🚀 go-pugleaf

From: Tom Gray <tomgray@igc.org>

                       LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
              **************************************
              *             from the               *
              *  AMERICAN WIND ENERGY ASSOCIATION  *
              **************************************
                          July 26, 1996

SENATE TO VOTE SOON ON WIND RESEARCH FUNDS;
MAJOR VICTORY IN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

     The U.S. Senate is expected to vote Tuesday afternoon (July 30) on
the Energy and Water Appropriations bill for the coming year.  When it
does, Senators James Jeffords (R-Vermont) and William Roth (R-Delaware)
will offer an amendment to restore renewable energy research programs,
including wind, to current year levels.  For wind, this would mean an
increase from the $15 million approved by the Senate Appropriations
Committee to $32.5 million. 

     This past week, we scored a major victory when the House of
Representatives voted overwhelmingly, 279-135, to increase
renewables programs above the levels previously set by the House
Appropriations Committee.  For wind, the appropriation was
increased from $6 million at the Committee level to $28.5
million--a 13% decrease from current year funding, but still a
major improvement.

     This sweeping victory in the House sets the stage for a
positive outcome in the Senate, but we must leave nothing to
chance.  PLEASE CALL YOUR U.S. SENATORS BETWEEN NOW AND TUESDAY
AFTERNOON AND URGE THEM TO SUPPORT THE JEFFORDS-ROTH AMENDMENT TO
INCREASE FUNDS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH.  You will find
attached excerpts from a fact sheet on the House amendment that
contains a number of "talking points" for your use.  Also 
attached is an article from the FINANCIAL TIMES of London that 
describes what is happening with wind energy in Europe.  You can
reach any Senate office by calling the U.S. Capitol Switchboard
at (202) 224-3121.  If you have any questions, contact Karl
Gawell or Sheila MacNamara of AWEA at (202) 383-2500. 

-----------------------------------------------------------

The SAFE Amendment: Securing America's Future Energy
(summary of amendment as submitted, 23 July 1996)

The SAFE Amendment, introduced by Representatives Schaefer, Klug,
Thurman, Minge, Salmon, and Fazio, will restore most funding
which was cut for renewable energy research and development
programs in H.R. 3816, the FY 1997 Energy and Water Development
Appropriations bill.

Q:   What is the purpose of this amendment?

A:   We must maintain viable renewable energy research,
     development, and demonstration (RD&D) programs as an
     insurance policy against increasing political instability
     from countries where the United States imports over 50% of
     its energy and to ensure that we have a "no-regrets"
     approach to pollution control and prevention.  The
     extraction, conversion, and use of energy is the single
     largest contributor to air and water pollution.

Q:   Why is this amendment necessary?

A:   The FY 1997 Energy & Water Appropriations bill, as reported
     to the floor, fails to take into consideration that
     renewable energy programs took the largest Department of
     Energy (DOE) cuts--29%--in FY 1996.  In the FY 1997 Energy &
     Water bill, DOE renewable energy programs sustain the most
     terminations and reductions of any civilian DOE RD&D
     program.  This is not balanced public policy.

Q:   Are renewables worth it when we must reduce the budget?

A:   We must gradually reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, as
     we face the long-term prospect of running out of these
     resources.  If we continue our research and development now,
     the cost and inconvenience to us and to our descendants will
     be much less than if we force future generations to embark
     on costly "crash programs" to research and develop energy
     sources which we failed to fund in the 1990s.  This is not
     something we should delay until we see an oncoming crisis--
     world energy crises have a habit of occurring when we least
     expect them.

Q:   What are other countries doing in support of renewable
     energy?

A:   As renewable energy budgets in the United States are cut,
     our industrialized competitors see a vacuum in this billion-
     dollar market (which is projected to grow by 70% in five
     years) and are filling it:

- Germany spends more for wind RD&D than the U.S.

- Japan spends twice the U.S. on photovoltaic (PV) RD&D and an
additional $150 million on PV procurement.

- Germany spends 50% more than the U.S. on PV RD&D and has a $100
million local government PV program as well.

- Spain invests an equal amount to the U.S. on solar thermal
RD&D.

Q:   How does the American public feel about renewables?

A:   The American public supports renewable energy.  A public
     opinion poll on energy was recently conducted by Vincent
     Breglio, pollster for Presidents Reagan and Bush.  Its
     results show that Americans want a new emphasis placed on
     developing renewable energy sources--more than any other
     form of energy listed in the survey.  Furthermore, a large
     majority (59%) said that a congressional candidate's
     position on energy funding policy was an important enough
     priority to make the voter much more or somewhat more likely
     to vote for that candidate.  Clearly, the public supports
     renewable energy and, if the opportunity is presented, will
     take it into consideration when forming voting decisions.

__________________________________________________________________

[from the FINANCIAL TIMES, London, 17 July 1996, p. 8]

THIS HAPPY BREEZE
Wind power is taking Europe by storm, but the industry is facing 
opposition, explains Geoff Nairn

	It's an ill wind that blows no good, so when Kenetech 
Windpower, the big U.S. wind power company, filed under Chapter 
11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in May, the heads of rival 
companies in Europe rubbed their hands with glee.

	Wind power is booming in Europe thanks to an improved 
technology, falling costs, and a European Union commitment for 
8% of Europe's primary energy to come from renewable sources by 2005.

	"Wind energy is the most mature and least exploited of 
renewable sources," says Juan Fraga, general secretary of 
Eufores, a European industry body for renewables.  Under the EU 
plan, wind will supply 2% of electricity demand in 2005.

	The target is not ambitious and many regiions of Europe 
will easily surpass that figure.  In the German state of 
Schleswig-Holstein, wind supplies 4% of electricity needs, while 
Denmark hopes to generate 10% of its electricity from wind by 2000.

	Wind power grew up in California in the 1980s, but the 
U.S. industry is under a cloud because of budget cuts to wind 
programmes and frequent changes in federal and state 
incentives.  Many blame this uncertainty for Kenetech's plight, 
but it also suffered blade failures and other technical problems 
with its turbines.

	The biggest wind power market is now Europe, which in 
1995 overtook the U.S. with 2,420 MW of installed capacity 
against 1,700 MW, according to the European Wind Energy 
Association.  Asia is also growing fast, particularly India, 
where 500 MW of capacity was installed in 1995.

	Wind power technology has improved greatly in recent 
years.  Turbine capacities have risen from 75 kW to 600 kW in 10 
years and reliability is close to 99%.  Bigger, more efficient 
turbines and greater production volumes have cut the cost of 
wind-produced electricity by 30-50% since 1990, and in some 
countries it is approaching that of fossil fuels.

	"Of all the renewable energies, wind is closest to 
market in terms of economic viability," says Ian Mays, the 
association's president.

	One company quick to grasp the commercial opportunities 
of wind is Gamesa, the Spanish aerospace company.  In 1995, its 
fledgling wind power subsidiary, Gamesa Eolica, installed 18 
turbines and had turnover of just over Pta 1 billion (5 million 
pounds).  By the end of 1997, managing director Juan Ramon 
Jimenez forecasts, there will be an installed base of 250 
turbines and turnover of Pta 20 billion.

	In March, Gamesa Eolica completed its first wind farm, 
on the exposed El Perdon ridge outside its home town of 
Pamplona, northern Spain.  The site has 40 turbines and 
generates 20 MW for the local utility.  Gamesa Eolica aims to 
complete a second plant of similar capacity by September.

	The Navarra regional government plans 10 more wind farms 
by 2000, when 11% of the electricity consumed there should come 
from wind.  Today only 10% of electricity is generated locally, 
using mainly hydroelectric plants, and the region plans to 
expand wind and hydroelectric power to become self-sufficient in 
electricity by 2010.  "It's a very ambitious target but we will 
achieve it," says Jimenez.

	Gamesa turbines, based on Danish technology, produce 600 
kW and are mounted on 40-m pylons.  They cost Pta 70 million 
each and will work with windspeeds as low as 5m a second [11 
mph], although the average speed at El Perdon is 9m a second [20 
mph].  The 39-m diameter blades have yet to be blamed for any 
bird deaths--something which has turned environmentalists 
against wind farms in Tarifa, southern Spain, and California.

	Gamesa Eolica this month signed an agreement with EHN, 
the electric utility of Galicia, northwestern Spain, to build 
jointly 984 MW of wind capacity, while other Spanish regions, 
such as the Basque country, have similarly ambitious plans to 
use wind power to reduce their energy deficits.

	Germany and Denmark are the European leaders in wind 
power, but Spain is growing fast and will have more than 300 MW 
of installed capacity in 1997, compared with 50 MW in 1993.  The 
potential is much greater--studies have identified sites which 
could generate 2,400 MW in total using current technology.

	Elsewhere in Europe, France and Ireland have good 
technical potential for wind power, although the U.K. has the 
best of all, with more than 126 TW (thousand billion watt) hours 
[billion kilowatt-hours] of onshore wind energy waiting to be 
harnessed each year.

	Despite aggressive expansion plans, the industry is 
meeting opposition from some utilities and fossil fuel 
generators.  "Vested interests are looking with some concern at 
what wind energy is achieving," says Mays.

	Utilities complain that wind-generated electricity 
fluctuates in power and is difficult to manage.  Wind farms are 
often far from centers of demand, but transmitting surplus power 
long distances is inefficient and can overload the grid if the 
wind blows strong, they say.

	Fossil fuel generators claim the price premiums many EU 
states pay for electricity from renewable sources are too 
generous to wind farms and distort the market.

	The forthcoming liberalisation [deregulation] of the EU 
energy market creates further uncertainty.  The wind power 
industry is now fighting back.  It believes some form of price 
support must stay in place for wind-generated electricity 
because of the longer payback time (15 years) of a wind farm 
compared with, say, a gas-fired plant.

	The industry also claims that fossil fuel and nuclear 
generators benefit from indirect subsidies and so the price 
premium for renewables is justified, even before the 
environmental benefits are considered.

	Generating 2% of Europe's electricity from wind would 
allow seven 1,000-MW coal-fired plants to be decomissioned and 
reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 30 million tons a year.

@Copyright Financial Times.  For permission to reprint, contact 
the publication.