Home › Blog › Page 1583

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Fossil Fuels

During a slow period at the Electric Drive Transportation Association conference this afternoon, I walked a couple of miles across town to interview spokespeople for the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) – Senior Attorneys Jay Pendergrass and Lisa Goldman.  We talked largely about the subsidies that our US federal government provides to energy companies, insofar as ELI recently completed a comprehensive, independent study on the subject.  “This is by far the most widely distributed report we’ve ever created,” Jay told me.  “It’s been downloaded over 18,000 times.”

ELI painstakingly pulled together information on every form of expenditures or forbearance (e.g., a tax break) that is given to fossil fuels, carbon capture and sequestration, corn ethanol, and what it calls “traditional renewables” like solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal.

The results are in the report linked above: fossil fuels get about $5.50 for every $1 going to renewables.

My main question, of course, is why our government is doing this.  The role of subsidies is to promote things that are in the public interest.  All the $70.2 billion that is going to traditional fossil fuels is accomplishing is creating “a transfer of wealth from the public to the shareholders of oil, coal, and gas companies,” as Jay explained.  Here’s $70 billion that could (should??) be going to promote things that actually are in the public interest: an end to our addiction to oil, to our empowering our enemies, to our poisoning our planet and everything living on it.

Interesting discussion, to be sure.

Now I’m off to the welcome party.  I’ll try to turn down my cynicism and enjoy myself.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Electric Vehicles

I just had a meeting with Jeff Siegel of GreenChipStocks at the Electric Drive Transportation Association conference.  When we were finished talking business, we compared notes on the event.

While it’s good to see all this happening, my personal belief is that politics, being, as it is, about consensus, tends to make for some really boring presentations. This is sad, because in truth, the migration to EVs (and renewables) is chock full of interesting and important controversy. When one considers the competition for establishing standards, the fights for subsidies and incentives, and so forth, there is actually very little agreement.

All you’re left with is that “EVs are good,” and that “the details will emerge over time.” I’m not sure we need a conference to present that.

I write this from Union Station, waiting for my train to Philadelphia.  Staying at Mom’s; driving to NYC in the AM.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Politics

Here’s a slight digression from our normal chat: the pending legislation that would essentially end the use of non-drug remedies as cures for diseases. Referred to by opponents as “criminalizing nature,” the laws will force Europe’s population to obtain a doctor’s prescription and rely on pharmaceuticals instead of using natural methods of healing found in herbal remedies and nutritional supplements. According to insiders, the US isn’t far behind.

This, of course, is just one example of the power of the pharmaceutical industry and its vast lobby. By eliminating natural alternative healing methods, it has, in effect, eliminated it only competition.

As outrageous as it is, I bring it up to point out a larger issue: the enormous power generally granted corporations. Healthcare is only one of dozens of areas in which the profits made by corporations are poured back into affecting our legal system, driving monopolistic positions and even greater profitability. The losers? You and me.

Until we have a constitutional amendment overturning the Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which allows corporations the right of “free speech” (like people have), and the license to spend without limit to influence our elections, we can kiss our democracy goodbye.

I urge you to check out MoveToAmend.org.

　

　

Tagged with: ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Electric Vehicles

This week I’m taking a break from the ideal Southern California weather, and traveling on one of my regular East Coast tours.  Today, I’m in Washington DC for the Electric Drive Transportation Association’s annual conference, where one of the day’s events was a press conference in which a few dozen of the currently- and soon-to-be-available EVs were displayed outside the Department of Energy Building.  Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and a few others spoke to an enthusiastic audience.  I was in the front row. 

Markey is obviously very bright, and has the quick wit one expects of a Congressman who thinks of himself as progressive.  “Many people have a theological belief in our abundance of oil.  The problem is that oil isn’t about THEology; it’s about GEology.  We have less than 2% of the world’s oil, while consuming about 25% of it.”

He also reminded us of the trip that George W. Bush and Condoleezza Rice made to Saudi Arabia a few years ago, the purpose of which was to make a request for an increase in oil production, thus a reduction in price on the world markets.  In exchange for the Saudis’ agreement to consider the idea, we agreed to sell them nuclear energy generation equipment (as if they need it, sitting on all that oil, with their own gasoline at 9 cents a gallon). 

“This was one of the low points in US history,” Markey told us, looking at his feet solemnly. “When Kennedy was president, he told Khrushchev, ‘We will use technology to dominate you in the Space Race.’ Why couldn’t Bush have done something like that?  Why can’t we simply commit to innovating and developing technology that will establish US leadership in the field of energy?  So much of this is right here, in our hands right now.  The electric vehicles you see here today are a lethal weapon in our fight to end our oil addiction.”

Something to think about.

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Electric Vehicles

Just arrived at my hotel at 12th and K.  It’s a bit past 2 AM EDT, and in a few hours it will be time to head out for the breakfast “networking” session prior to the start of the conference.   I’m psyched. Should be a good couple of days. 

Tagged with: ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Electric Vehicles

This year’s Electric Drive Transportation Association conference in Washington DC is shaping up to be a good one. Great agenda, lots of sponsors, and tons of high-level exhibitors. I’ll be there for two days, for a host of different reasons – one of which is the sheer joy of seeing all this moving forward.  Steven Chu’s the keynote speaker, and I always enjoy listening to him, as well. 

My hat’s off to the EDTA and its president Brian Wynne (whom I interviewed in Renewable Energy – Facts and Fantasies); they’ve done terrific work in pulling together causes that have disparate agendas, and moving the industry along as a cohesive unit.

I encourage anyone in town wishing to say hello to let me know.

Tagged with: , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Sustainability

I’m headed back East on Monday for meetings in Washington DC and NYC this week; I’ll try to write from the road. Among my stops is the Environmental Law Institute, where spokesperson Jay Predergrass has generously agreed to let me interview him for my next book.

From our initial conversations, these people sound extremely sharp and dedicated. I’ll be interested to learn things like how they differ in mission and function from the NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council), whom I interviewed for Renewable Energy – Facts and Fantasies. Apparently, both use the legal process as their core tool to keep environmental causes moving forward, or, to say it differently, from allowing unbridled industrialization from running roughshod over the environment.

 

Tagged with: , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Electric Vehicles

I just came across this article on Chrysler’s plan to offer a natural gas-based car in 2017. 

I know this sounds like a strange reaction, but personally, this cheeses me off.  I see it is an attempt to confuse and distract the consumer from alternate fuel vehicles, so Big Auto can sell more internal combusion engines and Big Oil can pump more gasoline for a few more years while the market scratches its head and tries to sort this out. 

Of course, Chrysler is free to choose whatever product marketing strategy it cares to.  But the net of this decision will be only two things:

a) An ultimate failure for Chrysler (and the tax-payers who bailed them out after their last many decades of failure).  There is no way in the universe that CNG (even though it’s cheap now) will become a viable fuel for the US long-term.  How much more will they need from us to cover this fiasco?  

and

b) A short-term confusion and turn-off for the consumer, as it will serve to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the evolution to EVs.

As always, not everyone sees it the way I do.  I just spoke with Plug-in America co-founder and heavy-duty EV advocate Paul Scott.  Paul welcomes Chrysler’s idea, and (though he didn’t say it) clearly thought I was half crazy for my reaction to the news. 

But hey — it’s a difference of opinion that makes horseraces. 

 

Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Politics

2GreenEnergy Associate Bruce Allen spends a great deal of time in Washington D.C., advising Congressmen on energy policy. Recently, when he told me his clients included people “at the highest levels of government,” I asked the natural question: “Oh really – who would that be?” At the time, Bruce demurred. “Sorry, Craig, but I can’t tell you right this minute.”

Well, as suggested here, it’s House Speaker John Boehner. Keep up the good work, Bruce. I can’t think of a better representative of a good, common sense approach to an energy policy built around sustainability.  I can only hope the client is receptive to your ideas.

Photobucket

Tagged with: , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Electric Vehicles

In yesterday’s webinar on electric vehicles (EVs) I used the same metaphor that the author of this article did: no car buyer wants to invest in the auto equivalent of the next Betamax (a standard for videotapes that became obsolete a few decades ago).

Sure, we all face the reality that perhaps EVs (or any of the dozens of other solutions we’re trying to deploy to avert imminent real-world disasters) will be replaced by newer technology. But the metaphor only goes so far.

The world did not become a better place in which to live when VHS somehow beat out Betamax as the video standard. Here, we’re talking about the health and safety of everyone living on Earth – as our dependence on oil deepens and we slip ever further into the associated issues: national security, lung disease, and environmental damage.

It’s true that the consumer doesn’t want to risk buying a Betamax. And I freely confess that very few consumers will make sacrifices for the larger good. But fortunately, we have gas prices rising, and an ever-increasing resentment of the oil companies – along with, of course, a few lonely folks who want to do the right thing.

Tagged with: , , , ,