Posting in Education
Can clean energy get its due in Washington? A group of more than 100 related organizations is doing its best to make it so.
If you're looking for an education on what clean energy could mean for your business or for your community over the next 10 years, this is the week to accelerate your research. That's because roughly 100 organizations representing renewable energy development, energy efficiency programs and environmental groups have declared it to be Clean Energy Week.
What this means, primarily, is a big public push for clean energy policy, such as the type outlined in the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) passed by the U.S. House of Representatives last summer. The bill is up for consideration by the Senate, but it's not the only one vying for attention. There are actually more than 30 different pieces of legislation that exist or are up for consideration that have something to do with clean tech or clean energy policy. And there's a whole lot of lobbying going on in Washington this week on behalf of those various laws.
The arguments in support of such policy from the clean energy advocates are pretty much what you would expect: That clean energy is not only good for the environment, reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 1 billion over the next decade, but that it could create upwards of 1.9 million jobs.
Pretty much any quote you pick from the organization's press release fits the bill in support of these themes, but I especially like this one from Reed Hundt, co-chairman of the Coalition for the Green Bank (a clean energy financing/funding mechanism) and former chairman of the Federal Communications Commission:
"As the president made clear in his State of the Union address, a focus on green jobs is the immediate focus for the clean energy sector, and in fact by promoting the double whammy of clean energy generation and transmission along with energy efficiency, literally millions of fine new jobs can be created over the next several years."
Hmmm. Probably the most useful link for both you and I on the Clean Energy Week web site, is the listing to all the local and national partners who are focused on clean energy issues. Let's see how much noise they can generate in Washington this week and whether or not clean energy can steal a few headlines from healthcare reform.
Jan 31, 2010
"Clean" energy has no real meaning. There is always a cost to the environment. Trading wind electricity and paying more for it than say hydro electric is silly. The dams are already in place, if wind or solar were the answer, capitalism would already be making money in those areas. Coal is a poor choice. Geothermal, wind and solar look promising. Got to get the government out of the way and not subsidize areas that are not renewable.
My greatest fear is that the SMART will be left out. Remember the old saying: "No man's life, liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session."
And who was it that just gave Petrobras, the Brazilian national oil company, $8 BILLION to develop their newly found oilfield off their coast in the South Atlantic? And who is the biggest single investor in Petrobras, who will benefit from our government's grant? The one and only, George Soros, campaign contributor to the Zero and "chief instigator" behind MoveOn. Now, we will be buying our oil not only from the Arabs but from the Brazilians as well as this oil will be mainly for export!! They mostly use ETHANOL made from their sugar industry residues!
America has natural gas and coal in abundance and does not need to send billions to countries that sponsor terrorism. Every billion in trade deficit equals 13,000 jobs lost. SO WHO BENEFITS FROM CAP AND TRADE AND KEEPING AMERICAN COAL IN THE GROUND? The United States agreed to transfer jobs and technology to developing countries under INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT Algiers Declaration Algiers, Algeria, 4-6 March 1975 In this context, they emphasize the necessity for the full implementation of the Programme of Action adopted by the United Nations General Assembly at its VI Special Session, and accordingly they emphasize the following requirements A major portion of the planned or new petrochemical complexes, oil refineries and fertilizer plants be built in the territories of OPEC Member Countries with the co-operation of industrialized nations for export purposes to the developed countries with guaranteed access for such products to the markets of these countries
The American people have said no to Cap and Trade. Polls suggest there are insufficient votes in the Senate. How can the SEC require corporations that will be adversely affected to pretend the will of the people has already been trampled by special interests? Cap & Trade is being forced on us because it creates a multi-trillion dollar commodity market. The beneficiaries are special interest who will set up the exchanges and trade in hot house gases and companies expecting federal subsidies to create alternative fuels and transportation. But citizens will pay more taxes and more for goods as business passes the cost along. And all this based on global warming theories proposed by scientists dependent on proving their theories in order to continue receiving federal grant money. The American people have suffered for decades with the political STD Gonorrhea Lectim. It is time for the cure: votemoutofthere!
Congress can sometimes act like a committee - an organization with 535 mouths but no head. They need to set high level goals, and not micromanage things. When I write high level system specifications, I have to constantly remind myself that I am telling the design engineers what to do, not how to do it. Congress must do the same thing or they are going to lock us into a path that may, at the time the regulations and laws are written, seem okay but turn out to be the wrong path in the long run.