• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Pelosi’s Big Bad Energy Idea

    Nancy Pelosi

    Instead of a bunch of small, bad energy bills, why not have one, large bad energy bill? That seems to be the sentiment coming from Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Cap-and-trade. A National Renewable Portfolio Standard. A New Smart Grid. Throw it all in there.

    Pelosi told reporters yesterday on Capitol Hill:

    I would like to see one bill, which is the energy bill, with the cap and trade and the grid piece. I think having it as one bill shows the — I don’t want to say the integrity — the oneness of it all, how it all relates to each other.”

    In reality, these are all separate issues and should be addressed separately.

    Cap-and-trade: A cap-and-trade program to reduce carbon dioxide emissions is nothing more than a regressive tax that will raise energy prices and cost Americans jobs – all for little, if any, environmental gain. A cap-and-trade is a less predictable version of a carbon tax and there is plenty of hope Americans won’t stand for an expensive energy tax, especially in a recessionary environment.

    Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS): A national RPS standard would mandate that a certain percentage of America’s energy come from wind, solar and other renewable energy sources by a certain year. The latest talk has been 25% by 2025. The result of an RPS will be less reliable electricity and higher prices for the taxpayer and the ratepayer. Heritage energy expert Ben Lieberman writes,

    The only reason why renewable electricity needs to be mandated in the first place is that these alternatives are far too expensive to compete otherwise. In effect, Washington is forcing costlier energy options on the public. This is particularly true for certain states, especially those in the Southeast, where the conditions are not conducive to wind power.

    Moreover, these sources of electricity are intermittent and unreliable and thus pose problems beyond the added costs. And like ethanol, renewable sources of electricity enjoy substantial tax breaks; thus, the mandate will cost Americans both as taxpayers and as ratepayers.”

    Smart Grid: A smart grid may very well be beneficial for energy consumers, but a federally mandated smart grid is a bad idea.  Some aspects of a smart grid may make sense while others do not.  Overall, it’s an extremely large undertaking and there’s no reason for the federal government to rush to judgment without first answering a number of questions. Does a smart grid only make sense if we invest heavily in renewables? If it’s a good, profitable idea, why isn’t the private sector investing in it? Are there regulatory hurdles that are keeping the private sector from investing in a smart grid?

    Maybe Nancy Pelosi was right in saying there’s a sense of “oneness” when it comes to these three policies. All three are anti-consumer, anti-energy, anti-growth measures that punish successful energy sources to subsidize unsuccessful ones.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    28 Responses to Pelosi’s Big Bad Energy Idea

    1. Spiritof76, New Hamp says:

      Please read an article by Robert Bryce in the Wall Street Journal of March 5 entitled, " Let's Get Real About Renewable Energy". It is a nice compliment to your posting.

      Your second point about the intermittent nature is worth expanding a bit further. Sun doesn't shine all the time nor does the wind blow 24/7. There is no ability to store vast quantities of electrical energy to resolve the intermittent nature of the renewable energy. One source more reliable in that regard is the Hydro power but the Obama administration is in favor of dismantling more dams than building new ones. You have to have conventional power plant on spinning reserve so that when the wind dies down, those plants can be brought on line to take up the load. The smart grid is not an answer to solve that problem although its purpose is distorted to make it appear as a way to make the renewable energy function reliably.

      Smart grid is intended to modify demand side of the load. Smart grid can track each individual user's demand and charge them according to the power plants satisfying the load. Let us say, that you are cooking in your oven or your air conditioner is operating at your house. If the power is available through wind power to satisfy that demand, you will be charged at a subsidized rate per KWHR. If the wind dies down, your meter will automatically increase your KWHR rate to a much higher level because they had to bring a conventional power on line to continue to satisfy that load. What they will do is to make you conform to the production method. If they can exert such a control as to able to control your thermostat at your house and all your major appliances, then they can shape the demand curve to tailor towards the renewable energy whims.

      Problem is scale. Renewable energy will remain insignificant at less than 10% overall. Look at Europe. Many countries there are now opting to order more coal-fired plants-Italy and Germany.

    2. Barb -mn says:

      "I don’t want to say the integrity — the oneness of it all, how it all relates to each other.” …does this make sense?

      Totally agree Spiritof76. Obama couldn't have articulated it any better or even close to the words you speak.

      It's so black and white!! A kindergartner could figure it out if they had proper education.

    3. Joe Steeves, CA says:

      I never seem to hear why nuclear is so bad. It has been used in Europe for years and although there is some danger the technology has come a long way since Three Mile Island. Until we have a viable alternative why not go with something we know works. Wind and solar just is not reliable enough.

    4. Judy Yorgason, Aloha says:

      Thank you for the input. I believe you are accurate in this amazing maze which is prepared to give the unscrupulous power over families, again removing freedom from us. How can we fight this group of terminators who are destroying America?

    5. Jamey, Central Calif says:

      The direction that they come from bothers me. Both sides agree that something needs to be done. Hers' is not the way. Give incentives to private business to create a good alternative and you would have 25% in half the time. You would also stimulate the Obama economy. But alas, that would be LESS government. WHAT was I thinking. What is someone like her doing talking about this anyway? What qualifications has she had in her life prior to being "elected" queen bee?

    6. Madonna, Florida says:

      When does Pelosi's term expire? She needs to tend to her grandchildren and stay out of politics.

    7. Dale, Cincinnati says:

      Wind has issues beyond reliability and cost. Massive wind and solar farms are an eyesore to scenic areas and fragile ecosystems, which happens to be were the sun shines and wind blows most often. I suspect that the elite owners of Pacific coast properties will stand for mega-scale wind forms near their homes. It will be more of the not in my back yard BS.

      I can hear Stalin now. "From each according to his ability and to each according to his needs." Oh, and me and my elite friends will decide what you need. Centralized planning really worked in the Soviet Union.

    8. Tim Az says:

      I went to IBMS smart grid website last night. Not only will this increase your electrric bill if the power company whishes they will be able to shut down any and all circuits in your home. They will decide what is best for you on any given day at any given moment. I hope no one needs life sustaining medical equipment in their homes like oxygen concentrators. So here's what I wrote on their blog. This technology is great. But you could get better result reducing co2 and other greenhouse gas outputs by applying this technology to every orifice on every living creature on planet Earth. You just dictate how much co2 and other greenhouse gasses can be emitted in a 24 hr. cycle from the orifices of every living creature especialy humans on planet Earth. Once any given creature has reached their maximum allowable ouput level of greenhouse gasses you simply seal off all orifices on every living creature until the begining of the next 24 hr. cycle. Then incrimentally over time reduce the allowable emittions of greenhouse gasses until the Earth has reached a responsible level of greenhouse gasses. That's saving the planet.

      I didn't write this but should have. If the great people of IBM were to sell this plan to Nancy Pelosi. IBM could see profits as far as the eye could see from the backs of all of Earth's amazing creatures. I also took the liberty of adding the phrase other green house gasses. After having written on IBM's blog I read an article about some German scientists who discovered that underwater creatures emit laughing gas.

    9. Melissa, Houston,TX says:

      Instead of controlling the orifices maybe they could begin with our diets. They could use all the scientific information they have to control the combinations of what we eat thereby lowering the greenhouse gasses we emit. One other upside of this would be that they could fine us when we don't eat the right combinations.

      I know that as a mother of five, Nancy Pelosi would love this because she understands how difficult it is for parents to constantly have to prepare meals for the family. The government could take over this responsibility too.

      I envision something like pre-packaged meals like Nutrisystem or Jenny Craig.

      Seriously, if we continue to see the planet cool as it is supposed to for the next 30 years, I imagine we are going to want more greenhouse emissions and won't be able to make enough to keep our orifices warm. Once again we will find ourselves beholden to the Chinese.

      You know how Queen Nancy (Anunciata Regina) always looks excited these days like "it is a new day!" I know she would love Tim's idea or mine because she would be able to really know her power. (See her book: Know Your Power) I imagine she would adopt both suggestions right on the spot.

      The sad thing is that we really are going to have to pay so much more for our power than is needed. Most of us can agree that energy independence and living in a cleaner world are valuable goals, but making people pay more for power during such difficult economic times doesn't make any sense.

      God bless America!

    10. Dale, Cincinnati says:

      To Madonna in Florida. Being from the granola valley area (you know…fruits, nuts and flakes) she will be there until hell freezes over. The only hope is to flip the house republican and maybe she will choke on crow.

    11. ra,ohio says:

      Her quote sounds like it came from a 5th grader!

      (I have nothing against intelligent 5th graders!)

    12. JImmy - May (by God) says:

      Right on Dale! You too Jamey, "queen bee", good one!

    13. Paul - North Carolin says:

      Maybe we can harness the hot air that the queen bee provides when she makes any comments.

    14. Steve in KC says:

      I predict that in less than 30 years you will see rusting, cob-webbed laden, dormant windmills dotting the countryside and our children and grandchildren wondering just what the hell were they thinking?!?!?!?

    15. Dianne Thompson, Vir says:

      How many wind mills does it take to equal the energy produced via one coal mine, or one nuclear plant? I thought I saw and read something like 1.3 million wind mills. If true that is ridiculous for modern times. In Virginia they are considering in our area. We don't even have much wind much less want de-foresting. However, I understand Nancy Pelosi invested in windmill technonlogy with T Boone Pickens and I guess she will force the issue

    16. Dennis, Idaho says:

      Someone asked "Does it make any sense?" It doesn't have to make sense, as long as they have the power of control your future and mine. I just hope they get enough rope to hang themselves. They can't shoot themselves in the foot because none of then own a gun.

    17. Al, The Villages, Fl says:

      There is a need to develop an energy bill that addresses all the issues relating to power generation,distribution, cost and environmental considerations. It also needs to address the transportation side of energy. Without that, you cannot move forward because the short term solution is to drill for oil owned by the U.S. That would satisfy the need to become independent and for national security protection but it will bring down the cost of gasoline so that the rest of the issues (long term, alt energy, etc) will not be addressed but kicked down the road. Pushing alt energy with the current administrations's approach will result in lots of money spent by R&D types but little gain, certainly not gain at a level that will answer the country's need in the next 5 years. Pickens pushed for the use of natural gas with an idea to move it over to transportation and replace the gap in generation by the use of wind. A sensible alternative to wind would be nuclear but you notice that he backed off when gasoline prices decreased. That gives you a hint that the curent knowledge for alt energy solutions require an equivalent of $5 a gal or more for gasoline. That will not sell without a clear light at the end of the tunnel. WE nee a group that could (like those that addressed the tax issue and came up with the Fair Tax)address energy on this larger scale with a short and long term approach to make it work. Otherwise, telling industry what to do will only end up in a patchwork of costly, inefficient, third world solutions.

    18. Spiritof76, New Hamp says:

      To Dianne of Virginia- A wind turbine (big one) produces about 2MW. A modern coal power plant produces 1000MW. You will need an army of 500 wind turbines to produce 1000MW. Wind turbine installation requires approximately 0.1 Sq.Km area of unobstructed open space for every 1MW. In order to equal a coal power plant of 1000 MW, you will need a minimum of 40 Square mile! The US installed capacity of electric power plants is roughly 900,000MW. Even if you include the land area used for mining of coal, land use by coal power plant is much smaller than the wind farm rated to produce the same amount of power.

      Wind turbine can only generate power within a range of wind velocity. If wind dies down or gets over 50mph the power generation stops. And, wind doesn't blow all the time. You can not store electricity (at those levels) for later use when the wind dies down.

      Hope that clarifies a bit for you.

    19. Jolene Atkins, Dalla says:

      This morning's CBS news claims Obama has a 58% approval rating. They must have polled only the White House.

      How could 58% of America approve of Big Government?

      I agree with the comment: "All three are anti-consumer, anti-energy, anti-growth measures that punish successful energy sources to subsidize unsuccessful ones."

      The Obama Administration becomes more firghtening every single day. It feels like we are all prisoners of the Liberals. It also feels like they will not work with the Republicans; nor take any of the Republican plans. The Democrati Steamroller rolls on and on and on. Will we ever get America and the freedoms we grew up with back again?

    20. Ron, Derry NH says:

      It is all about power and nothing about electricity.

      We are bearing witness to a party so bent on voicing its way over America that it has forgotten to be American.

      We the people would like science and industry to solve our energy limitations or excesses not a bureaucrat. We would prefer that some bone headed uneducated arrogant power crazed graft dealing saboteur of American well being to get out of the way.

      America needs power to grow, to live to be strong and science can and will discover the best financial and environmental ways, if power hungry policy makers would get their slimy hands out of the till and let industry make the decisions it needs to make to beat the rest of the world at this game of life.

      Pelosi is a power monger and shorts out every attempt at a free market to decides its energy needs and stifles Americas surging interest in clean energy. She has proved to have no leadership agenda but thwarting American interests and redirecting them to government favoritism and constituent rewarding. She is all about power and little to do with energy.

    21. Marshall Hill MI. says:

      Well Pelosi,try to implement your Plans in China!

    22. Paul, FL says:

      What about the energy to produce, package and distribute food? Maybe we can just rely on the old standby, "Soylent Green". We could start with members of Congress and work our way UP!

    23. ra,ohio says:

      Put conservatives in congress in 2010, and she will melt like the wicked witch of the west in the Wizard of Oz.

      The only way she survives is because she is surrounded by liberals. She is stupid and has no right to have the position she maintains.

      To this day I have no idea how she ever achieved it, aside from corruption in our election system. NAW !!! That could NEVER HAPPEN !!!

    24. Henry A Chabot says:

      I repeat its time to tell Nancy pelosi good bY.

    25. Tucker, Michigan says:

      I'm in the market for a new home and intend to be off grid as rapidly as possible with solar and wind energy. I am sick of paying $500 a month heating bills in the winter. I'm getting a tiny house I can heat with the fireplace. The money I save will allow me to become debt free within 3 years. And I live on disability.

    26. ron, florida says:

      Nobody has brought up the trade deficit and national security as part of the energy issue. Alternate energy prolongs our finite natural resources, and or reduces money sent to unfriendly nations. Im not worried about global warming but see value in conserving where we can with efficiency and promoting alternate energy with reasonable tax breaks for those reasons. Capitalism and american ingenuity will take care of the problems related to reliablity and economic vyability.

    27. enerwise, sc says:

      A wind turbine (big one) produces about 2MW. A modern coal power plant produces 1000MW. You will need an army of 500 wind turbines to produce 1000MW. Wind turbine installation requires approximately 0.1 Sq.Km area of unobstructed open space for every 1MW. In order to equal a coal power plant of 1000 MW, you will need a minimum of 40 Square mile! The US installed capacity of electric power plants is roughly 900,000MW. Even if you include the land area used for mining of coal, land use by coal power plant is much smaller than the wind farm rated to produce the same amount of power.

      Wind turbine can only generate power within a range of wind velocity. If wind dies down or gets over 50mph the power generation stops. And, wind doesn’t blow all the time. You can not store electricity (at those levels) for later use when the wind dies down.

      Hmmm, nine hundred times 40 Square miles,,,,? of land that must be cleared,,,, are these the same activist telling people to plant a TREE ?.

      Great idea cut down our forest [ old growth ] and plant new trees, we can just tell all the animals and insects to wait for the new trees to grow, sounds like someone didn't quite think this through.

    28. vern florida says:

      Pelosi is the biggest setback to the women who have worked hard to achieve equality in the workplace.In her first 100 days, she updated the cafeteria and menus in congress building,and made statements on what SHE would allow to come up for vote on floor of Congress. The woman has had too much botox and it has crossed the blood-brain barrier. She needs to go to the nearest nursing home.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×