Environmental League of Massachusetts * Friends of the Earth

Greenpeace * National Environmental Trust

Nuclear Information and Resource Service * Public Citizen

Sierra Club * U.S. Public Interest Research Group

 

Dear Senator:

 

On behalf of the millions of concerned citizens represented by our organizations, we are writing to raise our serious concerns with S. 1149, the Energy Tax Incentives Act of 2003, and to urge your opposition to adding it to S. 14, the Energy Policy Act of 2003.  We oppose the underlying energy bill because it is dirty, expensive and would increase our dependence on oil and we urge you to oppose it.  Unfortunately, the addition of the proposed tax package would only make the bill worse.  While we support provisions in S. 1149 that would promote energy efficiency and renewable energy, we believe that the bill’s overall benefits are unacceptably weighted toward the coal, nuclear, oil and gas industries.

 

The federal tax code has historically favored the oil, gas, coal and nuclear power industries.  Currently, the code provides $12.5 billion in energy incentives to these polluting and mature industries while offering only $500 million to renewable energy and energy conservation.  By including substantial incentives for the oil, gas, coal and nuclear industries, S. 1149 would exacerbate an uneven playing field where polluters reap a disproportionate share of incentives for energy production.  More than 61 percent or $12.3 billion of the tax break in S. 1149 would go to oil gas, coal and nuclear power, as compared to 36 percent or approximately $7 billion for renewable energy and efficiency.  In particular, we oppose the following provisions:

Clean Coal Incentives (Title IV)

S. 1149 would provide the first ever tax credit for production and investment using so-called “clean coal” technologies. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that the clean coal provisions in the bill would cost more than $2.1 billion over the next ten years.  Burning clean coal releases significantly more emissions than any other commonly used energy source, and exacerbates global warming and mercury pollution. The federal government already has spent more than $1.8 billion in funds on clean coal since 1984, yet emissions of carbon dioxide and mercury from coal-fired plants have continued to increase.  In addition, techniques often used to mine clean coal devastate communities, waterways and wildlife.

 

Oil and Gas Provisions (Title V)

S. 1149 would create or modify eleven oil and gas tax credits and deductions that increase our dependence on dangerous, polluting energy sources.  Among other things, the bill would extend the Section 29 tax credit, which has fueled the profitable and environmentally harmful development of coalbed methane. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimated the oil and gas provisions in the bill would cost more than $7.3 billion over the next ten years.  The oil and gas industries already enjoy tax incentives that industries in other sectors of the economy do not receive. From 1996 to 1998, the petroleum industry was one of the lowest-taxed industries in America.

 

Nuclear Decommissioning Costs (Title VI Section 601)

Despite terrible economic prospects, significant safety concerns, and lack of investor interest, S. 1149 would expand a tax break currently unavailable to non-regulated utility owned nuclear power plants.  The Joint Committee of Taxation estimates that this provision would cost more than $1 billion over the next ten years.

 

Current law provides tax breaks to rate-regulated utilities to reduce the decommissioning costs that they would otherwise pass on to their ratepayers. S.1149 would extend this benefit to non-regulated nuclear plants, which set their own rates and are able pass decommissioning costs onto ratepayers. This provision would inappropriately shift the costs of decommissioning from the nuclear industry and plant owners to taxpayers, giving the nuclear power industry a billion-dollar tax break.  The underlying energy bill already includes numerous nuclear subsidies, and when combined with the decommissioning tax break would amount to a multi-billion dollar windfall for this mature, dangerous industry.

 

Garbage Incineration (Title 1, Section 101)

While we support extension of the Section 45 tax credit for renewable energy, we strongly oppose the inclusion of municipal solid waste.  The addition of garbage incineration would thwart the intent of this incentive, enabling a highly polluting industry that poses major human health risks to receive benefits that should be reserved for truly clean forms of energy.

 

America deserves a safe, clean and affordable energy future.  Unfortunately, this bill’s inclusion of incentives for polluting industries far outweighs its support for clean energy and would take our nation backward, not forward.  The addition of S. 1149 to the energy bill would only make a dirty, expensive piece of legislation worse.  Please oppose the tax package and S. 14.

 

Sincerely,

 

 


 


Nancy Goodman

Research Director
Environmental League of Massachusetts

 

Erich Pica

Senior Policy Analyst

Friends of the Earth

 

Kert Davies

Research Director

Greenpeace

 

Kevin S. Curtis

Vice President, Government Affairs

National Environmental Trust

 

 

 

 

Michael Mariotte

Executive Director

Nuclear Information and Resource Service

 

Tyson Slocum
Research Director
Public Citizen

 

Debbie Boger

Senior Washington DC Representative

Sierra Club

 

Navin Nayak

Environmental Advocate

U.S. Public Interest Research Group