RECENT BLOG POSTS
TWITTER UPDATES
Follow us on Twitter
POTUS SPEAK UP - Five Things to Say about Clean Energy in Your Address
It is that time of year again. This Wednesday, January 27, 2010, the President will glide down the aisle in the House of Representatives, greeted by thunderous applause, and encounter the usually more dignified elected officials in a slightly teen-bopper, Beatles-esque-frenzy, practically climbing over each other to shake his hand.
He will ascend the rostrum in front of federal government and the nation and proceed to tell us how our country is doing. Within the first five minutes of the speech, President Obama will say the health of our nation is strong – because what else can a President say? The State of the Union address is largely an exercise in tradition. So, why then does it matter what he says?
It matters because behind all the ritual rhetoric lies a pretty good indicator of what the president will focus on in the coming months.
Which is also exactly why so many political pundits have been theorizing about the President’s speech for weeks now. Speculation has reached a fever-pitch with the stunning yet not surprising election of Senator-elect Scott Brown (R-MA) and the equally shocking Supreme Court decision last week, which some have argued, gave corporations the right to basically buy Congressional seats. Every public interest group in Washington is hoping – praying really – that their issue will rise to the level of a “shout out” from the President. We all desperately want the President to acknowledge (via his SOTU speech) that what we each work on is a top priority.
You can be certain that is what the community working for clean energy and climate solutions is hoping for – a shout out.
There have been many predictions in recent days about the death of a climate bill. Those predictions could be turned on their heads and dispelled with just a few sentences on Wednesday. In my ideal world, this is what President Obama would say:
1. “Investing in clean energy and climate solutions will generate jobs for Americans.”
President Obama has already hinted he will talk about job creation in his address. That’s no surprise: it is the most urgent priority for American families right now.
One of the best ways to get Americans back to work is to give them the job of building a clean energy economy and rebuilding American infrastructure. As soon as we set limits on global warming pollution, we will unleash billions of dollars in private investment for low-carbon solutions like energy efficient windows and batteries for hybrid cars.
That investment will create jobs--nearly 2 million, according to economists at the University of California.
2. “We are losing jobs to our overseas competitors everyday.”
We are getting the pants beat off us by our international competitors. According to the Green, Inc. blog over at the NY Times, “At the beginning of 2009, Chinese solar companies supplied 21 percent of the market; by year’s end their stake had more than doubled.” They are winning in the pricing game: “A Chinese module maker with little name recognition in the United States, Yingli, has captured 27 percent of the California market thanks to low pricing, the report said. Suntech, China’s leading module-maker, has a 10 percent share in California.” We need to get ourselves in gear if we are going to compete.
3. “Our dependence on foreign oil is unpatriotic.”
I am a mom with an SUV (granted a Honda CRV, but nonetheless, a SUV.) I love my SUV – I can shove kids, tricycles, backpacks, extra clothes, groceries, and even a box for Goodwill in the back and still have room for a family dog. But I can’t pretend that my choice has no repercussions to our national security.
Every time I fill up, I am lining the pockets of those who hate America. Almost all of us “soccer moms and dads” in our SUVs are in the same boat. We need to drive something functional that doesn’t feed terrorism. I don’t think that means that we need to buy tinier cars (although that may be part of the solution) – I think it means that we must make more efficient, cleaner cars. And the best way to do that is to give Detroit and other automakers the incentives they need to get the job done.
4. “An energy bill alone is not enough.”
This weekend the NYTimes notes in an editorial about climate, "The jobs argument should impress the Senate. Yet many Democrats as well as Republicans seem willing to settle for what would be the third energy bill in five years - loans for nuclear power, mandates for renewable energy, new standards for energy efficiency. These are all useful steps. But the only sure way to unlock the investments required to transform the way the country produces and delivers energy is to put a price on carbon.”
We keep writing checks for clean energy investments but we aren’t getting the most bang for our buck. If we don’t place a price on pollution, we will only see some of the benefit. In order to get the most for our money, we need to let the market work – and that means making those who pollute pay for their fair share
5. “Addressing climate change must be more than just a sound bite - it must be a process by which we will commit to get a bill passed this spring.”
Luntz also found that the public overwhelming believes that climate change is occurring – even 66% of Republicans think that global warming is likely happening – so now it is time to stop fighting about it and do something.
If you look on most Senate websites, you will find a statement about how climate change exists and we should do something about it. We need to turn that lip service into action.
Is the President likely to say all of this? Maybe not. But if he even gets half way there, I think we will be able to repeat that great Twain quote when it comes to a climate change bill: “Rumors of my demise have been greatly exaggerated.”
POST YOUR COMMENTS
Comment by: 4v4t4r at: February 3, 2010
One more note, 'Just me'. You console and stroke ego's with your post, pointing out that we are all in the same boat, that most of us have more than we need, etc… Meanwhile, you say we should listen to the upper 10% of our nation’s populous because they have a right to speak, are educated on various topics, and so forth. Something akin to 40% of charitable giving worldwide is provided by our nation. Of that, upwards of 50% is given by the lower 90% of our people who hold less than 10% of our nation’s wealth. That is disproportionate, to say the least. What we as citizens have is more than most other nations, but we do our best to help where we can, and still stay afloat in our own society. When you REMOVE our prosperity to give to those less fortunate, you remove our ability to help at all. We are already stretched thin. If we are to lead the world out of this crisis, it will be with ingenuity and principle, not taxation by a known-corrupt government.
Comment by: 4v4t4r at: February 3, 2010'Just me', perhaps I'm confused on my physical science and geophysical history once again, but to my understanding, millions of years ago, there were these things called dinosaurs, and they constituted the most populous indigenous life-form this planet has ever known, many multiples of the entire current carbon footprint by a factor. We know the temperature world-wide fluctuated, but was much higher, on the whole, than it has been within the last 50,000 to 75,000 years (depending on cited sources). We also know, again because of the science and technology we all like to tout, that the MAJORITY of sulfuric acid (the primary air pollutant in our environment) is dispersed into the upper atmosphere by ever-present volcanic activity. In addition, increased volcanic activity has resulted in the last few hundred years from the increasing solar spot activity (barring this year, where there have been remarkably few solar spots, hence the current global drop in temperature). Again, this bill is not aimed at solving any kind of crisis. The prospective over the next 30 to 50 years of climate drop due to the world following the Copenhagen agenda would be 1-2 degrees F. Accumulated with the expected RISE in temperature due to Solar activity of 20 or so degrees in the next 100 years, we're not going to see much of a difference. As for those in Washington, we as a whole did not elect them. We may have voted for one or the other, but as F. Roosevelt said, "Presidents are not elected, they are selected." We have very little to say one way or the other about who gets put on the ballot, because very few of us ever take part in the primaries. Even so, lobbyists and special interest groups (whether they be national, international, or local) back nearly every one of the candidates, and sometimes ALL candidates in a particular race. Gore says in front of congress that there is a "consensus" of scientists that defer all climate issues onto the human race. He does this directly after respected scientists and professors give testimony otherwise. He then compares them to "flat earth" kooks. Last I was aware, Gore was a politician, not a scientist. He did the same with his claims that he got the internet up and running, even though he hasn't a clue what a TCP/IP stack is. I'm not going to say this is all a hoax. It's not. But a large portion is. Global warming does exist. Sun spot averages are up over the last few decades (except, as mentioned before, for this year). Carbon dioxide saturation is at one of the lowest levels in millions of years. Volcanic activity is on the rise due to increased electromagnetic interference with Earth's field caused by sun spots and solar wobble. These are actual issues we CAN do something about. The technology exists. But taxing everyone for breathing is a little harsh, don’t you think? The “bad guys” who they refer to in the video… They try to act like fossil fuel companies would be hit to fund this. That’s a lie. First, how do you impose a national tax on multinational corporations? Energy companies are shifting service to emerging markets anyway, the same markets (i.e. China, India, etc…) that won’t have to abide by the Copenhagen accord. Second, we are still the primary user’s of fossil fuels, both for vehicles and for electricity. Pushing this bill through would make it ILLEGAL to leave your faucet running while you brush your teeth. It would allow the government to appoint new authority to law enforcement, giving them legal right to walk into your house unannounced and take an accounting of your energy usages to make sure you are within regulation. If anyone doubts what I’ve written, please don’t just write a nasty, ill-thought retort. Do your research on Google and Wiki, THEN get back to us with what you’ve found. Read what’s available on the bill. Read about the Copenhagen (“Hopenhagen” lol) treaty. Most importantly, DON’T LET ANYONE TELL YOU! RESEARCH IT YOURSELF! THE POWERS THAT BE RELY ON OUR LAZINESS AND COMPLACENCY!
Comment by: marco at: February 1, 2010Is this a specific bill that already exists that you are asking us to act upon and help gain momentum? Or are you asking us to push the house to create a new bill? Best, M
Comment by: Ham at: February 1, 2010I find it interesting that this blog highlights a video with people (actors) who work in one of the most polluting industries of the US. I would like to ask Ed Norton the next time he is making a movie that requires 5000 gallons of diesel to be ignited for an explosion that he talk with the director to edit that piece (thus not doing it) out of the movie for the sake of the world.
Comment by: CVBOY at: January 30, 2010I'm glad to read reality in the previous comments. Man-made climate change is a very profitable hoax; We don't need new laws regarding carbon emissions - we need the solutions that are out there MADE AVAILABLE so we can use them, i.e. stop the suppression of "free energy" devices. Let the free market do it's work and punish fraud, deceit, theft, false advertising, etc. OH, YES, stop paying actors to promote global hoaxes, even if the pay is "only" free publicity.
Comment by: DJ at: January 30, 2010All our efforts at stopping the climate change of the '70s have failed. We got a brief 30yr respite, and even saw over-compensation with skyrocketing temps in the late '90s. ---Finally, we're coming back to normal, climate wise, if maybe a touch too chilly for some. But together we prevented the looming ice age predicted by Stephen Schnieder. WHAT??? Climate changes??? NO WAY!!! I want my money back.
Comment by: monomer at: January 30, 2010I shall not rest until all Glaciers are advancing! But, seriously, the French get about 80% of their electricity from Nuclear Energy by having a ratio of Reactors/Population of 1/1 compared to the U.S.'s 1/3 - France has approximately 1 Reactor/1 million people while the U.S. has 1 Reactor/3 million people, and these are largely U.S. designed Reactors which France has improved upon. Power to the People? Jobs to the People? The Truth will set you free?
Comment by: Just me at: January 30, 2010As I sit here and read the former posts, I'm thinking "should I be shocked?" But I'm not. Activist talks about having more faith in the people of this country than the corrupt, money-making machine we have in Washington, our government. Those people in Washington? The people of this country elected them, they are US. Lizzie writes that maybe global warming is a fraud and that all these eco-disasters are due to the earth's natural recycling (weather pattern's that repeat themselves over time). After all, we are more aware of what's going on around us, thanks to technology. So I agree with her, to a point. Thanks to technology we can look back and learn from our past, while at the same time use reasoning to understand that we were not as populated 10,000 years ago. Not burning energy in any form as much as we are now. Not even 100 years ago. Thanks to technology, we also know now that what we are putting in the air as a byproduct of supporting our lifestyles is poison. By whatever name it's called, Earth is dying from it. Technology won't save us from killing our own planet. But we can use it, and our own knowledge. It has to come from US. Tired of Absurdities? Yes, I am too. But should you or anyone else be trashing celebrities? I am not familiar with a 'LEED AP' or what you do, but just by stating that you are a 'LEED AP' to give more weight to your opinion, you're doing the same as they are. Only it's not as effective and I mean no disrespect. A celebrity's name and face are familiar to most of US. Whether they're actors, A-listers, news commenters or hometown news desk reporters. We see them often, buy tickets to their movies, tune in to listen. They are educated enough to make a living at what they do, they live on the same Earth as the rest of us, they are just as vunerable to the air we all breath. From where I sit, at least they are trying to use their celebrity to make a change. We should listen. All of US. Curiosity started me on reading this, real concern led me to this webpage. I'm not sure what made me offer an opinion, but I am sure somebody out there will tell me. We are, all of US, spending a lot of time, energy and, in a lot of forums, money; picking each other over. Every word, every thought, every idea. It's a terrible thing to see. What's worse is knowing that we elected all of those Senators and all of those Representatives that are fighting like children for the best toy. Finger pointing and slandering. They represent US and only WE can change it. It's a huge issue, I understand that. Heather outlined beautifully her point of view. I don't know that she grasped all of it, but she made great points. Tired of Absurdities is worried about the money, understandable. I am too. However, I honestly think that a lot of US have more money than we need and WE spent a lot of money buying shovels to dig the hole we are in. It's going to take a lot of money to get US out, a lot of different issues need to be addressed. It's not just one problem. I am being simplistic, I know. I am doing so on purpose. I'm no longer shocked by all the nastiness I read on these posts, but it does leave me shaking my head in sadness. We've gotten so bogged down with splitting hairs and hating each other that we no longer see the issues clearly and I just wanted to keep it simple and try not to offend anyone, just hoping to hold up a mirror. We want to much and we don't seem to care who we hurt. In the process, we are huring ourselves very much.
Comment by: gotabrain2 at: January 30, 2010Go ahead and continue to drink the Al Gore "cool-aid" you sheep. Gore is laughing at the American public all the way to the BANK!
Comment by: Lizzie at: January 29, 2010Maybe so, maybe global warming is a fraud and all eco disasters are due to natural earth recycling. Still, shouldn't we be moving on anyway? Don't you have the feeling that we are accumulating technology with no purpose whatsoever if not that of feeding our childish need for gadgets? Well, lets use it to breath and live better!
Comment by: Gotabrain at: January 29, 2010Hey dumbf**ks! Have you been paying attention to the news? Man made global warming is a fraud, and this winter has been cold as hell. Get a clue! Jump onto some other trendy topic.
Comment by: Tired of Absurdities at: January 29, 2010I'm tired of listening to celebrities espouse rhetoric concerning topics they have no real understaning of. Half of them don't have educations, and they pretend for a living. Why would anyone pay attention to what they say? As a LEED AP I am quite aware of issues surrounding sustainibility, however this bill essentially undermines our own economy by taxing our energy to give to third world countries. Why not invest in our own technologies (which will create jobs) and resources instead of cripling Americans with the additional tax burden.
Comment by: activist at: January 29, 2010A bill is not needed to steer these intiatives. Freeing up the markets to continue their pursuit in response to consumer demands of more environmentally-friendly products is the answer. All of the issues you itemized in your list can be done by removing regulations, subsidies, and tax incentives (and punishments) that the government uses to shape the economy in the way that we see it today. We are here becuase of Washington's policies, not because the people in this country refuse to be responsible. I have more faith in the people of this country, than I do for the corrupt, money-making machine that we have in Washington.