Tea Party Gets US House To Throw Clean Energy Overboard

The U.S. House passed a spending bill (H.R. 1) early this morning that rolls back environmental protections and guts investments in clean energy.  As my colleague David Goldston explains here, the Tea Party Republicans are behind this effort that would increase pollution, harming human health and the environment.  The bill would also stifle innovation in clean energy technologies needed to reduce our dependence on oil and win the global race to manufacture and sell these technologies. 

H.R. 1 slashes key Department of Energy (DOE) programs that promote clean energy by about $1.7 billion – approximately a 23 percent decrease from current levels (set in Fiscal Year 2010 and extended by continuing resolutions since then).  This comes at a time when there is strong support for clean energy, as shown by this recent USA Today/Gallup poll finding that 83 percent of Americans favor Congress passing “an energy bill that provides incentives for using solar and other alternative energy sources.”  A group of leading corporate CEOs also issued this report last year calling for a minimum of $16 billion per year in clean energy innovation to make America a global leader in what will be the largest new market of this century.  

The Tea Party Republicans, however, pushed the House in the opposite direction in H.R. 1.  The bill includes a host of drastic cuts to clean energy programs that the Senate and administration need to reject.  The principal cuts are (I’m rounding all of the numbers to spare you the decimal points, and all cuts are from current levels): 

• DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Program (EERE) cut by $775 million – a 35 percent decrease.  EERE is pursuing groundbreaking research in clean energy technologies such as solar photovoltaic and building energy efficiency technologies.  More NRDC analysis of these cuts is here.
• DOE Office of Science cut by $886 million – an 18 percent decrease.  The Office of Science plays an essential role in driving U.S. innovation providing nearly 40 percent of funding for basic research in physical sciences, overseeing our national laboratories, and driving science education.
• State Energy Program (SEP) zeroed out.  SEP is a 30-year-old, cost-shared program that provides critically needed resources and grants directly to states and territories for clean energy programs.  Oak Ridge National Laboratory found that each dollar of SEP funds generates $7.22 in cost savings and leverages $10.71 of state and private funds.
• DOE Loan Guarantee Program cut by $25 billion for all technologies except for “nuclear power facilities and front-end nuclear facilities.”  The bill also rescinds all funds provided to the program by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.  According to Senate Energy & Water Appropriations Committee Chairman Feinstein, these provisions would prohibit DOE from finalizing every renewable loan application currently under review, including five projects where the conditional loans have already been issued.
• National Science Foundation (NSF) cut by $359.5 million. This would result in 500 fewer NSF research awards, supporting 5,500 fewer researchers, students, and technical support personnel.  Also cut is important NSF support for science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education programs at the K-12, undergraduate, and graduate levels. 
• National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) sees a reduction in its overall budget of $159.5 million, or 19 percent.  This would have a serious impact on the operation of NIST laboratories, forcing reductions in the technical and scientific staff available to work in, and operate, these facilities. 
• Government Services Administration (GSA) budget for building operations, alterations and repairs by over $220 million.  GSA manages over 360 million square feet of buildings, and is on the path towards reducing the energy intensity (energy use per square foot) of this space 30 percent by 2015 compared to 2003.  The cut to GSA’s funding would be a severe set-back in efforts to achieve this goal.  More NRDC analysis of this cut is here. 

As bad as the bill is for clean energy, it could have been even worse.  Some of the more egregious amendments not included in the bill were: 

• Congressman Akin’s (R-2nd, MO) Amendment No. 181 to withhold funding from DOE to implement the light bulb efficiency standards passed in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 with bipartisan support.  The light bulb efficiency standards require new bulbs to use 25 to 30 percent less energy than today’s incandescent light bulbs beginning in 2012, and 65 percent less energy by 2020.  The standards that begin to go into effect in 2012 would not ban the incandescent bulb – only require them to be more efficient. Congressman Akin offered, but then withdrew the amendment.  NRDC’s analysis of the light bulb efficiency standards benefits is here. 
• Congressman McClintock’s (R-4th, CA) Amendment Nos. 300-310 and 312-321 that would have eliminated vital programs in solar, wind, and biomass (and many others) at the DOE EERE Program.  The House did not consider any of these amendments.
• Congressman Latta’s (R-5th, OH) Amendment No. 259 to cut the EERE Program by $70 million.  The House rejected the amendment 137 to 293.
• Congresswoman Biggert’s (R-13th, IL) Amendment No. 192 to zero out the Advanced Research Projects Agency –Energy (ARPA-E).  ARPA-E funds specific high-risk and high-payoff game-changing research and development projects to meet the nation’s long-term energy challenges. The House rejected the amendment 170 to 262.  More NRDC analysis about the benefits of ARPA-E is here.
• Congressman Pompeo’s (R-4th, KS) Amendment No. 86 to eliminate $115 million of the funding for the Department of Defense’s alternative energy research.  This funding is critical to enhancing the mission capability of our troops and developing new clean energy technologies that will benefit our country as a whole.  The House rejected the amendment 109 to 320. 

These attacks on clean energy go against what strong majorities of our citizens want – more clean energy that strengthens our economy and national security, creates much-needed jobs, and improves our health and environment.  There were, however, a couple of votes that give us some hope that bipartisan resistance to this onslaught will emerge.  Over 100 Republicans joined with Democrats to soundly reject the Biggert ARPA-E, Latta EERE and Pompeo Department of Defense amendments described above.  

The Senate, rightly, seems intent to ignore the House bill and return to sensible budgeting.  And maybe once Congress finally funds the government – now that we’re five months into the fiscal year – they can turn to shaping energy policy.  There are some signs that there could be bipartisan progress in the Senate.  One recent example is Senator Lisa Murkowski’s (R-AK, Ranking Member, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee) co-sponsorship of an energy efficiency standards bill supported by environmental groups and industry.  Clean energy, after all, is not a partisan issue – it’s just the right thing to do for our country.

Thanks to my colleagues Christina Angelides, Robin Roy and Cai Steger for their contributions to this post.

Comments