A letter to your senator

[Skull Pilot]

I was up early. I am a bit of an insomniac and I was surfing the web looking for some info on energy efficient home designs and stuff like solar hot water systems and ground source heat pump systems etc. I have been designing our next house for almost 2 years now a bit of an obsession I admit but it's better than watching infomercials or internet porn at 3 AM.

I've posted many times about how to implement residential alternative energy and my thoughts on tax credits etc so I decided to pen a letter to one of my senators.

If any of you would like to send a letter to your senators or congressmen, i thought you might want to use the letter I wrote to help save time.

Here is the text


Dear Senator:
I am writing you today to impart to you my interest and concern regarding the energy policy of our country. I have reviewed President Elect Obama’s energy policy and I have serious concerns and doubts of the cost and efficacy of Mr. Obama’s proposals. While I am sure we as Americans can agree that a new direction in our domestic energy policy must be taken not for merely the sake of the environment but also for our national security and economic well being of American citizens as well, I find the current political rhetoric on energy to be too lofty and quite frankly not very pragmatic.

There is, of course, serious need for improvements to our power grid and I am in complete support of new nuclear electric plants as well as clean coal technology. Wind and solar are real long term solutions as well. But these strategies are very expensive and will take years to implement on a scale large enough to make any serious difference. And we will not realize much in terms of actual cost reduction of energy for many years to come if at all.

Senator, I am proposing that you lead an effort to make it easier for Americans to do what we do best, innovate and create. It is my humble opinion that we citizens can lead the way to energy independence with pragmatic solutions and use of existing and proven alternative energy technology. You may know that the federal government already gives some limited tax credits to home owners and businesses that purchase and install alternative energy technologies such as solar hot water and ground source geothermal heating and cooling units, wind turbines and solar electric panels. I am proposing an increase in these tax credits from the current 30% to 100% of the cost of purchase and installation of alternative energy systems for all residential and business use to be taken over 5 years.

A long term strategy that makes it easier for citizens to implement new energy technologies will be more effective than additional government spending. The demand for new technologies will rise and new business opportunities will present themselves to the American entrepreneur. Jobs will be created and the country will benefit.

Of course, Senator, this proposal is a small piece of the puzzle. The long term solution will be an attack on all fronts. Building codes need to be changed to require more energy efficient design, higher car mileage standards need to be implemented etc. But if we have to start somewhere, I suggest we start by making it easier for the American people and businesses to use their ability to innovate and succeed. This determination and entrepreneurial spirit of our people has always been and still is our greatest strength.

Thank you for your support.
Sincerely,

 

[NOBama]

Very nice letter. Kudos!

Not sure about that 100% tax credit thingy though!

 

[Old Rocks]

I have no problem with the 100% tax credit. By doing that we are aiding fellow Americans do something that improves the energy picture for all of us. Much preferable to giving the money to people like Haliburton and AIG.

 

[NOBama]

I don't have a problem with a 100% credit either. I just don't think they'll go for it, if they even entertain the idea.

Asking for it certianly can't break anything.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I don't have a problem with a 100% credit either. I just don't think they'll go for it, if they even entertain the idea.

Asking for it certianly can't break anything.

You'd hope if enough people ask for it that it will happen, but then again look how many people were against the bail out and it happened anyway.

well it cost me nothing but a stamp to try.

 

[pegwinn]

Well Written. Well Done.

 

[NOBama]

Has everybody sent this letter yet? (my way of bumping this thread to the top of the heap!)

 

[editec]

I am proposing an increase in these tax credits from the current 30% to 100% of the cost of purchase and installation of alternative energy systems for all residential and business use to be taken over 5 years.

Excellent proposal in my opinion.

But since less than 50% of the people pay any taxes, and those people probably cannot afford to begin greening their lives, let me add an additional proposal.

An ENERGY EFFICIENCY LENDING PROGRAM for those who cannot take advantage of the tax credits system.

Either grants very low interest loans to citizens to make their lives more energy efficient, or in some cases give them grants outright to invest in fixing up thier carbon footprint.

For example, since the working poor often end up purchasing older cars with crappy mileage, helping them to get into energy efficient cars (made by AMERICAN AUTO MAKERS) seems a sensible policy as well.

I could use a more efficient oil burner for example. But given that I am too strapped trying to heat my home, I cannot invest in the $10 K or so it would cost me to replace my 20 year old furnace.

Ironically, I could could purchase the furnace, I could probably fund most of it from the savings I'd enjoy.

Multiply me by two or three million homeowners who are basically in similar circumstances, and America is self-funding energy economies which are long overdue.

We could have EASILY funded such a program with the money we've pissed away in Iraq.

They transference of money from the working class to the Banking class, would ALSO have likely funded this sort of sensible policy, too.

There's plenty of money out there, we';re just pissing it away doing stupid and frankly CLASS WAR things with it, rather than solving our problems, folks.

 

[NOBama]

Excellent proposal in my opinion.

But since less than 50% of the people pay any taxes, and those people probably cannot afford to begin greening their lives, let me add an additional proposal.

An ENERGY EFFICIENCY LENDING PROGRAM for those who cannot take advantage of the tax credits system.

Either grants very low interest loans to citizens to make their lives more energy efficient, or in some cases give them grants outright to invest in fixing up thier carbon footprint.

For example, since the working poor often end up purchasing older cars with crappy mileage, helping them to get into energy efficient cars (made by AMERICAN AUTO MAKERS) seems a sensible policy as well.

I could use a more efficient oil burner for example. But given that I am too strapped trying to heat my home, I cannot invest in the $10 K or so it would cost me to replace my 20 year old furnace.

Ironically, I could could purchase the furnace, I could probably fund most of it from the savings I'd enjoy.

Multiply me by two or three million homeowners who are basically in similar circumstances, and America is self-funding energy economies which are long overdue.

We could have EASILY funded such a program with the money we've pissed away in Iraq.

They transference of money from the working class to the Banking class, would ALSO have likely funded this sort of sensible policy, too.

There's plenty of money out there, we';re just pissing it away doing stupid and frankly CLASS WAR things with it, rather than solving our problems, folks.

The last thing we need is another give away program. A tax credit makes sense becasue it gives people incentive to upgrade.

I'd rather see a PPU (Profit Per Unit) Disclosure on every consumer item sold in the US that costs over a certian $ amount. That would make companies more competitiive with each other rather than focusing on how much they can squeeze out of US, it would force companies to become more efficient, and it would raise comsumer awareness.

If we can get a couple 100M people to sign a petition on that, I'll pay a lawyer to write it up.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I don't know ed.

The last thing we need is another government loan program. The federal meddling in the housing market didn't work so well did it?

As people who can afford green upgrades save money and take advantage of tax credits, the demand for oil will drop, prices will drop and lower income people will see savings they can then use for upgrades and the related tax credits.

Loaning more and more money is not an answer. Economies of debt do not promote stability as we have seen.

 

[bk1983]

I was up early. I am a bit of an insomniac and I was surfing the web looking for some info on energy efficient home designs and stuff like solar hot water systems and ground source heat pump systems etc. I have been designing our next house for almost 2 years now a bit of an obsession I admit but it's better than watching infomercials or internet porn at 3 AM.

I've posted many times about how to implement residential alternative energy and my thoughts on tax credits etc so I decided to pen a letter to one of my senators.

If any of you would like to send a letter to your senators or congressmen, i thought you might want to use the letter I wrote to help save time.

Here is the text


Dear Senator:
I am writing you today to impart to you my interest and concern regarding the energy policy of our country. I have reviewed President Elect Obama’s energy policy and I have serious concerns and doubts of the cost and efficacy of Mr. Obama’s proposals. While I am sure we as Americans can agree that a new direction in our domestic energy policy must be taken not for merely the sake of the environment but also for our national security and economic well being of American citizens as well, I find the current political rhetoric on energy to be too lofty and quite frankly not very pragmatic.

There is, of course, serious need for improvements to our power grid and I am in complete support of new nuclear electric plants as well as clean coal technology. Wind and solar are real long term solutions as well. But these strategies are very expensive and will take years to implement on a scale large enough to make any serious difference. And we will not realize much in terms of actual cost reduction of energy for many years to come if at all.

Senator, I am proposing that you lead an effort to make it easier for Americans to do what we do best, innovate and create. It is my humble opinion that we citizens can lead the way to energy independence with pragmatic solutions and use of existing and proven alternative energy technology. You may know that the federal government already gives some limited tax credits to home owners and businesses that purchase and install alternative energy technologies such as solar hot water and ground source geothermal heating and cooling units, wind turbines and solar electric panels. I am proposing an increase in these tax credits from the current 30% to 100% of the cost of purchase and installation of alternative energy systems for all residential and business use to be taken over 5 years.

A long term strategy that makes it easier for citizens to implement new energy technologies will be more effective than additional government spending. The demand for new technologies will rise and new business opportunities will present themselves to the American entrepreneur. Jobs will be created and the country will benefit.

Of course, Senator, this proposal is a small piece of the puzzle. The long term solution will be an attack on all fronts. Building codes need to be changed to require more energy efficient design, higher car mileage standards need to be implemented etc. But if we have to start somewhere, I suggest we start by making it easier for the American people and businesses to use their ability to innovate and succeed. This determination and entrepreneurial spirit of our people has always been and still is our greatest strength.

Thank you for your support.
Sincerely,

What about if we tax the industrial emission of carbon and return the revenue to industry through subsidies for research and investment in alternative energy sources, cleaner-burning fuel, carbon-capture technologies and other environmental innovations. So basically companies
would know that we will tax higher consumption, but the revenue will be stored away, and to earn it back we will give subsidies for the investment in alternative energy sources.

 

[editec]

I don't know ed.

The last thing we need is another government loan program. The federal meddling in the housing market didn't work so well did it?

I understand your concerns.

Except investing in energy saving isn't all all like investing in making housing more expensive than working people can really afford, is it?

In one case all we end up with is people in houses they cannot afford, and in the other we end up creating REAL ECONOMIC benefits to the nation overall.

50% of ouyr oil is used to in vehicles, and 40% of it is used to heat our homes.

Investing in making those absolutely necessary expenditures more efficient is way different than just pumping more and more money into the housing market.

 

[Skull Pilot]

What about if we tax the industrial emission of carbon and return the revenue to industry through subsidies for research and investment in alternative energy sources, cleaner-burning fuel, carbon-capture technologies and other environmental innovations. So basically companies
would know that we will tax higher consumption, but the revenue will be stored away, and to earn it back we will give subsidies for the investment in alternative energy sources.

OK so you want to take X out of business profits in taxes. Now consider that some of that money X ' we'll call that amount Y, would be sunk into R&D of new technology and capital in improvements in efficiency.

Taxing companies an amount X which will inevitably either be passed on to consumers or will cause a reduction of R&D and capital improvements and even a reduction of the work force if the market will not bear the passing on of the tax X to the consumers. And in a prolonged recession, we know the market probably won't bear price increases.

You then propose that the government give an amount less than X back to the companies that were taxed. Let's call that amount Z. So then less money gets put into R&D and capital improvements than if the government had not taxed the company at all.

The addition of a new layer of bureaucracy will only lessen the implementation of new technologies and will slow the process of going green.

If instead the government gave tax credits for implementation of green and fuel efficient upgrades and improvements, there would be more money to invest in R&D and capital improvements, more money to expand and hire, and possibly a reduction in costs to the consumer.

 

[bk1983]

OK so you want to take X out of business profits in taxes. Now consider that some of that money X ' we'll call that amount Y, would be sunk into R&D of new technology and capital in improvements in efficiency.

Taxing companies an amount X which will inevitably either be passed on to consumers or will cause a reduction of R&D and capital improvements and even a reduction of the work force if the market will not bear the passing on of the tax X to the consumers. And in a prolonged recession, we know the market probably won't bear price increases.

You then propose that the government give an amount less than X back to the companies that were taxed. Let's call that amount Z. So then less money gets put into R&D and capital improvements than if the government had not taxed the company at all.

The addition of a new layer of bureaucracy will only lessen the implementation of new technologies and will slow the process of going green.

If instead the government gave tax credits for implementation of green and fuel efficient upgrades and improvements, there would be more money to invest in R&D and capital improvements, more money to expand and hire, and possibly a reduction in costs to the consumer.

Did you ever stop and consider what your 100% tax credit plan is? It is one massive government payout, when you wrote this did you try and anticipate how much it would cost to cover 100% of all conversions to alternative energy?I guess you also failed to realize the ultimate burden and debt for this payout will be billed to the taxpayers. Its funny that in your letter you speak against more government spending yet are asking for 100% tax credits to be payed by the government.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Did you ever stop and consider what your 100% tax credit plan is? It is one massive government payout, when you wrote this did you try and anticipate how much it would cost to cover 100% of all conversions to alternative energy?I guess you also failed to realize the ultimate burden and debt for this payout will be billed to the taxpayers. Its funny that in your letter you speak against more government spending yet are asking for 100% tax credits to be payed by the government.

For one, it is NOT a pay out.

It is a credit for the expense to be taken against taxes, either corporate or personal. If that credit results in more write offs than taxes paid, the remainder of the credit is used against future earnings.

Hence the government will not be paying anything out, it will be taking less from the public.

 

[Old Rocks]

Excellent proposal in my opinion.

But since less than 50% of the people pay any taxes, and those people probably cannot afford to begin greening their lives, let me add an additional proposal.

An ENERGY EFFICIENCY LENDING PROGRAM for those who cannot take advantage of the tax credits system.

Either grants very low interest loans to citizens to make their lives more energy efficient, or in some cases give them grants outright to invest in fixing up thier carbon footprint.

For example, since the working poor often end up purchasing older cars with crappy mileage, helping them to get into energy efficient cars (made by AMERICAN AUTO MAKERS) seems a sensible policy as well.

I could use a more efficient oil burner for example. But given that I am too strapped trying to heat my home, I cannot invest in the $10 K or so it would cost me to replace my 20 year old furnace.

Ironically, I could could purchase the furnace, I could probably fund most of it from the savings I'd enjoy.

Multiply me by two or three million homeowners who are basically in similar circumstances, and America is self-funding energy economies which are long overdue.

We could have EASILY funded such a program with the money we've pissed away in Iraq.

They transference of money from the working class to the Banking class, would ALSO have likely funded this sort of sensible policy, too.

There's plenty of money out there, we';re just pissing it away doing stupid and frankly CLASS WAR things with it, rather than solving our problems, folks.

Exactly! I see the continual quacking here about the high cost of alternative energy. Yet no one seems to be doing the research. The only thing that is keeping the cost of solar up is demand. As the thin film tech is coming of age, the cost per watt is already below 25 cents at the new Applied Materials plant. Even better than just footing the bill for a new furnace, if the federal government had a program where it would foot the bill for putting in geothermal systems in private residences, no cost to the present owner, but the price of the system must be repaid to the government on sale of the property, we could reduce the energy use of this nation by as much as 10% to 20%.

Once again, on the auto front, good new as far as what is possible, bad news as to where it is being done;
China BYD Auto May Be First With Plug-In Hybrid ~ Hybrid Car Review