From samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-feed-2.peachnet.edu!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith Sat Aug  7 18:09:04 EDT 1993
Article: 15245 of sci.energy
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Wind Energy Weekly #5 1/3
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)
Path: samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-feed-2.peachnet.edu!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <6.1506.1017.0NAE41BF@spacebbs.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 93 13:32:00 -0700
Organization: Space BBS - 15 nodes - v.32bis - (415-323-4193)
Lines: 96

This message was from TGRAY@IGC.APC.ORG to HOWARD SMITH
originally in conference EMAIL
and was forwarded to you by HOWARD SMITH
                    ----------------------------------------
[The following is the electronic edition of _Wind Energy Weekly_,
Vol. 12, #552, 6.21.93, published by the American Wind Energy
Association.  For more information on the Association, contact
AWEA, 777 North Capitol Street, Suite 805, Washington, DC 20002,
USA, phone (202) 408-8988, FAX (202) 408-8536, email
3304640@mcimail.com]

UCS OUTLINES OPTIONS
ON ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS

     The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), a leading
environmental organization, recently published a major study,
Powering the Midwest: Renewable Electricity for the Economy and the
Environment, which concluded that wind energy is among the
renewable energy technologies holding great promise for the region.
This is one of a series of articles reprinting excerpts from the
report, by permission of UCS.

POLICIES FOR A RENEWABLE FUTURE

Account for Environmental Costs and Risks

     . . . [T]he environmental impacts of pollution generated by
fossil fuels are not fully accounted for in market prices.  In
effect, clean air is treated as a free resource to be consumed by
utilities in the production of electric power.

     Although federal and state regulations require utilities to
meet certain pollution standards--in effect setting a cap on the
amount of free clean air that can be consumed--there is little
incentive for utilities to go beyond these standards and emit less
pollution.1

     And one important class of pollutants, greenhouse gases,
remains entirely unregulated.  Estimates of the dollar costs of
pollution . . . , although uncertain, leave little doubt that
failure to consider them puts renewable energy sources at a deep
disadvantage.

     States can address this problem in several ways.

     The most direct is to raise fees on pollution generated by
fossil fuels.  This can serve two functions: increase revenues for
the state and create an incentive for electric utilities and other
energy consumers to reduce their fuel use and develop alternative
fuels.

     From the standpoint of economic efficiency, it is regarded as
one of the best approaches, as it gives utilities a clear price
signal yet allows them to change their fuel mix patterns in the
most efficient and convenient manner for them.

     In contrast, the use of "command-and-control" regulation can
sometimes lead to less than optimal choices.  Although substantial
pollution fees are most appropriate at the federal level,
relatively modest state-level fees can generate significant
revenues and help fund renewable energy research and development
projects.

     Choosing an appropriate level of pollution fee is, clearly, a
difficult task, both politically and analytically.  One option is
to base the fee on some measure of the environmental and social
costs of fossil fuels.  For example, fees could be levied in
proportion to the carbon content of fuels.  Estimates of
environmental and social costs vary over a wide range, however,
making consensus on the proper fees difficult to attain.

     In addition, it is likely that pollution fees will raise
objections from electric utilities or consumers.  Although recent
analysis by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency suggests that
such fees need not place a burden on the economy if their revenues
are applied wisely, there is no doubt of their political
sensitivity.

     It may be possible, however, to create revenue-neutral fees
that avoid some of these problems.  For example, states could shift
some taxes on electric utilities from sales to pollution.2  At
present, states collect on average about five percent of utility
revenues, or about $8 billion a year, through sales taxes.
Shifting some or all of these taxes to pollutant emissions would
provide a simple and direct way to encourage utilities to produce
cleaner power, without increasing the overall tax burden on utility
customers.

     For example, if a five percent sales tax were replaced
entirely by an equivalent tax on carbon dioxide emissions, a
typical utility might pay about $2 per ton of carbon dioxide
emitted, a modest fee compared to those under consideration at the
national and international levels.  Over time, as the utility was
encouraged to produce less pollution, its tax burden would actually

(Continued to next message)


From samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith Sat Aug  7 18:09:15 EDT 1993
Article: 15246 of sci.energy
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Wind Energy Weekly #5 2/3
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)
Path: samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <6.1507.1017.0NAE41C0@spacebbs.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 93 13:32:00 -0700
Organization: Space BBS - 15 nodes - v.32bis - (415-323-4193)
Lines: 98

(Continued from previous message)

decline, resulting in lower electricity rates for consumers
(unless, of course, states chose to ramp up the fee!).

     Direct pollution fees are not the only option for taking
account of the environmental impacts of fossil fuels, however.
Legislation requiring that electric utilities consider
environmental impacts in their resource decisions can lend a
powerful impetus to efforts to develop alternative energy sources.
Preferably, environmental impacts should be monetized, but at a
minimum there should be rigorous adherence to objective processes
for incorporating environmental impacts in resource decisions.

     Similarly, utility regulators (if they have the statutory
authority) can require that utilities consider environmental
impacts in their resource decisions.  Only four midwestern states,
Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, explicitly require
utilities to account for external environmental risks or costs, and
only one, Wisconsin, require monetization of external costs.
     Creating such requirements--even if damages are not
quantified--serves the valuable purpose of forcing utilities to
identify and evaluate the environmental consequences of their
resource plans.

1With one exception: The emissions allowance trading system being
set up under the Clean Air Act Amendments gives utilities an
incentive to minimize their emissions of SO2 independent of the
regulated cap.  However, the average price of an emissions
allowance--projected to be around $400 per ton--is far lower than
the estimated health and other impacts of SO2 emissions.  Thus,
only a portion of the environmental cost has been accounted for in
the price of coal-fired electricity.


[Copies of Powering the Midwest are available for $15 members, $20
non-members from AWEA.  For more information or to order by
VISA/Master Card, please call (202) 408-8988; FAX (202) 408-8536.]


NEW WORLD BUYS 50%
STAKE IN MEXICAN FIRM

     New World Power Corp. of Lime Rock, Conn., said it has
completed a $7.65 million offering of common stock to non-U.S.
investors and will use $1.5 million of the proceeds to buy a 50
percent share in Entec S. A. de C. V., a Mexican rural
electrification company.  The purchase is subject to Mexican
federal approval, it said.

     New World, which operates several windfarms in the U.S., said
in a news release that Entec, which will change its name to New
World Entec, is likely to build a 100-MW wind power plant in
Mexico.

     New World said its offering consisted of 850,000 shares of
stock at $9 a share and that Oakes, Fitzwilliams & Co. and Stifel,
Nicolaus, & Co., Inc., acted as placement agents.  The offering
took place in conjunction with an additional offering of 150,000
shares sold by the firm's principal stockholder, it said.

     In addition to New World Entec's rural electrification
activities, that company "and related joint ventures plan to
develop, own and operate renewable resource projects including
windfarms and hydroelectric power plants in Mexico," New World
said.

     New World will provide the Mexican firm with "an enhanced
financing capability, including improved equipment purchasing
terms, project financing for utility grid and village grid projects
and credit facilities for institutional and individual system power
sales," the release added.

     It said New World will initially manage, through its
subsidiary Field Service Maintenance & Supply (FSMS), renewable
energy power plants developed by New World Entec.  FSMS and another
New World subsidiary, Northern Power Systems, will also manufacture
some equipment for the Mexican company.

     New World said it will use $3.6 million from the stock
offering to "purchase and retrofit existing windfarms[,] . . .
$750,000 to fund development of a new generation of wind
turbines[,] . . . $250,000 to fund development of village power
modules and conduct marketing efforts[,] and . . . the balance . .
. for working capital and other general corporate purposes.

     The new offering, combined with an $8 million public offering
last October and a $3 million offering of Series B Preferred Stock
in December, brings to $18.7 million the amount of capital that New
World has raised in the past year, the release said.


JUDGE ORDERS EFFORT TO
SETTLE NEW YORK PROCEEDING

     A New York administrative law judge has ordered parties in a

(Continued to next message)


From samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith Sat Aug  7 18:09:27 EDT 1993
Article: 15247 of sci.energy
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Wind Energy Weekly #5 3/3
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)
Path: samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <6.1508.1017.0NAE41C1@spacebbs.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 93 13:32:00 -0700
Organization: Space BBS - 15 nodes - v.32bis - (415-323-4193)
Lines: 50

(Continued from previous message)

renewable resources proceeding before the Public Service Commission
to meet June 21 and attempt to reach a settlement before going on
to a more formal hearing.

     Judge Jeffrey Stockholm announced June 11 that he would
schedule the settlement meeting, granting a motion from the staff
of the Department of Public Service (DPS) in the proceeding.  The
proceeding has been debating how best to implement a State Energy
Plan provision that calls for New York utilities to install 300 MW
of renewable electric generating capacity by 1998.

     Sources said the move apparently reflects a judgment by the
DPS that the Commission is unlikely to order utilities to install
significant amounts of new renewable capacity.

     AWEA was among several parties filing position papers in the
proceeding June 4.  In the AWEA paper, Northeast Representative Tom
Gray urged the Commission to:

o    "Reaffirm the 300-MW goal . . . and the need to go forward
     with it now, not 10 years from now, as a modest program aimed
     at diversifying New York's energy mix . . .

o    "Undertake collaborative efforts to identify and implement the
     steps that need to be taken to bring renewable . . .
     technologies . . . to the point of large-scale commercial
     readiness . . .

o    "Evaluate the total social cost of existing plants to
     determine where . . . wind . . . might be cost-effectively
     deployed to replace or back down generation from the dirtiest
     plants . . .

     Gray called for specific actions on a wide range of fronts to
position wind as a viable generating option by the beginning of the
next decade, when New York utilities are expected to once again
need new capacity.

     Before then, he said, the state take a series of steps,
including:  encouraging expanded wind resource assessment; making
changes in the pricing of utility resource acquisitions; providing
standard contract terms and conditions for wind developers selling
power to utilities; and providing net billing for wind systems of
50 kW capacity or less.

     AWEA, Gray said, "[has] prepared and [is] ready to offer for
consideration a balanced wind development program we believe the
state and its utilities should undertake."


From samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith Sat Aug  7 18:09:38 EDT 1993
Article: 15248 of sci.energy
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Wind Energy Weekly #5 1/2
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)
Path: samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <6.1509.1017.0NAE41C2@spacebbs.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 93 13:32:00 -0700
Organization: Space BBS - 15 nodes - v.32bis - (415-323-4193)
Lines: 96

This message was from TGRAY@IGC.APC.ORG to HOWARD SMITH
originally in conference EMAIL
and was forwarded to you by HOWARD SMITH
                    ----------------------------------------
[The following is the electronic edition of _Wind Energy Weekly_,
Vol. 12, #554, 7.5.93, published by the American Wind Energy
Association.  For more information on the Association, contact
AWEA, 777 North Capitol Street, Suite 805, Washington, DC 20002,
USA, phone (202) 408-8988, FAX (202) 408-8536, email
3304640@mcimail.com]


ENDLESS ENERGY OBTAINS
PERMIT ON MAINE PROJECT

     Endless Energy Corporation said June 24 that it has received
a conditional use permit from the Carrabassett Valley (Me.)
Planning Board for a windfarm on Sugarloaf Mountain that, when
built, will be Maine's first and New England's largest wind
project.

     The company had previously received a permit from the Maine
Department of Environmental Protection, and now plans to begin
construction in the fall with the project going on line on January
1, 1994.

     Central Maine Power Co. (CMP) signed a contract with Endless
Energy in 1989 to purchase 15 megawatts of power from windfarms at
up to three sites.  The contract allowed CMP to determine if wind
energy could contribute to Maine's electricity supplies without CMP
having to risk any rate payer money.  Endless Energy in turn was
able to raise capital based on the contract and sign contracts with
landowners.

     Endless Energy now has agreements with three landowners for
sites which can hold 70 MW of wind generating capacity.  Once the
pilot project at Sugarloaf proves itself, the company plans to move
on to these other sites, according to president Harley Lee.  "This
approach to wind energy starting with a small pilot at an already
developed site will allow Mainers to learn about the technology
gradually", Lee said in a news release.  "In other parts of the US
and world, public approval of wind energy has risen after wind
turbines were installed.  I think that once the people of Maine see
our turbines spinning up on Sugarloaf, they will be quite
supportive of our larger projects".

     Endless Energy has been measuring the winds on Maine mountains
since 1988 and has found a power generating resource comparable
with the wind farm sites in California and Europe, Lee said.  The
company will use modern wind turbines with 500-kW generators.  The
turbines are expected to produce well over 1 million kWh annually
each.  (A typical residential CMP customer uses about 7,000 kWh a
year.)  The towers will be 128 feet tall and the blades 128 feet in
diameter.

     The permits allow the installation of up to seven wind
turbines along the ridge at Sugarloaf Mountain ski area between the
summit and the shoulder of the mountain where Bullwinkle's Grill,
a restaurant, is located.  Sugarloaf's management recently
expressed some concern about the effects of wind turbines on its
ski business and wants to start with a small project, Lee said.

     In a recent letter to local residents, Warren Cook, president
of Sugarloaf Mountain Corporation, said, "We are interested in more
efficient and/or lower cost energy.  We are also concerned about
the visual impact on our area, community, and guests of the
resort".  Sugarloaf and Endless Energy are currently in
negotiations on the best number of turbines to begin the project.


DANISH OWNERS RATE
THEIR WIND TURBINES

     Danish turbine manufacturers Bonus, Wind World, and Vestas
were ranked most highly in the recently-published 1992 version of
the publication WindStats's annual turbine owners' survey.

     This year, WindStats asked wind turbine owners in Denmark to
grade manufacturers as poor, average, good, or excellent on
turbine quality, manufacturer guarantee, service guarantee, and
machine reliability, i.e., performance and availability. Of nearly
1,500 survey cards sent out, a total of 788 were returned
representing 905 turbines, or 26 percent of the more than 3,400
wind  turbines installed in Denmark. Of the twenty-five different
manufacturers represented by at least one response, only eleven
received 15 or more replies.

The top four manufacturers in each category include:

Turbine Reliability

Wind World     3.42
Bonus          3.31
Nordex         3.29

(Continued to next message)


From samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!darwin.sura.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith Sat Aug  7 18:09:45 EDT 1993
Article: 15249 of sci.energy
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Wind Energy Weekly #5 2/2
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)
Path: samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!darwin.sura.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <6.1510.1017.0NAE41C3@spacebbs.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 93 13:32:00 -0700
Organization: Space BBS - 15 nodes - v.32bis - (415-323-4193)
Lines: 59

(Continued from previous message)

Vestas         3.25

Manufacturer Guarantee

Bonus          3.22
Wind World     3.17
Vestas         3.13
Nordtank       3.10

Turbine Quality

Bonus          3.29
Tellus         3.29
Wind World     3.25
Micon          3.24

Manufacturer Service Guarantee

Nordex         3.25
Vestas         3.24
Bonus          3.11
Nordtank       3.07

     WindStats listed Bonus with the highest overall ranking (41
points), and Wind World and Vestas as runners up (34 and 33
points, respectively). Nordex had 31 points.


AWEA URGES WIND AS
CLEAN AIR REMEDY

     Utilities faced with the need to comply with federal clean air
laws should consider retiring polluting power plants and replacing
them with wind, AWEA said in comments filed June 24 before the
Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU).

     The DPU had announced in late May that it would be
investigating utilities' plans for compliance with the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA), which require reductions in sulfur
dioxide (SO2) emissions.  The DPU said its review is aimed at
ensuring that utilities meet CAAA requirements "in a manner
consistent with least-cost planning principles to achieve the
lowest possible cost impact on the ratepayers of the Commonwealth."

     AWEA Northeast Representative Tom Gray, in the comments, urged
that the DPU use the proceeding to begin applying non-economic
costs of power generation ("externalities") to existing power
plants.  Although Massachusetts has taken a strong position on
valuing externalities, it has so far only applied them to planning
for future resources.

     Gray noted that the recently-released Massachusetts Energy
Plan calls for state government to "develop incentives and/or
mandatory requirements that would encourage utilities to expand
their [use] of renewables" and to "quantify, in dollar terms, the
environmental, diversity, risk reduction and other benefits and
costs of renewable energy resources."


From samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!darwin.sura.net!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith Sat Aug  7 18:09:53 EDT 1993
Article: 15250 of sci.energy
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Wind Energy Weekly #5 1/2
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)
Path: samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!darwin.sura.net!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <6.1511.1017.0NAE41C4@spacebbs.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 93 13:32:00 -0700
Organization: Space BBS - 15 nodes - v.32bis - (415-323-4193)
Lines: 96

This message was from TGRAY@IGC.APC.ORG to HOWARD SMITH
originally in conference EMAIL
and was forwarded to you by HOWARD SMITH
                    ----------------------------------------
[The following is the electronic edition of _Wind Energy Weekly_,
Vol. 12, #553, 6.28.93, published by the American Wind Energy
Association.  For more information on the Association, contact
AWEA, 777 North Capitol Street, Suite 805, Washington, DC 20002,
USA, phone (202) 408-8988, FAX (202) 408-8536, email
3304640@mcimail.com]

NORWAY HOSTS ARCTIC
GLOBAL CHANGE MEETING

     The Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA) will host
an international conference August 21-26 on "Global Change and
Arctic Terrestrial Ecosystems," according to a notice on the
electronic network EcoNet.

     The purpose of the meeting will be to improve communication
and coordination among arctic researchers, "to assess likely
positive and negative feedbacks of arctic ecosystems on the global
atmosphere and climate," and to understand the impact of
"anticipated global change" on the arctic.

     The conference will take place in Oppdal, Norway.  For further
information, contact Dr. Jarle Holten, NINA, Tungasletta 2, N-7005
Trondheim, Norway, phone 011-47-7-580500, fax 011-47-7-915433, e-
mail jarle.holten@nina.no.


MCGOWAN REFUTES MYTHS
ABOUT WIND ENERGY

     Wind energy technology's recent progress is "shattering
myths," writes Prof. Jon G. McGowan of the University of
Massachusetts in a recent article for the magazine Technology
Review.

     McGowan, co-director of the University's Renewable Energy
Research Laboratory, identifies specific public misconceptions
about wind as follows:

o    Windpower is not a significant energy resource.  While wind is
     dispersed, McGowan notes, the total resource is "huge," with
     the state of North Dakota alone being potentially capable of
     supplying more than a third of the electric power currently
     consumed by the continental U.S.  Many other studies and
     estimates, by individual states and by other countries,
     support the view that wind energy can provide large amounts of
     power.

o    Wind-generated electricity is expensive and unreliable.
     According to McGowan, the notion of wind as costly stems
     largely from early U.S. government research machines, which
     were one-of-a-kind units, rather than mass-produced commercial
     models.  Estimates from Electric Power Research Institute and
     the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, he adds, place the
     cost of power from new windfarms at about 5 cents/kWh.

o    New designs are needed to make windpower feasible.  Current
     wind turbines are highly efficient, McGowan says, and further
     improvements are likely to be incremental in nature.  McGowan
     mentions advanced rotor blades, incorporation of composite
     materials, power electronics, and variable-speed generators as
     potential areas for further development.

o    Wind is impractical for utility use because of its
     intermittent nature and because of interconnection problems.
     While the wind is a variable energy source, McGowan says,
     utilities can factor its variability into their system
     planning.  The United Kingdom's Central Electricity Generating
     Board, he notes, concluded in a recent study that up to 20
     percent of that nation's electrical power could be contributed
     by wind without significant changes to the power grid.  Beyond
     that level, batteries or pumped hydro would be needed to store
     excess wind energy and feed it back to the grid during periods
     of low wind speeds.


SUBSIDIES FAVOR SUPPLY,
CONVENTIONAL SOURCES

     Federal energy subsidies are tilted radically toward energy
supply (as opposed to efficiency) and conventional energy sources
(as opposed to new sources like wind and solar), according to a
recent study from the Washington, DC-based Alliance to Save Energy.

     Looking at subsidies in 1989, the Alliance found that 58
percent ($21 billion) went to fossil fuels, 30 percent ($11
billion) to nuclear, and 12 percent ($4 billion) to all renewable
energy sources, including hydro, and energy efficiency.

     The Alliance termed the spending pattern it found "poor energy

(Continued to next message)


From samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-feed-2.peachnet.edu!darwin.sura.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith Sat Aug  7 18:10:03 EDT 1993
Article: 15251 of sci.energy
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Wind Energy Weekly #5 2/2
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)
Path: samba.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-feed-2.peachnet.edu!darwin.sura.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!portal!barrnet.net!iserver.spacebbs.com!spacebbs!howard.smith
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <6.1512.1017.0NAE41C5@spacebbs.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 93 13:32:00 -0700
Organization: Space BBS - 15 nodes - v.32bis - (415-323-4193)
Lines: 46

(Continued from previous message)

policy," saying "It may be appropriate to subsidize emerging energy
resources, but mature resources should stand the test of the
market.

     "When this test is applied to subsidies in 1989, the pattern
appears to be almost completely backward.  In other words, the
mature, conventional energy sources received almost 90 percent of
all subsidies."

     In addition, the Alliance said, "This pattern . . . also
represents poor environmental policy because it encourages the use
of polluting and environmentally risky energy sources.  Fifty-eight
percent of all subsidies . . . directly promotes the use of fossil
fuels--over 18 times more than . . . efficiency and 23 times more
than . . . emerging renewable technologies.

     "Given the growing concern in this country about global
warming, acid rain and other fossil-fuel-related pollution
problems, this imbalance is unwarranted."

     Looking at subsidies by end use, the Alliance found that those
devoted to electricity added up to about 11 percent of the cost of
all electricity consumed in the U.S. during the year, or about 0.73
cents/kWh.  In the case of nuclear fission, however, total
subsidies amounted to about 2.0 cents/kWh, or "more than four times
the amount of subsidy [on a per-kWh basis] of any other source."

     Subsidies to the nuclear industry, the Alliance said, extend
throughout the industry's "life cycle," from exploration support,
which is carried out by the U.S. Geological Survey, to post-
operational closure of nuclear power plants, with regulators
allowing utilities to set aside amounts for plant decommissioning
that are too small.

     Along the way, taxpayers pick up the tab for a variety of
items such as research on new reactor designs, insurance against
nuclear accidents through the Price-Anderson Act, and long-term
power contracts from the federal Tennessee Valley Authority that
omit risk-sharing with industry.

     For copies of "Federal Energy Subsidies: Energy,
Environmental, and Fiscal Impacts," contact the Alliance to Save
Energy, 1725 K Street, NW, Suite 509, Washington, DC 20006-1401,
phone (202) 857-0666, fax (202) 331-9588.


