Del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Reddit
Newsvine
co.mments
Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax incentives for the production of renewable energy and energy conservation.
This bill would repeal roughly $18 billion in manufacturing tax credits for oil and gas companies while extending and increasing tax credits for a wide range of renewable energy programs. It is expected to cause a contentious debate in the Senate, where it's chances of being approved are uncertain.
- Official: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax incentives for the production of renewable energy and energy conservation. as introduced.
- Short: Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008 as passed house.
- Short: Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008 as introduced.
2/27/2008--Passed House without amendment. (This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008 - Amends Internal Revenue Code provisions relating to renewable energy sources and energy conservation. Title I: Production Incentives -
(Sec. 101) Extends through 2011 the tax credit for the production of electricity from renewable resources (e.g., wind, closed and open-loop biomass, geothermal energy, small irrigation power, municipal solid waste, and qualified hydropower). Imposes a limit on such tax credit based upon investment in renewable resource facilities placed in service after 2009 in lieu of the current phaseout provisions for such credit.
(Sec. 102) Includes marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy as a renewable resource for purposes of the tax credit for producing electricity from renewable resources.
(Sec. 103) Extends through 2016 the energy tax credit for investment in solar energy and fuel cell property.
Allows an offset against alternative minimum tax liability for certain energy tax credit amounts.
Increases to $1,500 the credit limitation for fuel cell property. Allows public electric utility property to qualify for the energy tax credit.
(Sec. 104) Allows a new tax credit for investment in qualified new clean renewable energy bonds.
(Sec. 105) Extends through 2009 the special rule for the treatment of gain from electronic transmission transactions by a qualified electric utility (as defined by the Federal Power Act).
(Sec. 106) Extends through 2014 the tax credit for residential energy efficient property expenditures. Increases to $4,000 the maximum amount of such credit for solar electric property. Includes residential small wind equipment and geothermal heat pumps as property eligible for such credit. Allows credit amounts to offset alternative minimum tax liability. Title II: Conservation - Subtitle A: Transportation - Part I: Vehicles -
(Sec. 201) Allows a new tax credit for the production of plug-in hybrid vehicles. Defines "qualified plug-in hybrid vehicle" as a motor vehicle weighing less than 14,000 pounds that meets certain emission standards under the Clean Air Act and that is propelled to a significant extent by an electric motor that draws electricity from a rechargeable battery.
(Sec. 202) Extends through 2010 the tax credit for installing nonhydrogen alternative fuel refueling property. Increases the rate of the tax credit for alternative fuel refueling property expenditures from 30 to 50% and raises the dollar limit for commercial properties to $50,000.
(Sec. 203) Modifies the definition of "passenger automobile" for purposes of limitations on depreciation and expensing of vehicles to include any four-wheeled vehicles that are designed primarily to carry passengers over public streets, roads, or highways and that are rated at not more than 14,000 pounds gross vehicle weight.
Part 2: Fuels -
(Sec. 211) Extends through 2010 the income and excise tax credits for biodiesel (including agri-biodiesel) and renewable diesel used as fuel. Eliminates the requirement that renewable diesel be made using a thermal depolymerization process. Modifies the definition of "renewable diesel" for purposes of the income and excise tax credits for biodiesel and renewable diesel used as fuel to exclude any fuel derived from coprocessing biomass with a feedstock that is not biomass.
(Sec. 212) Disqualifies foreign-produced fuel that is used or sold for use outside the United States for the income and excise tax credits for alcohol, biodiesel, renewable diesel, and alternative fuel production.
(Sec. 213) Allows an alcohol fuels tax credit for the production of qualified cellulosic alcohol fuel.
Part 3: Other Transportation Incentives -
(Sec. 221) Allows employees to exclude reimbursements for bicycle commuting expenses from gross income.
(Sec. 222) Allows a tax credit against payroll liabilities of New York Liberty Zone governmental units (i.e., New York State, the City of New York, or any agencies or instrumentalities thereof) for expenditures involving transportation infrastructure projects in or connecting with the New York Liberty Zone.
Subtitle B: Other Conservation Provisions -
(Sec. 231) Authorizes the issuance of qualified energy conservation bonds to finance local government conservation and greenhouse gas reduction projects. Imposes a national limitation of $3.6 billion on the issuance of such bonds.
(Sec. 232) Extends the tax credit for nonbusiness energy property expenditures through 2009. Includes energy-efficient biomass fuel stoves as property eligible for such tax credit.
(Sec. 233) Extends the tax deduction for energy efficient commercial buildings through 2013.
(Sec. 234) Revises the amounts allowable under the tax credit for energy efficient appliances produced after 2007 (i.e., dish washers, clothes washers, and refrigerators) and extends such credit through 2010.
(Sec. 235) Allows a five-year recovery period for the depreciation of qualified energy management devices. Defines " energy management device" as a device that measures and records electricity usage data on a time-differentiated basis in at least 24 separate time segments per day and allows for the exchange of electricity-usage information and data.
Title III: Revenue Provisions -
(Sec. 301) Denies the tax deduction for income attributable to domestic production of oil, gas, or any related products for major integrated oil companies. Reduces such deduction by 3% for taxpayers other than major integrated oil companies after 2009.
(Sec. 302) Revises the method for calculating foreign oil and gas extraction income and foreign oil related income to require a valuation prior to a specified fair market value event.
(Sec. 303) Increases by 3% the estimated tax payment of certain large corporations (assets of not less than $1 billion) in the third quarter of 2013.
Title IV: Other Provisions - Subtitle A: Studies -
(Sec. 401) Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to enter into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) for a review of the Internal Revenue Code to identify the types of tax provisions that have the largest effects on carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions and to estimate the magnitude of those effects. Requires NAS to reports its findings to Congress not later than two years after the enactment of this Act. Authorizes appropriations for such study in FY2008-FY2009.
(Sec. 402) Directs the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretaries of Agriculture and Energy, and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to enter into an agreement with NAS to produce an analysis of scientific findings relating to current and future biofuels production and the domestic effects of a dramatic increase in such production activity. Requires NAS to submit an initial report to Congress on its findings within three months after enactment of this Act and a final report within six months.
Subtitle B: Application of Certain Labor Standards on Projects Financed Under Tax Credit Bonds -
(Sec. 411) Applies labor standards under the Davis-Bacon Act to projects financed with new clean renewable energy bonds.
... morehide bill summarySee Full Bill Text
Sponsor
- Rep. Charles Rangel [D, NY-15]
- and 36 Co-Sponsors
- Rep. Xavier Becerra [D, CA-31]
- Rep. Shelley Berkley [D, NV-1]
- Rep. Earl Blumenauer [D, OR-3]
- Rep. Kathy Castor [D, FL-11]
- Rep. Steve Cohen [D, TN-9]
- Rep. Joseph Crowley [D, NY-7]
- Rep. Lloyd Doggett [D, TX-25]
- Rep. Keith Ellison [D, MN-5]
- Rep. Rahm Emanuel [D, IL-5]
- Rep. Eni Faleomavaega [D, AS-0]
- Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [D, AZ-8]
- Rep. John Hall [D, NY-19]
- Rep. Baron Hill [D, IN-9]
- Rep. Mazie Hirono [D, HI-2]
- Rep. Paul Hodes [D, NH-2]
- Rep. Henry Johnson [D, GA-4]
- Rep. Stephanie Jones [D, OH-11]
- Rep. Ronald Kind [D, WI-3]
- Rep. Ron Klein [D, FL-22]
- Rep. John Larson [D, CT-1]
- Rep. Sander Levin [D, MI-12]
- Rep. John Lewis [D, GA-5]
- Rep. Daniel Lipinski [D, IL-3]
- Rep. David Loebsack [D, IA-2]
- Rep. James McDermott [D, WA-7]
- Rep. Jerry McNerney [D, CA-11]
- Rep. Richard Neal [D, MA-2]
- Rep. William Pascrell [D, NJ-8]
- Rep. Earl Pomeroy [D, ND-0]
- Rep. John Sarbanes [D, MD-3]
- Rep. Allyson Schwartz [D, PA-13]
- Rep. Albio Sires [D, NJ-13]
- Rep. Fortney Stark [D, CA-13]
- Rep. Niki Tsongas [D, MA-5]
- Rep. Christopher Van Hollen [D, MD-8]
- Rep. Peter Welch [D, VT-0]
Amendments
This bill has no amendments.
Amendments to H.R.5351
| Number | Status | Purpose |
|---|
Bill Status
 |
||
| OpenCongress widgets allow you to display information about bills and issue areas on your own website or blog. First, select which bill or issue you want to track, then customize the appearance of the panel, and finally paste a simple chunk of HTML into your site. Now your community will have an easy, up-to-date way to track the status of important bills and issues in Congress. | ||
| Introduced |  | Voted on by House |  | Voted on by Senate | | Considered By President | | Bill Becomes Law |
| February 12, 2008 | February 27, 2008 |
Latest Vote
| February 27, 2008Roll call number 84 in the House | |||
| Question: On Passage: H R 5351 Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008 | |||
| Required percentage of 'Aye' votes: 1/2 (50%) | Percentage of 'aye' votes: 55% | Result: Passed | |
Democrats Voting 'Aye'
Rep. Neil Abercrombie [D, HI-1]Rep. Gary Ackerman [D, NY-5]
Rep. Thomas Allen [D, ME-1]
Rep. Jason Altmire [D, PA-4]
Rep. Robert Andrews [D, NJ-1]
Rep. Michael Arcuri [D, NY-24]
Rep. Joe Baca [D, CA-43]
Rep. Brian Baird [D, WA-3]
Rep. Tammy Baldwin [D, WI-2]
Rep. Melissa Bean [D, IL-8]
Rep. Xavier Becerra [D, CA-31]
Rep. Shelley Berkley [D, NV-1]
Rep. Howard Berman [D, CA-28]
Rep. Robert Berry [D, AR-1]
Rep. Sanford Bishop [D, GA-2]
Rep. Timothy Bishop [D, NY-1]
Rep. Earl Blumenauer [D, OR-3]
Rep. Leonard Boswell [D, IA-3]
Rep. Frederick Boucher [D, VA-9]
Rep. F. Allen Boyd [D, FL-2]
Rep. Nancy Boyda [D, KS-2]
Rep. Robert Brady [D, PA-1]
Rep. Bruce Braley [D, IA-1]
Rep. Corrine Brown [D, FL-3]
Rep. George Butterfield [D, NC-1]
Rep. Lois Capps [D, CA-23]
Rep. Michael Capuano [D, MA-8]
Rep. Dennis Cardoza [D, CA-18]
Rep. Russ Carnahan [D, MO-3]
Rep. Christopher Carney [D, PA-10]
Rep. Kathy Castor [D, FL-11]
Rep. Ben Chandler [D, KY-6]
Rep. Yvette Clarke [D, NY-11]
Rep. William Clay [D, MO-1]
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver [D, MO-5]
Rep. James Clyburn [D, SC-6]
Rep. Steve Cohen [D, TN-9]
Rep. John Conyers [D, MI-14]
Rep. Jim Cooper [D, TN-5]
Rep. Jim Costa [D, CA-20]
Rep. Jerry Costello [D, IL-12]
Rep. Joe Courtney [D, CT-2]
Rep. Robert Cramer [D, AL-5]
Rep. Joseph Crowley [D, NY-7]
Rep. Elijah Cummings [D, MD-7]
Rep. Artur Davis [D, AL-7]
Rep. Danny Davis [D, IL-7]
Rep. Lincoln Davis [D, TN-4]
Rep. Susan Davis [D, CA-53]
Rep. Peter DeFazio [D, OR-4]
Rep. Diana DeGette [D, CO-1]
Rep. William Delahunt [D, MA-10]
Rep. Rosa DeLauro [D, CT-3]
Rep. Norman Dicks [D, WA-6]
Rep. John Dingell [D, MI-15]
Rep. Lloyd Doggett [D, TX-25]
Rep. Joe Donnelly [D, IN-2]
Rep. Michael Doyle [D, PA-14]
Rep. Thomas Edwards [D, TX-17]
Rep. Keith Ellison [D, MN-5]
Rep. Brad Ellsworth [D, IN-8]
Rep. Rahm Emanuel [D, IL-5]
Rep. Eliot Engel [D, NY-17]
Rep. Anna Eshoo [D, CA-14]
Rep. Bob Etheridge [D, NC-2]
Rep. Sam Farr [D, CA-17]
Rep. Chaka Fattah [D, PA-2]
Rep. Bob Filner [D, CA-51]
Rep. Barney Frank [D, MA-4]
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [D, AZ-8]
Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand [D, NY-20]
Rep. Charles Gonzalez [D, TX-20]
Rep. Barton Gordon [D, TN-6]
Rep. Al Green [D, TX-9]
Rep. Raul Grijalva [D, AZ-7]
Rep. Luis Gutierrez [D, IL-4]
Rep. John Hall [D, NY-19]
Rep. Phil Hare [D, IL-17]
Rep. Jane Harman [D, CA-36]
Rep. Alcee Hastings [D, FL-23]
Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin [D, SD-0]
Rep. Brian Higgins [D, NY-27]
Rep. Baron Hill [D, IN-9]
Rep. Maurice Hinchey [D, NY-22]
Rep. Rubén Hinojosa [D, TX-15]
Rep. Mazie Hirono [D, HI-2]
Rep. Paul Hodes [D, NH-2]
Rep. Tim Holden [D, PA-17]
Rep. Rush Holt [D, NJ-12]
Rep. Michael Honda [D, CA-15]
Rep. Darlene Hooley [D, OR-5]
Rep. Steny Hoyer [D, MD-5]
Rep. Jay Inslee [D, WA-1]
Rep. Steve Israel [D, NY-2]
Rep. Jesse Jackson [D, IL-2]
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D, TX-18]
Rep. William Jefferson [D, LA-2]
Rep. Eddie Johnson [D, TX-30]
Rep. Henry Johnson [D, GA-4]
Rep. Steve Kagen [D, WI-8]
Rep. Paul Kanjorski [D, PA-11]
Rep. Marcy Kaptur [D, OH-9]
Rep. Patrick Kennedy [D, RI-1]
Rep. Dale Kildee [D, MI-5]
Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick [D, MI-13]
Rep. Ronald Kind [D, WI-3]
Rep. Ron Klein [D, FL-22]
Rep. Dennis Kucinich [D, OH-10]
Rep. James Langevin [D, RI-2]
Rep. Rick Larsen [D, WA-2]
Rep. John Larson [D, CT-1]
Rep. Barbara Lee [D, CA-9]
Rep. Sander Levin [D, MI-12]
Rep. John Lewis [D, GA-5]
Rep. Daniel Lipinski [D, IL-3]
Rep. David Loebsack [D, IA-2]
Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D, CA-16]
Rep. Nita Lowey [D, NY-18]
Rep. Stephen Lynch [D, MA-9]
Rep. Tim Mahoney [D, FL-16]
Rep. Carolyn Maloney [D, NY-14]
Rep. Edward Markey [D, MA-7]
Rep. James Marshall [D, GA-8]
Rep. Doris Matsui [D, CA-5]
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy [D, NY-4]
Rep. Betty McCollum [D, MN-4]
Rep. James McDermott [D, WA-7]
Rep. James McGovern [D, MA-3]
Rep. Mike McIntyre [D, NC-7]
Rep. Jerry McNerney [D, CA-11]
Rep. Michael McNulty [D, NY-21]
Rep. Kendrick Meek [D, FL-17]
Rep. Gregory Meeks [D, NY-6]
Rep. Michael Michaud [D, ME-2]
Rep. George Miller [D, CA-7]
Rep. R. Bradley Miller [D, NC-13]
Rep. Harry Mitchell [D, AZ-5]
Rep. Alan Mollohan [D, WV-1]
Rep. Dennis Moore [D, KS-3]
Rep. Gwen Moore [D, WI-4]
Rep. James Moran [D, VA-8]
Rep. Christopher Murphy [D, CT-5]
Rep. Patrick Murphy [D, PA-8]
Rep. John Murtha [D, PA-12]
Rep. Jerrold Nadler [D, NY-8]
Rating Filter: 5
Comments
Displaying 1-30 of 34 total comments.
The facts would seem to be on the side of this bill's sponsors and their supporters. $18 billion would go a long way toward building the alternative energy industry, and that in turn would stimulate the economy. Like many investors in this country's energy sector, I have positions in both traditional and alternative companies. If alternative continues to grow as I hope it will, I'll shift assets out of oil and natural gas and into solar (or whatever). I frankly don't see a downside to this legislation.
The Bush Administration has a point when he says it's unfair to withdraw the manufacturing credit from JUST this industry. So, broaden the billl. In fact, let's withdraw it from OTHER dinosaurs we don't want this planet and the people of this country be obliged support. Any industry that continues to make profits by using up our non-renewable natural resources, should have manufacturing credit withdrawn, those revenues to be used to find renewable alternatives through responsible means.
The final vote includes those of a number of endangered Republicans who opposed the bill until it was a foregone conclusion, and then flipped their voting to make it appear the supported it.
So do we just ignore the 5 other votes because of that 1 vote?
I don't think so!
Renewable energy is great, but all conservation possibilities should be exhausted before putting in windmills that harm wildlife and so forth. With that in mind, the link below leads to software made by Faronics, a product that controls desktop computer energy usage,
http://www.faronics.com/html/download.asp?software=18&code=vweds
Brooke Saunders
Uptime Solutions
Richmond VA 804-545-4311
I agree windmills are atrocious and destroy land for use by people and wildlife. I am much more interested in seeing solar powered sky scrapers as they have been experimenting wish, which has been increasingly more viable as we have recently blown away theories on the limits of solar power.
I love it. A wolf/capitalist in a sheep's/environmentalist clothing. You go girl!!!
Wind energy has NOTHING to do with harming wildlife. More birds are killed by airplanes per capita than wind turbines (and that number is very low). Show me one study that indicates otherwise! PLEASE consider the ramifications of your post!
Filtered Comment [show]
"Instead we should be unleashing the power of the market, and expanding domestic production to meet our energy needs."
The bill is intended to allow the renewable energy industry to provide a greater share of the nation's energy needs. It does this by "unleashing" market power in the form of tax breaks. It is geologically impossible to expand domestic production of oil and natural gas to the point where it will meet the country's energy demands. So renewable energy must fill the void (unless we want to want to burn more coal or increase our reliance on imported oil).
What Congress is really doing is closing $18 billion in special tax breaks the oil industry doesn't need. It is transferring those tax breaks to another industry, renewable energy, that can uses them. If big oil wants their tax breaks back they can invest their profits in renewable energy.
Claiming the Congress is raising taxes just makes you look uninformed.
Nice try chief. you are transparent.
NICE TRY...haha. The facts are clear. When oil companies needed tax breaks and incentives to produce more oil it was given. Now when it's time to return the favor and provide incentives for renewable energy it's rejected. This SHOULD be a bipartisan issue. WE AMERICANS are going to need an energy mix to provide for the ever increasing demand. We will never get there without incentives. Time for the oil companies to pony up!
In an ideal world, we would not need government policies to steer industry toward desired outcomes; they would get there by themselves. Unfortunately, this is not an ideal world, and the idea of doing nothing for alternative energy until oil is either gone or unaffordable is ludicrous. One of the responsibilities of the government is to protect its citizens against future catastrophic events, and having no energy alternatives certainly qualifies, in my opinion. The renewable energy industry creates jobs and also allows us to employ scientists and engineers to harness energy more efficiently. Why we are not attacking this problem with the same zeal as when decided to put a man on the moon is something that I cannot understand.
If we're worried about the economy, then an all-out effort toward renewable energy is imperative. Our GDP per barrel of oil purchased is well below that of Europe and Japan. That puts our economy and standard of living at great risk.
The bill does appear to take away 3% of the tax breaks that oil companies and such were getting for extracting, refining etc, but still allows for tax breaks for working with and towards renewable energy resources. It appears to me that there are a lot of folks that think that this is going to lead to an $18 billion dollar tax increase to the oil companies, but from what I am reading that can be recovered by further investment into renewable energy.
If the oil companies don't invest in research and production of renewable energy, then yes, they will have higher taxes which equate to the taxpayers spending more on gasoline, electricity and natural gas to heat their homes.
The part that really bothers me though is the exemption of Citgo from the tax change. What purpose is a tax bill if there are exemptions? If all US oil companies are to suffer the loss of tax incentives, then why should a company in Venezuela still benefit from them?
Filtered Comment [show]
Why would the oil companies care. they will just pass on the 18 billion to you and me. aren't we lucky, gas will be $10.00 a gallon in no time at all.
H.R 5351 is a small incentive towards freeing our country from dependence on foreign oil and gas. Exxon made over $40 Billion in profit last year and the effect of this bill at worst would have made their profit $39.7 Billion. In the meantime, me and my family has spent the last four decades serving in the military with the majority of combat time spent protecting Oil interests.
Investment in Renewable energy and the Production Tax credits (PTC) provides incentives for Jobs and keeps us competitive in Renewable Energy technologies. China, Japan, and Europe are making large investments in this field while we continue to give taxpayer money to our most profitable oil corporations at the expense of our future. As a competitor I do not like to lose the race for Renewable Energy to China and Europe as our auto industry has lost to Japan and Europe.
There is a direct correlation between the expiration of the PTC and reduced investment in Renewable Energy. Insuring the PTC are renewed maintains over 116,000 jobs and creates thousands more. In February 2008 alone the US Labor department reported the economy lost 63,000 jobs. Are member of the Senate willing to throw nearly twice that number of American under the economic bus in order to give our tax dollars to Big Oil companies? How do representatives who vote against this bill proposing to employ the thousands of service men and women returning from combat in Iraq and Afghanistan while domestic oil companies are profiteering on public resources?
Wind and Solar power provide a resource for educating and employing millions of Americans in coming decades. The most effective and economical way available to us now to help this process is promote the renewal of the Energy Production Tax credit. The U.S. Department of Energy recognizes Wind and Solar energy as the most viable future sources of energy for our country. See http://www.doe.gov/energysources/index.htm and http://www.doe.gov/energysources/wind.htm We are rich in these resources and the sooner we develop them the sooner we free ourselves from exporting our money and soldiers to the Middle East. The Nobel Laureate, Richard Smalley lists Energy as the #1 of Humanities problems for the next 50 years. It is in our national interest to do all we can to develop our Renewable Energy resources.
I paid $3.43/gal for premium gas today. Last week it was $3.37. It's obvious that the price of gas is going up whether we do something about it or not. It's time to be leaders and not fear to invest in our future.
Renewable energy is our inevitable future whether or not it is what is most immediately necessary. Now what we need to consider is if this is the time we need to really embrace renewable energy at the expense of higher gas prices that are certain to take place. If not only to avoid this being more difficult in the future, this is something we are ready for, as demonstrated by the votes in favor of this bill, along with mine.
While I am in complete agreement with liveride, we need to be careful about which alternative energy source we are supporting. This bill gives tax credits to biodiesel--fuel made from food--which will additionally drive up food prices, as long as seed oils remain competitive with oil (and it will for a long time). We cannot grow our way out of an energy crisis--there is simply not enough land. We need to start talking about which of these alternative energy sources really has the potential from enviornmental, social and economic perspectives--not just from the perspective of the agro-industrial complex!
To be honest, I have not read the "H.R. 5351" bill in it's entirety nor really wish to read it, with all the distinctive sometimes colorful language that most of bills have. Maybe I should since the devil is always in the details. Regardless, I am in the solar industry and do wish this bill to pass - not simply to provide future growth in my industry but to create a base, or a starting point,to hopefully stear the United States into developing alternative and competitive options for energy, other than having oil as a primary (monopoly) source of power. I paid $3.72/gal. on 3/10/08 living in the San Francisco area. If the lawmakers in our country are able to at least establish a minimal starting point, an initial phase for change in terms of energy, then I can rationalize to myself that spending possibly a $4.00/gal.+ would be ok, for now. But if change is not in the forecast, then more than likely, I would have to rant to my children about stories of when "I remember gas being $5.00/gal" which by than time in the future, it would not surprise me to see the price of oil being exponentially higher than it currently is.
People please do yourself a favor and read the WHOLE bill and you'll find out Rep Rangel from New York was clever to disguise getting his state a lot of money by calling this bill the Renewable Energy Bill. Please read the whole bill, please. The money will probably go to a railway system from JFK airport to Manhattan, that might burn diesel fuel also. The more the "Big 5" are taxed, the more they raise the price at the pump, the more they lay-off, and plaese check to see who your company invest your 401K money with because it will probably be with one of the "Big 5".
Our congress is at it again and the people are too stupid to realize that this is true trash legislation. Is $3.18 a gallon for gas just not enough for you? We're going broke just trying to buy gas to get back and forth to work and these idiots want to raise the price even more? Carter pulled this same stunt back in the '70s the result FULL BLOWN recession and long gas lines. Pull your head out people!
While this appear to be an incentive for domestic oil companies to search for renewable energy sources, it protects foreign oil companies, like dictator-run Citgo. So we Americans will bear the brunt two ways - first with rising gas prices due to loss of tax incentives to our American companies which they will pass the cost on to us, AND lining Hugo Chavez's pockets with millions to use against us.
Renewable energy is a joke. Wind and solar are unreliable and require real generators to be held in spinning reserve to meet demand during the frequent periods when wind and solar are off-line. Ethanol requires more energy to produce than it can deliver, not to mention the enormous amounts of water required. The only practical, renewable energy source is nuclear. Deal with it.
That's why this is money is for development of these technologies, to make them ready for use. Thanks for offering zero evidence for your broad claims. Try reading about the new developments in solar technology:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080317114050.htm
I agree that ethanol is crap, though.
Dr Pujaals This bill benefits the Venezuela Oil company own by Hugo Chavez, because our Oil companies are going to have to pay taxes but Hugos don,t.
Dr Pujals This bill benefits the Venezuela Oil company own by Hugo Chavez, because our Oil companies are going to have to pay taxes but Hugos don,t.
Why should we be supporting thugs like Hugo Chavez? Let Chavez and any other oil producing country pay taxes just like we are forced to do.
Why should Chavez be excused from paying taxes. Why is Chavez exempt? I oppose it.
Basically the writing is on the wall here. the next president who will most likely be a democrat will absolutely have a key eye towards reducing or nearly elimating importing of oil. many sensible democrats do realize that oil is a major detraction and harm to our economy and homegrown fuels, and renewable resources are absolutely the way to go. my best hope is that a democrat winds the presidency and there are good majorities of democrats in the house and senate to advance these common sense bills that rebuild our economy, offer clean jobs in renewable energy, reduce the cost of fuels and provide many alternatives to oil, and overall make the neccesary investments in america to make it a great country to live in and prosper once again. i am hoping we can as a country start beginning to undo the huge mess of a presidency and horrible legacy left by george bush. we are in absolutely horrible circumstances in every sense of the word due to his leadership. healthcare and social security are still not fixed at all after 8 years of horrible leadership and every single domestic issue has falled by the wayside, hopefully all americans will smarten up and note that voting democrat is the best chance for our country to prosper and regain its former glory. i am strongly hoping for and supporting a tidal shift in ideals and viewpoints and hope that we can begin to bring ourselves out of the darkages where president bush's thoughts and ideals lie and become more progressive in the year 2009 and beyond. these alternative energy proposals and environmental bills will do nothing but help our economy, our trading partners economy, and create millions of jobs in new sectors for our workforce, overall it is where we need to be headed for the good of our country and the prosperity of others who rely on us.
Add A Comment