Recent Research
JANUARY 17, 2011 | Policy Report by COMMONWEALTH FOUNDATION
80 Ideas for a Prosperous Pennsylvania
A Blueprint for Transforming the Commonwealth
Pennsylvania must undergo a rapid transformation to reverse the poor policy decisions that have eroded economic freedoms and brought the state to its present condition. To provide a roadmap for success in this critical endeavor, the Commonwealth Foundation has compiled a list of 80 policy recommendations for Gov. Corbett and state legi
DECEMBER 30, 2010 | Commentary by PAUL CHESSER
Gov., Legislature Should Repeal Costly Renewables Mandates
A lot can be spun from the results of the Nov. 2 elections, but one fact is uncontrovertible: Pennsylvanians are sick of centrally planned, highly regulated, gimmick-driven economic policy. It hasn't worked, and now they want results.
OCTOBER 27, 2010 | Commentary by PAUL CHESSER
Never Enough Green for Renewable Energy
According to Pennsylvania's Public Utilities Commission, the annual cost of ownership for solar energy per kilowatt-hour is over 700% more than the cost of coal, and wind energy is almost 23% more expensive than coal. Meanwhile, state government provides more than $20 million annually for grants to alternative energy projects, and in 2008, G
Recent Blog Posts
NOVEMBER 22, 2011
Green Fiascoes and Boondoggles
Economist Mark Hendrickson, a member of CF's Council of Scholars, looks at the failure of government funded "green energy" projects in his latest column for the Center for Vision and Values. He identifies key lessons from these government fiascoes, for which the Solyndra scandal is only the most famous of many examples at the federal and state level.
There are at least four important reasons why we should stop funding "green" government programs:
First lesson: government-appointed experts are incompetent economic planners—a fact of life that any intelligent adult should know after the spectacular failure of central economic planning in the socialist experiments of the 20th century. No matter how brilliant and how well-intentioned government planners may be, they do not and cannot know what consumers want and how much they are willing to pay for it. Only free markets can solve this challenge. If electric cars are to be a viable industry, private companies will make them so.
Second lesson: The government's involvement in Solyndra raises troubling questions about possible corruption. While I think the Solyndra deal stinks to high heaven, I wonder whether any laws have been broken. Where is the dividing line between influence peddling, legitimate lobbying, political deal-making, and actual crime? Many farm-state Republicans have supported the uneconomical ethanol boondoggle for decades in exchange for generous support of their electoral campaigns, so the practice is bipartisan.
Third lesson: Government job programs are a blatant failure. They have never been economically beneficial. In the 1930s, Franklin Delano Roosevelt had the department of agriculture hire 100,000 Americans to monitor how much acreage American farmers were cultivating. These federal jobs produced no wealth. Their jobs made no more economic sense than paying people to dig holes and then fill them up.
Today's green workers are economically nonsensical, too. True, they sometimes produce something, but the economic value is invariably less than the amount of tax dollars needed to subsidize their job. In other words, federal jobs make us poorer.
Fourth lesson: Finally, we simply can't afford these green boondoggles. Uncle Sam's official debt is now $15 trillion, and when you include off-budget items and unfunded liabilities, the situation is far worse. Given this fiscal reality, it is the height of irresponsibility to throw taxpayer dollars at any special interests, and it is particularly egregious to subsidize enterprises that are plainly uneconomical.
posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 11:00 AM | 0 comment
NOVEMBER 21, 2011
Sky Darkens for Solar Mandates

HB 1580, which we wrote about previously, would accelerate state mandates for utilities to use solar power as part of their electricity portfolio.
A new Energy Association of Pennsylvania report calculates increased energy costs of more than $139 million annually if HB 1580 becomes law. Studies of similar laws in other states indicate that these costs will be directly passed on to consumers via higher utility rates.
The House Consumer Affairs Committee is scheduled to vote on HB 1580 on December 8. Government mandates in the legislation unfairly transfer the investment risk of solar power facilities from private investors to us, the consumers.
That risk is real and the bill should be voted down.
Environmental advocacy group PennFuture recently distributed a talking points memo warning solar supporters to avoid mentioning the infamous $528 million Solyndra scandal. Solyndra is but one of many green energy investment failures. Brightsource Energy Inc., a solar manufacturer with political connections, was the recipient of another $1.4 billion bailout.
Why should Pennsylvania force investment in an industry whose failure rate is skyrocketing? Solar energy's viability should depend on its success in the marketplace, not on subsidies and mandates enacted by politicians and backed by taxpayers.
posted by JOHN BOUDER | 02:03 PM | 0 comment
OCTOBER 28, 2011
State Energy Mandates Cost up to $440 million
A new study by Penn State scholars found Pennsylvania's alternative energy mandates will cost taxpayers up to $60 million next year and up to $440 million in ten years. Twenty-five to 30 percent of this price tag stems from meeting the state's solar requirements.
While solar looks bright on the surface, any jobs that depend on government assistance are overshadowed by a dependency on taxpayer pocket books. According to the Federal Energy Information Administration, solar energy producers already get 55 times more subsidies per megawatt hour than coal, and 95 times more than natural gas. Moreover, state solar energy is 10 times more expensive than electricity from natural gas and nearly six times more expensive than coal.
Given that Pennsylvania families can ill afford higher energy costs in this sluggish economy, Harrisburg policymakers are pushing a bill that would make these mandates more expensive.
House Bill 1580 would require that all solar credits used to fulfill the state's mandate be purchased from in-state companies, instead of companies within the PJM territory (PJM manages the electricity market in Pennsylvania and in all or parts of 12 other states and the District of Columbia).
The Penn State study shows that Maryland and Jersey—states in the PJM market that already require solar credits be purchased in-state—have solar credit prices that average 40 percent and 160 percent higher than Pennsylvania.
So just to recap, solar power drives up electricity prices for consumers, while lower prices for natural gas are reducing consumers' electric bills and saving Pennsylvanians on heating costs. Yet legislators are considering mandating the former and taxing the latter.
To learn more about Pennsylvania's alternative energy mandates, known as the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards, click here.
posted by KATRINA CURRIE | 04:30 PM | 0 comment

RSS FEEDS





