Get Energy Smart! NOW!

We went backwards today on the Energy Bill. While, perhaps, this is better than the 2005 Energy Bill, the air has been drained out of my (and many others’) enthusiasm for the bill.  Better than nothing. Probably.  Guess what, Senator Kerry would have supported a much better energy bill, without a doubt.  He wants a (far) better energy economy in the United States and is committed to addressing Global Warming.

[Read more →]

Reckless endangerment:  [Read more →]

And, well, is the Democratic Majority surrendering the battle to that reckless minority too quickly? Yet again …

The Energy Bill has seemed a strong effort in the face of political realities, even if inadequate in face of the reality what require, but it fell viction to a reckless minority who are wedded to a fossil-fuel, polluting path that further weakens America with each passing day.  They will feed lines about how this will hurt the economy.  These are, well, to put it as politely as possible, truthiness bordering on lies.  Green Energy solutions create jobs.  They improve the economy through improved health care and productivity. They improve the economy through reducing the balance of trade deficit.  They can hurt, however, Exxon-Mobil executives’ bonuses, however.

Senator Reid should not be so quick to cave in front of 40 Senators willing to put their fossil-fuel friends before the nation.  40 Senators willing to put their fossil fuel friends before the future of all humanity. 

Senator Reid:  KEEP THE SENATE OPEN for the weekend.  Make the 40 read the phone book in support of tax subsidies for the oil and gas companies.  Make this “CALLOUS MINORITY” explain themselves to the nation.

Ask yourself the question: 

How many Americans would be supportive of a filibuster supporting tax subsidies for Exxon-Mobil?

[Read more →]

Physical infrastructure (buildings) is, in short-hand, responsible for about one-third of global energy use and one-third of global warming (rough-hand guide way to think).  There are many ways to change this equation, strengthening building codes is one clear arena.  In my community, for example, 20 years ago, the ceiling “R” (insulation level) requirement was R-13, today it is R-38 (though expert guidance is ‘at least R-45’ and most of us who care about energy strive for above R-50).  That sort of change leads to significant reductions in energy use.

Well, the German government has just announced new building codes that will change the landscape when it comes to distributed renewable power:  starting 1 January 2009, all new homes built in German will have to meet 14 percent of total energy consumption for heating and domestic hot water with renewable power.

[Read more →]

When it comes to the Presidential campaign and global warming, there seems to have been a virtual blackout in the broadcast media. Search for the questions on this issue on that stalwart Meet The Press. If you find anything meaningful, let me know. And, well, that is about the level of coverage that is throughout the campaign.

Tonight, Katie Couric and CBS News are going to blast through this barrier, the day after Gore receiving the Nobel Peace Prize and amid the Bali negotiations. CBS is doing a segment on The Candidates On Climate Change. The core question:

Is The Global Warming Threat Overblown?

[Read more →]

 The Bloomberg article on industry lobbying against renewable power standards  contains, in addition to details related to Carbon on the City, an interesting item.

force them to boost electricity generated by wind, solar and other forms of renewable energy to 15 percent of the U.S. total by 2020. That’s up from less than 2 percent today, and is a move the industry says would cost at least $67 billion.

Not surprisingly, there is no exploration or explanation of that cost estimate.  A cost estimate that almost certainly is not meaningful from a societal standpoint, even if it might (MIGHT) have meaning for some corporations. What I wonder, in terms of “costs”, are the answers to the questions that are after the fold.

[Read more →]

Well, unless you are a Washington Post reader with its blackout of coverage of Rudy’s sex scandal, Sex on the City truly provides a revealing window on a top Republican Presidential contender.  Well, perhaps we should be wondering whether the new scandal that all (except, again, Washington Post readers) should be discussing might be called “Carbon on the City”.

As GreenMiles has connected, Guiliani’s firm has been paid by clients to fight Renewable Electricity Standards (RES) as part of the Energy Bill.  And, well, candidate Guiliani has come out against RES. Hmmm … coincidence or someone seeking to be Lobbyist-in-Chief?

[Read more →]

On a 12-8 vote, the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) committee passed out the Lieberman-Warner “American Climate Security Act”. Such stalwarts of environmental issues as Senators Barbara Boxer and Bernie Sanders voted for sending this bill out of committee and praised it (even strongly).  

Yet, there are those, including this author, who have serious issues with this bill and would not want it signed into law, as is.

Why, in the world, should a ‘blogger’ have a voice over such political powers as a Barbara Boxer?

There are a number of dynamics at play here:

• Understanding the Immensity of the Implications
• Political Reality vs Objective Reality
• Judgments about what is best political movement
• Judgments about what Mr 26% might do
  [Read more →]

Amid all of the fascinating things out there on energy issues, there are many that will increase energy illiteracy, that don’t merit the kilobytes wasted on them, that are, well, truly Energy NOT COOL.  Tonight inaugurates a new series that will, occasionally, draw attention to one of these contributions to hindering meaningful debate on energy issues.

When it comes to the future of America’s automotive fleet, it is clear that at least part of the Massachusetts Institute for Technology can’t get its mind around the reality of change in the transportation system.  They are focused on Business As Usual (BAU) rather than the Business To Be (BTB).

Factor of Two: Halving the Fuel Consumption of New US Automobiles by 2035 was recently published by MIT, a brand that carries a tremendous amount of credibility.  When it comes to technology, MIT is like that old EF Hutton ad:  

When MIT Talks Technology, People Listen

Sadly, however, this talk on auto technology could easily mislead rather than enlighten the discussion about the future and our future possibilities.

[Read more →]

There are many good people who, with real passion and sincerity, support the Lieberman-Warner American CSA even while, in most cases, agreeing that it has serious problems, such as the 40% or so of pollution permits that will be given away over the next 25 years.

They have made, in essence, a political calculation that they need to bribe serial polluters within Lieberman-Warner as a path toward securing vote.

This is a flawed approach, in my view, for a number of reasons.  All of which will get some arguing that I am for “ideological purity” over reality, don’t understand “sausage making”, and why can’t I simply get in line behind support the bill …  Well, let me try to lay out some quite basic and core issues that create concern.

[Read more →]