ReVision joined energy auditors, architects, and builders last week for a rally in support of UBEC, the Uniform Building and Energy Code, which sets standards for how homes and commercial buildings are built, from structural strength to ventilation, foundations and even the size of aggress windows. The Code also includes tough standards for energy conservation to help ensure new homes in Maine are less fossil-fuel dependent than their predecessors.

In a speech given by ReVision’s Jennifer Albee, we took the opportunity to highlight the value of the energy efficiency industry as a bright spot in a tough economy. Albee emphasized how exciting it is for a young person born and raised in Maine, to be in an industry geared for the future!

This rendering shows how the proposed Northern Pass tranmission line expansion project would affect the view of a stretch of Rte 125 that faces Clarksville, NH.

The road to a renewable grid is not always a pretty one. The northern pass transmission project, a brainchild of PSNH and HydroQuebec, is the latest example.

The current plan calls for building out a tall transmission line through New Hampshire’s north country, including 40 miles of wild, unspoiled terrain in Coös County, and roughly five miles in the White Mountain National Forest.  The idea is to transmit low-cost hydroelectric power to satisfy the growing requirement for renewable generation in southern New England.

Opposition to the project from residents and local businesses has been unequivocal. A blog titled Bury the Northern Pass contains interesting information about the claimed benefits and impacts of the project. The Town of Easton will be voting on full-on municipal opposition to the project in March.

Why are people opposed to the Northern Pass?

• There is not demonstrable need for the project in the state, since New Hampshire is already a net exporter of electricity.  Benefits of this project would mostly go to residents of Massachusetts, Connecticut, etc. who’d see their peak grid supply increase, and to the energy provider (i.e. Hydro Quebec), who would gain access to the market through a widened conduit.
• The regional economies of Grafton and Coös Counties largely rely on the wild natural character of the land, for example tourism, hospitality, and other outdoor pursuits.   Part of this character would be lost with the construction of 100-foot tall transmission towers over the 180-mile route.
• There are alternatives to the project.  Distributed generation such as solar photovoltaic arrays represent a more rational and gradual way to build out grid capacity, and directly benefit the localities where it is installed by locking in electricity rates though decades of future production.  Although we agree that renewable resources should play a fatter role in the Northeast’s power supply, running Big Wires though pristine mountain passes in the north woods is not a good “plan A.”

A recent letter to the Union Leader provides a good summary of the arguments against the Northern Pass, and notes the amount and intensity of local opposition.  There was also a vigorous public debate about RPS, which dovetailed into a debate about Northern Pass, two weeks back.

As promoters of smart solutions to our energy problems, and lovers of the rugged outdoors which gives New England its character, we hope to see alternatives to the Northern Pass gain steam and a healthy debate in Concord follow.

Make it a Sunny New Year!

There is bright news for both homeowners and businesses who are ready to make 2011 the year they finally go solar – several federal credits remain in place or have been extended.

In short:

• The uncapped 30% federal tax credit on residential solar electric and solar hot water systems remains in effect through 2016.
• In 2011 businesses can get a 30% federal cash grant in lieu of a tax credit, on top of state rebates (up to $2,000 in Maine, up to $50,000 in New Hampshire)
• Through 2012 bonus depreciation has been extended, allowing businesses to take up to 100% of the depreciation benefit of a solar energy system in year one for systems installed in 2011, and up to 50% in year one for systems installed in 2012 (with the rest coming over the next five years)

Read on for more specifics about each incentive.

Residential 30% Federal Tax Credit

The 30% federal tax credit is called the “Residential Renewable Energy Tax Credit” and was established by the federal Energy Policy Act of 2005.

This credit was initially capped at $2,000 for solar energy systems, but was expanded by The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to be an uncapped rebate for 30% of the cost of a renewable energy system (both photovoltaic and solar thermal are eligible, along with small wind and geothermal heat pumps).

The 30% includes all cost of labor as well as equipment costs for the renewable energy system. The credit can also be carried forward to future tax years if you cannot take the full credit in the year the system was installed.

More information:

• A homeowner claims the 30% credit on IRS 5695, Residential Energy Credits (PDF)
• The Solar Energy Industries Association has a great solar federal tax incentive FAQ
• Also see DSIRE – Residential Renewable Energy Tax Credit

Note: This credit is not to be confused with the “Nonbusiness Energy Property Credit,” which expired in 2010. That credit specifically applied to home “energy efficient” improvements, specifically:

• Biomass stoves (wood and pellets)
• HVAC equipment
• Insulation
• Windows and doors
• Roofing improvements

If you did purchase any of the above that meet Energy Star criteria, you can claim up to $1,500 on your 2010 taxes. See Energy Star’s website.

Treasury Grant in Lieu of a 30% Investment Tax Credit

In late 2010 Congress extended the 1603 Program: Payments for Specified Energy Property in Lieu of Tax Credits.

This incentive allows businesses to receive a cash grant from the US Treasury in lieu of waiting until they file their taxes to receive the 30% federal tax credit (called the Business Energy Investment Tax Credit (ITC), but with similar rules as the residential program).

By having access to the treasury grant, the program allows businesses to receive the full amount of the emergy credit even if they do not have enough tax liability to take the full 30%.

It also helps all businesses by getting cash into their hands more quickly, rather than waiting until they can file their taxes.

More information:

MACRS + Bonus Depreciation

Under federal tax code, renewable energy systems qualify for a 5-year Modified Accelerated Cost-Recovery System (MACRS) depreciation schedule.

The exact benefit of this depreciation is complicated and varies depending on your businesses’ tax rate, but typically it adds up to an additional 25% of a solar energy project’s cost being offset by reduced tax payments.

To further sweeten this incentive, in 2011 bonus depreciation has been extended, letting a business enjoy most of the benefit in year one, rather than waiting for the entire five year schedule.

DSIRE sums it up nicely:

The federal Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, enacted in February 2008, included a 50% first-year bonus depreciation (26 USC § 168(k)) provision for eligible renewable-energy systems acquired and placed in service in 2008. This provision was extended (retroactively for the entire 2009 tax year) under the same terms by The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, enacted in February 2009. Bonus depreciation was renewed again in September 2010 (retroactively for the entire 2010 tax year) by the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (H.R. 5297).

In December 2010 the provision for bonus depreciation was amended and extended yet again by The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (H.R. 4853). Under these amendments, eligible property placed in service after September 8, 2010 and before January 1, 2012 qualifies for 100% first-year bonus depreciation. For 2012, bonus depreciation is still available, but the allowable deduction reverts from 100% to 50% of the eligible basis.

The short of this is that a business that installs a qualifying solar energy system in 2011 can enjoy a 100% bonus depreciation the first year the system is commissioned, rather than waiting for the entire 5 year depreciation schedule. Also, a 50% bonus depreciation is available through 2012.

Given the time value of money and the tough economic climate, this benefit helps make solar energy systems more accessible in the near-term by businesses that will be able to save significant fossil fuel energy costs over the life of the system.

In fact, between the treasury grant, bonus depreciation, and generous state rebates, many businesses (particularly heavy water users like inns and restaurants) can enjoy a year-one payback on solar energy systems!

More information:

What Do Rebates Mean for Me?

Here are a few example solar energy projects to help illustrate how federal incentives affect solar energy economics.

Scenario #1- Residential SHW system

$10,500 installed cost
-$1,000 ME Solar Rebate (avg. $2,600 NH state rebate)
-$3,150 30% Fed Tax Credit
$6,350 Final Cost (40% savings with current incentives)

Scenario #2- Residential PV system 4kw (5,200 kWh/yr)

$19,000 installed cost
-$2,000 ME Solar Rebate (currently no NH state rebate)
-$5,700 30% Fed Tax Credit
$11,300 Final Cost (40% savings with current incentives)

Scenario #3- Commercial PV system

$100,000 installed cost
-$2,000 ME Solar Rebate (up to $50,000 in New Hampshire)
-$28,900 accelerated depreciation – avoided taxes over 5 years thanks to lowered net income, assumes 34% marginal tax bracket
-$30,000 30% Fed Tax Credit
$39,100 Final Cost (60% savings with current incentives)

Interested in learning more? Contact Revision Energy for a free consultation about how to take full advantage of the current government incentives available for renewable energy projects.

Clean energy advocates in New Hampshire have two big reasons to be thankful this season – the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission has announced an expansion of the solar hot water rebate available to homeowners and has released the application for their commercial solar hot water and solar electric rebate (PDF).

Here are some details on both programs:

Residential Solar Thermal is Hot

The solar hot water rebate in New Hampshire is tiered based on the performance of the system, which is expressed in MMBTU / year. This consists of a state rebate that ranges from $600-900 and a federal rebate which has been raised from $750 to $2,000.

Here’s what the rebate program looks like for different kinds of systems:

For a typical residential project (2 flat plate collectors which produce ~18.25MMBTU/yr) installed at a cost of around $10,500, the incentives amount to $5,750, well over half the cost of the system!

The rebates are retroactive, as well, so if you recently installed a solar hot water system and qualified for the New Hampshire state rebate, you can expect a holiday gift from the PUC soon.

Rebates Arrive for Business

The solar hot water system for Moat Mountain Brewpub will save the brewery an estimate 520 gallons of oil a year

Equally exciting is the arrival of the much anticipated commercial solar hot water and solar electric rebate.

This program makes $1,000,000 available to solar thermal and solar electric projects for businesses, schools, municipalities, apartment buildings – basically any structure not eligible under the residential program.

The rebates are pretty straightforward:

• Photovoltaic (Solar Electric): $1/Watt up to $50,000 (or 25% of the project cost, whatever is less)
• Solar Thermal rebate: $0.07 per kBTU/year up to $50,000 (or 25% of the project cost, whatever is less)

Like the residential solar hot water program, a RETScreen modeling analysis is used to calculate the kBTU/year performance of the solar hot water systems.  Solar electric is fixed based on the nominal wattage.

Solar Economics are Amazing

The generous rebate makes it extremely attractive to invest in solar if you’re a business.  Let’s take, for example, a medium scale solar thermal project for a business that uses a lot of hot water – a hotel or retirement home, perhaps – and is currently heating that water with oil.

We’ll propose a system of 20 flat plate hot water collectors and several super-insulated tanks that will produce over 182,500,000 BTUs/year of clean thermal energy.  We’ll imagine that the system will save 2,300 gallons of #2 oil per year, a result of both reduced oil use and greatly reducing standby losses of the oil boiler in the summertime.

Assuming this hot water system costs around $100,000 gross to install, the fuel savings alone will pay for the cost of the system within its first decade of operation.

However, now there is an exciting suite of rebates to apply:

$100,000 gross installed cost
($30,000) federal tax credit
($28,900) accelerated depreciation – avoided taxes over 5 years thanks to lowered net income, assumes 34% marginal tax bracket
($12,775) state rebate – $0.07/modeled kBtu/year
$28,325 net investment – less than a third of the total cost of the project!

Within this new context, that same solar hot water system will pay for itself within two years thanks to the fuel savings.

While the wasteful boiler imagined in this formula is a “best case” scenario for solar, the economics work out for businesses of all sizes who are ready to both take an enormous cut out of their carbon emissions and save money while doing it.

Contact us for more information about both the commercial and residential solar rebates or to schedule a free site evaluation.

While it’s faced legal hurdles in other parts of the country, Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing may finally be arriving for Maine residents as early as mid-November according to Efficiency Maine. UPDATE: As of April 4, 2011, PACE Solar Loans are now available.

This unique program allows residents in towns that have passed a PACE ordinance to get low-interest loans on energy efficiency and renewable energy systems, everything from insulation and caulking to solar hot water and solar electric systems.

The program allows homeowners to get an energy efficiency loan that is tied to their property – rather to them personally – so that they will not be liable for the loan if they decide to sell the house. In the meantime, however, a home with improvements financed through the PACE program will benefit with improved comfort and reduced fossil fuel energy costs and carbon emissions.

How Does PACE Work?

PACE loans will be available for up to $15,000 on what Efficiency Maine calls “energy saving improvements,” that is, either work that “result[s] in increased energy efficiency and substantially reduced energy use” or a “renewable energy installation or an electric thermal storage system.” Which means that residential solar hot water systems and grid-tied solar electric systems qualify for loans under the program (from the Model PACE Ordinance (PDF)).

These loans are intended to be tightly entwined with performance of efficiency upgrades so that the cost of the loan payment is comparable to or less than the current utility payment. PACE loans will not be allowed for terms longer than the expected life of the improvement.

Solar hot water systems, such as this one in Biddeford, Maine, will save the homeowner more than $15,000 in utility bills over its first 20 years of operation.

This is certainly a good model for solar energy systems which will last more than 20 years, and are most affordable when taking a long view of energy savings.

For instance, a typical solar hot water system saves 300 gallons of home heating oil per year, worth roughly $780/year at today’s prices, for a savings of more than $15,000 over the life of the system. With an out of pocket cost of $5,500 to $6,000 once you factor in state and federal rebates, it will take about 8 years for the system to pay for itself.

The same system, benefiting from a 15-year PACE loan at 5% interest, results in a payment of roughly $71/month, or $852/year.  Since the PACE loan is based on net installation cost of the system, you would still benefit from the $3,150 federal tax credit, which if applied to your monthly payment would bring your average payment down to $57/mo, or $684/year.  A financed system saves money from day one!

How Can I Get a PACE Loan?

Getting access to the fund requires a few things:

• You must live in a town that has passed a PACE ordinance. So far that includes Cumberland, Yarmouth, Arrowsic, Waterboro, Fayette, South Portland, Old Town, Hampden, and Belfast with dozens more in process. If you’re unsure whether your town has passed an ordinance, now is the time to call your town office!
• You must have an energy audit done, and the energy auditor must be able to show that your proposed system will meet Efficiency Maine’s performance requirements. PACE will be managed through Efficiency Maine’s existing Home Energy Savings Program (HESP), which requires a computer model that demonstrates a 25% energy savings from the proposed efficiency improvement.This modeling biases towards weatherization, though solar hot water can also be considered (since combined with boiler improvements solar hot water achieves dramatic decreases in home heating oil use). It’s not clear how solar electric systems will be evaluated for PACE loans just yet.

What About PACE in New Hampshire?

Unfortunately, PACE legislation has hit a big snag in New Hampshire. SeacoastOnline reported it this way:

Last year, the New Hampshire Legislature passed House Bill 1554 to create the framework for municipalities to develop PACE, according to Eric Steltzer, a policy analyst for the state Office of Energy and Planning. New Hampshire set up PACE as assessment districts, such as a water or sewer district. As such, PACE became a priority lien holder.

Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the Federal Home Mortgage Corp. and Federal National Mortgage Association, respectively, balked at being put in a secondary lien position. The mortgage giants said they would not support PACE in states in which those loans are given a priority status on liens, said Steltzer.

This means, said Steltzer, “When you sell your house, they will not offer a mortgage on a property that has PACE on it. I do not foresee any communities in New Hampshire creating PACE entities.”

In contrast, Maine’s program specifically states that the PACE loan is secondary to the primary mortgage to avoid this road block. However, New Hampshire citizens still can take advantage of terrific state rebates and a growing number of private financing options.

We’ll keep you posted as the program evolves in both Maine and New Hampshire, and of course alert you to any new rebate programs, incentives, or solar financing options!

Resources on PACE

• Towns backing energy efficiency loan program – Current Publishing
• Maine seeks to pick up ‘PACE’ of energy savings – SeacoastOnline
• PACE Incentives – DSIRE
• PACE FAQs – Efficiency Maine
• PACE Model Ordinance – Efficiency Maine (PDF)
• PACE Law Enacted in Maine – Efficiency Maine (PDF)

This NREL map shows the states in the United States where feed in tariff legislation has been passed – only 14 states so far

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has released the largest report on feed in tariffs ever produced by a US Government Agency.

The 144 page document, called A Policymaker’s Guide to Feed-in Tariff Policy Design (PDF Download), analyzes the results of Feed in Tariff legislation in over 75 countries, including the efforts so far in the United States.

What is a Feed in Tariff and Why Should I Care?

A Feed in Tariff (FiT) is an alternative to taxpayer-subsidized incentives for renewable energy programs. With a FiT, the government mandates electric utilities to pay a certain above-market rate for electricity generated by net-producers. Meaning, an individual with a good solar location can install solar panels and turn a profit.

There are a number of reasons that a FiT is more effective than cash and tax incentives towards spurring renewable growth:

• The FiT is a performance based incentive – Quality of system design and performance is determined based on a need for return on investment.
• The FiT does not depend on taxes – Since incentives rely on tax money, at some point those coffers will empty and the incentives run out.  A FiT can be financed many ways, usually in the electric market. This takes a burden off of strapped state and federal budgets, and permits renewable growth to scale.
• The FiT offers a predictable return on investment – Solar energy systems offer a predictable rate of production whose value increases as the cost of electricity increases. Given the state of the economy, a renewable investment can be more secure than the stock market!

Key Findings of the Report

The NREL report does a good job of debunking feed in tariff myths, while also critically examining policy challenges faced abroad. Some of their more interesting findings:

• “FITs are responsible for approximately 75% of global PV and 45% of global wind deployment” (5)
• “The arguments in favor of a FIT policy are primarily economic in nature. These include the ability to … stimulate significant and quantifiable growth of local industry and job creation … [and] only cost money if projects actually operate” (27)
• “RE developers benefit from the long-term stability of the revenue streams generated from electricity sales, which helps foster a high level of investment security.” (121)
• “Another benefit is the direct competition for market share that is occurring under FIT policies in countries such as Germany, France, and Spain. This can drive greater private R&D investment, while helping spur further innovation and technological cost reduction” (121)

The report cites a number of primary, secondary, and tertiary benefits (pg. 18-20) for growing the renewable energy with FiT policies, such as:

• Increasing local jobs and developing the economy
• Reducing greenhouse gases
• Displacing load (to phase out coal fired power plants)
• Peak shaving (i.e. reducing the peak load conditions which CMP cites as the reason for the $1.4 billion grid upgrade)

The report then goes on to discuss in great detail the pros and cons of different models of feed in tariffs and the variety of ways they can be made into policy. Variations include payouts based on fixed rate prices vs. premium rates which fluctuate based on the market, to sliding scale rates based on economic conditions and those that vary based on resource quality and location.

You can read this in-depth report for free. (PDF Download)

Will a Feed In Tariff Make it to Maine (and New Hampshire)?

If you’ve been following our blog for a while, you’ve seen our coverage of Maine’s own attempt to establish feed in tariff, which was voted unanimously “Ought Not To Pass” in May, 2009.

A watered down version of the bill, providing for pilot community-owned electricity generation with caps on tariff payouts, was later passed in June 2009. The Midcoast Green Collaborative has a great write-up of the legislation as well as a history of Maine’s slow road towards a feed-in tariff.

For the moment, no concrete, meaningful feed in tariff legislation for Maine homeowners is on the horizon.

Meanwhile, New Hampshire has just passed legislation that will require utilities to pay customers that are net-generators of electricity for their surplus.

The rates to be paid for this electricity are yet to be determined – whether they are truly market rates or a lesser “avoided costs” rate, but should the legislation be successful in spurring renewable energy growth it is possible that true feed in tariff legislation will follow.

We’ll keep you posted as feed in tariff legislation continues to develop in Northeast!

Special thanks to Clean Technica and Renewable Energy World for information about this new NREL report.

More Reading

Learn more about feed-in-tariffs and how other states and countries are using them to move solar energy forward:

• Hawaii feed-in tariff decision to open clean energy market
• Portugal Gives Itself a Clean-Energy Makeover (NY Times)
• Tripling of Solar Jobs in the UK this Year due to FIT?
• Feed-in tariff for alternative energy

Janet Ward, a friend of ReVision Energy in Concord, New Hampshire, recently alerted us to some questionable legislation making its way through the New Hampshire State Senate.

Bill SB 334, which states that it is “encouraging the installation and use of small scale renewable energy resources by homeowners and businesses,” is coming under fire because it would allow Public Service of New Hampshire (PSNH) to divert $5 million of money that should purchase renewable energy credits for a single solar development project in Manchester.

As reported from the New Hampshire Sustainable Energy Association:

PSNH is asking the New Hampshire House of Representatives for permission to fund a single solar energy project in Manchester with funds it is supposed to use to purchase Renewable Energy Certificates or pay into the State’s Renewable Energy Fund(REF).

The REF funds are intended to be available throughout the State for renewable energy projects to benefit residents, small businesses, and municipalities. The funds are vital to the small businesses which are building New Hampshire’s green economy.

The PSNH project, funded via the RPS program, undermines investment in New Hampshire’s small business future.

The bit of legislation that is causing the controversy:

In lieu of PSNH making payments under RSA 362-F:10 for class II electric renewable energy standard obligations or purchasing certificates, as defined in RSA 362-F:2, III, to comply with RSA 362-F class II electric renewable energy standard obligations, beginning upon the effective date of this act PSNH shall retain such payments and utilize $5,000,000 of such amounts to invest in the development of the solar photovoltaic renewable energy project in Manchester. The amounts retained by PSNH shall be used to amortize the outstanding capital investment for the project. When the nominal payments retained by PSNH equal $5,000,000, PSNH shall return to routine compliance with RSA 362-F:10 for going-forward class II electric renewable energy standard obligations.

What This Means

Under current law, the $5,000,000 would go towards the purchase of Renewable Energy Certificates (the Renewable Portfolio Standard or RPS) or pay into the New Hampshire’s Renewable Energy Fund (REF).

According to The Green Energy Times, “The REF funds are intended to be available throughout the State for renewable energy projects which benefit residents, small businesses, and municipalities. The funds are vital to the small businesses which are building New Hampshire’s green economy.”

In other words, the act would allow PSNH to create their own special project and avoid the current process, which incentivizes small businesses and entrepreneurs to create renewable energy projects, and drives a competitive renewable energy marketplace.

RPS requires New Hampshire to generate 16 percent of new energy from renewable resources such as wind, solar, biomass and hydro by 2025, and Renewable Energy World predicts New Hampshire’s energy will be 22-25% renewable by 2025 should the effort be successful.

Performance requirements for the PSNH project are not defined in the bill, though there is some verbiage in the Bill that suggests that performance of the PSNH project would be subject to review.

Opponents to SB 334 claim that the RPS program has led to regular employment for 126 electricians and solar installers and grants for more than 270 renewable energy projects across New Hampshire. In contrast, they claim that the PSNH project will create only five full jobs a year, “at a cost of $1 million per full-time position.”

What You Can Do

ReVision Energy encourages you to read about the legislation and then take action – there is a great amount of information as well as links to newspaper articles and opinion pieces at http://www.nhsea.org/public-policy.php.

You can contact members of the New Hampshire House Science, Energy and Technology Committee via e-mail: HouseScienceTechnologyandEnergy@leg.state.nh.us or visit the New Hampshire House website for for complete contact information for the Committee.

Most importantly, you can attend the Committee’s Public Hearing on SB 334, which will be held this Thursday, April 15 at 1pm in room 304 of the Legislative Office Building, 33 North State Street, Concord, New Hampshire (map and directions).

A solar power project completed this week in New Hampshire – clean energy is ready to go!

In his first official State of the Union address, President Obama offered a rousing challenge to Congress to get to work on a variety of issues – jobs, security, health care, and the transition to a clean energy economy.

With 2009 behind us, but its challenges far from over, Obama took an approach that was urgent, while at times light-hearted, as he analyzed the country’s problems and his suggestions for implementing change.

We were pleased to see “clean energy” make it into the speech some dozen times, though Obama mentioned “solar panels” only once.

Here’s our take on some of the key points raised during the State of the Union address:

• Obama Lauds Success of Recovery Act
  

  “Because of the steps we took, there are about two million Americans working right now who would otherwise be unemployed. Two hundred thousand work in construction and clean energy”

  Obama put a lot of effort into defending the actions necessary in 2009, both the unpopular bank bailout and the ongoing American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), aka the Stimulus.

  While Obama’s focus on clean energy jobs was on the manufacturing side – he mentioned both “the California business that will put a thousand people to work making solar panels” and a need to create “new factories that manufacture clean energy products,” the Stimulus also has had a big positive effect on those who install those panels thanks to financial incentives that were part of ARRA.

• Obama Sees Clean Energy as the Route to Tomorrow
  

  “We can put Americans to work today building the infrastructure of tomorrow … There’s no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains, or the new factories that manufacture clean energy products… I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change. But here’s the thing — even if you doubt the evidence, providing incentives for energy-efficiency and clean energy are the right thing to do for our future -– because the nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy. And America must be that nation.”

  Obama seemed very cautious about making the environmental case for a switch to a clean energy economy, instead rooting his argument in the need to create very real clean energy jobs.

  While we couldn’t agree more, and laud Obama for finding common ground, it’s a bit disappointing that the very real crisis facing our planet is still a point of argument.

  The reality is that regardless of the state of the economy, we need to make a move to clean energy now as an act of survival.

  That Obama was cautious to acknowledge this threat points to an even greater challenge of worldview we still have to resolve.

• Getting There – Incentives and Innovations
  

  “We should put more Americans to work building clean energy facilities and give rebates to Americans who make their homes more energy-efficient, which supports clean energy jobs. … Next, we need to encourage American innovation. Last year, we made the largest investment in basic research funding in history, an investment that could lead to the world’s cheapest solar cells or treatment that kills cancer cells but leaves healthy ones untouched.”

  Again, Obama mentions investment in research as a major player in the move to a clean economy. While we agree, the reality is that there are plenty of technologies that are already here which are reliable, affordable, and available.

  Both grid-tied photovoltaics and solar hot water are energy investments that make economic and environmental sense.

  We’re eager to see what Obama plans to offer with “rebates to Americans who make their homes more energy-efficient,” and wish we’d heard something about a feed-in tariff.

• The Economy of Old – Nuclear, Oil, and Gas?
  

  “But to create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives. And that means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country. It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development. It means continued investment in advanced biofuels and clean coal technologies. And, yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America.”

  After so much invigorating news from Obama, it was disappointing to hear his last word on energy mention nonrenewable sources of energy.

  While it may be necessary to find some common ground with Republicans to move the overall initiatives forward, we still disagree that more power plants and “clean” coal are the best way to build the nation’s infrastructure.

Disappointments aside, it’s encouraging to see how large a role clean energy fits into Obama’s plans to move the country back into recovery.

As Obama acknowledged, we have some mighty challenges ahead of us, but the technology is here to move to a clean economy.

What is difficult is mustering the will to act.