Tuesday, July 07, 2009

Why Do They Want Us To Spend Trillions on a Non-Existent Problem? « American Elephants
Do you have storms in your area that damage power lines and cause a widespread loss of power? Then you are familiar with trying to stay warm, cooking on the barbecue, using candles for light, or perhaps you are one of the lucky ones who has a generator. Nevertheless, you appreciate your electricity. But do you know where it comes from?

Surprisingly, no one in congress or the administration does. At least they must not, for their math simply does not add up. If you cannot read this lovely pie chart, 48.9 % of our electricity comes from coal, 20% from natural gas, 19.3 % comes from nuclear, 7.1 % from hydroelectric plants, 1.6 % from petroleum and the little pinky-peach wedge represents wind, solar and geothermal.

The Waxman-Markey climate bill will punitively tax the energy sources that contribute 90 percent of our current American electricity in order to bet our future on the wedge that is able to produce only 2.4 percent of our electricity. But we can do it. The conventional phrase is “if we can send a man to the moon we can…..
TheHill.com - Centrists threaten Obama's agenda
On climate change and energy legislation, Bayh, Lincoln and Pryor are seen as a collective headache for Democratic leaders.

Anna Aurilio, a lobbyist for Environment America, a liberal group, ranked Nelson, Landrieu, Bayh, Lincoln and Pryor as the toughest Democrats to persuade to join Democratic leaders on environmental votes.

She said that Nelson and Landrieu would present the biggest challenge on climate change legislation — Nelson and Landrieu say the proposal would raise electricity rates and affect jobs in their states.
frogblog » And you, sir, will do what?
Last night I went to the climate change target ‘consultation’ meeting, held in Wellington by Climate Change Minister Nick Smith. Today, I’m still feeling more than a little outrage.

It was heartening to find a room full to overflowing with 400+ citizens who were there to speak up for the need for a target that reflects the magnitude and the urgency of the challenge - or as one speaker so eloquently put it - a responsible target.

On the other hand, it was extremely frustrating to witness Nick Smith’s increasingly squirmy, gutless response.

His response was, roughly speaking, that if the people in the room wanted a strong target, then we had to show him exactly where all the cuts should come from. Putting aside the fact that this particular room may well have contained the expertise to do just that, it made me wonder what Nick Smith thinks it means to be a leader.

No comments: