Author Archives Laura Arnold

Ontario Revises Proposed Feed-in Tariffs

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   August 18, 2009  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments


Ontario Revises Proposed Feed-in Tariffs
May 13, 2009 (Revised May 19, 2009)

The Ontario Power Authority (OPA) issued revised draft feed-in tariffs at its stakeholder workshop May 12, 2009.

New tariff bands were added and tariffs increased for some technology bands. OPA also revised its proposed bonus payments for projects owned by community and aboriginal groups.

OPA, Ontario's power procurement agency, also eliminated a potentially significant barrier to financing renewable projects by reassuring investors that projects will be paid for generation foregone if economically curtailed.

Ontario is dependent on a large mix of inflexible nuclear power and with the closure of industry across the province there has been a surplus of power during the transition from winter to summer. This surplus has unsettled the investment community along Toronto's Bay Street, Canada's Wall Street.

Ontario has committed to close all its coal-fired power plants by 2014. It is the only jurisdiction in North America to make such a commitment. As a result, Ontario has embarked on an ambitious plan to become a leader in renewable energy development to make up the difference in lost power generation.

OPA has made several changes to its initial feed-in tariff proposal.

Rooftop PV <10 kW tranche now includes ground-mounted systems
Rooftop PV >10 kW tranche expanded to 250 kW, effectively raising the tariff for >100 kW<250 kW systems
Ground-mounted PV cap and degression eliminated
Hydropower is divided into two tranches and the lower tranche gets a little higher tariff
Hydropower term extended to 40 years
100% inflation protection during construction, then 20%.
Biogas tranche <500 kW added
Community and Aboriginal bonus extended to all technologies except rooftop PV
Aboriginal bonus raised to 1.5 cents
Amount of community and aboriginal bonus now depends upon percent ownership interest

North American Feed-in Tariff Policies Take Off

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   August 17, 2009  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Photo courtesy U.S. NREL
Gainesville’s feed-in tariff program is limited to 4 megawatts of solar PV each year. The program is already fully subscribed through 2015 — a 24-megawatt commitment.

Photo courtesy U.S. NREL
Vermont’s feed-in tariff policy plans to establish 50-megawatts of renewable energy. Large- and small-scale wind, solar, and biogas power projects under 2.2-megawatts in size are eligible."
by Ben Block on August 12, 2009

Clean energy advocates in Europe have long considered the feed-in tariff as an antidote to the industrial world's fossil fuel dependency. Now, the United States and Canada are starting to catch on as well.

Feed-in tariffs (FITs) guarantee that anyone who generates electricity from a renewable energy source - whether they are a homeowner, small business, or large electric utility - is able to sell that electricity into the grid and receive long-term payments for each kilowatt-hour produced. Payments are set at pre-established rates, often higher than what the market would ordinarily pay, to ensure that developers earn profitable returns.

The FIT is credited for the rapid deployment of wind and solar power among world renewable energy leaders Denmark, Germany, and Spain this past decade. Similar policies have since been adopted by many other countries, leading the FIT to become the most prevalent tool for promoting renewables.

In North America, its adoption has been relatively slow. As public support for renewable energy increases, however, more governments are adopting FIT policies - often as a complement to the widely used Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) that require utilities to purchase minimum amounts of renewable electricity.

Several U.S. states and Canadian provinces began serious consideration of the FIT last year. More than a dozen states, one province, and numerous municipalities have since implemented some form of FIT.

"We've reached a tipping point where a feed-in tariff is no longer such an odd idea for America," said Paul Gipe, the author of several books on wind energy and a FIT advocate. "In fact, it's the best idea for rapid development of the massive amount of renewable energy that's needed now."
Renewable energy projects have often struggled to gain the confidence of investors, a problem the FIT policy addresses by ensuring that anyone with a sun-drenched roof or windy backyard may receive funding for a set period of time, normally 15-20 years.
"A lot of the charm of the feed-in tariff is solid, take-it-to-the-bank security and confidence for the investing community," said U.S. Representative Jay Inslee, a sponsor of legislation
that would establish a nationwide FIT, at a Washington, D.C. briefing earlier this month. "You get access to what is very difficult to get right now: financing."

Not all FIT policies are created equal. The North American programs enacted to date often limit the level of economic incentive, the project size, and the renewable energy source, compared to large-scale programs enacted in Europe. Small-scale renewable energy advocates are praising FIT programs approved this year in Gainesville, Florida; Vermont; and Ontario as examples that North America should follow.

Gainesville, Florida
Florida, the Sunshine State, is blessed with bountiful solar resources to support renewable electricity. In the northern city of Gainesville, the municipal utility has helped ratepayers purchase their own solar panels since 1997. The program has partially financed some 40,000 watts of solar photovoltaic (PV) panels,but until recently there was no incentive for homeowners to install the panels properly.

"We weren't getting energy bang for the buck," said John Crider, an engineer with Gainesville Regional Utilities' strategic planning department. "People could get the rebate check and put their solar panel in the shade."

Last year, Assistant General Manager Ed Regan visited Germany, the world's leader in grid-connected solar PV, on a trip coordinated with the Solar Electric Power Association. Impressed by Germany's FIT policy, Regan convinced the Gainesville City Commission to approve the first FIT for solar PV in the United States. The utility promised that solar providers who signed up for the program before 2011 would earn $0.32 per kilowatt hour for 20 years, an estimated 4-6 percent return on investment.

"We assume, as time goes on, it will be cheaper to buy and install solar equipment," Crider said. "The rate we pay goes down as well, to keep the return ideally constant."

The utility, which is otherwise reliant on coal and natural gas for its power generation, wanted to be sure that electricity costs would not increase more than 1 percent due to the FIT, Crider said. The decision led the utility to limit the program to 4 megawatts total of solar PV each year. The program is already fully subscribed through 2015 - a 24-megawatt commitment. Before the Gainesville program, the entire state of Florida had installed 2.5 megawatts of solar electricity capacity.

The FIT gained the city's support mostly to boost the local economy. More than 220 companies in Florida produce, sell, or install solar PV products, according to the Apollo Alliance, a San Francisco-based organization that champions "green jobs" nationwide.

"Our primary motive is not to get the cheapest energy and keep profits high for investors, because we don't have investors," Crider said. "For the municipality, we have a larger vision.... Create a local, thriving marketplace for local solar providers."

Vermont

With two-thirds of Vermont's electricity contracts set to expire in 2012, the state was in a position this year to change its energy portfolio. Meanwhile, Vermont was far from its 2025 goal of 25-percent renewable energy - renewables were supplying less than 10 percent.

The state offered a "net-metering" program that allowed residents to feed renewably generated electricity into the grid, offsetting some or all of their electric bills. Hundreds of small-scale systems resulted, but these combined to meet a mere 0.02 percent of the state's electricity load.
"We were trying to alter the entire energy paradigm, but we were on a very slow trajectory," said Andrew Perchlik, executive director of Renewable Energy Vermont.
The net-metering program did not allow participants to turn a profit, a problem given that small-scale power generation projects required the same costly permits as commercial power plants. Too few Vermonters had reason to participate.
Legislators had considered adopting a FIT, but the policy lacked grassroots support until a new coalition of business leaders, environmentalists, and utility executives formed a renewable energy consensus. The group met before the state's politicians convened in January and settled on the framework of what would become Vermont's first FIT, which they call a "standard offer."
"Increasingly, utilities are realizing that customers are asking for renewable energy. In the long run, it will be less expensive than the alternative," said Robert Dostis, a former state House of Representatives energy chairman who now directs external affairs for Green Mountain Power. "By being at the table, we were able to contain the enthusiasm of some of the renewable energy advocates and have them understand the rate impact of some of their ideas."
The legislature settled on a 50-megawatt program that limited individual projects to 2.2 megawatts each. Starting in January 2010, 20-year contracts will be available for developers of large- and small-scale wind, solar, and biogas power projects.
Opponents said the public would reject the idea of paying more for renewable energy projects - the highest rate, $0.30 per kilowatt-hour of solar energy, far exceeded the $0.04 many ratepayers were being charged at the time. "That was not the case at all," Perchlik said. "Some 80 percent wanted renewable energy, and they were willing to pay 5 percent more."
The energy bill cleared the Democrat-controlled legislature easily. In May, Republican governor Jim Douglas allowed the bill to become law despite his concerns about it. He said the FIT "fails to recognize the current viability of renewable energy in a competitive setting and will needlessly increase costs to Vermont consumers so as to subsidize this one favored business sector."
Although program specifics have yet to be finalized, Vermonters are expressing growing interest. Dostis predicts that the program will fulfill its 50-megawatt limit by 2012. "I think this is really going to propel development," he said.
Ontario

During the 2007 provincial campaign, Ontario's Liberal party promised it would close every coal-fired power plant across the province by 2014. Premier Dalton McGuinty said the plant closures would benefit human health and meet half of the party's commitment to reduce greenhouse gases 15 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.
Following the election, the Liberal party secured 71 of the Legislative Assembly's 107 seats. Despite clear political support, shuttering 18 percent of the province's power source is no easy feat. The Liberals had already pledged to close the coal plants during their previous term, only to push back their own deadline.
Since 2006, the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) began offering a FIT system that provided 20-year payments of 11 Canadian cents (US$0.09) per kilowatt-hour for small-scale hydro, wind, and biomass power projects, and 42 Canadian cents (US$0.34) for solar projects. More than 1,000 megawatts of projects were installed during the first year, but renewable energy advocates criticized the payments, particularly for solar energy, as too small.
In March, the province announced that its proposed Green Energy and Green Economy Act would establish a revised FIT modeled after Germany's. The bill set payments for on-shore, off-shore, and community-based wind power; rooftop PV and ground-mounted PV power; small hydropower; and various biomass power options. Payments would depend on the project size for each technology.
The proposal was instantly applauded by renewable energy supporters. "The Green Energy Act is the most progressive renewable energy policy in North America in three decades," said Gipe, who advised the Ontario Sustainable Energy Association. "There was a decision to pay what it costs to develop renewable energy. It's clear to the public, transparent to everyone."
An OPA-conducted survey found 150 developers who were interested in the new FIT and were willing to construct 15,000 megawatts of electric capacity - enough to produce the equivalent of 20 percent of Ontario's electricity consumption.
Gipe also solicited support from Ontario's farmers, whom he advised would be eligible to receive payments for wind turbines on their property.
"I went to every farm group I could," Gipe said. "This is an opportunity to revitalize the Ontario economy...not just to revitalize the rural economy, but the entire industrial economy of Ontario."
The proposal was approved in May. It now stands as the most generous FIT policy in North America.

Reprinted with permission. Worldwatch Institute, Eye on Earth, http://www.worldwatch.org/

Ben Block is a staff writer with the Worldwatch Institute. He can be reached at bblock@worldwatch.org.

NREL Energy Analysts Dig into Feed-In Tariffs – Renewable Energy World

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   August 16, 2009  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

NREL Energy Analysts Dig into Feed-In Tariffs - Renewable Energy World

June 26, 2009
by Joseph B. Verrengia, NREL
Colorado, United States

Feed-in tariffs (FiTs) are the world's most widely used policy to drive renewable energy development. They have helped transform cloudy Germany into the world leader of installed solar power and photovoltaic manufacturing.

Now FITs are stimulating green energy investment in North America, too.
Locations as disparate as the city of Gainesville, FL, the province of Ontario, Canada, and the state of Washington recently have adopted measures establishing guaranteed long-term prices for clean electricity. A dozen more states and many more communities are considering similar energy policy proposals.

NREL energy analysts are digging into these complex policies in a series of technical reports designed to inform government policy makers, clean energy investors, utilities and other stakeholders.

Feed-in tariffs guarantee long-term payments at pre-established rates for the electricity generated from renewable sources. The production-based payments are often higher than market rates, but are on the verge of becoming competitive in specific locations for certain technologies such as wind power.

While utilities are obligated to buy the power, the long-term payments help encourage renewable energy development by reducing risks for investors. Any added costs are typically passed along to ratepayers and, for technologies like wind and landfill gas, may provide a hedge against electricity price volatility and large price spikes over the long-term.

According to the NREL studies, experience around the world suggests that FITs can effectively expand renewable energy deployment and remove barriers to renewable energy development, while creating jobs and helping meet renewable energy standards.

Best Programs Tailored to Local Conditions

States — or even local communities — may be tempted to copy the successful German model word for word. But, NREL analysts say that FITs are most effective when the policy design is adapted to local context.

"Every jurisdiction has unique characteristics that will influence the details of the FIT design and affect its success — these local differences are critical to consider," said Karlynn Cory (pictured below), co-author of State Clean Energy Policies Analysis (SCEPA) Project: An Analysis of Renewable Energy Feed-in Tariffs in the United States (PDF 1.1 MB).

The NREL reports examine a wide range of FIT programs. For example, Gainesville's tariff is limited to photovoltaic projects with a total city-wide cap of 4 megawatts (MW). Under Washington state's FIT policy, solar PV, solar thermal, wind, and anaerobic digesters are offered a payment that differs by technology and that increases if system components are manufactured in-state.

This spring, the Canadian province of Ontario revised its three-year old program to include a 20-year fixed price of as much as US $0.69 for every kilowatt-hour of solar power generated. In response, SunEdison, First Solar, Everbrite Solar and Nanosolar are developing both solar energy farms and manufacturing facilities near Ottawa, Kingston and other cities. (Below, left: NREL energy analysts Claire Kreycik, left, and Karlynn Cory have examined feed-in tariffs in North America and Europe. Credit: Joe Verrengia)

Timely Topic

With so many tariff options, Cory said it is timely for the Laboratory's Strategic Energy Analysis Center to tackle the topic.

"Understanding the policy design options allows decision makers to formulate more effective policies for their specific circumstances," Cory said. "This was a real opportunity for NREL to evaluate the key lessons learned in Europe and translate them to the U.S. context."

The second NREL study of FITs suggests that the policy can work effectively with renewable portfolio standards (RPS). States use RPS policies to set long-term requirements on how much renewable energy must be developed to meet consumer demand, boost clean energy development and reduce their reliance on fossil fuels.

Cory co-authored that report, Feed-in Tariff Policy: Design, Implementation, and RPS Policy Interactions (PDF 446 KB), with NREL analyst Claire Kreycik (pictured above) and Toby Couture, now of E3 Analytics.

Kreycik recently briefed New York state policymakers on how FITs can drive renewable energy deployment and job creation as they prepare to vote on an FIT proposal.

RPS mandates have been adopted in 29 states and Congress is considering a national standard. However, not all of these policies are designed to address investors' needs for revenue certainty. That's where FIT programs can be complementary. (Image: A technician installs meters at a new solar energy project in Gainesville, Fla. The city has adopted a local feed-in tariff to support the development of up to 4 MW of solar energy. Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

"RPS policies tend to set the requirement and let the market figure out how to get there," Cory said. "FIT policies can help utilities meet their RPS target. It doesn't have to be an either-or choice."

A third NREL report will focus on best practices for feed-in tariff policies. It will be completed later this year.

Joseph B. Verrengia writes for the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in Golden, Colorado.

This article originally appeared as a National Renewable Energy Laboratory feature article.

Shared via AddThis

Can green rush yield gold?

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   August 15, 2009  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments
Contractors, manufacturers hope clean-energy incentives,
mandates lead to more business


Indianapolis Business Journal
August 08 - 2009
by Chris O’Malley - comalley@ibj.com

http://www.ibj.com/html/detail_page.asp?content=43468

Federal stimulus funds and greenhouse-gas legislation have the potential to spark a green version of the Gold Rush. Or, perhaps—as with the energy rush of the 1970s gone bust in the 1980s—fool’s gold.

But environmentalism is more ingrained in corporate America, this time around. The prospect of greenbacks for green energy products and services has a growing number of contractors seeing gold in solar,wind and energy consulting.

“Truly, since the stimulus money was announced, we’ve heard from a lot of these [companies]. I would call it a significant number,” said Eric Burch, spokesman for the Indiana Office of Energy Development.

Among those panning for green gold are Antony Rhine and Richard Witka, managing partners of Indianapolis-based Sestertii, which recruits workers for the utilities industry.

A few months ago, they created Sestertii Solar Inc., a division to sell solar power systems engineered by Brighton, Mich.-based The Green Panel. Since then, they’ve been making the rounds of customers attracted to solar for varying reasons.

“One is they want to save the world. Two is to save money,” said Rhine of potential customers. Three is the perception that “it’s going to get their customers’ attention” to be green.

Ultimately, it may be incentives under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act that clinch the deal. The incentives include renewable-energy grants for 30 percent of the cost of solar or other renewable generation.

Sestertii Solar has yet to strike a big deal. But Rhine and Witka have been busy making presentations. They’re also seeking partnerships with architectural firms and construction companies.

They’ve even pitched the idea of a towable solar array that construction firms could place at remote job sites to power construction trailers and tools.

Helping pique interest in renewable power, in addition to tax credits under the recovery act, is the almost-certain prospect of more expensive electricity from the grid.

Ostensibly to reduce global warming attributed to human activity, a cause of warming not all scientists accept, the U.S. House of Representatives recently passed for Senate consideration a so-called cap and-trade bill aimed to discourage carbon dioxide emissions.

The American Clean Energy & Security Act would establish the trading of permits for the right to emit carbon. Some utilities will invest in renewable power such as wind. But it and other renewable fuels are still more expensive per kilowatt than coal to generate electricity.

Energy-intensive companies that didn’t give much thought to energy costs before “are going to have to look at [implications],” added Rhine.


Selling answers

Or companies can hire someone like Jeff Ton to look at the energy implications.

The former chief information officer of Lauth Property Group last January started his own firm, Confluence Dynamics. Ton conducts a comprehensive analysis of a firm’s energy usage and tailors a plan to reduce it. He also offers workshops on green building techniques.

Ton estimates he will have shaved about $6,000 off the annual $130,000 electric bill of one of his clients. Part of the solution was to consolidate a number of the client’s energy-gulping, heat-generating computer servers.

While at Lauth, Ton was involved in emerging technologies to bring energy efficiencies to buildings the commercial developer built.

In this economic climate, many businesses don’t want to invest big bucks in energy-efficient infrastructure, he said.

“But there’s still a lot of low-hanging fruit. You can drive the costs out without a huge capital investment,” Ton said. “The hurdle is the perception it’s expensive, that you’re pitching a retrofit.”

That’s in contrast to much of the glitter in sustainable building, such as construction of LEED-certified buildings, short for the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standard.

They can be an environmentalist’s dream. Keep Indianapolis Beautiful’s headquarters in Fountain Square, for example, sports vertical wind turbines and cisterns to capture water for irrigation.

Such top-to-bottom projects are still the exception. So companies that can install renewable generation systems, such as Indianapolis contractor Ermco, are also marketing energy-efficiency. At Ermco, it’s through the company’s newly formed “Green Energy Group.”

The Ermco unit also scouts for business such as switching out a company’s fluorescent lighting for more efficient systems, or installing sensors that shut off lighting when a room isn’t occupied.

Ermco conducts energy audits that can run 10 pages and provide details such as how long it will take for improvements to provide a payback and an estimate of carbon dioxide reduction, said David Peterson, business development manager at Ermco.

He said the, “Let’s be simple about it” approach recognizes that many firms aren’t in the mode to spend big money right now on projects such as a $12 million solar panel system for which Ermco recently worked up an estimate.

Those lucrative jobs will come eventually, Peterson said. “Green is the buzzword. We’ve always done it, but now it’s hot.”


Back to future

Laura Arnold has seen this before. The president of the Indiana Renewable Energy Association remembers how the energy crisis and policies of President Jimmy Carter in the 1970s helped spur renewable energy dollars. Arnold was a founder of the Indiana Solar Energy Coalition, helped lobby for a state solar tax credit in 1980, and—while working for the city of Fort Wayne—helped lasso a federal grant for solar retrofit of a fire station.

“We’ve been there, done that, got the Tshirt,” she said. “There were lots of things going on at that time.”

Today, there’s been an evolution to the extent renewable energy is part of a broader, “rather amorphous” green movement that includes everything from organic cotton clothing to on-site power production, she said.

The IREA Web site sports a surprising variety of contractors and installers of renewable energy generators, such as solar and wind units. A few, like SunRise Solar in St. John, actually make renewable-energy products—in this case, solarpowered attic fans.

“There’s certainly a lot of interest. There’s a high curiosity factor, is how I’d describe it,” Arnold said. “We still need to get over the hump. There are people who still think renewable energy doesn’t work in Indiana.”

But in other states, there are believers, and that’s good for companies that sell product outside the state.

“Our biggest sales are coming with states with [renewable power] incentives,” said Bill Keith, president of SunRise Solar. “I sell more in New Jersey than in the state of Arizona.”

And Keith sells them in far-flung places, such as Hawaii, Israel, the French West Indies and Singapore. The company the former roofer founded in his garage has zoomed to $4 million in annual sales from $39,000 in 2003.

The company employs just five people, but contracts with Indiana manufacturers for components and assembly of its solarpowered vents, which start at $495.

Keith said some of the companies he hires to provide parts and assembly are in the devastated recreational vehicle industry. The Hoosier Environmental Council estimates that renewable-energy legislation could benefit 1,300 companies in Indiana.

“I’ve got to think that’s grossly understated,” Keith said. “There are a lot of little industries [to benefit]. It’s like the space race. I kind of feel like we’re at that point right now with clean-energy legislation.”

The HEC cites a report by the Renewable Energy Policy Project, a Washington, D.C.-based lobbying group, that estimates Indiana has the potential to land 39,221 new jobs and $6.3 billion in investment in renewable-energy manufacturing.

A traditional manufacturer with operations in Bloomington and Logansport already has tapped into that potential.

Carlisle Industrial Brake and Friction has begun supplying to California-based Clipper Windpower, a maker of wind turbines, the brakes used to control the swivel and turn of the modern-day windmills.

Now the company expects potentially 25 percent of its future product pipeline could be in wind power, said Senior Sales Engineer Scott Eberle. He even gets questions from individuals building small wind turbines (they’ll want to use Carlisle’s trailer-brake product line for those).

“The opportunities for Indiana are really quite significant,” said Jesse Kharbanda, executive director of the HEC.

Cashing in on green


A sampling of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act incentives to invest in energy efficiency and renewable power.

  • Renewable energy production tax credit: The “placed in service” date is extended to the end of 2012 for wind, 2013 for others.
  • Repeal of limited business credits for renewable energy: Gone is the $4000 limit on the 30-percent tax credit for small wind-energy property and the $2,000 cap on solar and geothermal. Repeal is good on property placed in service after Dec. 31, 2008.
  • Production tax credit of up to 2.1 cents per kilowatt hour for power produced from renewable sources
  • Renewable energy grants: Instead of taking the energy investment or renewable energy production tax credit, a business can obtain a grant for 30 percent of the investment in a facility.
  • Clean renewable energy bonds: Applies to certain state utilities, government entities and cooperatives to finance renewable-generation projects. Funds available to issue bonds grow to $2.2 billion from one-time national limit of $800 million.
  • Residential energy-efficiency property tax credit: Maximum credit rose to $1,500 from $500.

Zogby Poll: Majority Favors Clean Energy Bill and Wants Senate to Take Action

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   August 14, 2009  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments
Survey finds likely voters connect reducing global warming
and promoting clean energy to new American jobs

Released: August 11, 2009

UTICA, New York - A majority of likely voters - 71% - favors the American Clean Energy and Security Act recently passed by the House of Representatives, and two-thirds (67%) believe Congress is either doing the right amount (22%) or should be doing more (45%) to address global warming, new Zogby International telephone poll shows. Just 28% believe that Congress is doing too much.

Respondents were read the following statement regarding the American Clean Energy and Security Act:

"The House of Representatives recently passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act, which would require electric power companies to generate 20 percent of their power from clean, renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, by the year 2020. Also included is a global warming plan which would reduce greenhouse gases from sources like power plants and factories by 17 percent, and an energy efficiency plan which includes new appliance standards and building codes to conserve energy."

Favorable views for the bill were high among all age and income groups and even among Republicans, with 45% having a favorable view of the bill. Seventy-three percent of Independents and 89% of Democrats also took a favorable view of the American Clean Energy and Security Act.

The survey finds that two-thirds (68%) of likely voters believe a new American energy policy will not result in job losses, with a majority believing such efforts could instead bring about job growth. Respondents were asked how "efforts to reduce global warming and promote clean energy" will impact American jobs, and more than half (51%) believe this would lead to new job creation, while another 17% believe these efforts will not affect American jobs. Twenty-nine percent feel efforts to promote clean energy will cost American jobs. Those who believe these environmental efforts will create new American jobs outnumbered those who disagreed in all age and income groups. Among self-described political independents, 53% agreed that new jobs will be created, and only 24% thought jobs would be lost.

When presented with arguments for and against the American Clean Energy and Security Act, including concerns about the impact of the legislation on energy prices, a majority (54%) believe the Senate should now take action, with two-fifths (41%) preferring that the Senate wait. Fifty-four percent believe the Senate should take action on the bill because "we need a new energy plan right now that invests in American, renewable energy sources like wind and solar, in order to create clean energy jobs, address global warming and reduce our dependency on foreign oil." Forty-one percent believe that the Senate should instead wait because "the House energy bill is a hidden tax that will cost thousands of dollars every year in increased energy prices, weaken our economy further, and cause America to lose jobs to China and other countries."

"Clearly, voters strongly favor the ideas outlined in the bill. Support for action on clean energy and energy efficiency was strong coming out of the election, and it is still strong today. Even when presented with the concerns some have raised about the potential costs associated with this legislation, most likely voters still want the Senate to act quickly to bring about a new energy plan for America," said Zogby International Research Analyst Sam Rodgers.
The Zogby International telephone survey of 1,005 likely voters was commissioned by the National Wildlife Federation and was conducted from July 31-August 4, 2009. The survey carries a margin of error of +/-3.2%.

The survey also shows 47% of likely voters would take a favorable view of their Congressperson if he or she voted in favor of the bill, while another 21% said it would make no difference in their opinion. Far fewer - 29% -- said they would view their Congressperson unfavorably if he or she voted in support of the bill.

Regarding Congressional action on global warming, a small majority of Republicans (54%) say Congress is doing too much, but a total of 42% say it should do more or is doing the right amount. Only 26% of political independents say Congress is doing too much, while two-thirds of Democrats (65%) want more Congressional action. More than 40% of every age group also wants more from Congress when it comes to taking action to combat global warming.

"Most voters would view their member of Congress more favorably or would not have their opinion impacted either way by a "yes" vote," said Rodgers. "This survey shows clear movement in favor of Congress taking greater action on global warming and most Americans believe this legislation would give a much-need boost to the American job market in this down economy."

For content, contact: Miles Grant, National Wildlife Federation Communications Manager, 202-797-6855 (w), 703-864-9599 (cell) or grantm@nwf.org

For methodology, contact: Stephanie DeVries, Corporate Communications and Research, Zogby International, 315-624-0200 ext. 273 or steph@zogby.com.
For a complete methodological statement on this survey, please visit:
http://www.zogby.com/methodology/readmeth.cfm?ID=1410
(8/11/2009)

Copyright 2013 IndianaDG