Renewable energy research bill dies in committee
RICHMOND — A Senate committee has killed a bill that aimed to set up a panel of scientific experts — including representatives of the University of Virginia and Virginia Tech — to identify and finance renewable energy research projects around Virginia.
The measure, HB 2404, was sponsored by Del. Rob Bell, R-Albemarle County, and was atop the House GOP’s “energy independence and alternative resources” agenda for the 2009 General Assembly session. The bill aimed to clean up the environment, create green jobs and stimulate the state’s economy.
The House of Delegates approved Bell’s proposal in a unanimous vote. But the Senate Committee on Health and Education declined to pass the bill Thursday and will not consider it again this year. The committee’s chairman, Del. R. Edward Houck, a Democrat from Spotsylvania who represents Louisa, Madison and Orange counties, did not immediately return a request for comment Monday.
“I’m pretty disappointed about it,” Bell said.
Bell’s proposal would have established the Virginia Universities Clean Energy Development and Economic Stimulus Foundation, which would have been overseen by seven appointees: one by the governor, four by the General Assembly, and one each by UVa and Virginia Tech.
The foundation would have administered millions of dollars of research funding from the Tobacco Indemnification and Community Revitalization Commission, which distributes Virginia’s $4.1 billion share of the 1998 settlement between the attorneys general of 46 states and the four largest tobacco companies.
Under Bell’s proposal, the foundation would distribute funds to projects it found most able to develop alternative fuels and clean energy production; support economic development in disadvantaged rural areas; and boost the commercialization of alternative fuels and clean energy technology.
Sen. Frank Ruff, a Republican from Clarksville who represents Fluvanna County and most of Buckingham County, is a member of the Senate committee that declined to endorse Bell’s bill. Ruff said he thought the tobacco commission could already fund clean energy projects if it so desired. Adding another foundation to make such decisions, he said, did not seem necessary.
“Creating a commission just for the sake of creating a commission is a waste of time and energy,” Ruff said.
In the bill’s defense, Bell said “expert scientific review [of projects] is time and effort well spent.”
Ruff also objected to the bill’s provision that only UVa and Virginia Tech had appointed positions on the foundation’s board. Other higher education institutions, he said, ought to have a seat at the table when decisions are made about which clean energy projects receive funding.
“Is all the resident knowledge in Virginia only at those two schools?” he said. “Other schools — Old Dominion University, VCU, George Mason — should have some input too, I think.”
Bell said he could have amended the bill to address such concerns, but the measure was the last bill to come before the committee on the day of its final meeting of the legislative session. As a result, the clock ran out and Bell will have to wait until next year to re-introduce the measure.
“Unfortunately, this is what happens in a short session,” he said. “There just wasn’t enough time.”
A spokeswoman for UVa was not available for comment Monday. Bell said the university was a major proponent of the idea.
Reader Reactions
Brian McNeill wrote an article (Daily Progress dtd. 02/20) entitled “House GOP Leaves Deeds’ Green Bills To Rot”. At that time, I accused him of using biased language and running interference for the Deeds political team.
Today McNeill wrote an article about a bill introduced by Rob Bell that addressed research into viable renewable energy. This article was entitled “Renewable Energy…Dies In Committee.”
What a change!!! …not one mention in the headline that the bill died in the Democratically controlled Senate at the hands of Democrats. To cover himself, he quotes one Republican, but fails to mention in the article that Democrats voted down the bill.
My point in writing this has nothing to do with who did or didn’t vote for the bill. It has everything to do with the inconsistency in McNeill’s writing. If he wants to plead a case for Deeds, then let him do it on the ed page…not in a news article.


Advertisement