Cooler Planet

Someone asked Cooler Planet about Congressman Roscoe Bartlett’s stance on solar energy.  Here’s what we found out.

Roscoe G. Bartlett has a doctorate in human physiology and is an eight-term Republican Congressman representing the 6^th District in Maryland.  He is a Conservative Republican who is also a stalwart solar energy advocate. 

Before his successful bid for Congress in 1992, Bartlett had an illustrious career as a professor, research scientist, farmer, and land developer.  During the 1960s, Bartlett directed the Space Life Sciences research group at John Hopkins University’s Applied Physics Laboratory where the lab’s research contributed to NASA’s missions on Gemini, Mercury, and Apollo. 

That background must have contributed to his support of solar power.  According to Congressman Bartlett’s website, during his tenure as a consultant and land developer his company “built more than 100 homes in Frederick County, many of them solar powered.” 

Today, Bartlett seems to practice what he preaches.  He designed and built his solar-powered home.  And he was the first US Congressman to buy a Prius.  (In 2008, the Baltimore Sun wrote an article examining what type of cars Maryland’s elected officials drive and discovered that Roscoe Bartlett is one of only two that drives a hybrid – and that Bartlett’s Prius is his second one). 

Bartlett’s interest in solar and other forms of renewable energy comes from a pragmatic recognition that oil cannot indefinitely supply our collective “energy appetite.”  On his website Bartlett states, “Oil dependency is increasing at such a rapid rate that it will eventually pass current production and manufacturing capabilities. That is why I have been, and continue to be, a supporter of our renewable energy legislation and programs.”

Energy is definitely Bartlett’s “puppy.”  He firmly believes Hubbert’s Theory of Peak Oil; much of the impetus behind Bartlett’s energy policy stems from a solid belief that we are on the downward side of the supply bell-curve regarding oil. 

Similarly, Bartlett recognizes that climate change is real.  He has spoken eloquently in Congress about how carbon dioxide emissions impact our atmosphere.  On that basis, he supports nuclear power.  In a March 6, 2008 speech on the Congressional Floor, Bartlett spoke about the feasibility of alternative energy sources, including nuclear power.  Bartlett explained that from a carbon emissions standpoint, “nuclear, by the way, is even better.  After you have paid a carbon cost for building the nuclear power plant, then there is no carbon dioxide produced for the duration of that nuclear power plant.”

Bartlett often is the man behind recent renewable energy legislation.  In explaining why he introduced legislation to extend renewable energy credits Bartlett wrote:

 “Solar power has grown annually an average of 18 percent with the federal credit; it grew 57 percent alone in 2007.  Why dim this bright spot in our shaky economy?  An independent study by Navigant found that nationally, “112,000 jobs in the wind and solar industries (78,000 wind, 34,000 solar) and $19 billion in investment” are at risk over the next six to eight months if the renewable energy tax credits are allowed to expire.”

He does not support ethanol because he views subsidies towards its production as a negative impact on markets within the food supply chain.

Bartlett’s stand on renewable energy has provoked ire even among his supporters. Just last week – May 22, 2008 – Bartlett changed his long-term position against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and publically stated he will back drilling there.  Bartlett announced that he is co-sponsoring the American Energy Independence and Price Reduction Act because the bill specifies that all the revenue garnered from drilling leases in the refuge’s coastal strip will be earmarked for alternative and renewable energy programs. 

Bartlett acknowledged that his reversal stems from skyrocketing oil prices.  He recognizes that drilling in the ANWR will impact the wildlife there, but Bartlett in making his announcement said, “I have been to ANWR.  I am convinced that the environmental impact will be minimal.” 

Bartlett’s pro-solar stance and support of alternative energies does not necessarily make him an all-encompassing environmentalist.  Curiously, the League of Conservation Voters who publishes a Scorecard each year based on a Congressman or Senator’s voting record, gave Bartlett a 45% score in 2007 and he hasn’t ranked much higher in previous years. 

Bartlett’s votes regarding energy and the environment seem to reflect a strict position of his values – he is a devout Seventh Day Adventist who believes in stewardship of our land but not necessarily wide spread use of federal mandates unless the science supports the intended objectives.  Overall, however, Roscoe Bartlett’s impressive understanding of energy issues and policy has made him one our country’s most important advocates for advancing renewable energy.

Moving away from New England toward the Midwest, Home Power magazine gives accolades to Minnesota, another state on its “Solar Super States” list.  Minnesota is a state known for its progressive “green policies;” no wonder the state has embraced solar energy initiatives as well.  In fact, Minnesota was the first state to adopt net metering rules.  Since 1981, residents who install solar electricity systems receive a check at the end of each month for any excess energy they generate.

Minnesota demonstrates that latitude does not stand as a detriment to harnessing the sun’s energy.  At a statewide average of 4.5 daily peak sun hours, Minnesota’s average is not much different from other Home Power super states like Maryland and Massachusetts.  On Minnesota’s Energy Info Center website, the state boasts that it has potential to receive more annual solar energy than Houston, Texas and nearly as much as Miami, Florida.

Minnesota has several state laws to encourage solar photovoltaic installations.  Its Solar Rebate Program, established in 2002, offers $2.00 per watt for solar electric systems up to 10 kilowatts in size, essentially reducing a system’s cost by 20 percent.  In addition, the state exempts solar equipment from sales tax.

In Minnesota the sun trumps shade.  State law gives local zoning boards the authority to create solar access easements to protect a property owner’s solar array from shading.

In 2006, Minnesota, like other fellow top solar states, set a goal requiring that energy companies must source 25 percent of their power from renewable energy sources by 2025.

Minnesota is the only Midwestern state to make Home Power magazine’s Top Ten Solar States list.  This state has “solar chutzpah” further dispelling the myth that solar energy is only viable in hot and arid regions.

Maryland is another state that relatively recently stepped up its solar energy policies and incentives.  Its aggressive initiatives have won Maryland notice on Home Power magazine’s list of Top Ten Solar States. 

Similar to New Jersey’s explicit goal for solar power, Maryland not only set a goal for its utilities to provide 7.5 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2019, but also in 2007, passed legislation that specifies that 2 percent must come from solar energy in addition to the already established 7.5 percent goal by 2022.   The intent is to have at least 1500 megawatts of solar capacity installed by 2022.

Maryland’s Solar Energy Grant Program enacted in 2005 offers property owner’s incentives to install solar photovoltaic or thermal systems.  Residents can obtain grants for 20 percent of the system cost (up to $2,000 for a solar thermal or $3,000 for a solar photovoltaic system).   The state also supports net metering for systems that are up to two megawatts in size.  Net excesses are carried over each month for a year; at the end of the 12-months any remaining net excess is zeroed out of the customer’s account balance.

Maryland State Senator Robert Garagiola who sponsored the successful 2007 solar energy legislation has pointed out that the resultant growth in solar energy is equivalent to the capacity of the Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant, located along Chesapeake Bay.  Proponents have also boasted that the new legislation will allow Maryland to meet the state’s projected new energy needs through its expanded solar power infrastructure.

Maryland’s wholehearted embrace of policies to promote the future growth of renewable energy and energy efficiency demonstrates the power of leadership and vision.  We at Cooler Planet salute the “Free State.”