in some places rather than take years and tons of money to try and pump it out after Centuries of wearing wooden shoes.

I'm not sure it solves all their problems but it was interesting to see them at least try to do something different and use their brains instead of buy each other off and tell each other it won't work. It's the same way I feel about power in this Country. If you find a cheaper solution....someone who is making ****loads of money off it says it's bad and does everything they can to pile drive the idea into oblivion.

I'm happy they did these wind farms. If they don't make anymore...at least they have built enough to study the impact over the next couple of decades. Maybe some R&D will happen to make things better or even come up with a better idea.

This was an Office Building they built on the water in Amsterdam. They moved into it and had operations going the very next day. Really cool.

http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/8416/builditbiggeramsterdams.jpg

sappstuf
2/17/2012, 09:28 PM
I agree...I don't really object to wind or solar...I am not a big believer in man made global warming but I would rather hedge my bets and limit CO2 and other emissions as much as feasible...

As far as wind is concerned we are probably half way to the max that would work within our grid....

I damn near bought a wind turbine cleaning business...watched the equipment operate...went up into the nasal to see how the lift was mounted....they pay 15k to clean one of those suckers...takes two to three days with good weather and the right equipment...I was chased off by the lack of consistent safety regs state to state...that plus keeping a half mile of steel lift cable in perfect condition...

I have a similar problem every morning...

diverdog
2/18/2012, 07:05 AM
I have a similar problem every morning...

Your tent mate that good looking?:playful:

Did you ever hear the military urban legend about the Navy guy called the "rabbit"?

sappstuf
2/18/2012, 08:20 AM
Your tent mate that good looking?:playful:

Did you ever hear the military urban legend about the Navy guy called the "rabbit"?

I'm a Navy Chief.. I have my own room!

I haven't heard about rabbit.

diverdog
2/19/2012, 09:30 AM
I'm a Navy Chief.. I have my own room!

I haven't heard about rabbit.

He was actually called the ether bunny.

Here is a varient of the legend. When I heard it (and we all believed because it was the Navy) the kid was on an aircraft carrier and his roommate worked in the ships medical facility.

http://www.snopes.com/college/risque/ether.asp