California Was A Disappointment In This Election – First the religious bigots again outlaw marriage for those that are gay

But then they knock down a couple of very important environmental initiatives. I so tired of Christian flakes and kooks I could tear my hair and scream.

 http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/11/05/mixed-bag-for-state-environmental-ballot-initiatives/

ballot-boxes.jpg

Mixed Bag for State Environmental Ballot Initiatives

Published on November 5th, 2008

[Update: I seemed to have overlooked an important constitutional amendment passed in Minnesota that established a funding mechanism for conservation programs. My apologies to our friends in the North Star State. See comments for more.]For many Americans, participatory democracy means choosing between the people who will choose for you. But for voters in 36 states, electoral democracy exists beyond the parameters of representative government. In the states where the tools of direct democracy like referendums and ballot initiatives are employed, preferences of voters are gauged directly on amendments to state constitutions, specific policy questions, budgeting issues and more. Of the 153 measures at stake across the country in yesterday’s election, about a dozen dealt with energy and the environment. Below are the results and analysis of eight of the more notable measures (in no particular order):

 Missouri Proposition C: Yes

Colorado Referendum 58: No

Colorado Referendum 52: No

Florida Amendment 4: Yes

Washington Proposition 1: Still undecided

Ohio Issue 2: Yes

California Proposition 1A: Yes

California Proposition 2: Yes

California Proposition 7: No

California Proposition 10: No

:}

:}

No To 100 Nukes – Thanks for that.

We waited breathlessly last night to find out if we would be building 50 nukes with a goal of 100. The answer NAH. Energy drenched America may have finally woken up.

http://kids.niehs.nih.gov/lyrics/happydays.htm

[Music and Lyrics by J. Yellen and M. Ager]

So long sad times
Go long bad times
We are rid of you at last

Howdy gay times
Cloudy gray times
You are now a thing of the past

Happy days are here again
The skies above are clear again
So let’s sing a song of cheer again
Happy days are here again

Altogether shout it now
There’s no one
Who can doubt it now
So let’s tell the world about it now
Happy days are here again

Your cares and troubles are gone
There’ll be no more from now on
From now on …

Happy days are here again
The skies above are clear again
So, Let’s sing a song of cheer again

Happy times
Happy nights
Happy days
Are here again!

Contact NIEHS (NIH, DHHS)
Children’s Privacy and Other Disclaimers
NIEHS Sing-Along Index
NIEHS Kids Page Main Index

The Report Says We Can Be Done With Fossil Fuels In 80 Years – My question is do we have that much time?

The answer is definitely NOT:

 http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn15043-2090-is-the-deadline-for-the-end-of-fossil-fuel-use.html?feedId=online-news_rss20

World can halt fossil fuel use by 2090

  • 12:13 27 October 2008
  • NewScientist.com news service
  • New Scientist staff and Reuters

The world could eliminate fossil fuel use by 2090, saving $18 trillion in future fuel costs and creating a $360 billion industry that provides half of the world’s electricity, the European Renewable Energy Council (EREC) and environmental group Greenpeace said on Monday.

The 210-page study [pdf] is one of few reports – even by lobby groups – to look in detail at how energy use would have to be overhauled to meet the toughest scenarios for curbing greenhouse gases outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

“Renewable energy could provide all global energy needs by 2090,” according to the study, entitled “Energy (R)evolution.” EREC represents renewable energy industries and trade and research associations in Europe.

A more radical scenario could eliminate coal use by 2050 if new power generation plants shifted quickly to renewables.

Solar power, biomass such as biofuels or wood, geothermal energy and wind could be the leading energies by 2090 in a shift from fossil fuels blamed by the IPCC for stoking global warming.

The total energy investments until 2030, the main period studied, would come to $14.7 trillion, according to the study. By contrast, the International Energy Agency (IEA), which advises rich nations, foresees energy investments of just $11.3 trillion to 2030, with a bigger stress on fossil fuels and nuclear power.

Rajendra Pachauri, head of the IPCC, which shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with ex-US Vice President Al Gore, called Monday’s study “comprehensive and rigorous.”

Dangerous change

“Even those who may not agree with the analysis presented would, perhaps, benefit from a deep study of the underlying assumptions,” Pachauri wrote in a foreword to the report.

EREC and Greenpeace said a big energy shift was needed to avoid “dangerous” climate change, defined by the European Union and many environmental groups as a temperature rise of 2 degrees Celsius since before the Industrial Revolution.

The report urged measures such as a phase-out of subsidies for fossil fuels and nuclear energy, “cap and trade” systems for greenhouse gas emissions, legally binging targets for renewable energies and tough efficiency standards for buildings and vehicles.

The report said renewable energy markets were booming with turnover almost doubling in 2007 from 2006 to more than $70 billion. It said renewables could more than double their share of world energy supplies to 30% by 2030 and reach 50% by 2050.

:}

But it will only cost 17 trillion dollars:

http://www.itwire.com/content/view/21375/1066/

 Sven Teske, with Greenpeace and co-author of the report, stated, “Unlike other energy scenarios that promote energy futures at the cost of the climate, our energy revolution scenario shows how to save money and maintain global economic development without fuelling catastrophic climate change.”Teske added, “All we need to kick start this plan is bold energy policy from world leaders.” [EREC]Teske concluded, “Strict efficiency standards make sound economic sense and dramatically slow down rising global energy demand. The energy saved in industrialised countries will make space for increased energy use in developing economies. With renewable energy growing four-fold not only in the electricity sector, but also in the heating and transport sectors, we can still cut the average carbon emissions per person from today?s four tonnes to around one tonne by 2050.” [EREC]

In the foreword to the report, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri wrote, “Even those who may not agree with the analysis presented would, perhaps, benefit from a deep study of the underlying assumptions,” [EREC]

Dr. Pachauri, who is the head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former-U.S. Vice President Al Gore,

 :}

For more links:

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSTRE49Q2I820081027

Green House Is Museum Piece In Chicago – To bad that is the only place that will take it in

So my question is why didn’t they build it next door and let a real family live in it?

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/SmartHome/popup?id=6074047

Chicago’s Greenest Home

This is what green living looks like. To showcase the future of eco-friendly architecture, Chicago’s Museum of Science and Industry has built a three-story “green” home in its backyard. On display from May 8, 2008 to Jan. 4, 2009, the Smart Home: Green + Wired exhibit not only features sustainable design and recycled materials, it also includes cutting-edge “smart” technology. With help from Wired magazine, the exhibit incorporates automation systems that save homeowners time, reduce energy consumption and enhance entertainment. For more information, visit msismarthome.org.
(JB Spector/Museum of Science and Industry)

 ht_smart_home_081020_ssh.jpg

:}

Please see the entire story for the slide show. There are 13 pictures in all.

:}

 http://www.thedailygreen.com/green-homes/eco-friendly/chicago-green-building-exhibit-46010908

Yesterday, on its 75th anniversary, Chicago’s much-praised Museum of Science and Industry announced construction of a 2,500 square-foot green home, reports the Chicago Sun Times. The home, slated for the museum’s east lawn, is designed to be a showcase for green living.

The 2-bedroom, 2-bath pre-fabricated house will feature a number of green building designs, including a gray water recycling system that redirects filtered sink water into the toilets. The toilets will even have two buttons to save water when only a little is needed, something that will be quite familiar to many Australian and European visitors.

The home will also have cement siding, energy-efficient LED light fixtures, insulating triple-pane windows, landscaping chips made of peach pits, recycled ceramic tiles and a green roof. It will be powered by solar and wind energy.

This “Smart Home” is scheduled to open May 8 and run through January 2009. It will cost guests $10.

 smarthome-md.jpg

http://www.nahb.org/news_details.aspx?newsID=7865

 Called the mkSolaire™, the home features family-friendly interior architecture and shows some of the possibilities and benefits of energy-efficient heating, ventilation and air-conditioning systems and earth-friendly building materials.

The “Smart Home: Green + Wired” exhibit and home tours run through Jan. 4. Some detailed information on the exhibit and home features is available on the museum’s Web site.

The home was manufactured and put in place by All American Homes of Decatur, Ill. and designed by Michelle Kaufmann Designs of Oakland, Calif.

The exhibit illustrates why many in the green building movement are embracing modular building systems. Modular construction, with its efficient use of materials, labor and energy, has been environmentally friendly almost since its inception.

In addition, modular construction can shorten the construction cycle by as much or more than two-thirds when compared to conventional site construction – reducing energy usage during construction and potentially saving on financing.

 sept_23_bsc_home1.jpg

:}

Please note quoting the late great Robert Palmer: The lights are on but no one is home. Energy conservation and a model home right?

Vampire Power Drain – Why the world thinks we are Power Hogs

I just unplugged the microwave, our coffee pot, a battery recharger for our Dewalt power tool kit and turned off the old timey record turntable/radio/tape player that was on “standby”. I just saved enough power in one day to power a hut in Africa or a Southern Asia for a month! Americans don’t get the fact that they waste, waste, waste. Worse then that we are role models for the world. The big 5 of the future – Brazil, South Africa, India, China and Australia all want to be like us. If they succeed humanity could cease to exist.

http://green.yahoo.com/blog/the_conscious_consumer/4/what-s-wasting-energy-in-your-home-right-now.html

 What’s wasting energy in your home right now?

By Lori Bongiorno Posted Thu Oct 9, 2008 9:34am PDT

   783 votes

Coffe maker (iStockPhoto)

Virtually all of your electronics are sucking up energy even if they’re turned off or not being used. Some of the biggest culprits include your TV, computer, and printer. Even your electric toothbrush is drawing energy when it’s plugged in and sitting idle. 

On its own, the “vampire power” used by one device might seem miniscule, but collectively it amounts to more than $4 billion a year of wasted energy here in the United States. What’s more, the Department of Energy says that about 75 percent of the electricity used to power home electronics is consumed while the products are turned off.  

The easiest (and most obvious) thing you can do is get up right now and unplug whatever you’re not using. Candidates include:

  • Your hand-held vacuum in its charging station
  • Power drills
  • Automatic coffee makers
  • The VCR you haven’t used in nearly a decade
  • The TV that’s collecting dust in the guest room
  • The empty refrigerator in the garage

For the slightly more ambitious, buy a power strip at your local hardware store. Yes, it takes a little time up-front to plug everything into it, but you’ll more than make up the time when you can cut all power with just the flip of a switch.

Clamping down on vampire power is one of the easiest ways to save money on your electric bill (about 5 percent a month) and pump less carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. It may not seem like much, but it all adds up!

Environmental journalist Lori Bongiorno shares green-living tips and product reviews with Yahoo! Green’s users. Send Lori a question or suggestion for potential use in a future column. Her book, Green Greener Greenest: A Practical Guide to Making Eco-smart Choices a Part of Your Life, is available on Yahoo! Shopping.

:}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standby_power

Standby power, also called vampire power, phantom load, or leaking electricity, refers to the electric power consumed by electronic appliances while they are switched off or in a standby mode. A very common “electricity vampire” is a power adapter which has no power-off switch. Some such devices offer remote controls and digital clock features to the user, while other devices, such as power adapters for laptop computers and other electronic devices, consume power without offering any features.

:}

I love the leaking electricity phrase – what it falls on the ground and makes a puddle? 

 :}

The British Government’s 2006 Energy Review found that standby modes on electronic devices account for 8% of all British domestic power consumption.  A similar study in France in 2000 found that standby power accounted for 7% of total residential consumption.  Further studies have since come to similar conclusions in other developed countries, including the Netherlands, Australia and Japan. Some estimates put the proportion of consumption due to standby power as high as 13%.

:]

To counter that is this little fellow. Unfortunately he doesn’t test anything with a CLOCK or LIGHT Display which do use power when turned off. Just think about the juice we use on clocks alone! Every house hold in America no matter how poor has an alarm clock that uses electricity. Is this necessary?

:]

http://theonda.org/articles/2008/03/09/mythbusting-vampire-power-suckers 

Fast on the heels of my energy-on-the-brain week in San Diego, I decided to run some experiments with my recently acquired Kill-a-Watt to debunk some myths about consumer electronics and power consumption. What follows is by no means exhaustive, but I figured I would write it up as it has frequently been the topic of lunchtime conversation at the office— with people arguing both sides of each argument as though it were politics and not simply electricity 101.

The basic statement that I was trying to confirm or disprove was that your computer/cellphone/ipod/etc. charger sucks electricity even when it is not connected to a device. Savvy environmental marketers have called this the “vampire effect” or the problem of “phantom power,” and truth be told, after I first heard the term, I could never look at one of those cuddly black bricks the same.

KillawattSo I went around the house looking for as many bricks as possible, putting my Kill-a-Watt between them and the wall source of power and then connecting and disconnecting their associated devices. An aside: For those that don’t know what a Kill-a-Watt is (pictured here), it’s one of several cheap gizmos you can buy to plug between a given appliance and the wall to measure how much power is being consumed. I’m not quite sure how it works, but quickly testing it on both 60 and 100 Watt lightbulbs convinced me that it worked as billed.

The result: for each of the 13 bricks that I tried, ranging from a wireless phone charger to a MacBook Pro power adapter, the vampire/phantom thing is complete BS. The moment you disconnect the associated device the Watts measured on the Kill-a-Watt go right down to zero. Interestingly enough, this is equally true for low wattage chargers like the iPhone one (~1-2W while charging). It makes sense— after all I’m fairly certain that a fairly cheap circuit on the power adapter can get a good sense of load and just cut the whole power supply off if nothing is connected. As a funny aside, it seems that there is a whole category of “smart powerstrips” that are sold to protect the user against this bunk phantom power thing.

:}

:}

People Just Don’t Get Why We Have To Stop Burning The World Up – Stop please stop

This is so sad it Makes The World Cry:

http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn14976-arctic-air-temperatures-hit-record-highs.html?DCMP=ILC-hmts&nsref=news6_head_dn14976

Arctic air temperatures

hit record highs

  • 13:11 17 October 2008
  • NewScientist.com news service
  • New Scientist staff and Reuters

Autumn air temperatures have climbed to record levels in the Arctic due to major losses of sea ice as the region suffers more effects from a warming trend dating back decades, according to a new report.

The annual report issued by researchers at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and other experts is the latest to paint a dire picture of the impact of climate change in the Arctic.

It found that autumn air temperatures are at a record 5 °C above normal in the Arctic because of the major loss of sea ice in recent years, which allows more solar heating of the ocean.

That warming of the air and ocean impacts land and marine life and cuts the amount of winter sea ice that lasts into the following summer, says the report.

The report adds that surface ice is melting in Greenland and that wild reindeer, or caribou, herds appear to be declining in numbers.

Domino effect

“Changes in the Arctic show a domino effect from multiple causes more clearly than in other regions,” says James Overland, an oceanographer at NOAA’s Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle and one of the authors of the report.

“It’s a sensitive system and often reflects changes in relatively fast and dramatic ways,” he says.

Researchers at the National Snow and Ice Data Center, part of the University of Colorado, recently reported that, this summer, Arctic sea ice melted to its second-lowest level ever.

The 2008 season, those researchers said, strongly reinforces a 30-year downward trend in Arctic ice extent – 34% below the long-term average from 1979 to 2000, but 9% above the record low set in 2007.

Last year was the warmest on record in the Arctic, continuing a region-wide warming trend dating to the mid-1960s. Most experts blame climate change on human activities spewing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

:}

Then there is this longer piece in The Independent;

:}

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/record-22c-temperatures-in-arctic-heatwave-394196.html 

Record 22C temperatures in Arctic heatwave

By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Wednesday, 3 October 2007

The high temperatures on the island caused catastrophic mudslides as the permafrost on hillsides melted, Professor Lamoureux said. “The landscape was being torn to pieces, literally before our eyes.”

Other parts of the Arctic also experienced higher-than-normal temperatures, which indicate that the wider polar region may have experienced its hottest summer on record, according to Walt Meir of the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado.

“It’s been warm, with temperatures about 3C or 4C above normal for June, July and August, particularly to the north of Siberia where the temperatures have reached between 4C and 5C above average,” Dr Meir said.

Unusually clear skies over the Arctic this summer have caused temperatures to rise. More sunlight has exacerbated the loss of sea ice, which fell to a record low of 4.28 million square kilometres (1.65 million square miles), some 39 per cent below the long-term average for the period 1979 to 2000. Dr Meir said: “While the decline of the ice started out fairly slowly in spring and early summer, it accelerated rapidly in July. By mid-August, we had already shattered all previous records for ice extent.”

An international team of scientists on board the Polar Stern, a research ship operated by the Alfred Wegener Institute in Germany, also felt the effects of an exceptionally warm Arctic summer. The scientists had anticipated that large areas of the Arctic would be covered by ice with a thickness of about two metres, but found that it had thinned to just one metre.

Instead of breaking through thicker ice at an expected speed of between 1 and 2 knots, the Polar Stern managed to cruise at 6 knots through thin ice and sometimes open water.

“We are in the midst of a phase of dramatic change in the Arctic,” said Ursula Schauer, the chief scientist at the Alfred Wegener Institute, who was on board the Polar Stern expedition. “The ice cover of the North Polar Sea is dwindling, the ocean and the atmosphere are becoming steadily warmer, the ocean currents are changing,” she said.

One scientist came back from the North Pole and reported that it was raining there, said David Carlson, the director of International Polar Year, the effort to highlight the climate issues of the Arctic and Antarctic. “It makes you wonder whether anyone has ever reported rain at the North Pole before.”

Another team of scientists monitoring the movements of Ayles Ice Island off northern Canada reported that it had broken in two far earlier than expected, a further indication of warmer temperatures. And this summer, for the first time, an American sailing boat managed to traverse the North-west Passage from Nova Scotia to Alaska, a voyage usually made by icebreakers. Never before has a sail-powered vessel managed to get straight through the usually ice-blocked sea passage.

Inhabitants of the region are also noticing a significant change as a result of warmer summers, according to Shari Gearheard, a research scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Centre. “People who live in the region are noticing changes in sea ice. The earlier break-up and later freeze-up affect when and where people can go hunting, as well as safety for travel,” she said.

Mark Serreze of the National Snow and Ice Data Centre, said: “We may see an ice-free Arctic Ocean in summer within our lifetimes. The implications… are disturbing.”

The North-west Passage: an ominous sign

The idea of a North-west Passage was born in 1493, when Pope Alexander VI divided the discovered world between Spain and Portugal, blocking England, France and Holland from a sea route to Asia. As it became clear a passage across Europe was impossible, the ambitious plan was hatched to seek out a route through north-western waters, and nations sent out explorers. When, in the 18th century, James Cook reported that Antarctic icebergs produced fresh water, the view that northern waters were not impossibly frozen was encouraged. In 1776 Cook himself was dispatched by the Admiralty with an Act promising a £20,000 prize, but he failed to push through a route north of Canada. His attempt preceded several British expeditions including a famous Victorian one by Sir John Franklin in 1845. Finally, in 1906 Roald Amundsen led the first trip across the passage to Alaska, and since then a number of fortified ships have followed. On 21 August this year, the North-west Passage was opened to ships not armed with icebreakers for the first time since records began.

Presidential Energy Policy – What if Community Energy Systems was running for President?

What would our collective Presidential Energy Policy look like? :

1. Ban the sale of Gasoline and Diesel as of January 2015, except 1 gallon containers and Heavy Transport Trucks.

2. Ban Diesel and Gasoline sales to Heavey Transport Trucks by 2018.

This would allow everyone to keep mowing their grass and having their backyard barbeques while the USA shifts its transportation capacity to cleaner safer fuels.

3. Ban the Burning of coal in Electrical Generating Stations in 2020.

That would require switching all those plants to another fuel source, probably natural gas.

4. Fund 3 Hot Rocks Power Stations. One in California to replace Diablo Nuclear Power Plant, One to replace Clinton Nuclear Power Plant in Illinois and one to replace Savannah Nuclear Power Plant in Georgia. This would begin the proceess of Converting our economy to geothermal energy on existing sites where Nukes should not be in the first place.

This would proceed for all Nuclear Power Plants in the nation.

 5. Create and support manditory energy conservation programs in both the residential market and the commercial market to reduce their consumption by 50%.

Lets insulate and modernize our world.

6. Order all Landfill operaters and Waste Haulers to begin the mining of all landfills and dumps for metals, glass, plastics and and paper products. Compost the rest.

7. Mandate that all materials be recycled with the goal of a steady state materials economy in the USA by 2020

8. Using tax incentives to increase the Market share of solar, geothermal and wind generation by 25% per year until the USA is largely energy self sufficient.

9. Create a maglev train system in the USA

10. Create a light rail system in the top 50 major markets.

11. Ban the sale of diesel fuel to the railroads in 2025.

12. Open the Yucca Mountain repository by Executive Order if necessary and order all spent nuclear materials to be stored there.

To pay for this I would cut the military budgets of the following services: reduce the Navy to 2 active Fleets, one on the West Coast, one on the East Coast; reduce the Army to 4 batallions; reduce the Airforce to 4 Airwings; leave the Marines alone.

To pay for these policies I would slash the Pentagon staff in half, and the “spying budget” by 1/3.

To pay for these policies I would close the Federal Office of Education. Then I would start in on some of the stupid Federal Budget items that we as tax payers fund, like closing the National Helium Repository in Texas. We sure won’t need the Strategic Petroleum Resevre.

This program would create million of new good paying jobs. Put this country back to work and not flipping burgers at McDonalds.

Barack Obama Beats John McCain – On Energy Policy that is and it wasn’t even close.

And it really did not have to be this way. One substitution could have changed the balance. If instead of 45 Nuclear Generating Stations he would have said 45 Hot Rocks Stations, then he would have generated as much capitol, created as many new jobs and generated as much electricity as his 45 Nukes. In fact it would have made him greener than Barack who I pointed out has “put in a little bit” for everybody and ends up maybe not getting the job done. The other place that Barack wins is with energy conservation. It is a big part of his plan and is nowhere in John’s. So all in all Obama’s plan is the best.

This is no endorsement. There is more to the Presidency than Energy Policy. Foreign Policy,  Military Policy, and Fiscal Policy are probably more important for his initial year in office. But Energy relates to all of those issues in an integral way.

And Obama has come so far:

www.obamamagazine.com

obama1.jpg

weblogs.newsday.com

obama3.jpg

 barackobama.imagelibrarys.com

obama2.jpg

www.politicogod.com

obama4.jpg

:}

The last one is my all time favorite because it was taken in Metropolis Illinois, during the Superman Festival. 

:}

Barack Obama’s Global Warming Policies – OH he calls it Climate Change as well

Obama’s Climate Change Initiatives are kinda short, but at least he addresses energy conservation. This in a country that should only use 9% of the world’s energy but uses 25% instead.

 http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy_more#emissions

Reduce our Greenhouse Gas Emissions 80 Percent by 2050

  • Implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050.The Obama-Biden cap-and-trade policy will require all pollution credits to be auctioned, and proceeds will go to investments in a clean energy future, habitat protections, and rebates and other transition relief for families.
  • Make the U.S. a Leader on Climate Change. Obama and Biden will re-engage with the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) — the main international forum dedicated to addressing the climate problem. They will also create a Global Energy Forum of the world’s largest emitters to focus exclusively on global energy and environmental issues.

« Return to New Energy for America

 Create Millions of New Green Jobs

  • Ensure 10 percent of Our Electricity Comes from Renewable Sources by 2012, and 25 percent by 2025.
  • Deploy the Cheapest, Cleanest, Fastest Energy Source — Energy Efficiency.Obama and Biden will set an aggressive energy efficiency goal — to reduce electricity demand 15 percent from projected levels by 2020.
  • Weatherize One Million Homes Annually. Obama and Biden will make a national commitment to weatherize at least one million low-income homes each year for the next decade, which can reduce energy usage across the economy and help moderate energy prices for all.
  • Develop and Deploy Clean Coal Technology.Obama’s Department of Energy will enter into public private partnerships to develop five “first-of-a-kind” commercial scale coal-fired plants with clean carbon capture and sequestration technology.
  • Prioritize the Construction of the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline. As president, Obama will work with stakeholders to facilitate construction of the pipeline. Not only is this pipeline critical to our energy security, it will create thousands of new jobs.

« Return to New Energy for America

:} 

Well at least with Obama it is short enough that people will likely read through it. Still there is the nasty Cap and Trade stuff that will do no good for anyone. We are up against some very hard changes that we need to make in our industrial infastructure. Coal and Oil just won’t cut it as energy sources anymore. Clean Coal technology is a myth. While Obama talks about cutting emmission by 80% he does not say whether that is current emmissions or the 1990 emmission levels. Again there is just enough GOOD energy policy here to give one hope, but enough BAD energy policy here to think that he is pandering again.

AND the Winner is? Try back on Monday this has tuckered me out. 

:}

John McCain’s Global Warming Policy – Well, he calls it Climate Change

But you know what he means, right? nudge nudge wink wink Know What He means?

 http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/da151a1c-733a-4dc1-9cd3-f9ca5caba1de.htm

Climate Change

John McCain will establish a market-based system to curb greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, mobilize innovative technologies, and strengthen the economy. He will work with our international partners to secure our energy future, to create opportunities for American industry, and to leave a better future for our children.John McCain’s Principles for Climate Policy

  Climate Policy Should Be Built On Scientifically-Sound, Mandatory Emission Reduction Targets And Timetables.
  Climate Policy Should Utilize A Market-Based Cap And Trade System.
  Climate Policy Must Include Mechanisms To Minimize Costs And Work Effectively With Other Markets.
  Climate Policy Must Spur The Development And Deployment Of Advanced Technology.
  Climate Policy Must Facilitate International Efforts To Solve The Problem.


John McCain’s Cap and Trade Policy
John McCain Proposes A Cap-And-Trade System That Would Set Limits On Greenhouse Gas Emissions While Encouraging The Development Of Low-Cost Compliance Options. A climate cap-and-trade mechanism would set a limit on greenhouse gas emissions and allow entities to buy and sell rights to emit, similar to the successful acid rain trading program of the early 1990s. The key feature of this mechanism is that it allows the market to decide and encourage the lowest-cost compliance options.

How Does A Cap-And-Trade System Work?A cap-and-trade system harnesses human ingenuity in the pursuit of alternatives to carbon-based fuels. Market participants are allotted total permits equal to the cap on greenhouse gas emissions. If they can invent, improve, or acquire a way to reduce their emissions, they can sell their extra permits for cash. The profit motive will coordinate the efforts of venture capitalists, corporate planners, entrepreneurs, and environmentalists on the common motive of reducing emissions.

Greenhouse Gas Emission Targets And Timetables

2012: Return Emissions To 2005 Levels (18 Percent Above 1990 Levels)2020: Return Emissions To 1990 Levels (15 Percent Below 2005 Levels)

2030: 22 Percent Below 1990 Levels (34 Percent Below 2005 Levels)

2050: 60 Percent Below 1990 Levels (66 Percent Below 2005 Levels)

The Cap And Trade System Would Allow For The Gradual Reduction Of Emissions.

The cap and trade system would encompass electric power, transportation fuels, commercial business, and industrial business – sectors responsible for just below 90 percent of all emissions. Small businesses would be exempt. Initially, participants would be allowed to either make their own GHG reductions or purchase “offsets” – financial instruments representing a reduction, avoidance, or sequestration of greenhouse gas emissions practiced by other activities, such as agriculture – to cover 100 percent of their required reductions. Offsets would only be available through a program dedicated to ensure that all offset GHG emission reductions are real, measured and verifiable. The fraction of GHG emission reductions permitted via offsets would decline over time.Innovating, Developing and Deploying Technologies

To Support The Cap And Trade System, John McCain Will Promote The Innovation, Development And Deployment Of Advanced Technologies. John McCain will reform federal government research funding and infrastructure to support the cap and trade emissions reduction goals and emphasize the commercialization of low-carbon technologies. Under John McCain’s plan:

Emissions Permits Will Eventually Be Auctioned To Support The Development Of Advanced Technologies. A portion of the process of these auctions will be used to support a diversified portfolio of research and commercialization challenges, ranging from carbon capture and sequestration, to nuclear power, to battery development. Funds will also be used to provide financial backing for a Green Innovation Financing and Transfer (GIFT) to facilitate commercialization.John McCain Will Streamline The Process For Deploying New Technologies And Requiring More Accountability From Government Programs To Meet Commercialization Goals And Deadlines.

John McCain Will Ensure Rapid Technology Introduction, Quickly Shifting Research From The Laboratory To The Marketplace.

John McCain Will Employ The Inherent Incentives Provided By A Cap-And-Trade System Along With Government-Led Competitions As Incentives For New Technology Deployment.

John McCain Will Foster Rapid and Clean Economic Growth

John McCain Believes An Effective And Sustainable Climate Policy Must Also Support Rapid Economic Growth. John McCain will use a portion of auction proceeds to reduce impacts on low-income American families. The McCain plan will accomplish this in part by incorporating measures to mitigate any economic cost of meeting emission targets, including:

Trading Emission Permits To Find The Lowest-Cost Source Of Emission Reductions.Permitting “Banking” And “Borrowing” Of Permits So That Emission Reductions May Be Accelerated Or Deferred To More Economically Efficient Periods.

Permitting Unlimited Initial Offsets From Both Domestic And International Sources.

Effectively Integrating U.S. Trading With Other International Markets, Thereby Providing Access To Low-Cost Permit Sources.

Establishing A Strategic Carbon Reserve As A National Source Of Permits During Periods Of Economic Duress.

Early Allocation Of Some Emission Permits On Sound Principles. This will provide significant amount of allowances for auctioning to provide funding for transition assistance for consumers and industry. It will also directly allocate sufficient permits to enable the activities of a Climate Change Credit Corporation, the public-private agency that will oversee the cap and trade program, provide credit to entities for reductions made before 2012, and ease transition for industry with competitiveness concerns and fewer efficiency technology options.

A commission will also be convened to provide recommendations on the percentage of allowances to be provided for free and the percentage of allowances to be auctioned, and develop a schedule for transition from allocated to maximum auctioned allowances. Cap-and-trade system will also work to maximize the amount of allowances that are auctioned off by 2050. John McCain Will Provide Leadership for Effective International Efforts John McCain Believes That There Must Be A Global Solution To Global Climate Change. John McCain will engage the international community in a coordinated effort by:

Actively Engaging To Lead United Nations Negotiations.Permitting America To Lead In Innovation, Capture The Market On Low-Carbon Energy Production, And Export To Developing Countries – Including Government Incentives And Partnerships For Sales Of Clean Tech To Developing Countries.

Provide Incentives For Rapid Participation By India And China, While Negotiating An Agreement With Each. John McCain Will Develop a Climate Change Adaptation Plan John McCain Believes A Comprehensive Approach To Addressing Climate Change Includes Adaptation As Well As Mitigation. He believes:

An Adaptation Plan Should Be Based Upon National And Regional Scientific Assessments Of The Impacts Of Climate Change.An Adaptation Plan Should Focus On Implementation At The Local Level Which Is Where Impacts Will Manifest Themselves.

A Comprehensive Plan Will Address The Full Range Of Issues: Infrastructure, Ecosystems, Resource Planning, And Emergency Preparation.

:}

There are a ton of problems with this plan but the first of the problems is IT”S TOO LONG. In fact, I doubt that anyone will ever read these words, and not just because this is an obscure blog at an obscure site. Nobody will ever get this far! The other problem is it takes too long. I mean no significant reductions before 2050. Who is going to be left alive at that point? But the real killer is the Cap and Trade system. This is just an industry fudge to get around the Clean Air Act. We need to shut down every coal fired powerplant in this country. Contrary to T. Boone Pickens, we need to convert all of those plants to natural gas, until we can get rid of them. We need to start at least three major “Hot Rocks” projects here in the US now. More about Cap and Trade when we look at Obama’s environmental proposals.

:}