Posts Tagged by Obama
Taking Aim At the Dirtiest of Coal Plants
| December 19, 2011 | Posted by Craig Shields under Fossil Fuels |
It’s hard to find too many people who approve of the job that U.S. President Obama is doing. The right wing thinks he’s essentially a socialist who’s done a terrible job with the economy, that he’s pushing for bigger, more repressive government and a redistribution of wealth. The left is disappointed that he’s backed away from many of his more progressive campaign promises, and believe that he’s just as much a product of Big Money as are the Republicans.
However, from my perspective as an observer of the energy scene, he’s a whale of a lot better than the guy who preceded him. Here’s some gratifying action aimed at dirty coal plants, of which everyone with lungs should approve.
Related posts:
New Environmental Review for Tar Sands Pipeline
| November 22, 2011 | Posted by Craig Shields under Fossil Fuels |
By any standards, the folks at the Sierra Club have been terrifically effective at leaning on government with respect to environmental policy. On November 10, the Obama administration announced that it would order a new environmental review for the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline — just days after thousands of Sierra Club members and other activists encircled the White House to protest the project.
I thought it would be appropriate to thank President Obama for this wise decision, which I did using this link here. You may wish to do the same.
Related posts:
Obama Fails To Redeem Self on Clean Energy — But Man, Doesn’t He Speak Well?
| May 2, 2011 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Politics |
I’m incredibly moved by acts – or even words – of brilliance. And that’s why, as saddened as I am that Obama has disappointed so many of the progressives who brought him to power, I believe that all Americans should applaud the job he did in his talk the other night at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.
Though I’m told I normally do an adequate job, I’m by no means an excellent public speaker. I appreciate the kind words, but I’m always working hard to improve my skills in this arena that I find so incredibly difficult. And, as it turns out, I’m not alone. Did you know more people are afraid of speaking in public than dying? As the saying goes, we’d rather be in the casket than eulogizing the deceased.
I hope you’ll check this out, and see not only Obama’s consummate command of political rhetoric, but the comic timing of a Jay Leno or a Bob Hope. As I listened to it, impressed as always, I counted my blessings that I’m not directly related to Donald Trump.
Related posts:
Pres. Obama Seeking 2012 Budget Increase For Green Energy
| February 22, 2011 | Posted by GreenSmithGirl under Renewables - Politics |
On Feb. 14, U.S. Pres. Barack Obama made a proposal to Congress to raise 2012 budget funds for renewable energy research. He proposed paying for this budget increase by cutting subsidies for fossil fuels including gas and oil.
This budget increase comes at a rather sensitive time for the White House. Recently, the U.S launched a World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute against China. The dispute is regarding the country’s support for wind power production and research. Additionally, Japan recently initiated a WTO dispute against Canada for their support of renewable energy subsidies.
Even though the U.S. disapproves of China’s support of wind manufacturing, Obama still seems to be placing a high priority on green energy as a whole. He undoubtedly recognizes that certain measures need to be taken if the U.S wants to compete with other countries that have already gone to great lengths to develop renewable energy technologies and resources.
Obama has proposed an amount of $29 billion for the Department of Energy in 2012. This number is up more than 4 percent from the 2011 budget and more than 10 percent from the 2010 budget, a substantial sum. And $8 billion, more than 30% of the Department’s total proposed 2012 budget, is earmarked to support renewable energy initiatives. These initiatives include research to support wind and solar power and new nuclear energy technologies.
But these budget increases will not come with out a cost to other areas of the budget. Pres. Obama is asking Congress to revoke almost $4 billion dollars in fossil fuel subsidies. If approved, this number would jump to over $46 billion over the course of ten years. Read More
Related posts:
[The Vector] Changing Hearts and Minds on Cap and Tax
| December 31, 2010 | Posted by Aedan-Kernan under Renewables - Politics |
A couple of weeks ago, David Shukman the Environment Correspondent at the BBC went to marvel at the 1,400 wind turbines that spread in line after line across Nolan County, Texas. Each turbine doubles the revenue from the cotton field it is planted in.
Shukman dropped in on the mayor of a town in the midst of this manmade forest – Greg Wortham of Sweetwater – to talk about the money the turbines bring to the community and their beneficial effect on climate change.
But Mr Wortham had a warning for his British guest:
“Whatever you do, don’t mention the climate. It’s too polarising. Carbon footprint, green, climate change – those issues are so charged in the US… there are just certain labels that cause people to form into groups.”
The reason the United States needs renewable energy has become such an emotional touchpoint that those who are benefitting most from renewable energy cannot bear to discuss the issue. Read More
Related posts:
Mainstream Media: Energy Policy Needs More Prominence
| September 5, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Politics |
I got a high-quality rowing machine (Concept2) on Craig’s list yesterday, and have committed to daily use. It’s really the perfect tool for strength building and cardio simultaneously. But the reason I bring this up is that it will essentially force me to watch a bit of television, enabling me to keep up better with the coverage that the mainstream media affords various subjects of national and international importance.
Cooling down after my workout just now, I ask myself what I learned from 20 minutes or so in front of the Chris Matthews Show. Essentially, it’s that Obama has not done a good job in explaining himself and the actions he’s taken. While he was waiting for the stimulus package to take effect, he spent the majority of his political capital pushing through healthcare reform – a bill of dubious priority. The majority of Americans are angry with government, and the last think they want to see is more of it – in healthcare – or anyplace else. With the mid-term elections now only two months away, the Democrats are floundering to regain the trust of the electorate.
What does this mean in terms of renewable energy in the US? To me, it means this: don’t hold your breath. There are so many obvious actions related to energy policy that you or I would do if we were in charge, not one of which is anywhere close to happening. Anyone of conscience acting independent of corruptive influence would start, I think, with these three:
1) Create a level playing field, removing the imbalance of subsidies that favors fossil fuels by a factor of 12:1, and accounting for externalities
2) Develop some version of federal renewable portfolio standard (RPS), probably looking at the country by region, and targeting specific adoption of solar, wind, geothermal, hydrokinetics, etc. accordingly
3) Be fair and honest in the allocation of stimulus money and other grants to businesses that actually can make a difference, vs. corporate behemoths that make huge campaign contributions
But let’s be realistic. The world of “what is right” and the world of political reality are galaxies apart. What can I infer from the fact that 20 minutes of analysis came and went in front of me – without a mention of the word “energy” even once? I think it’s pretty clear. If you’re looking for reform here, we have a lot of work in front of us if we’re going to elevate this issue to the position of prominence it needs to be.
Related posts:
Gulf Oil Spill — Sadness and Disgust
| June 16, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Politics |
We all share a deep sadness and disgust over the Gulf oil spill. Of course, the pragmatists among us are less interested in affixing blame than we are in resolving the issue, and ultimately containing and cleaning up the mess. To this end, I have to say that I find a few aspects of this particularly troubling:
We seem to have little interest in reaching out to other countries (Norway, The Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, etc.) that have extensive experience in dealing with crises like this.
We are wrapped tight in red tape from the Army Corps of Engineers and OSHA, hobbling our efforts to stop the disaster.
President Obama: I know you’re trying your best to demonstrate leadership in this terrible moment in human history; we all recognize and appreciate that. But I urge you to understand that this is not business as usual, and take bold steps based on the points above. Bypass the deeply entrenched jingoistic and bureaucratic jungle in the federal government, and get the job done.
Related posts:
Obama Opening up East and Gulf Coasts to Offshore Drilling — by Bill Paul
| April 1, 2010 | Posted by BillPaul under Renewables - Business |
Yesterday’s announcement by Obama that he’s opening up East and Gulf coasts to offshore drilling is very good news, insofar as it will drive increased visibility of the imperatives for renewable energy. Coming on the heels of Obama’s announcement of federal loan guarantees for new nuclear power units, this now sets the stage for a strong administration push for climate change legislation by the fall — not that it will be called that, given how politically-charged that phrase has become. Obama is giving more moderate Republicans, especially SC Sen. Lindsey Graham, what they want and need to support a bill that is expected to include, for the first time ever, some sort of cap on carbon dioxide emissions. Exactly what that cap will look like and which companies and industries it will impact most will be the source of a lot of political haggling in the weeks and months to come.
In short, what everyone thought was dead, at least for this year, now seems very much alive. With healthcare out of the way, climate change legislation (which they’ll probably call energy legislation) should become the new buzz in Washington. On Wall Street, everyone’s going to wonder how this will affect different companies and industries, which is where we come in.
Separately, take a look at this recent Reuters story, specifically in the 3rd paragraph the mention of growing “institutional interest” in alternative energy. This too is good news.
Related posts:
Obama's State of the Union Address and Energy Policy
| January 28, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Politics |
Here’s a post I wrote on Renewable Energy World on president Obama’s State of the Union address the other night.
I like to support Obama for his efforts along a number of lines, especially a progressive energy policy. But to me, all the pandering to the masses in that address served more to confuse people than to enlighten and motivate them.
Related posts:
Obama in Copenhagen
| November 27, 2009 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Politics |
With the Copenhagen summit occupying so much attention on the international stage, I may as well weigh in with my own viewpoint. In brief:
Obama’s commitment to a 17 percent emissions cut from 2005 levels by 2020 is virtually meaningless – even if it actually occurs. It’s a small fraction of what climate scientists have called for in their peer-reviewed studies on global warming. This carefully contrived, last-minute decision to send Obama was made with the proviso that it needed to appear to be a success. The commitment to this meager cut in emissions may be construed as a victory for the White House, but it most certainly is not for the rest of the people who live on this planet.
Having said that, as I’ve written many times before, Obama’s hands are tied. Here’s a man who won a landslide election a year ago, who has no more power than I do to move forward a progressive agenda and make real change. The lobbyists who work for the big energy corporations have an utter stranglehold over him and the entire the legislative process.
If you think I’m exaggerating, look at the healthcare logjam. The vast majority of Americans – and 57% of the physicians who treat them – favor single-payor – and we can’t even get that on the table. Here, the lobbies for the big money in healthcare are so powerful that our representatives are forbidden to even discuss an idea that represents a potential threat.
I honestly wish I could find I way to be optimistic and less cynical about the way in which we govern ourselves — but I can’t.
