All year, I’ve been keeping an eye on the disbursement and use of ARRA funds for energy projects. Earlier this year, the news was quite positive—$150 billion in funding set aside to fund “green” energy sources, including distributed energy and efficiency programs, for the next several years. As the 2010 budget began to make its way through the congressional pipeline, the DOE had set it’s sights on a total of $26.9 billion, with $2.25 billion specifically set aside for renewable energy and energy efficiency programs.
Last week, the House approved its version of 2010 spending for energy-water projects and projects focused on energy efficiency and renewable resources fared relatively well,. The $33.5 billion budget (which can be viewed here) includes the following energy-related provisions:
• $2.2 billion for energy efficiency programs including renewables (solar, biofuel) and vehicle technology (a rare—$314 million—increase of amount originally requested by the DOE)
• $172 million for improvements to and modernization of the nation’s electricity grid (a $35 million increase from the initial budget request)
• A reduction from $197 million to $92 million for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository in Nevada
Surprisingly, despite the increased amounts attributed to energy-related projects, the Associated Press reports that overall the ARRA stimulus has been reduced from an original estimate of $787 billion to $44 billion.
So what do you think? In this economic climate, is the price tag too high? Is the money being disbursed in the most effective manner? And will this funding result in tangible results, or lose its way amidst a forest of bureaucracy and red tape?