The House voted in favor of the most ambitious climate-change bill in history but will the long list of concessions cripple it’s best intentions?
According to the New York Times, Representaitve Henry A. Waxman of California, co-authored the revolutionary climate bill but was forced to coerce the delegation with billions of dollars in promises in order to get the votes he needed to pass the bill through.
Utility companies seemed to make out the best from the hundreds of pages of special favors written into the bill. Big Coal made an especially big haul as they were granted the go-ahead to build new coal-burning power plants without shouldering new costs. They also walked away with billions toward free pollution permits and the development of carbon capture technology to help meet future pollution targets.
While President Obama agrees the bill isn’t an exact science, he does believe it represents an extraordinary step for the nation.
For a close examination of the new climate bill, check out some of the following links:
House passes bill to address threat of climate change (NY Times)
With something for everyone, climate bill passed (NY Times)
Obama: “Cynical claims” attacking energy bill (Associated Press)
Photo by The Official White House PhotostreamThe House voted in favor of the most ambitious climate-change bill in history but will... more
I found this to be very interesting. This is the only actual comparison of the actual amounts involved that I have ever seen-------and it paints an entirely different picture than the one painted by conservatives who oppose renewable energy because it is subsidized.
My only reservation about the study is that it is not broken down into more speciic groups. I think that some fossil fuels are much worse than others, and not all renewable energy options are good choices either.
Still, I think this is good information to have handy.I found this to be very interesting. This is the only actual comparison of the... more
What does it mean when the Kansas City Star runs an editorial like this one???
Somebody there has had a stroke... of intelligence?
KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- The following editorial appeared in the Kansas City Star on Tuesday:
Congress has tried to create a charmed life for ethanol and Midwestern corn growers in recent years.
First came a hefty tax credit for producing the renewable fuel. And in late 2007 U.S. lawmakers passed a new standard that requires quadrupling the output of ethanol and other biofuels by 2022.
But this month the federal Government Accountability Office issued a sobering report that questioned the need for the tax credit because it's not expected to boost ethanol production beyond already-mandated levels.
In reaction, Congress should scrap the 45-cent tax credit that artificially supports each gallon of ethanol.
The credit helps keep out cheaper ethanol from Brazil, boosting the cost of driving for American motorists.
More notably, the tax credit is no longer needed now that Congress has mandated such a large increase in production. Right now the credit is a source of easy profits for the industry.
The GAO report also correctly called for more rigorous examinations of ethanol's long-term impact on the environment.
That's a field ripe for study, mostly because farmers likely will be using more land, water and fertilizers to dramatically increase corn production. The GAO authors fairly point out that changes in crop yield and the use of water conservation techniques could lessen these environmental concerns.
Ultimately, new studies could help determine whether ethanol's true effect on the environment is more harmful than now thought.
In the short term, getting rid of a tax credit costly to U.S. taxpayers is a needed first step in Washington. "
OMG and WTF?!
and Hooray!What does it mean when the Kansas City Star runs an editorial like this one???... more
For those of you willing to sign up to a 2-year subscription plan through Verizon, $150 suddenly becomes enough to snag a Gateway LT2016u netbook...For those of you willing to sign up to a 2-year subscription plan through Verizon,... more
If a letter from a presidential aide is to be believed, President Barack Obama is set to make an audacious call to end fossil fuel subsidies at the United Nations on Tuesday.
A letter (PDF) from Michael Froman, an aide to Obama, setting out the White House’s climate change priorities ahead of the Copenhagen summit, states that “eliminating fossil fuel subsidies would help energy markets work better and improve our energy security.”
That leads DailyKos blogger RLMiller to conclude that Obama “will ask the G-20 countries, including our own, to end the hypocritical practice of billions of dollars of subsidies to dirty, carbon-emitting fuels while preaching to developing countries about their carbon emissions.”
In making such a call, Obama would be echoing the arguments of many environmental groups, as well as the United Nations Environment Program, which last year called for the “scrapping” of the subsidies.If a letter from a presidential aide is to be believed, President Barack Obama is set... more
It’s not easy, but it starts with entrepreneurs and executives like me and you. The biggest problem is, as much as we think the government helps small businesses and start-ups, the government actually harm entrepreneurs’ long-term objectives. Ever wonder why, with all the money provided through loans and grants, most startups fail within their first 5 years?
Lots of these failed startups can be attributed to inexperienced entrepreneurs entering into an already competitive marketplace. Some of these entrepreneurs lack management skills, others didn’t take the time to formulate a thorough business plan, analyze the market and competition, or bring enough capital to the table. Many entrepreneurs actually bring too much “capital” to the table; but they do so in the form of loans which they ultimately cannot pay back (this is where I reiterate the importance of a thorough business plan). Outside lack of planning the single biggest threat to a small businesses success is the government.
I know, I know. Grants, government-backed loans, the Small Business Administration--all of these things are meant to help entrepreneurs; not bankrupt them. But what about government subsidies and bailouts to failing companies? These policies hurt entrepreneurs more than the government programs in place to help them.
Government subsidies are killing America. Subsidies, by definition, support a failing business with tax payer money. This immediately removes any incentive of the failing business to rethink their strategy or develop new revenue streams. Think about it: if the government paid you to fail, would you change your business strategy? Of course not.
Alister & Paine, INC. specializes in digital media auditing, buying and B2B Marketing.
Alister & Paine is a digital magazine covering business, lifestyle and human interest topics.Want to save the economy?
It’s not easy, but it starts with entrepreneurs and... more
And people think we will pay with cap and trade or a carbon tax? Why then aren't the same people crying about the huge amounts of money taxpayers are left holding the bag for by these loans given to energy/coal companies they don't pay back? THEY DESERVE TO BE TAXED.And people think we will pay with cap and trade or a carbon tax? Why then aren't the... more
LEAKED GOVERNMENT LETTER by a highly reliable government source marked HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – FOR YOUR EYES ONLYLEAKED GOVERNMENT LETTER by a highly reliable government source marked HIGHLY... more
Already over-exploited fishstocks continue to be depleted. The Us taxpayers provide commercial fishing subsidies that contribute to overfishing, environmental pollution and climate change,.
U.S. taxpayers doled out more than $6.4 billion in subsidies to the commercial fishing industry between 1996 - 2004, possibly accelerating the ongoing collapse of fish stocks worldwide and adding to the devastation of large ocean fish species.
U.S. subsidies, calculated for the first time by Renee Sharp, director of Environmental Working Group's California Office and renowned fisheries economist Ussif Rahid Sumaila, director of the Fisheries Centre at the University of British Columbia, amounted to 21% of the $31 billion U.S. commercial fish harvest between 1996 - 2004.
Some kinds of subsidies can be good, if they encourage conservation and careful management of fishery stocks etc. But, there is general international consensus that some other kinds of subsidies can contribute significantly to the depletion of ocean fish.
The Sharp-Sumaila study published in the North American Journal of Fisheries Management and supported by the Lenfest Ocean Program has determined that direct federal and state subsidies to commercial fishing operations totaled $6.4 billion and averaged $713 million annually between 1996 - 2004.
50% more boats than needed to bring in the fish...
There is ample evidence that the U.S. commercial fishing fleet has over-exploited marine fish stocks, in some cases to the danger point. An April 2008 report entitled “Excess Harvesting Capacity in U.S. Fisheries” and published by the National Marine Fishery Service (NMFS) found that 12 of 25 U.S. commercial fishing operations it examined had 50% more boats than needed to bring in each operation’s total fish catch for the year. Having too many boats is one component of overcapacity.
The logical result of overcapacity is overfishing, meaning, that more fish are harvested than can be naturally replaced. Reports on the current status of U.S. fish stocks are bleak. According to NMFS data, in 1997, 32% of the nation’s 269 monitored fish stocks were considered over-fished, meaning seriously depleted. In 2007, a decade later, 24% of 190 monitored fish stocks were still categorized as over-fished, and another 17% were deemed subject to overfishing.
The global situation is similar: In 2004, the last year for which subsidy data were available, the United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization estimated that the proportion of over-exploited and depleted world fishery stocks approached 25%, up from 10% in the mid-1970s.
44% of Federal & State subsidies support fuel costs.
Although fishery management failures have long been recognized to play a key role in the growing problem of overfishing and overcapacity, more recently a consensus has emerged that government subsidies to the fishing industry are also an important contributor
Fishing subsidies also have significant environmental impacts that stretch beyond the sea. EWG’s calculations showed that fully 44 percent of federal and state subsidies between 1996 and 2004 went for fuel for fishing fleets.
Supporting fuel costs has may not have only helped promote the needless expansion of commercial fishing operations, it has also likely caused wasteful fuel consumption, air and water pollution and greenhouse gas emissions that exacerbate global warming.On The Hook: Commercial Fishing Reaps Billions
Already over-exploited fishstocks... more
The government has announced new plans designed to boost electric car sales, under which drivers will be offered subsidies of up to £5,000.The government has announced new plans designed to boost electric car sales, under... more
Barack Obama's tax policies may hurt the same middle-class city dwellers who supported him.
governmental policies may be sowing the seeds of its own failure...
excerpt......
"ironically, what seems to be the administration's core proposal, ratcheting up the burden on "rich" taxpayers earning over $250,000, could have unintended consequences. For one thing, it would place undue stress on the very places that have been Obama's strongest supports, while providing an unintended boost to those regions that most oppose him.
At the heart of the matter is the age-old debate about who is "rich." If you define wealthy as $250,000 a year for a family of four, that means different things in different places. America is a vast country, and the cost of living varies widely. What seems a princely sum in, say, red state Oklahoma City is barely enough to eke out a basic middle-class life in blue bastions like New York, Los Angeles or San Francisco."Barack Obama's tax policies may hurt the same middle-class city dwellers who supported... more
The real price of fruits and vegetables between 1985 and 2000 increased by nearly 40 percent while the real price of soft drinks (AKA Liquid Corn) declined by 23 percent.
The Farm Bill essentially treats our children as a human disposal for all the unhealthful calories that the Farm Bill has encouraged American farmers to overproduce.
The public health community has come to recognize it can't hope to address obesity and diabetes without addressing the Farm Bill.The real price of fruits and vegetables between 1985 and 2000 increased by nearly 40... more
The CATO Institute explains the problems with the growth of agricultural subsidies over the years, especially while the number of farms in the U.S. continues to decrease. It explains how protectionism has hurt consumers while government sponsored ethanol has increased the price of agricultural commodities here as well as overseas. Most subsidies go to big business pushing out small farm competition distorting the market while helping corporate farms bulk up on excess profits. For more information on liberty please visit Michael Shanklin’s youtube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/shanklinmikeThe CATO Institute explains the problems with the growth of agricultural subsidies... more
Behind America’s dollar hamburgers and 72-ounce sodas is a key ingredient that quietly fuels our fast-food nation: corn. In King Corn, recent college graduates Ian Cheney and Curt Ellis leave the east coast for rural Iowa, where they decide to grow an acre of the nation’s most powerful crop.
"The apple juices and the grape juices that are canned and they say 'sweetened,' that’s going to be a high-fructose corn syrup. And then you look down the meats — beefs, porks, chickens. You feed them corn and that gets turned into their biomass that we consume."Behind America’s dollar hamburgers and 72-ounce sodas is a key ingredient that... more
What we eat effects our health. That is becoming clearer with every year we read about increases in diabetes, obesity, allergies, and other illnesses. A sound naturally oriented food policy across the board that works towards sustainable development and environmental engineering of food crops is the best healthcare policy we could have. This also includes labelling foods in America to disclose GMO ingredients.What we eat effects our health. That is becoming clearer with every year we read about... more
Do coal companies really think they will get away with pulling the wool over all of our eyes? There is no real money going into this non existant technology because they are lying to us about it and using it for ads that lie to us. For anyone who has never seen a lump of coal let me assure you, it is NOT CLEAN. Even if you pump every CO2 emission out of it, IT IS STILL DIRTY. Coal ash will still exist. Blown up mountains will still exist, (and just as a point of order, cutting down all of those trees will also be detrimental as it leaves no barriers to storms and mudslides and exacerbates the very climate change they claim their "clean coal" will help stop because it is those trees that act as carbon sinks.) Toxic waste that gives you cancer will still exist. And the CO2 you pump out of it will still also exist and as reports have already brought forth, burying it in the ground (wherever that would be) may not be sustainable either.
But of course, people will not be told that nor will the majority of Americans who do not care or have time to research what they are told will be schooled as to what this process is all about, how it is done, or the effects of it. They are being led to believe that this is some new type of coal being dug up out of BLOWN UP MOUNTAINS. It is inane beyond belief!
These companies are like the tobacco companies in making you think that if they call cigarettes "light" they do not swirl poisonous gases around your lungs when you suck them in. And Americans must not now get sucked into the lies of the coal lobby that is only looking out for their own profits over the health of the American people.Do coal companies really think they will get away with pulling the wool over all of... more
How the nuclear lobby is spinning liberals, lawmakers, and grassroots environmentalists
by Jason Mark, from Earth Island Journal How the nuclear lobby is spinning liberals, lawmakers, and grassroots... more
“If we are to meet growing energy demand and slow the growth of greenhouse gas emissions, nuclear power must be a larger part of our energy mix; it is a mature technology with significant potential to supply large amounts of safe, reliable, emissions-free base load power. In order to ensure that such an expansion can occur, the United States must have a permanent repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste,” said Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman.
URS is organized into three divisions: the URS Division, the EG&G Division, which includes the operations of Lear Siegler Services*, and the Washington Division.
*Among LSI's assets are its well regarded and wide-ranging Department of Defense Contract Field Team (CFT) programs as well as other major domestic and international contracts.
EG&G Technical Services, Inc. and Lear Siegler Services, Inc. consolidated to become one of the nation's leading U.S. federal government contractors providing operations and maintenance, systems engineering and technical assistance, and program management, primarily to the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security.
"In a open letter to the next president, author Michael Pollan writes about the waning health of America's food systems — and warns that "the era of cheap and abundant food appears to be drawing to a close."
The future president's food policies, says Pollan, will have a large impact on a wide range of issues, including national security, climate change, energy independence and health care"...
I heard this on NPR on a rather long road trip... it was quite an eye-opener. "In a open letter to the next president, author Michael Pollan writes about the... more
Building 45 new nuclear plants in this country is insanity and will doom the waterways of this country and put our national security at risk. For a candidate who also talks about fighting the 'war on terror' as well, how could this thought even be entertained in the world we live in? Nuclear energy is not safe, it is not CO2 free, and I am truly getting tired of John McCain talking about what he really knows nothing about. He was on a nuclear submarine that didn't get blown up so that is how he assessed nuclear power is safe? Does he even understand the process of how the uranium is extracted and the toxic pollution it causes to our waterways and land? Does he understand how the toxic waste causes cancer? Does he understand the radioactivity of the waste? The immense amount of water nuclear uses? (Not good in a country now experiencing droughts, especially in the US Southwest) The cost in dollars and in potential lives?
My one message to him and yes, Obama as well who has now flip flopped to say he too engages nuclear is: STOP LYING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. The strides being made in solar, wind, and geothermal are here and now. We could take the money their congressional subsidies give out for their nuclear pipedreams and repower this country! I will make a pledge that should John McCain be corronated I will call the White House every day regarding this issue and 'clean coal.' And I will do the same if it is Obama.
It is unconscienable to me that they could ever want to foist this antiquated unsafe energy source on us just to appease backers and the lobbyists who get the subisidies from Washington Dc. The nuclear option must be out of the question. It is antiquated. It is unsafe. It is toxic. It wastes water. It is expensive. It puts our national security at risk, and will take too much time in light of the reports coming from peer reviewed scientists regarding the current state of our world. Why don't these candidates ever pick up a report instead of a poll to craft their policies? Building 45 new nuclear plants in this country is insanity and will doom the waterways... more
