Some time ago Rep. Tipton introduced another “jobs” bill. A friend asked me what I thought of the bill, but I deferred comment until I had actually read the bill. The text of the bill, HR 2842, is linked below. It is known as the “Bureau of Reclamation Small Conduit Hydropower Development and Rural Jobs Act of 2011’’.
Anti-Regulation Tipton waits all the way until the second paragraph to strike regulations. He exempts all hydropower projects designed to generate up to 1.5 megawatts of electricity on federal water conduits from The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. This Act was one of the first bills designed to protect the environment by requiring environmental impact studies on all projects funded with federal money.
There is some logic to exempting these projects from further NEPA analysis, since the land was disturbed with the construction of the original water conduit. However, there are environmental challenges with large projects, which include the destruction of a river ecosystem and its replacement with a reservoir. According to a Texas report, hydroelectric dams, “previously thought of as zero-emissions power sources, actually do emit greenhouse gasses, particularly methane from the decomposition of organic materials.”
As is typical with Tipton, the only mention of jobs in the bill is in the title. It is unclear how jobs will be created by this bill, since it does not contemplate any funding for hydroelectric projects. Any jobs created would be in rural areas by the simple fact that irrigation canals exist primarily for the purpose of irrigating crops in Rural America. The size of the contemplated plants is relatively small—and construction seems to primarily require the pouring of a lot of concrete. There is a companion bill introduced by Nebraskan Rep. Adrian Smith that removes regulations from non-federal water conduits.
Tipton’s bill was referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources, and hearings were held on September 14 in the subcommittee on Water and Power. Blogger Coyote Gulch reports that H.R. 2842 is supported by the Family Farm Alliance, the National Water Resources Association, and the American Public Power Association.
My opinion: Increasing the generation of hydroelectric power is a lot friendlier to the environment than the development of oil shale in Western Colorado. It is clean energy, and should be pursued.
Homework
HR 2842
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Coyote Gulch Analysis of HR2842
Everything You Never Wanted to Know About Hydropower
How Big is a 1.5 Megawatt Hydroelectric plant
Anti-Regulation Tipton waits all the way until the second paragraph to strike regulations. He exempts all hydropower projects designed to generate up to 1.5 megawatts of electricity on federal water conduits from The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. This Act was one of the first bills designed to protect the environment by requiring environmental impact studies on all projects funded with federal money.
There is some logic to exempting these projects from further NEPA analysis, since the land was disturbed with the construction of the original water conduit. However, there are environmental challenges with large projects, which include the destruction of a river ecosystem and its replacement with a reservoir. According to a Texas report, hydroelectric dams, “previously thought of as zero-emissions power sources, actually do emit greenhouse gasses, particularly methane from the decomposition of organic materials.”
As is typical with Tipton, the only mention of jobs in the bill is in the title. It is unclear how jobs will be created by this bill, since it does not contemplate any funding for hydroelectric projects. Any jobs created would be in rural areas by the simple fact that irrigation canals exist primarily for the purpose of irrigating crops in Rural America. The size of the contemplated plants is relatively small—and construction seems to primarily require the pouring of a lot of concrete. There is a companion bill introduced by Nebraskan Rep. Adrian Smith that removes regulations from non-federal water conduits.
Tipton’s bill was referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources, and hearings were held on September 14 in the subcommittee on Water and Power. Blogger Coyote Gulch reports that H.R. 2842 is supported by the Family Farm Alliance, the National Water Resources Association, and the American Public Power Association.
My opinion: Increasing the generation of hydroelectric power is a lot friendlier to the environment than the development of oil shale in Western Colorado. It is clean energy, and should be pursued.
Homework
HR 2842
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Coyote Gulch Analysis of HR2842
Everything You Never Wanted to Know About Hydropower
How Big is a 1.5 Megawatt Hydroelectric plant
RSS Feed