How much conflict of interest does GE have in reporting CLIMATEGATE?

[Dig]

http://www.ge.com/innovation/

http://www.ge.com/audio_video/ge/advertising/american_renewal_ecomagination.html

http://www.ge.com/audio_video/ge/advertising/american_renewal_manufacturing.html


GE Launches Carbon Offsetting Credit Card
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/07/ge_launches_car.php
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto  on 07.25.07
Business & Politics (news)

GE is offering a new credit card where a dollar of carbon offsets will be purchased for every hundred dollars you spend, whether it's on compact fluorescents or gasoline.

While offsets are controversial, GE notes: “We are not sending a message that you can buy your way out of your environmental responsibility,” said Lorraine Bolsinger, vice president of GE Ecomagination. “We’re offering another tool in the kit for reducing carbon footprints.” The Myearthrewards website says it pretty clearly:

we can’t “shop away” global climate change. The most important thing for all of us — individuals as well as companies and other organizations — is to use energy more wisely by being as efficient as possible in everything we do. It is also important that, whenever possible, we purchase renewable energy through our utility providers and use alternative fuels in our vehicles. The final thing to do is to offset those remaining impacts that can’t be avoided.

According to the New York Times, every Earth Day it will use the money to buy offsets from projects that capture methane from landfills and coal mines. Later, it will add reforestation and alternative energy projects.

They have launched a website with tips and a basic carbon calculator at ::myearthrewards.

Disclosure Note: GE advertises on TreeHugger and the New York Times says:

G.E. is keeping everything about the card as green as possible. It is spurning paper applications, insisting that people apply online or by phone. Although by law it must send paper bills when asked, it is encouraging cardholders to receive and pay their bills online. It plans no direct mail and will advertise on search engines like Google and on environmental sites like treehugger.com. ::New York Times

See also Treehugger on How to Green your Carbon Offsets

Obama’s Climate Exchange Is A Gift To GE (GE)
http://www.carbonoffsetsdaily.com/usa/obamas-climate-exchange-is-a-gift-to-ge-ge-4971.htm
| Sourced From Business Insider |

GE needs all the help it can get right now, with its stock hurtling closer towards $0 on a daily basis. The company obviously stands to benefit from infrastructure buildout, and from capturing its share of green (energy) dollars. The more wind-turbines we erect, the better for GE.

But there’s a nexus between its green ambitions and its finance unit in the form of a new venture called Greenhouse Gas Services, which will facilitate the trade of carbon tax credits.

Thus as Tim Carney* notes, GE has been lobbying heavily for a cap-and-trade system, rather than a straight tax system which wouldn’t require a market. And of course they got their wish:

GE — a member of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, which advocates cap and trade — leads the push for greenhouse gas restrictions.

In the fourth quarter of 2008 as the company’s stock fell 30 percent, GE spent $4.26 million on lobbying — that’s $46,304 each day, including weekends, Thanksgiving and Christmas. In 2008, the company spent a grand total of $18.66 million on lobbying.

Reviewing their lobbying filings, you might think you were looking at Al Gore’s agenda. GE’s specific lobbying issues included the “Climate Stewardship Act,” “Electric Utility Cap and Trade Act,” “Global Warming Reduction Act,” “Federal Government Greenhouse Gas Registry Act,” “Low Carbon Economy Act,” and “Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act.”

Of course, this market won’t really get going until 2012, so hopefully GE will still be around in its current form to see all the lobbying pay off.

* Yes, John Carney’s brother, blah blah, etc.

[James]

How much conflict of interest does GE have reporting, period.

[Dig]

GE and AES’s big carbon play
http://theenergycollective.com/Podcasts/36193
by Marc Gunther on 03/08/2009 17:19   0 comments , 554 views

In Hudson, a small town nestled in the scenic Appalachian foothills of western North Carolina, the county government is capturing methane, a potent greenhouse gas, from an abandoned landfill and turning it into fuel—with help from General Electric, AES Corp. and Google.

The methane-capture project is the first significant carbon offset deal to emerge from Greenhouse Gas Services, a joint venture of GE and AES, with MissionPoint Capital Partners, that has been operating under the radar since it was formed back in January 2007. Google is the venture’s first announced customer, besides a GE-branded credit card.

Now, with climate-change regulation from the Obama administration on the horizon, Greenhouse Gas Services is aiming to ramp up its business – capturing or reducing global warming pollutants. I spoke with GHGS’s CEO, Mauricio (Mo) Vargas, who says the GE-AES venture intends to be a major player in the U.S. carbon market.


New Energy Finance predicts that the regulated U.S. market will be worth $1 trillion or more by 2020. Such estimates are little more than wild guesses, but most people who understand carbon markets agree that the U.S. market will be a huge deal.

“We’re the big dogs here,” Vargas says. “Whether that’s true today, that’s not the point. That’s where we are going. We’re going to scale this up.”

“The new administration is pushing climate change legislation extremely hard,” he says.

I met Vargas (below) at AES’s corporate offices in Arlington, where the joint venture operates. AES is one of the world’s largest power companies (132 generating plants in 29 countries on five continents) and an early player—back in the early 1990s—in the carbon business. GE is, well, GE.

Vargas, who is 38, had previously worked for GE, then did a stint at AES and became CEO of the JV last March. He’s got a MBA as well as a degree in mechanical engineering.

He told me that GHGS is pursuing several types of projects, all of which capture or prevent the emissions of greenhouse gases and thereby generatecarbon credits, which the company then sells to corporate or individual customers. Its projects include methane capture from landfills, coal mines or agricultural waste; renewable energy projects that reduce emissions by replacing fossil fuels; or land or forestry management projects that increase the capture of CO2.

“We’d like to build three or four projects with each type of technology, and see how they go,” Vargas says.

Vargas was coy about identifying particular projects to which GHGS is committed, but he said they include a landfill deal in suburban Virginia and a large project to capture methane from cow manure in Minnesota. “It’s not the sexiest of businesses,” he says, referring to the cow dung project.

For now, GHGS is selling carbon credits into the voluntary offset market. Google, for example, is buying offsets in an effort to meet is goal of becoming carbon neutral. (I searched in vain on Google’s site to see if the company has met its goal.)

Buyers of voluntary offsets, like Google, are typically doing so to enhance their reputations, so they are looking for more than carbon credits. They want to be able to talk about how they offset their emissions. So building a wind farm or creating a small-scale hydro project in a poor country has more value than, say, trapping industrial gases from a factory in China.

“They want a story,” Vargas explains. “Coal mines are releasing much more methane than an agricultural project will, but they are less attractive in the voluntary market because they are related to coal.”

The real business opportunity for GHGS will come when the company can sell offsets to companies, most likely coal and oil companies, that will be regulated under cap-and-trade legislation proposed by the Obama administration. Companies that burn fossil fuels will need to either buy allowances that will permit them to emit carbon dioxide, or buy offsets from companies like GHGS.

“Our goal has always been to go into the compliance market,” Vargas says. “The voluntary market is a warm up.”

The GHGS venture is worth watching. I’m pleased that Mo Vargas will speak next month at Brainstorm Green, FORTUNE’s conference on business and the environment.

If you want to learn more about carbon finance, I can point you to a webinar that I moderated last week for the Edelman public relations firm and the Environmental Markets Association. It’s long—about 90 minutes—but it features expert commentary from Thad Heutteman of the consulting firm PEAR, Wiley Barbour of the American Carbon Registry and Mark Grundy of Edelman. You can access the webinar slides from this link.  Here is a link to the audio.

[Dig]

Jim Deakin on Carbon Credits
http://www.gilacourier.com/?p=4513
Written by Gila on Nov 19th, 2009.

Jim Deakin is running for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in 2010, challenging Senator John McCain. Mr. Deakin submitted the following Op-Ed to Gila Courier. For more information on his campaign, see JimDeakin.com.

UNITED STATES TO FUND GENOCIDE THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL TREATIES AND LEGISLATION

Whether you believe global warming is manmade or a natural planetary evolution the truth is; U.S. and global environmental taxation associated with the buying and selling of “Carbon Credits” will lead to mass poverty, mass murder and genocide.

Carbon Credits will be purchased from countries with low green house gas emissions and sold to companies and countries with higher green house gas emissions, in an effort to offset the consumption of consumer countries such as the United States and help the people of poor countries to improve their lives and promote social equality and social justice.

Almost everyone is familiar with the genocide in Darfur, Sudan.  Quickly for your information – Omar al-Bashir is the ruler of Sudan. His human rights abuses have killed 200,000 people and driven five million from their homes.

Because Sudan has low carbon emissions, Omar al-Bashir will be able to sell his “Carbon Credits” to companies like GE, through a broker such as Al Gore.

If Omar were compassionate and made the lives of his people better he could build solar power facilities and homes. His people could buy GE refrigerators, GE washer/dryers, cups, plates, bowls, plastic food containers, and yes, even cars… the carbon footprint of his country would increase.  Sudan aka Omar now has fewer “Carbon Credits” to sell.

Since we already know that Omar is willing to kill his people for free, how many would he kill to receive a $2 Billion check from a multinational conglomeration like GE?

The United Nations will not prevent this tragedy. I remind you of the failures by the U.N. to prevent the current genocide.  I would also remind you of the corruption and failures by the U.N., France, Russia and other countries associated with the “Oil for Food” program.

Omar is not the only person in the world who could succumb to this level of financial pressure. Parade magazine just published its annual list of the world’s ten worst dictators.  North Korea, Iran, China, Saudi Arabia, Burma, Zimbabwe, Syria, Libya and Uzbeckistan are already on the list.

Enslaving humanity to pay for “carbon pollution” and mass murder are a violation of human rights.  The global climate change hoax must be stopped.

The United States is a leader in innovative solutions because of our character and freedom, not because our government imposes taxes to force compliance.

[Dig]

CARBON-CREDIT FIRST
http://channel0106.blogspot.com/2009/10/carbon-credit-first.html
Wednesday, October 28, 2009

       IRPC, a major petrochemical and energy firm, yesterday signed agreements with GE Energy and GE carbon in connection with its investment plan for a 220-megawatt combined heat and power plant worth about US$200 million (Bt6.7 billion) in Rayong province.

       The project will be the country's first carbon-credit trade as far as a largescale power plant is concerned, said IRPC president Pairin Choochotetavorn.

       IRPC's 20-year-old power plant is currently fuelled by bunker oil to generate electricity, causing a great deal of pollution due to the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

       This will be replaced by the new combined heat and power plant, which will use natural gas and generate 420 tonnes of steam per hour.

       Pairin said the 220MW plant, which will be operational in early 2011, will reduce CO2 emission by about 400,000 tonnes per year.

       As a result, the project is qualified to join the global carbon-trading scheme, as it will contribute to a reduction in global warming.

       At present, a tonne of CO2 is traded at around $15. The global credittrading scheme is expected to be operational in the next eight months.

       IRPC signed the del with GE Energy to buy gas turbines and other equipment for the new power plant.

       It also appointed GE Carbon as adviser for the project to sell its carbon credits in the international market as part of the Clean Development Mechanism.

       Given its scale, IRPC's project will contribute to getting on for a half of the reduction in CO2 releases targeted by the Energy Ministry, which aims to cut the Kingdom's emissions by an overall 1 million tonnes per year in the initial stage.

       Satish Kashyap, director of GE Carbon, said a total of 525 projects had been certified worldwide for the sale of carbon credits.

       Thailand currently has only 24 of these projects, while China has proposed more than 600 and India 500. Malaysia has 30 projects and South Korea, 33.

       Pairin said the IRPC facilities were not situated in the pollution-control areas designated by the Central Administrative Court, which recently issed an injunction on 76 industrial projects in Map Ta Phut and other parts of Rayong. However, the company would be affected if PTT were to revise its investment plans in the pollutioncontrol areas, he added.

[EvadingGrid]

Electrifying thread 

[Dig]

A GE AES venture reduces greenhouse gases on behalf of Google
http://ge.ecomagination.com/our-impact/investment-ghg-google.html

Carbon credits are often an important tool for companies to offset their emissions and help meet environmental and regulatory goals. Thanks to a venture formed in 2007 by GE Energy Financial Services, several projects to generate such credits are under way.

A venture between GE Energy Financial Services and global power producer AES Corporation, Greenhouse Gas Services is building a portfolio of projects that reduce, avoid or destroy gases that directly contribute to global warming. Current portfolio projects include those that create carbon credits by capturing and destroying methane from landfill gas, coal mines and agricultural waste.

Greenhouse Gas Services joined with Google in 2008 to co-develop a greenhouse gas reduction project at a landfill in Caldwell County, North Carolina. Under the arrangement, Greenhouse Gas Services will capture and destroy methane gas emitted from the landfill to generate an estimated 110,000 tons of carbon credits over a ten-year timeframe. Google will use a percentage of the credits to advance its goal of company-wide carbon neutrality.

In addition to methane destruction projects from landfill gas and agricultural waste, Greenhouse Gas Services is also exploring opportunities from precision farming and energy efficiency as future sources of emissions reductions.

[Dig]

Carbon Offsets: Feel Good Greenwashing?
http://www.prwatch.org/node/6881
Source: New York Times, January 9, 2008

GE, one of the world's biggest polluters, sponsors a carbon offsets credit card that lets cardholders put a 1% cash rebate on purchases toward projects that help mitigate global warming.

The Federal Trade Commission is looking into the booming business of selling carbon offsets, which are billed as a way "to balance the emissions created by, say, using a laptop computer or flying on a jet." Deborah Platt Majoras, chairwoman of the FTC feels that with the tremendous growth in the field, there is potential for abuse of the public's trust. The last revision of the FTC's environmental advertising guidelines was in 1997, and did not include terms common today, like sustainability, carbon offsets or renewable energy. "As more companies use offset programs to create an environmental halo over their products, the commission said it was growing increasingly concerned that some green marketing assertions were not substantiated. Environmentalists have a word for such misleading advertising: 'greenwashing.'" Corporations that are offering carbon offset credits to consumers include Dell, Continental Airlines, General Electric, Bank of America, and Volkswagen. "The FTC has not accused anyone of wrongdoing -- neither the providers of carbon offsets nor the consumer brands that sell them. But environmentalists say -- and the FTC's hearings suggest -- that it is only a matter of time until the market faces greater scrutiny from the government or environmental organizations."

[Dig]

Carbon Trading: The World's Next Biggest Market
http://www.greenchipstocks.com/report/carbon-trading-the-worlds-next-biggest-market/107


If you haven't been following the debate surrounding capping and trading emissions, you're missing out. Not only does it have implications for how our nation — and the world — produces energy; it has the potential to offer a myriad of opportunities for well-informed investors.

You see, California has been asking for permission to regulate greenhouse gas emissions since 2004, but the philistines at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have yet to grant it permission to do so.

For quite some time the EPA's excuse was that they didn't have the power to regulate emissions. That's funny. . .greenhouse gases harm the environment and the EPA is supposed to protect the environment. Maybe their organization should consider a name change. . .

Back in April, the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA did in fact have the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Like we didn't see that one coming.

After that decision, you'd expect everything to come up roses. But this administration doesn't make anything easy, even obeying Supreme Court decisions. So here we are, a substantial time since that decision, and the EPA still hasn't given California (or the eleven other states that would do so), permission to regulate emissions.

And while it would be nice to have the federal government's support, it looks like the rest of America is ready to move on without it.

Already, corporate behemoths like General Electric, DuPont, Johnson & Johnson, and others have come together to form the United States Climate Action Partnership.

Even oil juggernauts like Shell, BP, and ConocoPhillips have joined this coalition, which calls itself "an expanding alliance of major businesses and leading climate and environmental groups that have come together to call on the federal government to enact legislation requiring significant reductions of greenhouse gas emissions."

Now you can be certain the environmental groups that are a part of this alliance are there with pure intentions, but I'm willing to bet some of those companies are looking for a way to make a buck from the capping of emissions.

Carbon Market Potential

According to a recent New York Times article, carbon trading is one of the "fastest-growing specialties in financial services." And companies are scrambling to get a slice of a market now worth well over 100 billion and that could grow to $1 trillion within a decade.

The article, "In London's Financial World, Carbon Trading Is the New Big Thing," goes on: "Carbon will be the world's biggest commodity market, and it could become the world's biggest market over all."

If you doubt that assertion, consider this: Every year, humans generate about 38 billion tons of carbon dioxide.

And that number will continue to grow, as developing nations demand more energy that will likely be produced by coal and other carbon heavy sources of fuel.

As more international governments start to regulate their country's emissions, and as more companies start to voluntarily limit their emissions (as we're seeing in the U.S.), the demand for available carbon credits will skyrocket. And so will their price!

One need only revert to the simple law of supply and demand to see that this industry is going to be huge. If increased demand dictates an increase in price, getting in now could be one of the wisest investment moves you make in the first half of this century.

Carbon Trading: an Introduction

Europe has had a carbon market (surprise, surprise), for quite some time now. Each member state of the EU gets an annual emission allocation, which is then divvied up among its worst emissions-producing companies.

The companies are then legally obliged to produce no more emissions than they are allowed. If a company comes in under target, it can sell its excess allowance as "carbon credits" to other firms that have overshot their targets. But if it exceeds its target, it has to pay a penalty and then go to the market to buy credits to make up the difference.

Right now, with an abundance of carbon credits available, their price is relatively low. But with the second phase of the program (2008-2012), starting to rev up— bringing with it a reduced amount of credits and more stringent targets — the price of carbon credits is set to explode.

The United States has a version of a carbon market as well. . .

Established in 2003, the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) is one of North America's only voluntary and legally binding greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction and trading systems.

The companies that join the exchange commit to reducing their aggregate emissions from the same baseline used by the EU: 6% by 2010. Currently, the exchange has more than 200 members, ranging from corporations like Ford and Motorola; to municipalities such as Oakland and Chicago; to educational institutions such as Tufts University and the University of Minnesota; to farmers and their organizations such as the National Farmers Union and the Iowa Farm Bureau.

Emissions reductions are independently verified and count for about 4% of total U.S. GHG emissions — leaving plenty of room for growth.

Investing in Carbon

The only pure play is to buy Certificates in Emission Reductions (CERs). However, the sole way to currently do so is through an established carbon fund set up by huge capital firms. The most well-known firm that does this, Climate Change Capital, requires a minimum investment of $33.3 million — leaving little opportunity for small investors.

Or, you could invest directly in the company that owns the carbon exchange Climate Exchange Plc. (LSE: CLE).

These guys cornered the market early. They even own the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX).

But if those shares are too pricey, there's still hope for getting into the carbon market.

More than One Way to Profit

Carbon isn't just a one trick pony. There are a few ways to make sure you get your share of this opportunity. . .

You see, as this industry grows and matures, companies are going to be looking to make money from it in any way possible.

So if you don't have the $33 million and change needed to break into trading CERs, there's still hope.

For starters, you could invest in companies that reduce emissions simply by the nature of their business. Companies that produce clean energy will soon be profiting on two fronts; they'll be selling their power and the carbon credits they acquired while making it.

For example, a company that produces electricity via a clean renewable resource may not only sell the electricity, but also the carbon credits earned from not burning fossil fuels. . . so long as the emission reductions are certified by an independent third party.
Recent Carbon Headlines

Senate Committee Passes Bill to Force EPA Action on CA Waiver

GE, AES Ramp Up Venture Behind Green Credit Card

Global Voluntary Carbon Market Grows by 200 Percent in 2006

XShares to Develop Carbon Emission Credits ETFs

Blue Source Moving into Carbon Trade Standards
Lawmakers Unveil Industry-Backed Climate Bill

Of course, this arrangement would be much easier to understand and keep track of if a cap and trade system were implemented by the federal government. In fact, just capping the amount of emissions would do wonders.

Today, only 3% of our electricity is renewably produced. A 12% increase in the next twelve years would not only send renewables through the roof, but would create a pretty sweet carbon market as well.

As the demand increases for carbon credits, many companies are coming on the scene that specialize in reducing emissions. These are companies that help reduce the overall emissions of a variety of businesses, like farms, factories, and utilities.

These companies are not only getting premium consulting fees, but a portion of the carbon credit proceeds, as well.

You should take a look at Ecology & Environment Inc. (AMEX: EEI), which offers a range of environmental consulting services, including environmental planning, management, and regulatory compliance.
This is just one example of such a company, and there's yet another way to tap into this industry.

As more governments begin to cap carbon emissions and initiate trading schemes, there will need to be regulatory bodies that measure and confirm reduced emissions. And those agencies will need new instruments and technologies to measure and record.

The bottom line is, the savvy investors that stay on top of this nascent industry will witness the birth of an entire new generation of dominant companies - and the making of legendary profits.

For more on opportunities in carbon markets, as well as the booming alternative energy market (our current portfolio is up 66%), join Green Chip Stocks now.



You're Now Entitled to Try Green Chip Stocks for Only $1.00

I truly hope you found the above report informative and insightful. It's our goal at Green Chip Review to bring accurate, timely cleantech investment information to all those interested. . . for FREE.

But in addition to our free newsletter, we also help thousands of investors navigate the sometimes complex world of clean energy for personal profits. As the first investment advisory to focus exclusively on clean technology, we've been helping investors profit in this space for years.

We were closing solar triple-baggers long before being "green" became the latest social trend. And we'll continue to be the best. . . no matter how full the bandwagon gets.

Now that you've read our free solar report, you're entitled to a special trial subscription of Green Chip Stocks.

For a limited time, you can sign up for a 30-day special trial to Green Chip Stocks for just $1.00. When you do, you have access to all the profitable information reserved for our premium members and you'll get stock updates delivered to your inbox.

If you like our investment style, our research, and our winning recommendations, you'll be able to continue at a special discounted rate. If not, you can walk away. . . no questions asked.

Use this link to start your $1.00 trial membership today: http://www.angelnexus.com/o/op/13983

I look forward to welcoming you as the newest member of Green Chip Stocks.

To a new way of life, and a new generation of wealth...

Jeff Siegel
http://www.angelnexus.com/o/op/13983

[Dig]

GE: Extend Clean Energy Tax Credits Or We’ll Go To Germany, China
http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/09/15/ge-extend-clean-energy-tax-credits-or-well-go-to-germany-china/print/


Posted By Environmental Leader On September 15, 2008 @ 12:46 pm In Asia, Business-to-Business, Clean Energy, Government, Policy & Law, Pricing, Savings, U.S., Wind Energy | No Comments

General Electric Energy’s John Krenicki recently pleaded with senators to extend tax credits for renewable energy (see transcript below), which are set to expire at the end of the year. If they expire, Krenicki told [1] Keith Johnson of Wall Street Journal that, “we’ll go to Germany and China.” Both countries have long-term plans to promote clean energy.

Krenicki says he is prepared to fly down every week and repeat his plea. Other executives, such as General Motors CEO Rick Waggoner, Shell Oil president Marvin Odum, and Goldman Sachs co-president Gary Cohn, are also requesting the extension of tax credits for renewable energy.

Last week, Dow Jones reported [2] via AgWatch Network that the U.S. Senate unveiled a $40 billion package of renewable energy tax credits. The package includes a credit for capturing and storing CO2, and a new tax credit for nuclear energy production. The cost of the package is expected to be offset by new taxes on the oil and gas industry.

While the Senate is receptive, Krenicki says the real problem is the messy politics which make it harder to renew the credits.

Some readers of Johnson’s blog responded positively, but they also voiced some of their concerns. One reader wrote:

Good to see that some of industry’s heavyweights are rattling the cages of Congress. The only concern I have is that many of those named are part of the energy problem we need to address with innovative energy planning.

Here’s the full transcript of Krenicki’s remarks made at the Senate Energy Summit:

Senate Energy Summit

Friday, September 12, 2008

Opening Remarks
John Krenicki
Vice Chairman, GE
President and CEO, GE Energy Infrastructure

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I am John Krenicki, Vice Chairman of the General Electric Company and President and CEO of GE Energy Infrastructure.

I appreciate the opportunity to participate in this Energy Summit, and would like to commend you and Senator Domenici for your leadership in attempting to forge a bipartisan response to our current energy challenges.

GE Energy’s businesses offer a diverse portfolio of products and services in the area of fossil power generation, gasification, nuclear, oil & gas, water, transmission, smart meters, and renewable energy technologies such as wind, solar, and biomass.

I know policies for all of these technologies are of interest to you and your committee but today I would like to focus on just one in my opening comments  – the production tax credit for renewable energy.

By the time the gavel falls on the 110th Congress, the world will know the answer to a very important question: “Will the Congress and the US Government be a reliable partner in the quest for a cleaner and more secure energy future – or not?”

Since entering the wind industry in 2002, GE has invested over $700 million in technology, increased wind turbine production 6-fold, and tripled our US wind turbine assembly sites.  We’ve expanded capacity from 10 wind turbines per week to 13 per day, and we have grown renewable energy jobs at GE to more than 2,500.  GE has also tripled the number of its suppliers, who now cover 15 states and account for an additional 2,500 US jobs.  Last year we announced that two blade manufacturing companies would build new facilities in Aberdeen, South Dakota and Newton, Iowa to supply GE wind turbines, adding 1,250 jobs. The renewable energy tax credit is the foundation of this growth!

In 2002, when we entered the US market, wind energy added only about 1% of the new electrical capacity installed that year. Last year, 34% of the new electrical capacity was wind.

We’re proud to have an important role in one of the world’s most successful renewable energy policies. Mr. Chairman, you and your colleagues should be justifiably proud of that success.

Oddly, because of that success, the production tax credit’s future seems at risk.  For example, the Joint Tax Committee states that a yearlong extension of the production tax credit will “cost” the US Treasury 4 to 5 billion dollars?  Yet without a year extension of the production tax credit, most of the projected 7 gigawatts plus of new renewable power would be illusory. And most of the additional income from project taxes, payroll taxes, land lease taxes, and vendor taxes associated with the wind industry would not materialize.

But beyond the ‘green power’ and tax benefits to continuing this policy, there are consequences to inaction. According to a study last February, Navigant Consulting concluded that PTC expiration would place 76,000 jobs and more than $11.4 billion in clean energy investment at risk.

And there is a global dimension as well. The connection between a stable domestic policy and a vibrant export sector for renewables is exemplified by Germany, whose incentive system has earned it a reputation of the world’s leading ‘green’ power country.  Wind power technology is the country’s second-leading export industry after automobiles. Yet this year the United States, thanks to the PTC, will surpass Germany in electricity generated from wind energy.

How does the United States win by stumbling into an outcome that disrupts this efficient deployment of clean energy?

By extending the PTC, you will reaffirm the United States’ global leadership in the deployment of clean, carbon free, renewable energy – and send a signal that the US Congress stands ready to join others in addressing the more complicated problem of climate change.  We are ready to help.

Thank you again for the opportunity to participate in this Energy Summit.  I look forward to your questions

Article printed from Environmental Leader: http://www.environmentalleader.com

URL to article: http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/09/15/ge-extend-clean-energy-tax-credits-or-well-go-to-germany-china/

URLs in this post:

[1] told: http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2008/09/12/industry-to-congress-renew-the-expiring-clean-energy-credits/?mod=googlenews_wsj

[2] reported: http://www.agwatchnetwork.com/newsView.cfm/uuid/56A0FBDA-9149-97AF-B72886CB98C853B4/from/rss

[Dig]

GE: China leading UK and US on carbon capture technology
China in better position to export than US or EU, says GE executive director
http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2251843/china-leading-carbon-capture
Tom Young, BusinessGreen, 22 Oct 2009
 
Chinese companies are more advanced in their development of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology than those in the EU or US, according to the executive director of General Electric (GE).

Magued Eldaief told the CBI energy conference in London today that if it moved fast, the UK still had the opportunity to be a world leader in CCS technology, but that it was already showing signs of lagging behind Chinese firms.

"Today China is in a much better position to export its technology in terms of the investment it has put into R&D and in terms of its supply chain," he said.

The comments could cause considerable concern among UK investors in CCS technologies. The prospect of exporting CCS technology to developing nations such as China is often cited by the British government as a prime reason for increased investment in CCS.

At a recent conference on CCS technology, energy and climate change secretary Ed Miliband outlined proposals for an international task force that would encourage developed and developing nations to work together on the technology so that new systems and best practices could be shared as quickly as possible.

The International Energy Agency estimates that 100 CCS plants will be needed by 2020, scaling up to 850 plants by 2030 and 3,400 plants by 2050 if global emissions are to be reduced.

[Dig]

CLIMATEGATE DENIERS...

Carbon Credits are ficticious, they do not exist. They are a total fricking scam made out of thin air and supported by GE propaganda machines.

Wake up!