The Peoria Journal-Star reports today that wind-based electrical generation at schools statewide is getting a boost from Springfield; Rep. Don Moffitt (R-Gilson) to be precise.
While I’m not thrilled with the notion that some of this state assistance is coming in the form of monetary grants, it’s a great step forward toward more rational energy-production policies in this state. (Part of the other side to this Springfield coin is that school will be able to pool their windfarming resources together — a great idea.)
Why am I not all that enthused about the grants? Don’t get me wrong, everyone likes a little windfall now and then (bad pun intended), but the state’s coffers aren’t exactly overflowing and simply doling out batches of money is not sustainable in the longer-term — greenbacks need to flow back into the state’s accounts somewhere along the line.
My preference would be to see the state develop a no- or even low-interest loan program. Windmill implementation is ideally suited to loan packages because as excess current is generated it can be sold to the power utilities. This revenue stream can help pay off the loan’s P+I.
I’d also like to see the state moving toward this loan concept in other “green tech” areas, notably green buildings for municipalities. I’ve spoken briefly with a very few state leges about the idea and need to pursue it with vigor soon. (I’ve been waiting for the session to end to start pushing it since it’s pointless to bring up new legislative ideas this late in the schedule.)
The problem municipalities run into with much of green building is that the initial construction costs are higher. Private sector developers can afford to spend that up-front money but municipalities are usually scraping dollars together for new construction as it is. If the choice is an overall green building, but no gym … the gym is going to win out every time.
In the long-term though, the higher costs of green construction are more than paid for by not just the lower long-term operating and maintenance costs but also higher productivity among employees in the relatively healthier, more user-friendly building.
Construction loans to municipalities for the specific purpose of developing green buildings are ideal. The program would eventually pay for itself through the small amount of interest collected. Municipalities would have a ready source of “start-up cost” funds for green construction of their new village halls, schools, police stations, recreation centers, libraries, maintenance facilities, etc. The interest due could be paid out of the savings reaped between the difference in normal operating costs vs. lower “green” operating costs. And on and on…
And, as I’ve mentioned before, whether or not you believe in global climate change — aka, The Apocalypse — anytime we can implement green technologies it also improves bottom line operational costs, has health benefits and generally keeps our environment more clean. All you hunters, bird watchers, gardeners, hikers and other outdoor enthusiasts oughtta appreciate that.
These construction loan ideas are topline concepts right now and clearly a lot of details would need to be worked out, but I’m glad to see Illinois inching its way forward toward more sustainable and less-impactful policies. Rep. Moffitt, Sens. Linda Holmes and Susan Garrett and their colleagues in these areas are to be commended for their foresight.
(H/T Paul Richardson/CapFax for the PJ Star link)
13 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 30, 2007 at 10:26 pm
c-rockjr1
Why does the state need to hand out loans? They cant even stop a defict, and you want them to loan folks money?
Green happens at home, not in government.
May 31, 2007 at 12:33 pm
robnesvacil
Did ya read the post?
The state is planning to hand out grants right now, not loans, for these school windmills.
What I said was if they’re going to do that the least they could do is make the program about loans that get paid back instead of grants that don’t get paid back. I even acknowledged your concerns about the state’s deficit, C-Rock.
And if you think it through, having the state “hand out loans” in the area of green technology makes eminent financial sense all around (for the state and for smaller gov’t agencies like school districts, etc).
Nevermind the enviro aspects, the question is should we be trying to save a few bucks on the front end but end up with much higher long-term costs or should we figure out a way to encourage smarter financially-sound construction up-front (even though initially it’s more expensive) in order to dramatically decrease cost-of-use for the 50 or 100 years that most of these buldings will be in use.
Municipalities usually don’t qualify for tax breaks and other existing green construction incentives so many of them balk at the higher up-front “green” costs and build their buildings using traditional construction methods.
That may be cheaper in the very short term (you get a bigger building at lower construction cost than with green, aka “LEEDS”, construction), but it is actually much, much more expensive to operate, maintain and staff in the long term.
Constructing green buildings saves the taxpayers money in the long-term, but because of the higher initial costs many municipalities are hesitant to lay out the cash to build them.
After the start-up costs, a statewide loan program would pay for itself through the interest income and would encourage long-term fiscal responsibility by allowing municipalities to construct green buildings. For municipalities, they would have a means of covering the higher up-front costs and would then be able to pay the interest off via the savings generated (or, in the case of wind-production electricity, they could pay the P+I through the income generated by the excess electricity).
If you want to be green at home go right ahead — we try to do it in our family. But it ought to be happening in government moreso than at home because our governments are funded by all of us. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: we are the government in this country.
Building based on LEEDS principles simply saves money in the long-term (above and beyond the environmental benefits that make tree-huggers happy).
You live in the northwest burbs, C-Rock. Surely you’ve noticed the government construction boom in the area as towns plus school, park and library districts outgrow their decades-old facilities. Village halls, fire stations, libraries, maintenance facilities, pools and rec centers … the whole area is seeing a boom in government-funded construction.
Shouldn’t we be encouraging fiscally responsibility with regards to that construction?
(I’ve got the financial stats at home demonstrating how much more cost-effective maintenance and staffing are on LEEDS “green” buildings … that is, if you need something to fall asleep to.)
June 1, 2007 at 7:54 am
c-rockjr1
Oh,
I agree with you on the boom on government building. Most of it is waste. Examples is the parking garage/city hall in Mt. Prospect, and Arl Hts City Hall. And Des Plaines wants a new one.
On grants, and loans, I dont know. The State is just as bad as the FED, and locals should make decisions that work for them. Whould those loans have conditions? Maybe have to use certian contractors that are politically connected?
Too much potention for corruption, and you know that.
But most building is a waste, especially libaries. Local cities do not need to store paper files.
June 1, 2007 at 8:31 am
robnesvacil
Wow. Do you really hate government so much that hate libraries? You must not have any kids that know how to read.
As for your corruption worries — former Sen. Peter Fitzgerald managed to dam up most of the Lincoln Library corruption before it got out of hand. Sure there’s the wife of some Establishment figure in the big mural; but that’s better than Rezko getting millions to sell soggy fries in the cafeteria.
June 1, 2007 at 9:02 am
c-rockjr1
YOu have borders, you have barnes and noble. Plus the Internet is where most kids these days get material for reports and such.
We are a wired society.
June 1, 2007 at 2:28 pm
robnesvacil
…Somehow I just knew that’d be your response. It’s typical of the folks who act like everyone has money so what’s the big deal about wanting to be selfish rather than making wise investments in our communities.
In case you haven’t noticed, Borders and B&N and the like all charge money for their books. While libraries charge taxes, they don’t charge for rentals. And, libraries almost always have much larger selections (esp. of older books).
Finally, not everyone is “wired” at home and must rely on publicly available Internet access.
Next you’ll be saying we don’t need fire departments because everyone has a hose at home…
Some folks believe nothing good can come of government. These people create a self-fulfilling prophecy if they manage to get like-minded candidates elected. Just witness the difference in hurricane response between a president which believes gov’t actually can do some good (Clinton) vs. a president who couches his disgust with government with phrases like “small” or “limited” government (Bush 43). With Clinton we had a FEMA that actually did something with regards to hurricane preparedness as well as response. With Bush we got ‘a heckuva job’…
I’m one of those folks who believe that we can create a government which actually does some good. We see it already everyday in government agencies as mundane as the FAA which keeps 1000s of planes in the air with only rare incidents. And we also see it in government agencies as vital as the military which, whether or not you approve of the commander-in-chief’s strategies (no matter who that CiC is), our men and women in uniform make us all proud for serving and sacrificing with such distinction.
That’s not to say I’m not a realist. I understand any time you get a large pool of money together — in a business, in a church, in a government — there is the potential for corruption. That’s why we need to demand as open a government as possible, to make sure those in charge are honest and remain so.
…There’s my two cents on that.
June 4, 2007 at 11:54 am
c-rockjr1
Well,
your belief in government is foolish. Government is a evil. Thats it. It should be limited. Governments have something we do not have. The power of legalized theft (taxes), and the ability to kill.
Plus they are not accountable. Look at our deficits in the Fed, and IL.
June 4, 2007 at 2:11 pm
robnesvacil
Perhaps you’d prefer to buy your own island and form the Nation of C-Rock.
Til then, you’re stuck living in this democratic republic we call America where we the people get to decide what our government looks like.
Your belief that the government is unaccountable is misdirected. It is politicians to whom you should be directing your ire — they’re the ones making the decisions you label “evil” (and such over-the-top vitriol precisely proves the other point I just raised about conservatives putting the war in the “culture wars”).
And politicians are only as accountable as we the people make them. If you don’t like the person representing you, it is well within your wherewithall to run for office in an effort to replace that person.
June 7, 2007 at 8:24 am
c-rockjr121
Hey
here is the future of libaries. We could just provide a room with PC’s. It would be cheaper to maintian a room, than have a huge building filled with paper. Private companies, working with schools to provide books to the world. Sure they will have banner ads from google, but you will have free books just out there for all to use.
College libraries putting 10 million books online
By Tara Malone and Kiran Sood
tmalone@dailyherald.com ksood@dailyherald.com
Posted Thursday, June 07, 2007
Angling to reach students where they increasingly are — online — a dozen universities Wednesday unveiled plans to digitize up to 10 million library books.
Billed as one of the most ambitious undertakings of its kind, the partnership both preserves historic manuscripts, maps and collections while putting them a click away from more people than ever before.
The agreement — which includes Northwestern University, the University of Illinois and the University of Chicago — comes as part of Google Inc.’s book-scanning project.
June 7, 2007 at 4:28 pm
robnesvacil
That works if you don’t mind having Twinkies and Cocoa Puffs ads all over your kids’ textbooks and such.
Or, we could just pay taxes as an investment instead of having our kids eyeballs glazed with evermore sugar coating. (And we wonder why diabetes is at epidemic proportions among our youth…)
June 8, 2007 at 6:58 am
c-rockjr121
Well,
its getting information out there to the world. For free. Its getting knowledge out to society, to consume at its own pace. What is wrong with that?
Also, why isnt your government, which you want to do something for society- capable of doing such as quickly?
June 8, 2007 at 8:24 am
robnesvacil
What are you talking doing “as quickly”?
This is a public-private partnership — or did all those state schools involved in the project suddenly go private?
And you may note that Google is a progressive company which is not doing business in a ‘traditional’ manner.
July 22, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Thank you (follow up to “More, please”) « Illinois Reason
[...] now where’d Giannoulias get that idea? (Just kidding.) I am certainly a big supporter of these sorts of smart, efficient government & [...]