Bill Opalka | Dec 28, 2010

Senator John Thune had a challenge for renewable energy developers the other day - to work to remove regulatory barriers to clean energy development. The problem would have widespread support in any forum since projects take years to develop and exorbitant costs drive up project prices and delay deployment.

But there's a catch. Thune said those same barriers apply to "traditional" energy sources, though he didn't specifically mention coal, oil and natural gas.

The American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE) held its annual Policy Forum on Capitol Hill last week and one of the keynoters was Senator Thune, a Republican from wind-rich South Dakota.

"Clearly, we need to take a long look at the regulatory environment facing our domestic clean energy industry and make tough choices to streamline regulations at every opportunity," he said. "I want to challenge everybody in this room to start thinking about the similarities between the barriers faced by the renewable energy industry and those confronting other sectors of domestic energy production."

Thune said renewables have a significant role in the domestic supply, but it's a source that has to be part of an overall mix.

"It's important to realize, however, that in an era when energy production will have to come from both traditional and nontraditional sources, a truly effective national energy policy is one that fosters development across the board."

He cited Cape Wind and its near 10-year odyssey with state and federal regulators to gain approval. It faces continual court challenges. I might add the large solar projects on federal land [5] in the Southwest that really only got going when the streamlined permitting process.

So the implications are interesting. Not to put words in his mouth, but I think this begs several questions in a multitude of scenarios.

Would streamlined siting authority for transmission for renewable energy also mean easier access to offshore oil and natural gas drilling sites? Would the brewing controversies over shale gas extraction create an incentive to short-circuit regulatory reviews for water usage or impacts on the aquifer? What about nuclear power plant siting and waste disposal? Or multi-state natural gas pipelines?

And here's a question for renewable advocates. If the precedent set by fast-tracking large solar projects or the promises to expedite offshore wind [6] development lead to expanded development opportunities and a faster time-to-market outcome, what's to say the same logic won't be applied to nuclear power, offshore drilling and shale gas extraction if an administration more sympathetic to those energy sources takes office?

In other words, a Pandora's Box would be opened.

In other parts of his remarks, Thune held out hope for bipartisan progress in energy matters but he warned of tight budgets and a more bottom-line-oriented approach to federal project support.

"Future renewable energy incentives will be enacted with extreme budget austerity. That's something we all have to recognize, too with the budgetary constraints we're facing," he said, while energy projects will consider their environmental benefits, "but their impact on our economy, family pocketbooks and mainstream jobs" will be crucial.

This story first appeared in RenewablesBiz Daily and was written by its editor, Bill Opalca

Copyright © 1996-2010 by CyberTech, Inc. All rights reserved.

To subscribe or visit go to:  http://www.energycentral.com

To subscribe or visit go to:  http://www.energybiz.com