Showing posts with label Climate Change. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Climate Change. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

White roofs to fight global warming - Chu

From money.cnn.com.

It's a fine article on the potential impact of white roofs.

What gets me is:

This is a marked contrast from previous energy secretaries, who often came from business or political backgrounds and had little experience in the energy industry itself, let alone the scientific community that many now hope will help the country move away from fossil fuels. President Reagan's first energy secretary tried hard to abolish his own department.


It just makes it hard to believe in humanity that this kind of thing is true. Sure, not many people understand Energy, or its real impact on their lives; I wouldn't understand it if I hadn't stumbled into Physics. Aw well, we've got a good Qualified Energy Secretary right now, and so I'll try to just keep looking forward. :)

Friday, January 2, 2009

Great News from Congress, Markey to take Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee Chairmanship.

Rep Markey possible to take Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee Chairmanship...

This is great news! Boucher is from Virginia, which is a Coal State. He'll have over the Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee, while Markey from MA will be very influencial in Climate Change / Energy Policy.

I've seen Markey talk about Energy, and he's a Solar Warrior. This is good.

Sunday, September 7, 2008

Biden / Friedman - Meet the Press - Video.

See it Here.


Excellent Interviews.

Biden definately shows his smarts in a way that I hadn't seen before, and Thomas Friedman is a must see if you're looking for the Energy Revolution. He's all over it, and from this interview, he's demonstrating that he's watching the situation carefully. He describes the situation with China well, and is clearly quite inspired.

Friday, April 11, 2008

New Gore Slideshow.

See the video.

Credit to Mom_Pop401k on the Yahoo boards for the find.

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Peak Oil Paper - For future Reference.

http://www.peakoilassociates.com/PeakOilAnalysisOctober6-2007.pdf

Friday, February 15, 2008

Gore speaks before a collective $20 Trillion.

Gore warns on 'subprime carbon' industry

From the article:

"You need to really scrub your investment portfolios, because I guarantee you — as my longtime good redneck friends in Tennessee say, I guarandamntee you — that if you really take a fine-tooth comb and go through your portfolios, many of you are going to find them chock-full of subprime carbon assets," the former vice president said.

Monday, January 28, 2008

Sunday, January 27, 2008

Posted in response...

Question:

"I have always voted Democrat except for Reagan's second term.

I'm really wanting to vote Democrat this time but I am coming to the realization that energy is a national security issue (may be a bit late to the party there but I am there now).

Anyway, can someone tell me what Mr. Obama or Ms. Clinton are going to do to get us off of the "oil standard" as I call it?

Do you think it will work?"


My Response:

I'm less sure about Obama on this, but he does support Energy reform of some sort. I just wonder where it sits in his priorities. In his victory speech after Iowa he used the phrase "Tyranny of Oil." It's only words, though. I don't know well prepared he is with a workable plan, and how dedicated he is to doing battle to make it happen.

Hillary is particularly strong here (as I see it). She's done several major speeches on the subject, and is very knowledgeable. Healthcare is her first priority, I think, but I'm confident that Energy won't wait until she's done with our Healthcare system.

I watched Bill Clinton talk about this subject the other day on CSPAN, and he mentioned a program that he's got going on right now between NY Developers and Banks, so that the Banks will lend the Developers the money to upgrade their properties to Green properties, and the banks would basically not charge more in payments every month than the Developer had saved in Energy Costs.

So, with Hillary, we also have Bill. They could get things done. Bill has been working very hard in the last few years in putting together and working with NGO's and Businesses to accomplish beneficial projects. He's got skillz and connections.

That said, I'm supporting Obama. HAHA! It's a tough choice. I'd like to see fresh blood, and Obama seems very solid. He's thoughtful and inclusive. Bringing Americans back together may very well be more important than having experience-based plans ready to go. There's no reason that President Obama can't tap Hillary, and Bill, or even Gore, for that matter, to help pull together and implement a solid plan.

Here are the official statements from the Obama / Clinton websites:

Obama's Official Energy Position

Clinton's Official Energy Position

Will it work? I'm confident that it can work, because there is little other choice in the matter. There are a growing number of people that are ready to jump in and take whatever efforts are required, and not only that, there is a boatload of money to be made in making it happen. This is the world energy market, and it's a big one. It does depend, however, on a level of stability in the world that is not assured right now.

The pieces are being put into place right now, however, that will lower costs dramatically in many of the "Alt-Energy" techonologies, and there is great potential in the capacity of conservation programs to pay off for American energy consumers. We just need a leader willing to let it happen.

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Interesting Republican Action...

Vitter of Louisiana tried to bring in an amendment, which was what he called the "Warner Bill," which would have opened up the Continental Shelf off of several southern states to Natural Gas Development.

He was told by Boxer that that Amendment didn't belong in this Bill, because it had nothing to do with Global Warming, and because it would kill the Bill.

Vitter did not relent.

Warner spoke, and said that yes, it was his Bill, he had written it and it had failed in Congress. In fact, it had been voted against by several of the States that were on the coastline affected. He said, No, it shouldn't be in this bill. Warner is in strong support.

Monday, January 21, 2008

Imhoffe Nuclear Target,

James Imhoffe mentions a nuclear energy target of 150GW by 2030.

If LDK is able to double production from 2009 to 2010 to around 2MW output per year, then by 2030 they, themselves, would have produced 40GW of Solar Wafers by 2030.

Ok, so Nuclear has the advantage of generating power 24 hours per day, but those Solar panels will be a fine addition to keeping daytime power costs out of control. Think Air Conditioning.

CSPAN showing Climate Change Committee Debate.

Sounds great!

Republicans and Democrats WORKING TOGETHER.

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Video: Head of the Asian Development Bank (Japanese)

Here's a video from Bloomberg:

Kuroda of ADB Says Asia Slowdown Would be `Constructive'

He spends 16 minutes or so talking about general Asian/World economic growth, and then goes to politics.

The interviewer points out the US Presidential race, and the candidates, and asks the guest about it. The guest says that the Bank is a non-political organization, but goes on with a special point.

CLIMATE CHANGE.

This is the item that this banker has brought up as a primary point that the US has to work to resolve.

Don't let bashers fool you. This thing is going to be big.

Saturday, September 29, 2007

Nice target!

"Portugal has targeted that 45% of the country's total power consumption be from renewable energy by 2010."

WOW!

Portugal buys 500 megawatts of wind power from GE through 2009.

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Global Warming Bill in Congress. More Alaskan Hijinks.

Compromise Measure Aims to Limit Global Warming

The complex measure, sponsored by Senators Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico, and Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, would put in place a firm limit on emissions of heat-trapping gases that most scientists say are causing the warming of the planet. Like other so-called cap-and-trade schemes, it would allow companies to buy and sell the right to emit carbon dioxide, which is seen as the chief culprit in global warming.

But to secure labor and corporate support, the measure also places a limit on the price industry would have to pay for such permits. And to win the endorsement of Alaska’s two Republican senators, the bill contains billions of dollars in new money to help their state cope with the effects of climate change on roads, bridges and coastal areas.




I'm torn on this. Of course, I'd rather have a superior bill, like one that we might get after 2008, but on the other hand, this sounds to me like quite a reasonable bill, considering the difficulty in getting the support of the affected unions, as well as many of the affected corporate interests.

I'd be perfectly happy if this passes; to my knowledge this bill is actually separate from the Energy Bill that they've been working on, and that will address much that this one doesn't. On the other hand, if it fails, then we'll just have to wait until there's a new President and a more Democratic Congress.



There is one thing that I do find offensive about this bill, though, and that's the "Billions of Dollars" that will go to Alaska in order to "help them cope." Come on. That money is a payoff to the Senators for their support of the bill. Alaska really doesn't need this money, they still have oil, and they're still going to be pumping it. Should coal states get cash in order to "cope?" What about states that have been proactive and have been working hard to invest in and develop clean, renewable energy prior to the US Government forcing that change with legislation.

No, Alaska should not be getting Billions of Charity Dollars in return for supporting Global Warming Legislation. If we don't pay them off, and they kill the bill, how much money is Alaska going to pay to the other states that will be having to "cope" with the environmental affects of Global Warming?

As long as Alaskans can count on their Senators to get away with these kind of counterproductive giveaways they're going to keep voting in the same corrupt breed of person.

It seems that though the State of Alaska only cost $11 Million Dollars to buy, the cost of maintaining the State is in the Billions.

Saturday, July 7, 2007

Live Earth is just the beginning.

From this 30 minute interview with Gore he makes the following statement:

"... see saturday, 7/7/07, as the great launch, where we really have, it's like a kick-off, it's a wakeup call, SOS, and ask people to answer that call, and then launch the intensive messaging that will get us across the tipping point."

Gore isn't done talking about this, he's just getting started, and he surely won't be alone.

On Live Earth and Activism.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070706/music-live-earth/


SYDNEY, Australia — Live Earth got a traditional Aboriginal welcome in Australia and a high-tech virtual one in Japan, as the 24-hour global concert series to raise awareness about climate change kicked off Saturday.

Al Gore made appearances at both _ as a hologram in Tokyo and via live video link with Sydney _ urging rock fans to join the fight against global warming.



Sounds like a good start. Also sounds like they might still be able to do something in Washington DC.

I'm recording what I can of it, as I'll not be around tomorrow, and there's always online options (www.liveearth.org).


As for those who are scoffing at the concept of "celebs" flying around the world, using fossil energy, and blasting away with stacks of speakers, again using fossil energy, and suggesting that this in some way invalidates the point of the concerts; I'd just like to point out that the other option is to do nothing at all.

Any action requires energy.

Action on a Global Scale, which Live Earth represents, requires a large amount of energy.

The vast majority of the energy supply on Earth is Fossil-based. Therefore, in order to take any action at all requires Carbon Emission.

So, if action is required to move the World Economy towards Carbon Neutrality, and yet action is not allowed simply because it causes Carbon Emmissions, then there can be no transition at all towards a Carbon-Neutral Economy, and so we settle for a future devoid of alternatives to Fossil Energy.


Bonus Info: Solar Web Hosting Company Powers Live Earth Sites

Double Bonus: Gore Brings Surprise Live Earth Concert to Washington

Triple Bonus: Garth Brooks will be at the Washington show. Now, last I checked, Mr. Brooks and the majority of his fans are not Moveon Liberals.