-
-
Exelon to slash greenhouse gases by 2020
"Exelon Corp. said Tuesday that it plans to slash its greenhouse gas emissions and those of its customers within 12 years to levels below what one of the nation's largest power generators currently emits every year.
The Chicago-based company, already on track to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 8 percent from 2001 levels, said its $10 billion plan to cut 15 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually will be the equivalent of removing nearly 3 million cars from American roads. Greenhouse gases are cited for rising world temperatures.
"The science is overwhelming - climate change is happening now and human activity is the primary cause," John Rowe, Exelon's chairman, president and chief executive, said in a statement." "Exelon Corp. said Tuesday that it plans to slash its greenhouse gas emissions and those of its customers within 12 years to leve... more -
A new day is dawning
It is beginning to take hold. Honesty. On Good Morning America Thursday, ABC News' Chief Washington Correspondent George Stephanopoulos reported "the Democratic National Committee will no longer accept contributions from federal lobbyists, will no longer take contributions from PACs" in keeping with Obama's well-publicized policy. It is beginning to take hold. Honesty. On Good Morning America Thursday, ABC News' Chief Washington Correspondent George Stephano... more
-
Nuclear energy heats up U.S. Presidential race
John McCain embraces it. Barack Obama wants to address its flaws. Hillary Clinton is cautious but not opposed.
Nuclear power -- controversial in the United States and throughout much of the world -- is on the agenda of all three US presidential candidates as they seek to diversify the country's energy mix and reduce dependence on foreign oil.
Interviews with top policy advisers to the three White House hopefuls reveal a varied approach to the technology that some observers see as a necessary answer to fighting climate change and others view as expensive and dangerous.
McCain, a Republican senator from Arizona who has wrapped up his party's nomination, is by far the most enthusiastic about the carbon-free fuel source, regularly calling for more nuclear power plants at campaign stops throughout the nation.
"I believe we are not going to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and become energy independent ... unless we use nuclear power and use it in great abundance," he said in North Carolina on Monday.
McCain adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin said nuclear power faced an "uneven playing field" from years of political opposition.
"Sen. McCain would eliminate the political obstacles that hinder nuclear power, allow it to compete more effectively, and likely increase its share of the US energy portfolio," he said.
Nuclear energy accounts for about 20 percent of US electricity supply, a figure that could rise if regulations on carbon dioxide emissions are imposed, making greenhouse gas emission-free nuclear plants more attractive.
There are 104 operating nuclear reactors nationwide.
Obama, an Illinois senator and the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, shares McCain's belief that nuclear energy is part of the solution to climate change.
But he opposes new federal subsidies and would work to address concerns about safety and waste storage, senior adviser Jason Grumet said.
"Because of the fact that climate change is a species-challenging dilemma, we don't have the luxury to do anything but try to solve those real problems," associated with nuclear technology, he said.
Clinton, a New York senator, prefers using renewable fuels to fight climate change because of nuclear energy's risks.
"Hillary has real concerns about nuclear power because of the issues around safety, waste disposal and proliferation," policy director Neera Tandem said.
"She opposes new subsidies for nuclear power, but would continue research focused on lowering costs and improving safety." John McCain embraces it. Barack Obama wants to address its flaws. Hillary Clinton is cautious but not opposed. ... more -
Barack Obama: this is my patriotism, these are my values
At the N.C. Democratic Party Jefferson-Jackson dinner in Raleigh (NC) on May 2nd, the immense hall exploded with energy when Obama presented a speech about his patriotism and values. This article includes photographs and three videos (Barack Obama's Jefferson-Jackson speech, the acclaimed actor Tom Hanks' endorsement of Obama, and Obama playing hoops with the UNC basketball team). At the N.C. Democratic Party Jefferson-Jackson dinner in Raleigh (NC) on May 2nd, the immense hall exploded with energy when Obama pre... more
-
Nuclear Energy Lobby In U.S. Using Climate Change for Profit
After a hiatus of nearly three decades, nuclear energy is booming. Seventeen power companies in the U.S. are making plans to build more than 30 nuclear plants.
One important factor in the resurgence: new federal and state laws that help utilities pay for nuclear plants that, if completed, would be among the most expensive projects ever built in the country.
One state where nuclear power is making a comeback is Florida. At a meeting last week in Tallahassee, Florida's Public Service Commission voted to approve the state's first new nuclear plants in decades.
Commission member Nathan Skop hailed the decision. "Simply put, nuclear power is a strategic investment for the state of Florida and our national security—to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and to protect our environment," he said. After a hiatus of nearly three decades, nuclear energy is booming. Seventeen power companies in the U.S. are making plans to build mor... more -
Barack Obama's Ties To Nuclear Power
I'm surprised any network even dared to touch this. But it does prove to me that Barack Obama is no more anti-lobbyist than Hillary Clinton is. However, more importantly, I am not convinced that he would not use nukes in a military strike. Even at the debates, he has made it clear that he would not hesitate to attack Pakistan (and like Bush has stated that terrorists are planning to hit us again) and just to remind you, Pakistan has nukes. For me it is hard to look credible for you to say you are against nuclear proliferation yet for nuclear power. And as this wound up, the bill he stated he passed was watered down and never became law. Is this then really change or just more of the same wrapped in a different package? And this issue is important to me and one I think should be important to more people. Nuclear power is not the "clean green" energy source everyone has been led to believe it is, and Obama's ties to lobbyists along with Clinton regarding this make me very wary of just how much they will be for truly eliminating nukes while allowing subsidies for gigantic nuclear power plants to be built. And one other thing, how would the residents of any town know that any "voluntary" policing was working? In the beginning of this Obama stated that the bill regarded notification of what the power plant "believed to be radioactive." That is just an open invitation for them to lie about what they are still emitting and simply saying it isn't radioactive enough to warrant notification. Why are they allowed to leak at all? So as long as they "notify" residents they don't have any other accountability? Again, like the Bush administration we get "voluntary" policing of a potentially deadly hazard to humans, marine life, air, and water. And frankly, that isn't good enough for me. I'm surprised any network even dared to touch this. But it does prove to me that Barack Obama is no more anti-lobbyist than Hilla... more
-
Nuclear Donating Big To Obama and Clinton
And yet, we are to believe they are candidates of change? That they care about the environment? Nuclear energy is not "green." It is an antiquated dangerous form of energy that has seen its day. It is only because of the rise of concern over the climate crisis that certain lobbies have been trying to push it into the green column in order to make a profit from it. And Obama and Clinton are helping them in their quest to do so at the expense of this planet. Subsidies to the nuclear industry could be used to bring innovative and truly visionary alternate energies to the fore that would reduce our dependence on oil in much cleaner and safer ways. This is very discouraging to see and tells me that Obama, who talks about change in his glossy abstract speeches means only changing the person living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. It doesn't mean changing the way business is done. Any candidate who truly believes in addressing climate change and in fighting terrorism is not for nuclear power, period. It is bad enough that Republicans push for nuclear energy and antiquated methods proven to be unproductive in progressing us towards the future. I expected better from Democrats, or at least, those who call themselves Democrats. And yet, we are to believe they are candidates of change? That they care about the environment? Nuclear energy is not "green.... more
-
related topics
Exelon
Contributors (62)
Exelon
