Thanks to Big Wind the hidden cost of wind energy may get even MORE expensive.

Wind Production Tax Credit

In 2013, Congress renewed the Wind Production Tax Credit (PTC) which will cost taxpayers more than any other subsidy Wind PTC in the past 10 years. Congress said this subsidy would be temporary, back in 1993. After more than 20 years of this failed subsidy, it’s time to #EndtheEnergyGiveaway and take the training wheels off Big Wind.

Latest

ICYMI: Big Wind Doesn’t Need Welfare

“Congress has a decision to make: Will they stand with American families or with Big Wind’s high-powered lobbyists?” -AEA President Thomas Pyle
WASHINGTON – The American Energy Alliance has long argued that the wind industry should no longer receive the taxpayer-funded wind Production Tax Credit (PTC).  In a recent interview with the Casper Star-Tribune, Power Company of Wyoming CEO Bill Miller stated that the 3,000-megawatt Chokecherry and Sierra Madre wind facility in Wyoming does not require the wind PTC:
“Because of the size and the quality of the resource we have for the project, this project can be done without the production tax credit.
“Quite frankly, though, it would be very beneficial to the project and the market if it were available, but it is not necessary for it to be viable. There are probably not a lot of projects today that could say it doesn’t matter. It does matter, but it is not absolutely required.”
Click here to read the full story in the Casper Star-Tribune.

“This reinforces what we have known all along—the wind industry is no longer an infant and should not be treated like one,” said AEA President Thomas Pyle.

“For over two decades, Americans have been pouring their tax dollars into propping up an industry that has been around for over a century. Extending this handout will cost American families billions of dollars. Congress has a decision to make: Will they stand with American families or with Big Wind’s high-powered lobbyists?” He added.

SURVEY: Americans Reject Costly EPA Proposal

WASHINGTON – A new survey released today by the American Energy Alliance found that the majority of American voters oppose EPA’s recently proposed power plant regulations when confronted with the real world impacts of the rule. The survey was conducted among registered voters in Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, Montana, and North Carolina.

“At a time when Americans are struggling with cost of living and still asking the question ‘where are the jobs’, there is concern about the proposed EPA regulation and the economic impact it will have,” said David Winston, President of the Winston Group, which conducted the survey.

Highlights from the survey:

  • The majority of voters in all five states believe that improving the economy and creating jobs should be the top priority of the Obama administration.
  • Before receiving any information about the regulations, no less than 57 percent of voters in any state supported the regulations. But after listening to key facts about their impact (both positive and negative), no more than 44 percent in any state supported it.

“When faced with the harsh economic reality of the EPA’s new rule, the majority of Americans reject this unprecedented attack on American energy security,” said AEA President Thomas Pyle.

“From the start, the Obama administration has not been forthright with the American public about the exorbitant costs of this rule. Unfortunately, this has become the norm for the ‘most transparent administration in history’: regulating from the shadows and deliberately hiding the consequences of their actions from the American people. And the myriad consequences of the EPA’s new rule are all too real. From lost jobs to rising electricity bills, the EPA’s most recent effort to undermine affordable energy hurts low income families the most.”

“The American people, especially those who live from paycheck to paycheck, cannot afford higher energy costs. Unfortunately for Americans, President Obama seems intent on delivering on his promise to make electricity prices ‘necessarily skyrocket.’”

The survey was conducted for the American Energy Alliance by the Winston Group among 500 registered voters in each of the following states: Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, and North Carolina, and 503 registered voters in Montana for a total of 2,503 registered voters. The margin of error is +/- 4.4 per state.

To view the results, click here

###

ICYMI: Lessons from Australia’s Carbon Tax Debacle

WASHINGTON — American Energy Alliance Vice President of Policy Daniel Simmons penned an op-ed for Roll Call titled “Lessons Congress Can Learn from Australia’s Carbon Tax Debacle.” The text of the op-ed follows:



“Lessons Congress Can Learn From Australia’s Carbon Tax Debacle”
By Daniel Simmons

For the past few years, Australia has been lauded by environmentalists as an example other countries should emulate. The adulation began in 2012, when the country enacted its “carbon tax” — a $21.50 charge (in U.S. dollars), increasing annually, on each ton of carbon dioxide emitted by the country’s power plants. Australia’s list of admirers extended all the way to the White House, where President Barack Obama described the country’s actions as “good for the world.”

Yet Australia is now the first country to eliminate its carbon tax. In so doing, it struck a blow in favor of sound public policy — and American legislators should pay attention.

Last September, the Institute for Energy Research released a comprehensive study on the effects of Australia’s carbon tax. The tax was a disaster. In its first year of existence, the tax increased household electricity prices by 15 percent — the highest quarterly increase in the country’s history. Businesses fared no better — their electricity prices jumped 14.5 percent in a single year.

It doesn’t take an economist to see how this stifled the country’s economic growth. Rising electricity costs mean higher prices for almost all goods and services. They also mean fewer future job opportunities for businesses trying to stay in the black. Australia’s unemployment rolls rose by an astounding 10 percent over the course of a year — the equivalent of the United States adding 950,000 people to the unemployment line by next July.

Meanwhile, there was no environmental benefit to speak of. According to the Australian government’s own data, carbon emissions actually increased after the tax was enacted. Even if the carbon tax were still in operation, the country’s emissions levels weren’t expected to fall below current levels until 2045.

No wonder Australians turned against the tax. They’d have to endure three decades of fewer jobs and higher prices on every day goods just to achieve negligible environmental gains.

But this isn’t just a lesson for Australia. For years, American environmentalists have clamored for a similar carbon tax. They have been joined by a dozen U.S. senators, who several years ago sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid demanding Congress levy “a price on greenhouse gas emissions” — a carbon tax by another name.

Among the letter’s signatories are several Democratic senators facing re-election this year, including New Hampshire’s Jeanne Shaheen, Alaska’s Mark Begich and North Carolina’s Kay Hagan.

Yet the effects would be little different in America than they were in Australia. The Heritage Foundation, using data provided by the Energy Information Administration, recently estimated the effects that a slightly more aggressive carbon tax would have (the EIA data assumed a $25/ton tax, compared to Australia’s $21.50/ton rate).

Heritage found that America could be looking at an economic disaster.

In its first four years, the tax could cut a family of four’s income by nearly $2,000 a year. It could raise the same family’s electricity bills by more than $500 per year and increase gas prices by 50 cents per gallon. Finally, it could eliminate more than a million jobs in the first few years.

Yet Americans’ economic despair would ultimately be for naught. Using assumptions from the data from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s assessment report, a recent analysis found America could eliminate all of its carbon emissions and still only lower global temperatures by 0.137 Celsius by 2100 — a statistically insignificant amount.

Put another way: A carbon tax is all economic pain and no environmental gain. Surely we can agree that sapping the economy and stifling innovation won’t make it any easier for us to promote a healthy environment.

Australians learned that the hard way.

It only took them two years of higher prices, fewer jobs, and no environmental benefits before they abandoned their carbon tax. America’s environmentalists and the legislators who listen to them should take note. There’s no need for history to repeat itself in a different hemisphere.

Click here to see the original post. 

###

Wind Energy Gets Away With Murder

According to an estimate published in the Wildlife Society Bulletin in March, almost 600,000 birds are killed by wind farms in America each year, including over 80,000 raptors such as hawks, falcons and eagles. Even more bats die as their lungs are inverted by the negative pressures generated behind the 170 mile-per-hour spinning.

Take Action Now