Energy policy on the ObamaCare model
President Obama has decided that the Gulf oil spill means we need to change the way we power our entire country, not just the way we regualte offshore drilling. Politico reports today that the next three weeks will be crucial to that effort, with the ball in the court of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid:
The options will break down into three core elements, and the question will be how the leaders choose to combine them.
The first and easiest piece is a Gulf-spill response measure to reform offshore drilling and raise disaster liabilities on oil companies. “That one’s must-pass,” said Scott Segal, an energy lobbyist at Bracewell & Giuliani, echoing the sentiments of congressional staff members on both sides of the aisle.
The second element is a clean-energy bill that would require a boost in renewable electricity produced by sources such as wind and solar. A version of this bill, sponsored by Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), was passed by the panel last year with bipartisan support and is widely viewed as the most palatable clean-energy compromise now in the Senate.
The third, biggest and most contentious piece is a price on greenhouse gas emissions — a policy at the heart of the climate change debate. In a nod to how heavy a lift this would be, it’s likely that the carbon-cap piece will be limited to pollution from power plants and will not apply across the economy.
The article suggests that Bingaman and other Democrats believe they don’t have the votes for cap and trade, and that a package with the first two pieces is more likely. This scenario has environmentalists riled up, not just because of the dim prospects for cap and trade, but because the target for a renewable-energy mandate may end up at 15 percent of all the nation’s power — rather than the 20 percent requirement in a bill the House passed last year, or the 25 percent that Obama advocated while campaigning.
Is it just me, or is this the health debate, part deux?
Cap and trade, like the public option, is a long-held goal on the left (well, in cap and trade’s case, long is relative to the age of the global warming debate) that looks to be shot down because too many legislators know that they’d lose their jobs if they passed it.
So, we move on to the left’s next-best thing in the debate, mandating renewable energy; think mandating certain coverage aspects in health care. With the most drastic option out of the way, this is where the left and right will fight it out.
The left will push for higher percentages than are feasible, in terms of economics and probably logistics as well (the best areas for solar and wind generation are not necessarily where the demand for power is greatest). Note in the Politico article that the environmentalists object to energy efficiency being part of the renewable requirement. Nothing will ever be enough for them, because they object far more to our way of life than our means of power generation.
The right will argue that we can’t afford what Democrats are proposing, that the Western European nations that have tried such a renewables push before us have been slowly backing away from those policies, and that forcing electricity rates to jump (even if they wouldn’t quite “skyrocket” as Obama admitted would happen with cap and trade) is an especially terrible idea amid a sluggish recovery.
The left will proceed to brand Republicans and conservatives as spiteful planet haters.
The right will suggest that Congress respond to the oil spill by simply passing a bill that deals with drilling regulations, and continue to work on the broader energy question, since electricity generation itself has nothing to do with the energy needs that petroleum fills. The left will sneer at that, because it knows that the broader policy question will go nowhere on its own merits. (Come to think of it, this mirrors the immigration debate as well.)
The difference, if it comes, may be whether Obama, Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi still have the juice to make vulnerable Democrats take the poison. Or whether they can contort enough parliamentary procedures to get what they want without a proper vote.
And at the end of the day, if they can pull it through, Democrats will have enraged conservatives and peeved moderates for a legislative “achievement” that doesn’t even satisfy their most liberal supporters.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
117 comments Add your comment
CJ
July 12th, 2010
11:25 am
With regard to electrical rates “skyrocketing”, MIT estimates amount to about $340 per year (not $3100 per year as Republicans have falsely claimed over and over again—such misrepresentations leading to reasonable inferences that Republicans are “spiteful planet haters”).
Note also that every time Kyle and others complain about the cost of energy, they never include the taxes that we and future generations pay to maintain bases and fight wars in the middle east (all of which are currently being put on the nation’s credit card). Nor do they include the costs associated with lost business, lost jobs, lost lives, and environmental destruction arising out oil spills, coal mine disasters, and blowing up mountains (hundreds of feet of mountain top are blasted in order to more easily reach coal, thereby dumping waste into the surrounding valleys and burying miles of streams).
In fact, the pending energy/climate proposal would overhaul a broken energy framework, reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and foreign oil, combat global warming now (yes, a fifth independent investigation concluded that the integrity of the science is sound), make America more competitive globally, cut the budget deficit by $19 billion (according to recent CBO estimates), create jobs in a burgeoning industry, and undoubtedly, save money for taxpayers in the long run.
Kyle is right about one thing, the right will suggest that Congress continue to work on the broader energy question. That’s another way of saying that the right will seek to do exactly what they did when they had control of the White House and Congress…not a damn thing.
CJ
July 12th, 2010
11:30 am
Oh, and one more thing that the pending energy/climate proposal might accomplish—requiring short-term sacrifice on the part of Americans for long-term savings, environmental preservation, and economic growth. God forbid that this generation sacrifice in any way.
Metro Coach
July 12th, 2010
11:44 am
Thanks CJ, for the daily dose of liberal-progressive-socialist point of view, people should “sacrifice for the good of the collective.” “Renewable” energy won’t put fuel in anyone’s car, nor will it bring down the cost of power. No oil drilling jobs would be lost if the Obama administration had not authorized an un-Constitutional drilling ban. Thank God there are still a few judges with some sense of the law. Any estimate the CBO gives should be multiplied by at least 10, because that is going to be closer to the true cost of any bill passed by Congress, especially when lawmakers don’t show them the entire bill, like Dems did with the healthcare bill. No one doubt’s “global warming”, what most people deny is the fact that humans have that much impact on the entire climate. The globe warms and cools all on its own, humans, their SUV’s, and cow flatulence have nothing to do with it.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
11:49 am
“President Obama has decided that the Gulf oil spill means we need to change the way we power our entire country, not just the way we regualte offshore drilling.”
So when’s he gonna cap the oil leak? It’s been what, 100 days?
“Note also that every time Kyle and others complain about the cost of energy, they never include the taxes that we and future generations pay to maintain bases and fight wars in the middle east”
If you’re so concerned about the future, why did you vote for Obama?
“Republicans are “spiteful planet haters”
Then why hasn’t the mighty and all powerful Obama capped the oil leak?
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
11:50 am
“requiring short-term sacrifice”
Social Security was supposed to be short-term…… CJ, please, continue to post democrat talking points about how evil the GOP is blah blah blah.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
11:51 am
The SS Obama continues to tank.
Governors Voice Grave Concerns on Immigration
BOSTON — In a private meeting with White House officials this weekend, Democratic governors voiced deep anxiety about the Obama administration’s suit against Arizona’s new immigration law, worrying that it could cost a vulnerable Democratic Party in the fall elections.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/12/us/politics/12governors.html
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
11:52 am
CJ
Can you please post a link to those MIT numbers. Thanks
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
11:56 am
“The left will proceed to brand Republicans and conservatives as spiteful planet haters.”
Yeah, but with unemployment at 10%, the general public could care less about global scamming. Al Gore is in a bitter divorce and is on the verge of being on trial for rape. The left has lost it’s confidence in Obama and blaming Bush is getting them nowhere.
Cap and Trade won’t pass simply because the democrats are all fighting for their seats. Obama has now divided the country far more than Bush ever did and is wasting even more taxpayer dollars suing AZ.
But hey, at least we got “the first black president” out of the way. Next up, Palin.
joan1
July 12th, 2010
12:00 pm
I figure Obama didn’t react to the oil spill for over a month, and has refused help from other nations because he wanted the spill to reach the “crisis” point that Emanual said is the “right time’ to enact some idiot piece of legislation. This golden goose of a country is rapidly running out of eggs. What I don’t understand is why people don’t seem to get it. Do people think you can tax people greater and greater amounts and that they won’t become disheartened, leave the country, hide their assets or do whatever it takes to survive? Then where will all the welfare people go?? Rioting in the streets I guess, like the Greeks.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
12:07 pm
Can’t wait to see how the left wingers explain this one. 700.000 census workers about to be out of a job.
End of Census, and for Many, End of Job
PROVIDENCE, R.I. — It was a finely honed machine, this United States Census team, and it had a good run. But in the coming days and weeks, many of its members will experience the pain of unemployment — once again.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/12/business/12census.html
CJ
July 12th, 2010
12:08 pm
You got me Metro Coach. Sacrificing for the good of others. How evil!
Undoubtedly, Jesus (died on the cross), Adam Smith (advocated for progressive taxation decades before Marx was born), Eisenhower (led the Greatest Generation in war and financed interstate highways at taxpayer expense for the benefit of future generations) and Reagan (raised taxes several times, including Social Security taxes) were evil socialists too. But rather than following their lead, you’d have us honoring the memory of a Russian socialite who penned “The Virtue of Selfishness.”
Actually, despite your angry, fact-challenged rant, I’m not persuaded. Surprised?
Balderdash
July 12th, 2010
12:10 pm
“liberal-progressive-socialist point of view, people should ’sacrifice for the good of the collective.’”
I think conservatives held this view during the Great Depression and World War II. It was considered patriotic.
“The globe warms and cools all on its own, humans, their SUV’s, and cow flatulence have nothing to do with it.”
The first part of this statement is true. The second is not. Ancient ice tells us exactly the content of the atmosphere in previous periods of global warming. They all have elevated CO2, with the difference being now it is elevated to previously unseen levels. What’s the difference? An industrialized planet.
CJ
July 12th, 2010
12:15 pm
Here you go, Grand Forks–
It’s a letter from one of the authors of the M.I.T. study that the GOP was misrepresenting:
http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/republican.pdf
StJ
July 12th, 2010
12:19 pm
“Nothing will ever be enough for them, because they object far more to our way of life than our means of power generation.”
Therein is the root cause of the energy debate, and most other policy debates…a group of pompous, self-righteous people who think they know what’s better for us than we do, and are pushing to write that into law.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
12:40 pm
“It’s a letter from one of the authors of the M.I.T. study that the GOP was misrepresenting:’
No, I want the actual MIT numbers from MIT. Not some left wing rag.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
12:42 pm
“Actually, despite your angry, fact-challenged rant, I’m not persuaded. Surprised?”
Interesting, CJ rants about “fact-challenged rants” and posts garbage from think progress.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
12:43 pm
Balderdash
Where’s Al Gore these days?
Ragnar Danneskjöld
July 12th, 2010
12:44 pm
Good afternoon all. I would urge all rational politicians – oxymoron acknowledged – to oppose all three proposals.
(1) Off-shore drilling does not need “reform” – a single accident in 40 years does not require “reform.” Typical activist thinking, lock the barn door after the horses escape, and lock only the doors at well-run stables. While I agree that liability amount “caps” make no sense, surely frivolous causes of action, or remote causes ought not carry liability, and indeed plaintiffs ought to be punished for such fraudulent claims. Example, President Obama ordered cessation of all drilling due to the oil accident. That massive loss of wages has nothing to do with BP, but is entirely attributable to leftist cognitive incapacity – BP ought to be exempt from such claims.
(2) “Clean energy” is code for “economically-inefficient energy proffered by leftist friends of the President, who therefore ought to be sucking at the taxpayer teat to be able to sustain the normal lifestyle of an overlord.” In a rational world the market makes such decisions, rather than overlords picking winners and losers.
(3) Cap and tax has nothing to do with the global warming fraud, and everything to do with controlling the rabble. Only national socialists support such constraints on economic growth.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
12:45 pm
Ragnar Danneskjöld
Great points. Say hi to Bookman for me!
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
12:50 pm
I saw Predators over the weekend. Nothing great but not bad either.
Nothing beats this scene: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6jlEzKL748
David S
July 12th, 2010
12:52 pm
There should never be a “national energy policy.” Having one smacks of the Soviet style 10-year plan. Central planning doesn’t work. But worse than that, it causes plenty of other unintended consequences.
Our government is plagued by rampant crony-capitalism. From the day the Senate passed the treaty with Saudi Arabia pledging to defend the House of Saud against all threats, this country has been tied to the rotting corpse of middle east oil and violence.
Today we have energy subsidies that are turning our food (corn) into wasteful and inefficient fuel. Free security (courtesy of our bloated military) for the middle east oil companies, other tarriffs and subsidies that help out every range of fossil and other fuels, and now blatant giveaways to “alternative” energy companies that have successfully lobbied/bribed/slept they way to big payoffs.
Every dollar that is taken by force from the american consumer and given to a friend in big business is another dollar that cannot be freely spent in support of the best energy source the consumer can purchase. Our dependence on foreign oil did not happen because of free market forces, but rather because national energy policy made oil SEEM cheap (tell that to all of our dead soldiers in the middle east – because that is all they are fighting for) and thus gave oil and petroleum products an artifical competitive edge. Add to that laws destroying property rights (allowing air pollution, etc.) and you have a situation in which a market of mixed, likely more efficient energy sources was never allowed to happen all so that the friends of government could line their pockets and be free from competitive pressure. And yes, this goes all the way back to Wilson and before. Bush and Cheney were just the two worst examples of crony capitalism, but the rest are cetainly not exempt.
Here’s a policy we might try – FREEDOM. Oh right, neither party wants to try that one. No wonder we have a ballot access policy written by the two major parties to keep themselves from any serious competition.
No More Progressives!
July 12th, 2010
12:52 pm
“Actually, despite your angry, fact-challenged rant, I’m not persuaded. Surprised?”
After reading your Howard Dean-styled daily diatribes for months, nothing you say surprises me. So no, I’m not surprised.
No More Progressives!
July 12th, 2010
12:58 pm
“Clean energy” is code for “economically-inefficient energy proffered by leftist friends of the President, who therefore ought to be sucking at the taxpayer teat to be able to sustain the normal lifestyle of an overlord.” In a rational world the market makes such decisions, rather than overlords picking winners and losers.
This is an excellent point. Watch Wall Street and the venture capital crowd; when they start pouring money into wind farms (just an example) then it’s time to stand up and take notice of what has changed in the market. The reason it takes Govt. grants to get these worthless (wind farms)investments up & running is because the private side has done their homework and, frankly, wind is “neato” for the greenies but worthless to a nation with the power demands that we have.
Nuclear, anyone?
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
1:00 pm
“Nuclear, anyone?”
One day we’ll have to nuke the oil leak.
CJ
July 12th, 2010
1:21 pm
Grand Forks,
Why do you insists on wallowing in your ignorance?
The letter I linked to was written by one of the MIT scientists that penned the study that the GOP claims to be their source of the $3100 figure. The link I provided is a direct link to the letter itself. I Googled, and that’s the first link that came up. Who posted the letter is irrelevant to it’s contents. If you’d prefer to find it by way of somebody else’s web server, have at it. But your lame excuse for not accepting a correction from the scientists who the Republicans misrepresent is exactly that.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
1:31 pm
“Why do you insists on wallowing in your ignorance?”
Oh goody, another left winger throws out the “ignorance” card yet can’t accomplish a simple task. Since when was asking a simple question about facts considered being ignorant?
“The letter I linked to was written by one of the MIT scientists”
No, you posted a link to Think Progress, a left wing rag of lies.
“Who posted the letter is irrelevant to it’s contents.”
Interesting that Think Progress is the ONLY website to have posted a letter from MIT.
“But your lame excuse”
You mean like when you rant on Fox News?
“correction from the scientists who the Republicans misrepresent is exactly that.”
LOL!!! Whatever you say cj.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
1:32 pm
CJ
That letter is garbage.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
1:32 pm
More proof that Obama is a one term president.
Dems propose delaying primary season
With memories of a 2008 primary season that almost began before Christmas and lasted into the summer, Democratic party officials are proposing delaying the start of the 2012 presidential nominating primaries.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/10/dems-propose-delaying-primary-season/?fbid=Mu1a4ekBxm4&hpt=Sbin
CJ
July 12th, 2010
1:35 pm
“Off-shore drilling does not need “reform” – a single accident in 40 years does not require “reform.””
A single accident in 40 years? You might want to revisit this assertion–
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oil_spills
JDW
July 12th, 2010
1:50 pm
Jay, enraged conservatives, peeved moderates and unsatisfied liberal supporters seems the perfect balance to me. That means legislation that is squarely in the middle with along with most of America.
JDW
July 12th, 2010
2:00 pm
Grand Forks if you would stop your pontificating and posturing and read the letter CJ posted you will find the following:
http://globalchange.mit.edu/pubs/reports.php
Please note that the address is at MIT.EDU and not some “left wing rag of lies” as you purport. Kudos to you though, you have the Party of No strategy down cold.
Deny, lie, mislead but never learn.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
2:01 pm
“You might want to revisit this assertion– ”
Pot meet kettle.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
2:06 pm
“Grand Forks if you would stop your pontificating and posturing and read the letter CJ posted you will find the following:”
I did. It’s nothing but garbage.
“Please note that the address is at MIT.EDU and not some “left wing rag of lies” as you purport. ”
Oh my bad, Think Progress threw me there.
“Kudos to you though, you have the Party of No strategy down cold. ”
Better than being on the sinking SS Obama.
“Deny, lie, mislead but never learn.”
That sums up Obama.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
2:07 pm
“Deny, lie, mislead but never learn.’
What did I lie about and mislead on?
mark
July 12th, 2010
2:10 pm
Only a great President serves two terms!
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
2:23 pm
Democrat party is the party of high school drop outs, illegal aliens and…….convicted felons.
Felons Voting Illegally May Have Put Franken Over the Top in Minnesota, Study Finds
The six-month election recount that turned former “Saturday Night Live” comedian Al Franken into a U.S. senator may have been decided by convicted felons who voted illegally in Minnesota’s Twin Cities.
That’s the finding of an 18-month study conducted by Minnesota Majority, a conservative watchdog group, which found that at least 341 convicted felons in largely Democratic Minneapolis-St. Paul voted illegally in the 2008 Senate race between Franken, a Democrat, and his Republican opponent, then-incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/12/felons-voting-illegally-franken-minnesota-study-finds/
JDW
July 12th, 2010
3:16 pm
Grand Forks asked “What did I lie about and mislead on?
In response to the assertion “the letter was written by an MIT scientist. Grand Forks wrote “no, you posted a link to Think Progress, a left wing rag of lies.”
Grand Forks has lied the letter in question is clearly on MIT letterhead and was signed by Dr. John M. Reilly, Co-Director, Joint Program and Senior Lecturer, Sloan School of Management at MIT.
Grand Forks also wrote “
Interesting that Think Progress is the ONLY website to have posted a letter from MIT”
Another lie by Grand Forks
The letter is also posted at:
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Reilly_Response_Letter_1.pdf
http://wilderness.org/files/MIT-Letter-Science-Policy-Global-Change.pdf
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2009/04/mit-scientist-republicans-confused-about-my-climate-change-study.php?page=3
Links are posted at
http://www.forestcouncil.org/tims_picks/view.php?id=1788
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/08/16-2
http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/04/02/mit-to-republicans-lay-off-the-scaremongering-on-climate-costs/
That are many more but you get the idea.
Horrible Horrace
July 12th, 2010
3:25 pm
Franken is a crude butthole.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
3:56 pm
“Grand Forks has lied the letter in question is clearly on MIT letterhead and was signed by Dr. John M. Reilly, Co-Director, Joint Program and Senior Lecturer, Sloan School of Management at MIT.’
Are you blind? The pdf link has Think Progress on it.
Again, what did I lie about?
“The letter is also posted at:”
All left wing outlets except for the the WSJ. Interesting that you, not CJ, are defending the MIT letter.
“That are many more but you get the idea.”
Grammar fail.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
3:58 pm
“Grand Forks has lied the letter in question is clearly on MIT letterhead and was signed by Dr. John M. Reilly, Co-Director, Joint Program and Senior Lecturer, Sloan School of Management at MIT.”
I never lied about anything, ma’am. I never said the letter was NOT from MIT. Your words not mine.
TJ
July 12th, 2010
3:59 pm
Grand Forks,
Thanks for the link to the article about felons voting in MN. But we all know there is no such thing as voter fraud (when it is perpetrated in favor of Democrats), ha ha. President Bush “stole” the election in 2000 and the Ohio Attorney General stole it for President Bush in 2004, according to Democrats. But you want to vote for a Democrat, then checking prison records, maybe making someone show a picture ID at the poll, maybe prove they are citizens, well, that’s just “disenfranchisement”, we all know that.
2000 was an attempted coup d’etat by the Gore camp (try to change the rules of the game after it was played), etc. and they came pretty close, but luckily the Republic withstood the attempt (not the first, not the last). Sore losers, just took Tipper a while to find that out, I guess.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:07 pm
TJ
You’re welcome. Kyle is outnumbered by two left wing columnists and neither Jay nor Cynthia want to talk about important things such as high unemployment, voter fraud etc…..
And yes, left wingers still continue to say that Bush somehow stole the election in 2000. Just sit back and laugh at them.
Bob Barr and Jim Wooten
July 12th, 2010
4:14 pm
Kyle is outnumbered by two left wing columnists…
What are we…chopped liver?
Fix-It
July 12th, 2010
4:16 pm
CJ,
I can understand your train of thought, the problem is you don’t understand anybody else’s, or even listen to facts. (Is that a liberal thing?) I think it is wonderful that you want to save the world, feel free to any time but do force me or other people to pay for your wants and desires.(is that also a liberal thing) If all you wonderful liberals want to help out you can always pay more taxes, volunteer YOUR money not mine.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:19 pm
“What are we…chopped liver?”
JIm Wooten is retired. Bob Barr is a libertarian who posts topics maybe once a week.
You were saying?
ButtHead
July 12th, 2010
4:24 pm
JDW,
Are you trying to tell me that MIT is a conservative right-wing collage? Is it you who is misleading people? Last time I looked there were no such thing as a right-wing collage; they have been taken over by liberal terrorist, and actually some real terrorist. Here is a liberal quiz; can you spot the facts in the previous two sentences? hint hint, 2 facts 1 opinion, see if you can figure it out..
Brad
July 12th, 2010
4:26 pm
@Grand Forks, et.al.
In your view, is there ever an appropriate time to delay gratification?
HDB
July 12th, 2010
4:27 pm
What people aren’t looking at when it comes to energy policy is how the nation has been corrupted by those who create energy (oil and utilities)….and how we have been prevented from going to alternatives (auto companies and politicians).
The US could’ve been energy independent since 1972…but…
1) The oil companies destroyed the plans that both GM and Chrysler had for vehicles that ran on gas-turbine engines and alcohol based fuels
2) The auto companies stymied gas turbine technology by limiting Andy Granetelli’s STP Turbine cars in the Indianapolis 500
3) The auto companies in the FIRST oil crisis, continued to make bigger cars, allowing the Japanese to formulate more fuel efficient cars
4) Governmental interference in the Reagan Years eliminated the TAX INCENTIVES for solar and wind technology for the masses. Siemens is now the leader in wind turbine technology whereas GE was the innovator!!
5) No common design of a nuclear reactor prevents rapid construction of nuclear power plants for electric generation; Freance gets almost 70% of its electricity from nuclear sources
6) NIMBY!! Yucca Flats in Nevada…and Hanford is almost full!! What are we to do with spent nuclear material…and the half life is almost 10,000 years??
I would have loved to have seen home production of ethanol for personal use, the uncapping of oil wills in Texas and Oklahoma (that have been capped since 1969 — all because the oil companies said it was CHEAPER to import oil from the Middle East), a standardization of oil drilling – particularly in DEEP water (the moratorium would’ve only affected 36 wells….not the entire industry!), gas turbine and electric technology for automobiles, wind and solar technology for home domestic usage….and energy policy that TARGETS the nation to be energy independent in 10 years! Germany is half way there; Brazil IS there…….
Dave
July 12th, 2010
4:30 pm
This is how they’ll get everything (like cap and trade passed):
The Obama-Pelosi Lame Duck Strategy
Union ‘card-check,’ cap and trade, and so much more
“The rush to recess gives Democrats little time to pass any major laws. That’s why there have been signs in recent weeks that party leaders are planning an ambitious, lame-duck session to muscle through bills in December they don’t want to defend before November. Retiring or defeated members of Congress would then be able to vote for sweeping legislation without any fear of voter retaliation.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704293604575343262629361470.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
RK
July 12th, 2010
4:31 pm
The article and comments all address the supply side of energy use. On the demand side, there should be unanimous agreement on the expectation that our built environment be as efficient as possible. Energy bills drop when usage drops. This concept works both in residential and commercial properties. Architects and building designers know how to create “tight” enclosures that properly shade window in a healthful manner. This simple goal would go a long way to lower energy demands to those of 1990 by 2030.
For those who are concerned with the “greenhouse gases,” let there be a policy debate to close all coal fired energy plants and replace them with natural gas (made in the USA) or nuclear power (as safe as the power plants in our largest warships).
Dave
July 12th, 2010
4:33 pm
How many of you libs are willing to live like this:
In the heat wave, the case against air conditioning
“This isn’t smart. In a country that’s among the world’s highest greenhouse-gas emitters, air conditioning is one of the worst power-guzzlers. The energy required to air-condition American homes and retail spaces has doubled since the early 1990s. Turning buildings into refrigerators burns fossil fuels, which emits greenhouse gases, which raises global temperatures, which creates a need for — you guessed it — more air-conditioning.
A.C.’s obvious public-health benefits during severe heat waves do not justify its lavish use in everyday life for months on end. Less than half a century ago, America thrived with only the spottiest use of air conditioning. It could again. While central air will always be needed in facilities such as hospitals, archives and cooling centers for those who are vulnerable to heat, what would an otherwise A.C.-free Washington look like?”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/09/AR2010070902341_pf.html
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:34 pm
HDB
Why do left wingers like Al Gore preach to the masses but instead of abiding by their own rules, break them instead?
We could be energy independent if we drilled for our own oil and used nuke energy.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:36 pm
“The auto companies in the FIRST oil crisis, continued to make bigger cars, allowing the Japanese to formulate more fuel efficient cars”
During the 90’s GM made a bunch of electric vehicles which no one bought. The Japanese didn’t start making fuel efficient cars until the mid 2000’s. Now, fuel efficient car sales are way down.
RK
July 12th, 2010
4:36 pm
Dave, I agree with your position on air conditioning. Of course, my outdoor humidity is typically 20% when the air temperature is over 90 deg so I don’t have the same conditions as in the Midwest, East, and South.
Again, if attics are not adequately insulated, the living space will be hotter during the summer and cooler in the winter.
Brad
July 12th, 2010
4:37 pm
@ RK
There should be agreement on the demand side. However, energy prices are not high enough to encourage a high degree of efficiency. That’s what happens when instant gratification pushes costs to the future.
HDB
July 12th, 2010
4:38 pm
Dave July 12th, 2010
4:33 pm
Electricity created by hydroelectric plants create little greenhouse gases; nuclear, wind, and solar emit NONE!! In those areas that use all of the above, the energy to run A/C units is as clean as it gets!! The problem is with coal and gas-fired plants. If there were a more efficient way of eliminating CO ,CO2, SO2 from coal, there wouldn’t be as much of an issue as it is now…….
RK
July 12th, 2010
4:40 pm
Grand Forks, those GM electric vehicles were not bought because they were not for sale. The leasers typically loved the cars and would love to buy them but GM took them back at the end of leases and crushed them. The entire business plan for the EVs was to meet California emissions regulations which were eventually loosened to the point where GM didn’t need those cars on the road.
David S
July 12th, 2010
4:41 pm
HDB, business doesn’t do anything on its own. It is just not that powerful. It must use the power of government to achieve its ends. It uses the power of regulation and licensing to keep out alternatives. It uses it subsidies and tarrifs to achieve a financial advantange over alternatives.
In a truly free energy market, every business would have to pay its own way and earn its own keep. Without any government interference we would have a vast and competitive energy sector that delivered as much energy as the country needed at the lowest price available and nobody would be able to skirt responsibility for liability or environmental damage or anything else.
Brad
July 12th, 2010
4:42 pm
@Grand Forks
There’s plenty of hypocrisy coming from the right as well. It’s not relevant to positions on either side of the issue.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:43 pm
“There’s plenty of hypocrisy coming from the right as well.”
Like what?
RK
July 12th, 2010
4:43 pm
@ Brad
Watch electric coal costs escalate soon when their coal contracts expire and they renegotiate extensions and new contracts. China is reaching into the global coal supply to meet their skyrocketing needs and they can afford to pay more than we want to which will increase our domestic coal costs.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:44 pm
RK
I could have sworn that around 1997 there were electric cars sitting on the lot of local GM dealer in Atlanta.
HDB
July 12th, 2010
4:47 pm
Grand Forks July 12th, 2010
4:34 pm
Can’t speak for Al Gore…but we could’ve been energy independent in 1976 if we’d done a few things better….
“During the 90’s GM made a bunch of electric vehicles which no one bought. The Japanese didn’t start making fuel efficient cars until the mid 2000’s. Now, fuel efficient car sales are way down.”
Not quite; when the FIRST oil embargo hit….the Japanese, paarticularly Toyota, Datsun (now Nissan), and Mazda, started bringing over smaller, fuel-efficient cars to counteract GM/Ford/Chrysler’s continued building of small cars. American workmanship was always thought as better…and Japanese was thought to be cheap! When the gasoline proces went over $1/gal (remember those days!), the Japanese cars were selling the point of getting over 30mpg! That’s when the viewpoint changed. GM put our cars like the Vega…and Ford created the Pinto to counteract that…but the fuel efficient technologies for most American car companies were in Europe where fuel efficiencies were mandated (Opel/GM – Germany, Vauxhall/GM-England, Ford-Europe, Mitsubishi/Chrysler – Japan….). When gas prices spiked to $4/gal, sales of Hondas, Mazdas, Toyotas went up…and GM/Ford/Chrysler couldn’t get an SUV off the lot!!
Look at the 2011 models now; the preponderance of them are LAUDING their fuel efficiencies…….
Brad
July 12th, 2010
4:47 pm
How about every gay-bashing, fundamentalist preacher caught with a boy-toy?
RK
July 12th, 2010
4:49 pm
@ Grand Forks
Perhaps you did see them there then. If you do NetFlix rent a movie titled Who Killed the Electric Car? and learn the story. Okay, maybe there are some fibs in the film; I was persuaded to its truthfulness when they interviewed a woman claiming to be the GM product publicist for the EV1 who laid out the sordid story.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:49 pm
“How about every gay-bashing, fundamentalist preacher caught with a boy-toy?”
Not sure what that has to do with politics or scamming people for millions of dollars.
So, every preacher who is against gay marriage is gay?
News to me.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:50 pm
RK
THAT’S the vehicle I remember seeing. Forgot the name. Thanks for the movie suggestion.
HDB
July 12th, 2010
4:50 pm
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:44 pm
RK
I could have sworn that around 1997 there were electric cars sitting on the lot of local GM dealer in Atlanta
In California, GM had an electric car that people were buying like mad….but when the gas prices came down, GM destroyed the cars! Why, I don’t know….but most cars with innovations START in California! Cali is the test bed…and if it works there…then it goes nationwide….
Brad
July 12th, 2010
4:50 pm
The point is, GF, that the volume and tone of a position has little to do with its validity.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:51 pm
HDB
Most people I know who buy Japanese, me included, don’t buy them for fuel efficiency. We buy them for longevity. Meaning, we don’t want to buy a car that will fall apart in 5 years.
HDB
July 12th, 2010
4:51 pm
RK – THANKS….I was thinking about the EV-1 in California…….you made my point!!
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:52 pm
“California! Cali is the test bed…and if it works there…then it goes nationwide….”
Cali is going bankrupt. Hope that doesn’t go nationwide.
HDB
July 12th, 2010
4:54 pm
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:51 pm
HDB
Most people I know who buy Japanese, me included, don’t buy them for fuel efficiency. We buy them for longevity. Meaning, we don’t want to buy a car that will fall apart in 5 years
Actually, it’s BOTH!! I would’ve, however, bought a German 4-CYL with a 6-spd gearbox with RWD if I could have afforded it!! My Nissan with its 6-spd gets almost 40mpg….and THAT was its major selling point! Most Japanese cars are more fuel efficient…..point of agreement??
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:55 pm
“Most Japanese cars are more fuel efficient…..point of agreement??”
Anything under 6 cylinders gets good gas mileage.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:56 pm
“The point is, GF, that the volume and tone of a position has little to do with its validity.”
You said EVERY fundamentalist pastor is gay and has a “boy toy.”
Can you please name off 5 fundamentalist pastors who’ve turned out that way?
HDB
July 12th, 2010
5:03 pm
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
4:55 pm
“Most Japanese cars are more fuel efficient…..point of agreement??”
Anything under 6 cylinders gets good gas mileage.
Not all together true…..the Mercedes-Benz 300E….that was an in-line 6…..and it can get almost 34 mpg on the highway….and it has the power curve to run at 200 kph (120 mph) with a low fuel burn!! Did it on the Autobahn in Germany and I-65 in Alabama……..
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
5:04 pm
“.the Mercedes-Benz 300E….that was an in-line 6…..and it can get almost 34 mpg on the highway….and it has the power curve to run at 200 kph (120 mph) with a low fuel burn!!”
What’s the price tag, HDB?
Most people can’t afford those cars. Nice try though.
HDB
July 12th, 2010
5:08 pm
Grand Forks July 12th, 2010
5:04 pm
Don’t disagree with you on the price….but I rented one when I was in Germany…..and drove a family members’ here!! That’s how I found out……There are 6-cyls with the power curve of an 8….but the fuel efficiencies of a 4………
If the Germans and Japanese can do it…so ca we Americans……
That was my point……..
HDB
July 12th, 2010
5:10 pm
Manana….amigos!
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
5:13 pm
HDB
I’ve driven 6 and 4 cylinder cars. The cost of upkeep is cheaper on a 4 cylinder than it is on a 6. Gas is cheaper in the long run as well. At least for me it was.
The only way people will buy American again is if car companies make cars that last. GM screwed themselves with owning and operating 4-5 different car companies that competed with each other.
Their cars were/are crap. My wife has an American made car that is the same year as my Japanese car. Her car has had more problems too.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
5:24 pm
The left says that Obama is not a Muslim but his actions show just the opposite.
Obama at odds with Petraeus doctrine on ‘Islam’
The White House’s official policy of banning the word “Islam” in describing America’s terrorist enemies is in direct conflict with the U.S. military’s war-fighting doctrine now guiding commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jul/11/obama-at-odds-with-petraeus-doctrine-on-islam/
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
5:25 pm
Obama’s racist wife, who’s never been proud of America, is now putting her foot in her mouth…again.
I’m still waiting to see that evidence of some person spitting on black congressman and calling them the N word.
Michelle Obama Rouses NAACP Before Vote Condemning ‘Racist’ Elements of Tea Party
First Lady Michelle Obama brought renewed energy to the NAACP today, delivering the keynote speech at the annual convention one day before the nation’s largest civil rights group is expected to condemn what it calls racist elements in the Tea Party movement.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/naacp-tea-party-civil-rights-group-considers-resolution/story?id=11144640
AmVet
July 12th, 2010
5:27 pm
Hi, Grand Forks/LA/whodat! Your contributions are sorely missed over at Bookmans!
“Nothing will ever be enough for them, because they object far more to our way of life than our means of power generation.”
What the h e l l does that even mean, Kyle? Is it Republispeak for environmentalists are traitors?
If so, such drivel from one of the your far right wing posters, I would expect, but you? Gadzooks.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
5:32 pm
“Your contributions are sorely missed over at Bookmans!”
I bet, that’s why you and other left wingers were crying for Bookman to ban me. I noticed that you and other left wingers devoted several pages to talking about me.
“What the h e l l does that even mean, Kyle? Is it Republispeak for environmentalists are traitors?”
ScamVet, whenever I see pile of dog crap in the yard, I think of you.
“If so, such drivel from one of the your far right wing posters, I would expect, but you? Gadzooks.”
ScamVet doesn’t get out very much these days, Kyle. You gotta understand that she spends most of her days ranting about how evil the right is all while ignoring her own cult of Obama.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
5:38 pm
Bush debt vs. Obama debt.
http://download.premiereradio.net/guest/rushlimb/pdf/DowRollerCoaster.jpg
AmVet
July 12th, 2010
5:44 pm
Nope, Victimboy, I never called for your banishment. I knew you would blow your stupid head off without any help from me. And VOILA! You did it yet again!! What is that, six or seven different times you’ve been blackballed from AJC forums for being such a childish lout?
At any rate, it was just enormously funny watching you once again implode all over yourself and making a Royal Grade A ass/embarrassment out of yourself on a public blog. That, and thinking about all those times you flat out denied being LA and whodat.
Were you born an inveterate liar or did you develop into one as a teenager?
OK, back to the GF/LA/whodat free zone.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
5:55 pm
“I never called for your banishment. ”
Sure you did, Scam. You and several other retarded left wingers who wet their pants when someone other than a brain dead left winger, comes in and posts something that makes left wingers look…..stupid.
“I knew you would blow your stupid head off without any help from me.”
Ah, now I’m stupid. The one thing I learned over on Bookmans blog is that left wingers get away with calling right wingers stupid, @ss, idiot etc…..
It took 5 days of you and other left wingers to cry so that Bookman would get the IT department to dig a little more.
“What is that, six or seven different times you’ve been blackballed from AJC forums for being such a childish lout?”
Nope, I can post here, Tuckers, Wootens, and Barrs. Speaking of childish lout, you were banned from Bookmans blog for a few days. But please, deny that as well, Scam.
“At any rate, it was just enormously funny watching you once again implode all over yourself and making a Royal Grade A ass/embarrassment out of yourself on a public blog.”
Ah, but I never imploded. I never called you names like HEY, you just called me! Again, intelligence isn’t your strong point is it?
“That, and thinking about all those times you flat out denied being LA and whodat.”
Scam, you don’t know me and I don’t know you. There are no rules for blog names. Otherwise you and I would have to reveal our real names.
“Were you born an inveterate liar or did you develop into one as a teenager?”
I blame people like you.
“OK, back to the GF/LA/whodat free zone.”
Have fun, troglodyte!
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
5:59 pm
Kyle,
Read AmVets rhetoric and determine who is doing the provoking. Thanks-Grand Forks LA Communist AJC Who Dat?
x-con
July 12th, 2010
6:16 pm
Nixon was tricky dick.
Clinton was slick willie.
Will Obama be tar balls?
Gerald West
July 12th, 2010
6:58 pm
Too much politics, too little substance, Kyle! First off, ObamaCare, is a derogatory term for the health care bill Congress managed to pass in spite of all odds. It’s not the health care bill Obama wanted, as it doesn’t address health care cost reductions. But, it is a start toward a rational way to pay for health care in America. So, call it CompromiseCare, or Half-A** Care.
It’s easy to ridicule proposals for reducing the energy dependence of the US. What are the alternatives? What would you propose, Kyle? The Republican policy was “Drill, Baby, Drill!” Why don’t we hear that anymore? It was a delusion anyhow: there’s no way the US can drill its way to energy independence, or extract enough additional oil to lower the price of gasoline at the pump.
So, what now?
DEWSTARPATH
July 12th, 2010
7:29 pm
“I is smart! I went 2 skool to study poetry. I’z smarter dan you conservitive people. I can spell werds rite and better dan u. I like stalking other bloggers and pretending to be powerful.”
- That’s “Grand Fork LobLAw” trying to use my handle for his twisted game.
But he purports to be a victim as usual:
“Grand Forks” – July 12th, 2010 – 5:59 pm
“Kyle,
Read AmVets rhetoric and determine who is doing the provoking. Thanks-Grand Forks LA Communist AJC Who Dat?”
Grand Forks IS LA Loblaw. No doubt.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
7:33 pm
DEWSTARPATH
Hey Dew, how’s it hanging?
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
7:34 pm
“That’s “Grand Fork LobLAw” trying to use my handle for his twisted game. ”
Can you prove that, Dew?
WOW
July 12th, 2010
7:41 pm
http://www.wimp.com/oilspills/
WOW
July 12th, 2010
7:44 pm
Grand Dorks!
DEWSTARPATH
July 12th, 2010
7:57 pm
“Hey Dew, how’s it hanging?”
- I’m doing just fine.
DEWSTARPATH
July 12th, 2010
8:01 pm
“That’s “Grand Fork LobLAw” trying to use my handle for his twisted game. ”
“Can you prove that, Dew?”
- The proof is on Wooten’s “Believe Obama or Lying Eyes” forum –
Nobody else but you responds to my posts there lately.
soames
July 12th, 2010
8:22 pm
Recommended reading: Blue Planet in Green Shackles
No More Progressives!
July 12th, 2010
9:09 pm
HDB
July 12th, 2010
4:47 pm
Grand Forks July 12th, 2010
4:34 pm
Can’t speak for Al Gore…but we could’ve been energy independent in 1976 if we’d done a few things better….
Really? Like what???
No More Progressives!
July 12th, 2010
9:13 pm
AmVet
July 12th, 2010
5:27 pm
Hi, Grand Forks/LA/whodat! Your contributions are sorely missed over at Bookmans!
Why would Bookman’s site miss anybody? There are enough communist bedwetting sociopaths on his site to fill Bryant-Denny Stadium 25 times over. Not including the infamous ScamWet.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
10:44 pm
“- The proof is on Wooten’s “Believe Obama or Lying Eyes” forum –
Nobody else but you responds to my posts there lately.”
Dew, I haven’t been on that blog in a while. Just checked and it looks like someone is messing with you. But anyway, glad you’re here.
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
10:47 pm
No More Progressives!
ScamVet is filled his depends when he found out I was banned from Bookman’s blog. He and other left wingers get away with calling people names but when the tide turns he goes running to his daddy and cries like a little kid who got beat up on the playground. Sure he talks a big game, but go after him and he folds fast.
DEWSTARPATH
July 13th, 2010
1:58 am
“Dew, I haven’t been on that blog in a while. Just checked and it looks like someone is messing with you. But anyway, glad you’re here.”
- I’ll survive someone “messing with me” on a blog. But thanks for
the welcome mat, Grand Forks.
ODDOWL
July 13th, 2010
2:25 am
JIm Crow is alive and well in South Carolina… Jim “Crow” DeMint is gallivanting around the State talking up succession and civil war. There is one Man in S.C. who can eradicate Jim Crow and bring S.C. back into the family of States. That Man’s name is Al Greene, Democrat for Senator. Vote Al Greene and force Jim DeMint to eat waterloo Crow.
No More Progressives!
July 13th, 2010
7:30 am
Grand Forks
July 12th, 2010
10:47 pm
Sure he talks a big game, but go after him and he folds fast.
I’ve noticed the same. He and his minions are a tough bunch when it’s 25 to 1; they can’t carry any water without calling names.
No More Progressives!
July 13th, 2010
7:32 am
That Man’s name is Al Greene, Democrat for Senator.
The Senate (and the House) are already filled with buffoons, reprobates and tax cheats. Why do we need another?
about time
July 13th, 2010
7:40 am
Has anyone seen the movie Gasland which is currently playing on HBO? Before you start putting down Obamas energy plans, take a look at what Dick Cheney, George Bush and our friends at Haliburton have done.
Grand Forks
July 13th, 2010
9:08 am
“Sure he talks a big game, but go after him and he folds fast.’
I did and he went and cried to Jay.
“He and his minions are a tough bunch when it’s 25 to 1; they can’t carry any water without calling names.”
Yep, and like I said, I can handle any amount of left wing attacks against me. The problem comes when they go and cry to mommy about it.
Grand Forks
July 13th, 2010
9:08 am
“I’ll survive someone “messing with me” on a blog. But thanks for
the welcome mat, Grand Forks.”
No problem, Dew.
nelsonhoward
July 13th, 2010
9:15 am
Wind power is an endlessly renewable source of clean energy. Take one commercial grade wind turbine. It costs 3.5 million to build and once online, produces 2 megawatts of energy per year. the 2 megawattsofenergy genrates 3.5 million dollars the first year. That is a 100% return on investment. That is as good as it gets. It also generates considerable tax revenue used that can be used to operate municipalities and school systems. It just gets better and better.
The “Nacelle” the worlds largest wind turbine can generate enough energy to provide all the energy needs for 750,000 homes. Admittedly, it has a large foot print, needing 100 acres for construction.
The only real draw back to wind power is that some people find wind turbines aesthetically displeasing. They can hold up the building of turbines with lawsuits, however with a planet rapidly reaching the tipping point with the blanket of CO2 gases covering the earth and holding the heat in, these people are going to lose.
Clemson U. has already begun work on prototypes and research with an 88 million dollar grant from the government[U.S.]
I need not say more by bringing the oil spill in the Gulf as an example of an evironmental disaster of monumental proportions. Endlessly renewable clean energy is the future.
Grand Forks
July 13th, 2010
9:26 am
More bad news for the Obama cult followers.
Confidence in Obama reaches new low, Washington Post-ABC News poll finds
Public confidence in President Obama has hit a new low, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll. Four months before midterm elections that will define the second half of his term, nearly six in 10 voters say they lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country, and a clear majority once again disapproves of how he is dealing with the economy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/12/AR2010071205453_pf.html
curious observer
July 13th, 2010
9:36 am
Gerald West,
“It’s easy to ridicule proposals for reducing the energy dependence of the US. What are the alternatives? What would you propose, Kyle? The Republican policy was “Drill, Baby, Drill!” Why don’t we hear that anymore? It was a delusion anyhow: there’s no way the US can drill its way to energy independence, or extract enough additional oil to lower the price of gasoline at the pump.”
There are geologists who believe the US has more oil than the rest of the world combined. No, the US will not drill away from foreign dependence but not due to a shortage of oil. The environmental (mental being the significant portion) movement has blocked the construction of refineries for at least 30 years. The general belief is that the storms in the Gulf each year somehow reduce our imports but the fact is the refineries run at capacity 24/7 and storms interrupt production and the resulting shortfall drives prices.
The US has the oil but the Liberals behind the environMENTAL movement have a goal of destroying capitalism and the movement is nothing but a tool to achieve socialism. There was a recent Wall Street Journal Article detailing the plan to establish a Board of Trade for carbon credits. The software to run the Board is in place and owned by the usual suspects; Al Gore, Franklin Raines, George Soros, William Ayers, Bill Clinton, David Rockefeller, Goldman Sachs et al.
The rank and file environmental workers have been duped into a movement designed to enrich those named previously. Follow the money. Al Gore would make $15 Billion the first year but so what if the average energy bill for a middle class household rises by 2 to 10 fold? Obama and his buddies will be even richer. The Progressive Movement is a scam but Amvet and the rest of the Liberal Loons here and across the US are too blind or unwilling to see the facts.
Halftrack
July 13th, 2010
10:32 am
Cap & Trade is really Cap & TAX. Where have the voices of the environmentalist been on the damages of the oil spill by BP. Global warming is the biggest hoax of the century. Carbon Dioxide is the stuff we breathe out every day. Plants use this to make oxygen for us to breathe & live and the plants convert it for their own food. The Government would be better off to offer incentives with a monetary award for new inventions, etc. to cut down on oil usage and create new devices for energy. We just need to motivate our inventors and quit trying to tax everyone to death & control their lives.
No More Progressives!
July 13th, 2010
11:34 am
A 500 megawatt coal plant produces 3.5 billion kilowatt-hours per year, enough to power a city of about 140,000 people. It burns 1,430,000 tons of coal, uses 2.2 billion gallons of water and 146,000 tons of limestone.
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/brief_coal.html
How much coal does the US have?
What happens to the wind turbine when the wind stops blowing, or blows too hard?
No More Progressives!
July 14th, 2010
8:16 am
curious observer
July 13th, 2010
9:36 am
There are geologists who believe the US has more oil than the rest of the world combined.
Why, oh why aren’t we drilling in the Bakken find?
Can someone please tell me?
Buckagon
July 14th, 2010
10:10 pm
CJ,
The socialist progressive rant about lost jobs, lost wages, combatting global warming, saving the planet, purifying the environment and lost lives is always rhetorical overreach at best–a lie at worst. Your faith in the “fifth independent investigation” is entirely unwarranted. It’s an entirely blind item to you. (I am an environmental engineer, and it’s not to me.)
The climate hoax works just like this. You want a diamond ring. You look around, and everyone tells you I have the best one–if you like, a trusted professor from the fifth independent investigation tells you this. Though you know nothing about diamonds, you come to me, I schmooze you, ask you all kinds of great questions, make you feel good and sell you the rock. In the end, I took thousands of dollars from you for cut glass. Because you have NO WAY of verifying this for yourself, you have no way of knowing that I ripped you off. (What’s fascinating to me is the bald prejudice against transparent people like Palin or Reagan, yet liberals seem to think that THEIR scientists that they can’t understand are completely infallible.)
What is clear is that the right is the only place where such real debates take place and the only side that recognizes the need for a clean environment with economic production. Tales of magical Obama-green jobs are fantasy, never will be true.
The simple fact is that increasing cost on energy will increase cost on everything DRAMATICALLY. And green jobs–were they available–will require massive technical retraining. As has happened in many other countries, the weakness of the command economy will once again result in economic malaise if not abject misery.
Too bad the sea-level hasn’t gone down on Obama’s watch either.
If you are indeed scientifically literate, I’d be happy to challenge you on the basic technical stuff. Let me know. The climate cabal is basing their models and their historical assumptions on very flimsy stuff. Overall, the argument is so thin, that only a politician ignorant of science (Gore) would dare be the spokesman for the movement.
No More Progressives!
July 16th, 2010
6:52 am
Buckagon
July 14th, 2010
10:10 pm
It’s an entirely blind item to you. (I am an environmental engineer, and it’s not to me.)
I spent 25 years in the hazardous waste treatment and disposal industry. I cannot speak with much authority on the Clean Air Act, yet I have a working understanding of it. It never ceases to amaze me the nummnutz that come here & pontificate about “environmental issues” and don’t have the slightest clue what they’re talking about.
Politicians in training, I suppose.