...the bill could go either way.  

Right now, the only really good thing I see outta it is the 8-year renewal for solar.

1 year for wind isn't much, 'specially when combined for incentives for tar sands.

And I don't think the taxes on oil will actually do much.

Either the House strips somes bad stuff, adds some good stuff, or we stall untill we get a new Congress and go through the process again.

Otherwise, I, personally, don't think this bill is worth it.

If it helps anything.  It's actually 2 years for wind.

Geothermal and Hydro however only get 1 year.

-David Ahlport

a few months back said that they figured that they needed just a couple more years of support before they could walk on their own.  Just needed to be some more manufacturing and installation infrastructure in place.

They may well have not pushed for more (with the understanding that they could come back and reapply later if necessary).

Geothermal might be in a position to come back for more next year if current drill-down projects show some good results.

I don't think it possible to take a strong anti-fossil fuel stance and stay in office.  The greater public has yet to be convinced that we can get the job done without digging up carbon.

Another year or two of wind farm performance, some nice drops in solar prices, some affordable PHEVs and the political winds will shift.

The administration has made it abundantly clear it doesn't like legislation that it removes the tax breaks to oil and gas companies and encourages renewables. Not wanting to seem to contradict the bogus and election motivated "all of the above" scheme, Bush has not said he will veto it.

The bill will go to conference to iron out the differences between the house and senate versions and the inevitable changes will be used as an excuse to veto it.

Geez man, that's a pretty bummer way of looking at that stuff.  I mean, they've passed it a bunch of times before - i'm pretty confident that, especially now, they'll continue the tradition.  It'd be foolish not to.