Trump's energy policies

[stpioc]

The Trump administration wants to slash the Department of Energy’s (DOE) investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy by 70 percent, according to a draft budget obtained by Axios. Even setting aside the issues of air pollution and climate change, gutting renewable energy and efficiency runs counter to the president’s stated commitment to economic growth and job creation.

Clean energy is the world’s biggest new source of sustainable high-wage employment. That’s why China’s has budgeted a $360 billion investment in renewable generation alone by 2020. Beijing calculates the resulting “employment will be more than 13 million people.” Even in this country, clean energy jobs already outnumber fossil fuel jobs by more than 2.5 to 1.

Second, the DOE’s clean energy program has the highest documented rate of return to taxpayers of any federal R&D program. One National Academy of Sciences study found that an $11 million investment in a handful of energy efficiency technologies, returned about $30 billion in energy savings.

Trump campaigned on zeroing out clean energy funding — and on trying to bring back jobs to the coal industry, which leading experts say is simply not possible. Clean energy will be a $50-trillion industry, but Trump policies mean the U.S. won’t benefit

Bloomberg New Energy Finance projected in 2016 that the world will invest an astonishing $3.4 trillion in solar alone by 2040 — more than the investment for all new fossil fuels and nuclear combined.

Trump wants to gut energy program with highest job potential and rate of return

[stpioc]

Trump argued that he really takes care of the environment. His actions speak much louder than his words, as usual

In less than five months, Trump has reversed dozens of Barack Obama -era rules designed to preserve the environment and fight causes of climate change.

Trump has said those regulations hurt coal, oil and gas companies, limiting both their production and ability to put Americans to work. But to date, rolling back environmental regulations for fossil fuel companies has not improved company revenues or stock prices. There has been a turnaround in hiring in the extraction industries, but it is still nearly 24% below its industry high of 850,000 jobs in September 2014.

That's not surprising, as it will take years for some of these regulatory rollbacks to take full effect, if they ever do, and, meanwhile, low prices for oil, gas and coal have cut into fossil fuel company revenues. Stocks spiked, particularly for coal companies, immediately after Trump's victory. But investors appear to have lost confidence that Trump's policies can increase revenue for companies suffering from a glut in supply of natural gas or a drop in coal production that demonstrates low demand.


Worse yet for many fossil fuel companies, their stock prices show that the changes have not boosted investor confidence that coal, oil and natural gas companies will rebound in the future. And, immediately after the reports emerged that the U.S. would withdraw from the Paris agreement on Thursday, coal company stocks fell again.

[stpioc]

They're soooo happy..

They didn’t give him much money during his campaign, presumably because, like most people, they were confident he wouldn’t win. But they made up for it quickly after the election. According to an analysis by the Center for Public Integrity, “oil, gas and coal companies and executives contributed more than $1 out of every $10 raised for Trump’s inauguration, for which he raised nearly $107 million overall” (a new record).
The love affair between Trump and fossil fuel companies has blossomed ever since. Recently, Kathleen Sgamma, president of the oil and gas trade group Western Energy Alliance, gushed to the New York Times, “not in our wildest dreams, never did we expect to get everything.”

“Everything,” in this case, denotes a long list of friendly appointments and regulatory rollbacks. For all its controversies, distractions, failures, and unfilled jobs, the Trump administration has been steady and true in its devotion to fossil fuel interests, giving them a greater presence inside executive agencies, stripping them of regulatory restraints, and proposing to defund their competitors.

Donald Trump is handing the federal government over to fossil fuel interests - Vox

[stpioc]

Energy secretary Rick Perry first posing as a scientist and then proposing studies with thinly veiled purpose..

Energy Secretary Rick Perry this morning said carbon dioxide is not the primary driver of climate change, stirring the global warming debate ahead of his appearance on Capitol Hill this week. On CNBC's "Squawk Box," Perry was asked if he believes CO2 is the main factor driving fluctuating Earth and climate temperatures. He said "no," adding that he thinks "most likely" the ocean waters and the environment are the main drivers.

DOE head says carbon dioxide not primary cause of climate change | Science | AAAS

In the weeks after Energy Secretary Rick Perry kicked off a 60-day study examining the impact of wind and solar on fossil baseload power plants -- hinting that he might use DOE authority to halt state renewable energy targets -- an army of researchers, grid experts and renewable energy professionals showed up at his doorstep. 

They were armed with a deep body of research (including a report from a prominent anti-subsidy libertarian think tank) and real-world experience (including from Perry's home state of Texas) showing that variable renewables aren't the threat to grid reliability that the Energy Secretary implies. The latest to weigh in: David Hochschild of the California Energy Commission and David Olsen of the California Independent System Operator Board of Governors. The two prominent energy experts penned an op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle, calling DOE assumptions about grid reliability "nonsense."

Countries With the Most Wind and Solar Have 10 Times Fewer Outages Than America | Greentech Media

[stpioc]

Note to Rick Perry (see previous entry in this thread)...

Major oil companies are lining up behind an idea by former top Republicans to impose a tax on carbon dioxide emissions. The Climate Leadership Council, which is pushing the idea, on Tuesday announced that Exxon Mobil Corp., BP, Royal Dutch Shell and Total are among a group of “Founding Members” for its campaign. Other major corporate and individual members are also included. The group, led by former Treasury Secretary James Baker and former Secretary of State George Schultz, is hoping for a boost to its longshot goal of garnering support among Republicans for a carbon tax to fight climate change.

Oil giants back carbon tax proposal | TheHill

[stpioc]

The fossil fuels industry has received billions of dollars in federal tax breaks and other government support over the past several decades. But Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), who took over as committee chairman in January, was presumably referring to federal policies that support wind and solar energy, not the fossil fuels industry.

“We have to be careful that whoever has the strongest lobby force doesn’t end up putting too big of a federal thumb on the scale when it comes to competition,” Walden said Monday at the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) 2017 energy conference in Washington, D.C. “It can have a negative disruptive market force that protects an industry that can’t survive perhaps or would be hurt perhaps if they had to compete in a more open market.””

House energy leader praises fracking, warns against supporting renewables

[stpioc]

And yet more clean energy cuts..

A House appropriations subcommittee advanced an energy and water appropriations bill this week that offers little respite from President Donald Trump’s attacks on renewable energy and clean energy technology programs.

The bill, approved by the House Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, would provide more funding than the Trump administration’s request for many Department of Energy (DOE) offices but still would slash funding for renewable and efficiency programs and completely eliminate the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E).

The DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) would see its funding fall by about half under the House budget plan, from $2.1 billion to $1.1 billion. EERE’s mission is to help support the development of clean, renewable, and efficiency energy technologies and support a global clean energy economy.

In his budget proposal, Trump requested a budget of $636 million for EERE in fiscal year 2018, about $1.4 billion, or 70 percent, below the FY16 enacted level for the office.

Energy efficiency, renewables spending to be cut in half under House budget proposal

[stpioc]

Methane, by the way is a much more potent greenhouse gas compared to CO2..

The fight over former President Barack Obama’s methane agenda has moved to the courts.  The Trump administration last week took two major steps toward wiping a pair of Obama-era methane pollution rules off the books.  Environmental groups have sued to stop President Trump from nixing the rules, though the oil and gas industry has stepped up to defend the administration’s actions.  Taken together, observers expect a raucous, lengthy legal fight over the standards, which were a key part of Obama’s climate change agenda. “I expect at every step, we’ll be sued by the environmental groups,” said Kathleen Sgamma, the president of the industry-funded Western Energy Alliance, which wants to end the methane regulations.

Trump regulators trigger pollution fight | TheHill

[stpioc]

A leaked draft study of the electric grid requested by Energy Secretary Rick Perry found that federal energy efficiency policies are in the process of saving U.S. consumers and businesses more than a half trillion dollars. Meanwhile, the new administration is halting energy efficiency policies and gutting funding for energy efficiency improvements for American homes. Perry’s department is currently being sued by 11 states for stalling efficiency mandates for air conditioners and other high-energy products.

Energy efficiency is a huge money saver — but the Trump administration is against it

[stpioc]

Sign of the times..

The House of Representatives voted Thursday to approve a large spending bill for fiscal year 2018 that slashes clean energy spending and approves keeping fossil fuel research at current levels. In a spending package known as the “minibus,” the House voted to set the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy’s (EERE) budget at $1.1 billion, a 45 percent cut from the office’s fiscal 2017 budget of more than $2 billion. The Trump administration requested an even bigger cut for the Department of Energy office that would have lowered its budget to $636 million, or 70 percent, below the 2017 budget.

House slashes funding for clean energy, restores funding for fossil fuel research