Congress is currently weighing a federal renewable energy standard that would require utilities to purchase a percentage of clean energy that increases over time. Based on the success that the states have seen, and projections on the environmental benefits and small incremental cost, it is a win-win situation.

Thus far 28 states have instituted RES (alternatively known as RPS), and none have had to scale back or repeal the mandates, according to the Center for American Progress.

The current legislation, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, (ACES, H.R. 2454), co-sponsored by Congressmen Waxman and Markey, requires a 15 percent RES for large utilities by 2020, and that utilities also reduce demand by 5 percent through energy efficiency.

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory just released a study on the impact of three earlier RES proposals that found that dramatic reductions in emissions would be achieved with almost no impact on electricity prices.

Two of these bills (from Waxman and Markey) were combined into the current proposal, so much of the analysis would approximate. The NREL study found that the emission of 435 million tons of CO2 might be eliminated when compared to continuing to use the projected mix of fossil fuels and renewable without a federal mandate. Electricity prices across the country would rise by no more than 1 percent, and in no one state by more than 5 percent, and some states would see prices go down.

This would also create thousands of new jobs, which would boost the economy. One study I’d like to see — the “human capital” density of energy. For example, how many hours/jobs does it take to provide power via natural gas, coal wind, solar or hydro. If the overall financial cost is comparable, isn’t it more sustainable to pay local clean energy workers than for tons of coal or imported oil?

One interesting aspect of the legislation is that solar power from distributed resources, most likely from residential and small commercial installations, would get 3x credit for each kWh of electricity generated, so the actual percentage of clean energy would be less. Utilities that don’t comply would have to pay twice the going rate for renewable energy credits, with the proceeds going to the utilities that exceed their goals.

Republican representatives want to change the bill to add nuclear to the list of qualifying renewable energy sources. This doesn’t make sense, as outlined by the Center for American Progress:

“Nuclear power relies on uranium, a nonrenewable resource that contributes to global warming because mining and processing it requires large amounts of fossil fuels. In addition, nuclear does not make the United States less dependent on other nations, since we import more than 90 percent of the uranium we use.”

While this bill may have its imperfections, a national RES would create jobs and clean the air with little to no extra cost. That sounds like a winner to me.