Sbsp affirmative- arl lab- ndi 2011
Plan Popular- Renewables Lobby
Download 1.74 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- They’re key to the agenda – span the business spectrum and have tons of political will
Plan Popular- Renewables LobbyAlternative energy lobby’s strong – they’ll make the plan popularLaRussa, ’10 – independent clean energy political analyst [Cassandra, 3/30/2010, Open Secrets, “Solar, Wind Power Groups Becoming Prominent Washington Lobbying Forces After Years of Relative Obscurity,” http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/03/solar-wind-power-becoming-prominent.html, DS] In 1998, the entire alternative energy industry barely even registered as a political player in Washington, spending a mere $2.4 million on lobbying the federal government. Meanwhile, in the same year, the oil and gas, electric utilities and mining industries spent a combined $142 million advancing their own legislative interests. That landscape, however, has changed considerably. By 2007, the alternative energy industry had begun to drastically increase its lobbying spending, almost doubling its expenditures from the previous year. In 2009, alternative energy organizations shelled out an unprecedented $30 million to protect and promote their interests on Capitol Hill. The alternative energy industry’s lobbying expenditures have grown to 12 times from its 1998 level. In comparison, oil and gas spending and mining spending have grown less than three times their 1998 amount, and electric utility spending has grown to just twice its 1998 amount. The growing involvement of the alternative energy industry in legislative affairs is reflected not just in increased spending, but also in the number of companies and organizations that employ federally registered lobbyists. In the late 1990s, only about 20 alternative energy industry organizations used federal lobbyists. By 2009, there were about 200 alternative energy companies and organizations employing lobbyists to help advance the industry’s interests. The American Wind Energy Association is one of those organizations that recently and significantly increased lobbying efforts. Until 2008, AWEA failed to crack the $1 million mark in annual lobbying expenditures -- and most years, it spent less than $500,000. In 2009, its expenditures experienced a drastic increase, and the group spent almost $5 million on lobbying for issues related to the wind power industry. But why did AWEA, and scores of other alternative energy corporations, trade organizations and non-profits, get involved in legislative affairs so suddenly and with such gusto? The involvement stems from the growth in number of alternative energy companies, which was made possible by the growth in popularity of wind power in the national consciousness, said Christine Real de Azua, an AWEA spokeswoman. Real de Azua states that this, in turn, increased AWEA's ranks by more than 1,000 new business members in 2009 alone, many of them "companies entering or seeking to enter the wind turbine supply chain." Last year "was a record year for wind power in the U.S.," Real de Azua said. "The industry installed 10,000 megawatts last year, enough to generate as much new electricity as three new nuclear plants." The recent involvement of AWEA in federal affairs, she said, "reflects the urgency of the industry's number one priority -- passing a national renewable electricity standard with aggressive, binding near- and long-term targets, as part of comprehensive energy and climate legislation." Azua de Real cites "market certainty" as a concern of AWEA's members, who need legislative support of their industry "in order to expand their operations and invest in new manufacturing as well as new wind farm facilities." She added that it is imperative to the members of AWEA that the U.S. government "steps up and clearly commits to developing renewable energy." AWEA cites the sheer potential of wind energy and the opportunity for job creation as two key points that their lobbyists emphasize in the fight for favorable legislation. Not as drastic but certainly notable is the increased lobbying by the Solar Energy Industries Association. Until 2007, the organization had never spent more than half a million dollars on federal lobbying efforts. In 2009, it spent more than $1.6 million. Monique Hanis, an SEIA spokeswoman, attributes the increase in lobbying presence to a growth in membership that enabled the organization to expand legislative activities. She explains how in late 2008, SEIA's increased lobbying pressure paid off when Congress "passed the eight-year extension of the solar investment tax credit," which allowed the organization to move on to lobbying regarding climate, renewable energy standards, green jobs and appropriations. The goal of spending more money than ever before on federal legislation, Hanis says, is "to remove market barriers so that solar can compete fairly with other energy sources and we can expand the amount of solar used in this country." SEIA has already seen positive gains from their increased expenditures, Hanis said. The group’s lobbyists were successful in promoting several provisions of the stimulus bill, such as the "lifted cap on solar investment tax credit for residential solar water heating systems." In addition, the industry’s increased presence on Capitol Hill has "built bipartisan support of and knowledge about solar." But while alternative energy interests are just getting acquainted with K Street, the oil and gas industry has been a permanent resident for years. Since 1998, the oil and gas industry has never spent less than $50 million on lobbying in any given year, and in 2009, it reported $168 million in lobbying expenditures. Does a rise in alternative energy lobbying threaten to erode the oil and gas industry's political power? Probably not, said American Petroleum Institute spokesman Bill Bush, adding that he is “not concerned” about the alternative energy industry's efforts and “not aware of any impact” they're having on the petroleum industry's fortunes. Bush also emphasized that the oil and gas industry "understands that there is a role for alternative energy" and has "invested billions in it." He added, however, that "on various issues, we may be on different sides." In 2009, API focused on energy legislation and "issues related to access to oil and natural gas development," Bush said. The institute spent more than $7.3 million in 2009 on federal lobbying efforts after spending between $2.8 million and $4.8 million each year on lobbying between 2002 and 2008. As this decade moves forward, climate and energy policy remains a key issue in Congress. Barack Obama labeled such legislation a high priority long before he became president, and people and political action committees associated with the alternative energy industry responded with campaign contributions of $173,500. The oil and gas industry poured more than five times that amount into Obama's campaign coffer, but gave most of its presidential campaign contributions to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are currently drafting a bill to address the nation's energy needs. The bill, if passed, could certainly become a major political victory for Obama. Although most of the conversation regarding the drafting of legislation has revolved around the question of greenhouse gases and the proposed “cap-and-trade” policy, the bipartisan bill also makes a point of emphasizing job creation and the use of renewable energy. In a statement in February, Kerry promoted his energy bill by stating, "Americans want us to be energy independent. Moreover, every job created in the course of energy independence is a job that stays here at home." And with political focus on alternative energy constantly expanding, the lobbying power of the alternative energy industry may soon become as plentiful as Great Plains breezes and desert sunshine. They’re key to the agenda – span the business spectrum and have tons of political willMulkern, ‘9 - politics writer for the Denver Post [Anne C., 3/19/2009, Scientific American, “Lobbyists Swarm Washington Touting Energy Ideas,” http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=lobbyists-energy-ideas, DS] There's a green gold rush on Capitol Hill. With Congress plowing toward legislation on energy and climate, lobbyists and their clients are swarming House and Senate offices. They are booking up conference rooms, shaking hands and submitting proposals for financial help and policy changes. There are hundreds of hired guns now working on the energy issues. They represent a swath of diverse and sometimes conflicting interests, from small companies turning algae into oil to traditional utilities and big corporations, including Google, United Parcel Service and Safeway. "What's happening in energy and carbon, what's being contemplated is nothing short of transformational," said Steve McBee, CEO of McBee Strategic Consulting, a lobbying firm with 31 clients interested in energy. Bills planned on energy and climate in Congress, he said, represent "an attempt to fundamentally shift the market." "There's enough momentum and political will," McBee said, adding that Congress and President Obama "have a fighting chance of getting it done." Momentum on changing energy policy began in the last two years, as state after state passed regulations promoting renewable energy. The private sector started shifting toward green power production, but that movement stalled with the economic crisis, several lobbyists and energy experts said. With credit dried up and venture capitalists ceasing investments, companies that need money for power projects are turning to the federal government. Lawmakers besieged by ideas now must decide how to weigh requests and pick which are most aligned with their constituencies' needs and policy goals. "What we're seeing is a very large number of clean energy companies and clean energy developers pursuing Congress and federal support in an effort to maintain the momentum that began 12 to 24 months ago," said Nick d'Arbeloff, president of New England Clean Energy Council, a trade group. "It won't be an easy process for any of these companies to unlock dollars for their organization," d'Arbeloff added. "But a signal is being sent by the White House and by the Department of Energy that clean energy is a priority." Companies and groups interested in energy and natural resources legislation spent nearly $355 million on lobbyists last year, up from $240 million in 2007, according to Congressional Quarterly's MoneyLine. That spending and the pool of people pleading their case are growing steadily this year as well. Since January, 185 companies hired lobbyists to work on energy issues, MoneyLine records show. Even Fortune 500 companies that have long employed lobbyists on other issues have needed to hire more to track potential energy policy changes. Established smaller companies want to shift toward clean energy. And new companies need help approaching lawmakers. "We try to listen to everybody, because we know that there is no one single solution," said Anne Johnson , spokeswoman for Republicans on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. "There's a lot of demand. There are a lot of people calling. "We know that we have to look at these technologies while also looking at cleaner traditional energy." With so many people knocking on their doors, lawmakers know they will ultimately write policies that will benefit some and exclude others. The goal, one said, is to avoid picking winners. "It is our job here to set the signals right so we have a level playing field for these clean energy companies," said Rep. Jay Inslee, (D-Wash.), who sits on both the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. "Virtually any technology that has potential to be viable, they should have a seat at the table to move forward," Inslee said. Outside experts from universities, including Stanford and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, are helping lawmakers evaluate which proposals might be commercially viable. "We're not just throwing darts here," Inslee said. Wanted: 'game changers' While lawmakers favor mature technologies that are proven and might work at a scale that could make them profitable in the future, Inslee said, Congress is also interested in innovative applications that could be "game changers," such as nanotechnology that would make solar cells more efficient. Some lobbyists, including McBee, believe businesses with products or plans that are transformative are more likely to gain traction with Congress. "There is a desire for real strategic change," McBee said. A key to success in this competitive market, he said, "is not wasting people's time with ideas that are incremental." "Where the strike zone is is ideas that are mature, that are proven, that are bench-tested, but either capital or policy is needed to take it to scale," McBee added. "We are sort of actively seeking companies out that fit that bill." Because of the congressional desire for big ideas, he said, traditional lobbying tactics like seeking help from old friends do not necessarily work. "Great ideas transcend who it is you know, what it is your [political action committee] looks like," McBee said. Palo Alto, Calif.-based company Better Place is working to persuade Congress that it has one of those revolutionary ideas. The company wants to build an infrastructure for charging electric cars. But the idea requires a shift in how electric cars would be sold and recharged. New electric cars would be sold with exchangeable batteries, said Andy Davis, vice president of the clean energy team at McBee Strategic Consulting. Drivers would buy battery usage plans based on their driving amounts, similar to how cell phone plans work. They would use charging stations owned by Better Place. States and cities have shown interest in the company's concept. The business has an agreement with the Israeli government to build infrastructure there, Davis said. In the United States, Better Place and its lobbyists are working on giving lawmakers information about its plan. Moving from lab to marketplace Others seeking help on Capitol Hill say they have proven technologies that need help moving to commercial scale. PetroAlgae, a Melbourne, Fla.-based company, wants to build a demonstration plant to show that it can grow algae and turn it into oil. Such oil would not emit any carbon dioxide when processed and burned, said Patrick Von Bargen, director at lobbying firm Quinn Gillespie & Associates. Algae grows on a diet of carbon dioxide, Von Bargen said, which makes the technology especially useful as Congress pursues policies to lower the country's greenhouse gas emissions. The company, which has about 100 employees, hired Quinn Gillespie this month. PetroAlgae is seeking help applying for DOE grants created through the stimulus bill, Von Bargen said. The company also wants to make sure that future legislative definitions of biofuels are broad enough to include algae. A biofuel in general is fuel developed from plant material. "One of the critical things that policymakers need to do, they need to be technology neutral," Von Bargen said. MicroPlanet, a Seattle-based company that hired a lobbyist last October, wants help deploying a technology it says would help conserve power. Because the nation's electrical grid is inefficient, utilities send out more power than a customer actually needs to ensure that when the electricity reaches a home, it is at the required 114-volt level. Using products installed outside a customer's home, MicroPlanet's technology keeps the power that goes into the house at 114 volts, said Noah Reandeau, lobbyist with Gordon Thomas Honeywell Government Affairs. Any additional power above 114 volts stays on the electric line, he said. The technology has been deployed in nine countries, he said. In Washington, Reandeau said, "We're raising awareness of the fact that the technology exists." As Congress moves toward a national requirement that utilities produce some power from renewable sources, Reandeau said, MicroPlanet wants to make sure that lawmakers consider voltage regulation as an option for meeting the mandate. R&D assistance Some companies that have hired lobbyists are looking for research and development help. Lyman-Morse Boatbuilding, a Maine-based company, wants to use boat building technology to develop wind blades that could work on the Eastern Seaboard, where air currents can top 100 miles an hour. That requires a different kind of blade than one that works in Colorado or West Virginia, said Thomas Goldberg, the company's lobbyist. Because the blades are more than 200 feet long, he said, the tip of the blade would spin much faster than the hub. Blades need a redesign to ensure they do not tear apart in the East Coast environment, Goldberg said. "You have to have something that is significantly more robust," said Goldberg, who is with the American Technology Specialists lobbying firm. The company wants money for R&D. Tax credits that recently passed are not as helpful, Goldberg said, because no investment banks are lending for renewable projects. At the federal level, there is limited cash available and many businesses asking, Goldberg acknowledged. Members of Congress are asking sophisticated follow-up questions, such as requesting that a company provide more information on its product plan and assessments of its competitors' engineering designs. "The number of people who want to come forward and claim that they can do this is increasing," Goldberg said. "You make your case on the merits." Tracking bills, regulations Lobbyists also are representing companies that say they are ready to go commercially with energy products but need help tracking congressional and Obama administration regulatory moves. ADA Environmental Solutions, based in a Denver suburb, makes a product that reduces the mercury emitted by burning coal. The process uses activated carbon, similar to how water filters work, said President and CEO Mike Durham. The company, which hired a lobbyist this month, is building a $400 million plant in Louisiana. It wants to build five more in other cities to meet demand from coal plants because 16 states have passed mercury-control regulations, Durham said. "It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when bills in Congress would require mercury control at all power plants," Durham said. In addition, Durham said, the company may want to compete for DOE grants for research on sequestering carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants. Cleaning coal of its greenhouse gas byproduct is a widely discussed idea but at this point unavailable at a commercial scale. "The country has to invest in the technology," Durham said, "if they want to rely on this very secure fuel and reduce carbon emissions." Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 1.74 Mb. Share with your friends:
|