9 posts Page 1 of 1
 
"Without clear climate change policy, not only will manufacturing jobs be siphoned off to overseas rivals investing heavily in renewable energy sources, but U.S. companies won't have any clear direction on where best to invest their money in new capital projects to keep in line with regulations, top executives said.

{...}

Improved energy efficiency standards for buildings and appliances; more research and development into biomass, clean coal and other technologies; and opening more U.S. acreage to oil exploration would all help create jobs, Dow's Liveris said.

At a separate conference in Pittsburgh, experts said U.S. workers are already finding jobs building wind turbines, installing solar panels and retrofitting buildings with stronger insulation to conserve energy."

http://www.reuters.com/article/ELECTU/idUSN1440647520080314

Do you agree with these CEOs that the US needs and would benefit economically from stronger regulations on climate change?
entuto - go look up a graph of total solar irradiance over the past 30 years (measured by satellite) before claiming that global warming is always caused by the Sun.

dpj5 - why are you talking about Reuters? That's like attacking Al Gore about global warming science. Try discussing the content, not engaging in ad hominem attacks.


 
Climate change is a reality, but the controversy is silly. The only constant about climate is that it changes. The earth's climate has changed since the beginning, and man has usually blamed himself (angering the gods, too much C02, etc) for its change. Our Sun is the cause for the temperature fuxuations in all our celesial planets (including Earth). For Man to think he is more powerful than the Sun in this day and age is rediculous. Those who enrich themselves by trading off this ignorance to pedel "carbon credits" to the fearful are the worst type of charlitans.

 
Reuters is not an American company.
"In 1995, Reuters established its "Greenhouse Fund" to take minority investments in a range of start-up technology companies, initially in the United States."
Yeah, that's reliable.

 
No, I would be in favor of new stronger regulations limiting the power of government to interfere in our daily lives and to protect us from bureaucratic bungling. Like daylight savings time for example, it doesn't save energy and or daylight.

Or how about fuel efficency standards that are believed to have caused over 40,000 deaths since they were inacted.

 
Yes! Lets invest in America again. There is nothing more expensive than continuing to do what we are doing.
There are estimates as high as $800 billion annually for the hidden costs of oil and gas in the U.S. That would add $8 to a gallon of gasoline if you paid it at the pump. Oil accounts for up to $300 billion annually of our trade imbalance.
Oil and gas subsidies and tax credits are costing us up to $80 billion annually. The cost of military protection of oil shipments are estimated as high as $100 billion annually. Environmenal and health costs are hundreds of billions.
And then there is all the world conflict associated with oil. We're finding out what that costs.

Something like this proposal published by Scientific American could be done using 1/4 as much public money as we now give oil and gas companies annually.

Scientific American A Solar Grand Plan
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan


from Green Wombat
"The United States could lose more than 116,000 green collar jobs and forgo $19 billion in green tech investment in 2009 if Congress fails to extend two tax credits crucial to the renewable energy industry, according to a new study."

"In recent months, PG&E has signed deals for more than a gigawatt of electricity - enough to light more than 750,000 homes - with solar power plant developers. Such power purchase agreements can take more than a year to hammer out and the permitting and construction of a solar power station can take another three to five years."

"The solar thermal industry is in its infancy but utilities like PG&E (PCG), Southern California Edison (EIX) and San Diego Gas & Electric (SRE) have signed several contracts for solar power plants and negotiations for gigawatts more of solar electricity are ongoing."

"The first solar power plants in California won't go online until around 2010 but the construction and operation of those projects are expected to create thousands of jobs. Like the PV industry, solar thermal companies are dependent on the investment tax credit to attract the big money it takes to finance the construction of billion-dollar power plants. The loss of the investment tax credit would hit California particularly hard."

"Navigant projects an even bigger crash for the wind industry should the production tax credit expire, with installations falling from 6,500 megawatts to 500 megawatts in 2009 with the lose of 76,800 jobs. The wind industry has been continuously buffeted in recent years as Congress has allowed the production tax credit to expire repeatedly only to resuscitate it. In the past, the expiration of the tax credit has resulted in a 73% to 93% drop in the wind market, according to Navigant."

"Representatives from Silicon Valley tech giants, Wall Street investment banks and utilities signed a letter sent to the congressional leadership late Wednesday urging the long-term extension of the 30 percent investment tax credit as well as the production tax credit for the electricity produced by solar, wind, geothermal and other renewable energy systems. Among the signers urging action by March 1 are executives from Google (GOOG), Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), Applied Materials (AMAT), Credit Suisse (CS), Wells Fargo (WFC), venture capitalists Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers and utility San Diego Gas & Electric, a subsidiary of energy giant Sempra (SRE)."
Posted by Todd Woody
http://blogs.business2.com/greenwombat/

Here's what solar can do.
"Solar thermal power plants such as Ausra's generate electricity by driving steam turbines with sunshine. Ausra's solar concentrators boil water with focused sunlight, and produce electricity at prices directly competitive with gas- and coal-fired electric power."

"Solar is one the most land-efficient sources of clean power we have, using a fraction of the area needed by hydro or wind projects of comparable output. All of America's needs for electric power - the entire US grid, night and day - can be generated with Ausra's current technology using a square parcel of land 92 miles on a side. For comparison, this is less than 1% of America's deserts, less land than currently in use in the U.S. for coal mines."

http://www.ausra.com

Wind has big potential as well. And is cost effective.

"Estimates of the cost to construct nuclear power plants are as high as $4,000 per kilowatt, as compared to about $1,400 per kilowatt for wind projects."

http://www.cleanwisconsin.org/campaigns/NuclearPower/unsustainable_cost.html

Doing these things will improve the economy, not harm it. Sure there will be some disruptions and adjustment, but the alternative is unthinkable.

 
From your quote:

"more research and development into biomass, clean coal and other technologies;"

He is advocating clean coal, you are advocating no coal.

"opening more U.S. acreage to oil exploration would all help create jobs,"

What does that have to do with cutting co2 emissions? Environmentalist appose the opening of oil fields in Alaska.

Most of the experts including the IPCC say alternative energy is insufficient to cover the world demand for energy. Nuclear power is needed. You are against nuclear power.

While I will admit 12 months of cooling is early to say the warming trend is over, but what will happen if this cooling trend continues. What will happen to those investments?

 
Climate change is a natural cycle, yes, but it's stupid to think that humanity is having no impact on it. Even if we weren't, we're still impacting our immediate environment- air, water, etc.

So really, the worst that could come from stricter regulations is- GASP- cleaner air and water. How awful. :P

 
Wal-Mart and Home Depot would love a bill that forced people to buy new light bulbs. The profit margins on CF lights are far more than on incandescent bulbs.

Archer-Daniels-Midland is reaping huge profits on ethanol subsidies, even though ethanol uses more gasoline than it produces ethanol to produce.

EOM is doing great because congress has no political will to drill for more oil. Tight supplies with high demand keeps profit margins high.

Many corporations profit greatly from strong regulations. So why wouldn't these corporations support gvmt regulations?

 
We all have a ring side seat to see what has happened to the US economy with deregulation, less oversight, fewer rules and a free market anarchy system designed for the benefit of huge corporations to exploit maximum profit from the average person. It only took the conservatives 30 years to make this train wreck.

We have been doing the same thing to the planet for the past 60 years and doubled the human population at the same time for more anthropologic effect. We have exceeded the carrying capacity of many ecosystems and are relentlessly driving them into collapse.

If there was a way to isolate ones self from all of this environmental suicide, I would say let the morons do what ever they want and live with the consequences... just like some of the once billionaires will be signing up for food stamps soon that have scammed the investment markets and have nothing left for themselves or anyone else.

Take only what you need, there is freedom in that, and leave the rest for future generations. How many billions does one person need at the expense of thousands of other's well being? Arnold the Green fruad from California, commutes every day on his private jet (1 1/2 hours each way) because he can't find a house big enough, and he misses his kids, how touching... Work with nature and the planet, not against it! Why is this so hard for some of you to see???

The pathetic calls of victimization by some of the people that post here is so convoluted it makes me laugh, then reality sets in again and it makes me want to cry...

It is easy to demand more of the same, but I see way too little real courage to figure out ways to conserve on an individual basis so less consumption is needed. We are no longer strong, we are no longer brave, and the predictable outcome will certainly leave us all less free. And that is what makes me feel like a victim, and makes me fight even harder!

A paradime shift of massive proportion has long been predicted by many cultures, religions and prophets... the date is 2012. Will you be in a situation to survive what ever that out come might be???

My favorite prediction has always been, "The meek shall inherit the Earth."

So be it... I think it is too late to regulate. I think there are too many selfish morons out there that want anarchy and to have things their way at the expense of evrything that has come before those now living in excess, and those that will follow in extreme hardship for a very very long time.

AHO!

9 posts Page 1 of 1

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron