A flurry of good intentions

Congress tries to green America’s power supply

WHEN in doubt about energy policy, build more windmills. That, in short, was the thrust of the energy bill approved by the House of Representatives on August 4th. The legislators disagreed about a proposal to reduce the fuel-thirst of American cars. Surprisingly, they also passed up the opportunity to lavish more subsidies on ethanol. They did not even bother to consider a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade scheme for greenhouse gases. But they did give the nod to an amendment that would require utilities to generate 15% of their power from clean sources, such as windmills and solar panels, by 2020.

Proponents of the Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) say it will help to reduce both America’s dependence on imported fuel and its greenhouse-gas emissions without raising power prices. They point to studies by the Energy Information Administration, a government agency, and Wood Mackenzie, a consultancy, which argue that the extra expense of renewable generation will be offset by reduced demand, and so lower prices, for coal and natural gas. No fewer than 27 states, as well as the District of Columbia, have already enacted similar standards. The European Union also has one, to generate one-fifth of its power from renewables by 2020.
But not everyone is convinced. Politicians from southern states complain that their part of the country is not mountainous enough to provide much hydropower, not blustery enough for windpower and not sunny enough for solar power (or not when compared with the south-west, at any rate). Southern Company, a big utility, claims that complying with an RES of 20% would cost it over $26 billion by 2030. Environmentalists argue back that there is plenty of scope for generating relatively cheap green power from farm waste in the South, or from offshore windfarms.

The Economist