Farm Bill Showdown?

[Adapted from my post at Red, Green, & Blue on 4.29.2008] Word has it that the farm bill congressional conferees hammered out at the end of last week would most likely be vetoed by President Bush. Opponents argue that the bill is full of wasteful handouts to wealthy growers, while supporters defend the supports as a needed rural safety net that also expands nutrition aid for the poor. The bill is expected to be on the House floor later this week and go to the Senate quickly thereafter.

According to Ryan Grimm at Politico.com, when asked what the President would do if the current iteration of the farm bill made its way to the President's desk White House spokesman Scott Stanzel replied, "as it stands now, it is not something the president would support." Despite the threat, there may be enough Congressional support to override the veto. According to House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN), "If the White House is stupid enough to veto this, they’re going to get overridden.”

The farm bill is a very popular funding mechanism for Congressional spending. Every state's congressional delegation works extremely hard to get their slice of the agricultural pie - not doing so does not bode well in the eyes of powerful ag interests and the voters of agricultural states. In short, farm bills do not get vetoed. At least very rarely do they get vetoed - there are a few exceptions.

One exception to the rule is when a second term president uses a veto (or threatens to veto) an appropriations bill, such as a farm bill - and criticize Congress for loading it with pork and earmarks - without any serious political repercussions. Interestingly enough, the last time a farm bill was vetoed was nearly 10 years ago, when another late second-term president successfully vetoed a farm bill - a veto which Congress made no attempt to override. But the political climate is quite different from that of ten years ago, and I would suspect that this President does not have the political capital to successfully veto the farm bill.

Other posts on farm policy:

"Small Wind Remains in Farm Bill" :: Green Options (12/2007)

Photo: mike138

New Zealand: Renewable Energy Cheaper than Gas

Investment in renewable energy generation in New Zealand, especially geothermal and wind power, is already more attractive than investment in gas-fired generation, according to a story in Friday's New Zealand Herald.

"Renewables are by far the most economic proposition, especially geothermal," said Bruce Parkes of Wellington-based Contact Energy. "But the cost of wind and baseload gas is roughly equal with a carbon price of $23 and gas at $7 a petajoule, which is around the current price."

Last December, lawmakers in New Zealand proposed a 10-year moratorium on the construction of any new fossil fuel-burning power plants. But officials from Contact Energy believe that goal can be met without the need for the moratorium - simply because the economics are favorable.

Other Posts on Energy Costs:

• "Data: US Electricity Rates Vary. But They're All Going Up"
• "Straw Poll: How Much do You Pay for Electricity?"
• "Consumer Choice and the Eco-Social Externalities of Coal"
  

New Zealand Herald
Photo: Robyn Gallagher

Winter Storms + Wind Farms = Falling Electricity Prices

[Originally published at CleanTechnica on 4.18.2008] The powerful winter storms that moved across Europe in March precipitated a considerable spike in electricity supply on the European grid, thanks to continental wind farms.

Wind speeds of 100 mph were recorded across Europe and topped 135 mph at the Czech Republic’s highest mountain, Snezka. The surplus electricity on the grid, produced mostly by German and Danish wind farms pushed prices down by 12% on the spot market.

Traders buying and selling round-the-clock power reported that the ‘day ahead’ price in central Europe’s power market dropped to €49.5 ($76) per megawatt hour compared with €56 at the end of the previous week, according to a piece at Planet Ark. Unfortunately, the article also suggests that sudden drops in electricity prices on the spot market have little effect on end-use rates.

This story points out one of the most persistent ‘problems’ of large-scale wind energy development- how do we address the peaks and valleys on the grid presented by wind power, and how do we reconcile those with power plants which cannot be easily adjusted to deal with those peaks?

Several options of dealing with the storage issue have emerged including compressed air, hydro pump-backs, and more efficient flywheel designs. These are all good steps, and more will undoubtedly emerge. That is why it is important that the ‘problem’ of storing wind energy be framed as an opportunity for technological innovation, and not as a justification for more coal-fired power plants.

Photo: © Kamil Sobócki | Dreamstime.com

The Synergy Between Wind Energy and Freight Trains

There were a pair of articles in Sunday's Denver Post about the synergy between the wind energy and heavy rail industries (I suppose you could also say there is a synergy between heavy rail and the energy industry, more broadly defined, as residents of the mountain west are all to familiar with the mile-long coal trains and natural gas filled tanks criss-crossing the landscape and creating delays).

When Vestas Wind Systems announced that they would locate their first North American blade plant in Windsor, Colorado, company officials said part of the reason for doing so was because of the site's proximity to the regional rail network. Each blade being produced at the Windsor facility will be about 150 feet, and at full production capacity, Vestas expects to roll out about six of those blades per day, making rail transport quite attractive, to say the least.

Now, Beaumont, Texas-based Dragon Wind has thrown its hat into the ring and announced its plans to open a plant in Lamar, Colorado that will build 262-foot steel wind turbine towers. Officials of Dragon parent Modern Group Ltd. said Colorado's stature in wind power and rail access to Lamar were keys in siting the plant.


Rising Fuel Costs Making Rail-Freight More Attractive

Skyrocketing fuel prices are contributing to noticeable shifts in the country's freight-by-rail traffic. Add to this, locomotive fuel efficiency that has increased 80 percent since 1980 and you end up with a train that can carry a ton of freight for 423 miles on a gallon of fuel. Steve Raabe writes in the Denver Post article:

"Record high energy prices — especially for diesel that fuels locomotives — have hit railroads as hard as any other transportation sector. But rail's ability to handle trains with hundreds of cars gives it an efficiency advantage compared with tractor-trailer freight."

I will say this in reply to all of the above: If the time ever comes that I am stopped for ten minutes in downtown Fort Collins to let a freight train pass by with car after car loaded with wind turbine blades from nearby Windsor, rather than car after car of liquified natural gas from
the Powder Basin in Wyoming, or forest products from Idaho and Montana, I won't mind waiting.

Photo: disckychick

Related Posts:

• "Vestas Quietly Opens First North American Blade Plant"
  
• "New Vestas Plant Spurs Growth in Supply Chain"
• "A Big Week for Vestas Wind Systems"
  

Cartoon: 'Mean Joe Green' on Clean Coal

[Note: This week we are adding an exciting new feature to ecopolitology: selections from writer and cartoonist, Joe Mohr's "Mean Joe Green" series of environmentally-themed political cartoons, courtesy of Green Options Media. We are grateful to have Joe's sharp-witted and thoughtful cartoons gracing the pages of ecopolitology. And we hope you enjoy them. For more, follow this link to Joe Mohr's Green Options archive.]

British MPs Spurn Renewable Energy Feed-in Tariff

I wish the U.S. Congress operated with more of the same ground rules (both official and unofficial) as does the British Parliament. You see, yesterday I found myself watching the House of Commons proceedings as MPs deliberated the merits of a renewable energy feed-in tariff (FIT). I mean they actually deliberated.

I've always gotten a kick out of watching the Prime Minister's question and answer session, and have ever since C-SPAN started carrying it many years ago. But I am less accustomed to watching the rank-and-file debate the specifics of policy. That's why I appreciated the level of back and forth as compared to what I am used to watching from Capitol Hill when they are "debating" policy.

Unfortunately, for those who support FITs as the best mechanism for growing renewable energy capacity, Labour party rebels failed to convince enough of their fellow MPs to support the proposal. According to the BBC, the move, led by Labour's Alan Simpson, was defeated by 250 votes to 210. It had garnered cross-party support with some 276 MPs from all parties signing a Commons motion ahead of Wednesday's vote. 35 Labour MPs voted against the government.

"MPs reject renewable energy move" BBC NEWS (430/07)
Photo: Timothy B. Hurst