let me emphasize this point. No. 1, the Alexander-Kyl amendment has more certainty. It extends the production tax credit from 1 year to 2 for all these. Second, the distinguished Senator from Washington mentioned solar power. Solar asked to be out of the production tax credit 3 years ago because all the money in the production tax credit was going to wind. In the Energy Policy Act of 2005, I was the lead sponsor of the amendment adding the investment tax credit for solar power. No one loses under the Alexander amendment No. 4429, except wind is treated similar to everybody else. It gets 1 cent per kilowatt hour. That means it will still get more of the money than anybody in the production tax credit. But open-loop biomass, all these emerging renewable technologies will suddenly have a fighting chance to get some of the money that since 1992 has almost all gone to one proven technology. That is not a wise use of taxpayer dollars. It is not a good use of funds to continue to over subsidize wind, which is now a mature energy technology. Two years instead of one is a vote yes.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the Alexander-Kyl amendment related to renewable energy tax credits.
Share
More from Douglas Alexander
This acquisition supports the long-term transformation of HM Naval Base Clyde and supports the kind of high-skilled jobs and economic opportunity that our communities deserve.
Ours are: Let's get the spending off the bill that does not create jobs now. My staff finds that only about $135 billion of the $900 billion goes to things that happen in the first couple of years--building roads, improving national parks…
I have received 600 e-mails and letters from Tennesseans in response to a request I put out asking them to share their personal stories about high gas prices. It has been my practice each week to put a few of those into the Congressional…
By bringing this site back to life, the UK Government is also continuing its commitment to help with local recovery following the closure of Finnart last year.





