Bush admin. will zero out funding for geothermal and hydro power

Jerks.

Posted by David Roberts at 12:00 PM on 15 Sep 2006

I try to be a good person. I try to keep love in my heart for all people. Why do they make it so hard?

Declaring them "mature technologies" that need no further funding, the Bush administration in its FY 2007 budget request eliminates hydropower and geothermal research, venerable programs with roots in the energy crises of the 1970s.

We're talking about -- cumulatively -- roughly $50 million in research money. There's nowhere else in the federal budget we could find $50 million to trim? Really?

Oh, wait, but look, we're not even saving the money, just reallocating it:

Any savings from the cuts would be nil since all of the nearly $24 million ($1 million from hydropower and $23 million from geothermal) research funding would go to other programs such as biofuels.

Why? Why?

It's a small amount, but it matters quite a bit to the people laboring in the trenches studying this stuff:

... geothermal holds vast potential - at least 30,000 megawatts of identified resources developable by 2050 and more unidentified resources, much of it in Western states, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory reported in May.

Research aims at new technologies that can use underground zones with good heat but little water and those with lower temperature rocks deeper in the earth.

"The idea that geothermal is a mature technology that doesn't need further research doesn't even pass the laugh test," says [Karl Gawell, executive director of the Geothermal Energy Association].

And:

"There's this view that hydropower is a technology that's been around a long time, and there's not much more we can do to improve it - but we've got the next generation of hydropower - ocean, tidal, wave and conduit energy coming on," says Linda Church Ciocci, executive director of the National Hydropower Association, a Washington trade group.

Even those focused on environmental damage from dams worry about lost funding. "We'd like to see federal funding continue for new research on hydrokinetic systems and damless hydro," says Robbin Marks, director of the hydropower reform campaign at American Rivers, a Washington environmental group. "We're interested in understanding more about the environmental impact of those systems.

"Power from tidal flows, waves, and irrigation canals are expanding the definition of hydropower - none of which are likely to get DOE research funding if the hydropower budget gets whacked, some observers say.

The federal government has not even come close to grasping the situation we're in. Not even close.

For story: Bush admin. will zero out funding for geothermal and hydro power
4 Comments | Post a Comment

They know, they lie, we die

The federal government has not even come close to grasping the situation we're in. Not even close.

We are the ones not grasping the situation we're in.

Our government is a trade group for fossil fuels. There is no way they will allow support for new technology that will benefit their competition: hydroelectric power, geothermal energy, solar energy, efficient cars, efficient buildings, Kyoto,,,. They will support technology which is not competitive with fossil fuels as a diversion and a distraction from reality: ethanol, hydrogen, nuclear, rooftop pv, war,,,.

by sunflower at 12:46 PM on 15 Sep 2006

Bushwacking Energies

In order for the public to be enraged about such concerns, they will first need a synapse movement in that general direction. While those of us who are 'enlightened' to the needs of future generations (and our own) sit and tirelessly respond to the idiocies resulting from stolen elections, the reality is that those who stole it intend to keep stealing. They're stealing possibility away from its meaning. They're taking the cornerstone from the Castle. They're stacking wads of greenbacks in the mattress while Greens go without sleep.

If we're ever going to do anything about the solution, we're going to need to address the problem. With our votes. With our wages. Responsible consumption, knowledgeable choices, financial support for contingent leadership, and a dedication to writing the existing leadership to inform them of their needs to reconsider. To reconsider who they're folllowing. To reconsider who they're supposed to be leading. To reconsider the legacy that is theirs to leave. To reconsider throwing away the future for a few lousy bucks you can't take with you.

While they're reconsidering, like I hope they will, we'll be out there considering how much we can reduce our consumption by riding the byways, bikepaths and heavily congested roadways, and hopefully see you out there - on your bikes of course. - JD

JD & Kelley Howell of Eugene, OR. visit us: Cut20.blogspot.com

by Howell Haus at 5:40 PM on 18 Sep 2006

Bush.........zero

Cutting funding to anything other than oil related industry is the course that the bush administration has always held to,stayed the course as the president likes to state it.Funding for ethanol is still funding for the oil industry.It still has us using oil and not getting on to using electricity or hydrogen or anything other than crude oil.This is going to have to be a multi-pronged approach that we are going to have to have to get off the oil teat.Yes,some of these other renewable energy sources still uses oil,but each step gets us further away from war for oil planning.To cut funding(and it is a tiny amount)from any program that is based in the future of our nation is foolish and we will pay for those mistakes as a people and an economy.Already the japanese have surpassed us in the technology needed to move into the future of energy use and we are falling further and further behind other countries in the area of alternative energy.

Why not ask why!?

by usandthem at 7:48 PM on 18 Sep 2006

Bush Himself Has a Geothermal System

When President Bush built his ranch in Crawford, TX, this oilman chose an electric geothermal heat pump for heating and cooling his new home.

As an owner of one of these systems, I can confirm the significant energy savings in heating and cooling seasons here in New England. Heating savings are 40% to 50% while cooling savings are closer to 80%! With such staggering energy savings, why in the world isn't this type of system MANDATED in new construction? Could it be because heating/cooling systems are installed by companies that sell OIL?

While traveling through Sweden this summer, I discovered that the percentage of homes heating with oil has dropped, over the past 20 years, from about 80% to about 15% today because fuel oil has gotten so expensive. (Gasoline hit almost $7.00 per gallon while I was there.) Homeowners are retrofitting their homes with Bore Hole Exchange (BHE) systems that are essentially geothermal systems designed for use in the northern climates where ground temperature is typically in the 40's. Designed only for heating, these systems, also known as "Mountain Heat", have found many commercial applications in this land of frugal and environmentally sensitive residents. (In many cities, it is against the law to wash your car due to the detergent runoff into local lakes and streams.)

The newest generations of the geothermal systems are almost 20% more efficient than the system I installed 10 years ago. Imagine how much more efficient they could be with additional dollars funding more research.

by Foveator at 7:41 PM on 25 Nov 2006

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.