Obama's energy plan heavy on clean tech
While many headlines from Sen. Barack Obama's speech on energy policy on Monday focused on tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, a look at the details shows a significant pledge to clean technologies.
The presumed Democratic nominee for president delivered a speech in Lansing, Mich.--an area hit from the declining auto industry--to unveil his New Energy for America plan.
Overall, it calls for investing $150 billion over 10 years to create new clean-energy jobs and to cut U.S. dependence on imported oil from the Middle East and Venezuela.
Short-term measures are geared at lowering gasoline prices by tapping the petroleum reserves. They also include a tax rebate.
The medium and long-term plan calls for policies to promote renewable energy, clean-tech jobs, and energy efficiency. Specifically, the plan's goals are:
Putting 1 million U.S.-built plug-in hybrid cars on the road by 2015 through loan guarantees for retooling automakers and a $7,000 consumer tax credit.
A mandate that 10 percent of electricity come from renewable sources by 2012 and 25 percent by 2025.
Cap and trade-based climate regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050. A portion of the proceeds from auctions would go toward next-generation biofuels.
For many clean-tech entrepreneurs and investors, these are the sorts of policies they are seeking. A recent poll by Earth2Tech found that a great majority of clean-tech venture capitalists favor Obama over McCain.
His rival, presumed Republican nominee Sen. John McCain, also supports alternative energies and plug-in vehicles but political coverage of his energy policies focuses on his support for expanded oil drilling and nuclear power.
For more details on the comparison between McCain and Obama's plans, see this Bloomberg article and this CNN article.
Martin LaMonica is a senior writer for CNET's Green Tech blog. He started at CNET News in 2002, covering IT and Web development. Before that, he was executive editor at IT publication InfoWorld. E-mail Martin.
Let's just see if one Chevy Volt is merrily striding down the highway in 10/11. I'm not holding my breath.
When it is all said and done, Green Tech will be just that, $ Tech in the fat pockets of the greedy Oil sycophants.
I remember the 70's well and we had our chance then to make it right. Didn't happen! Just a show, like now.
Dream on....
Don't drill for oil. That won't lower gas prices (what?1?!?).
Don't use nuclear power. It's only the best form of generating power we have right now that's viable.
Let's make everything green! (whatever that means).
As much as I hate both Obama and McCain, McCain's plan at least makes sense. Obama's plan will not be viable for another 25 years. We need offshore drilling and drilling in Alaska, along with nuclear power to lower gas and energy prices right now.
Jeep Grand Cherokee 2008 (13mpg)
Hummer H2 (10mpg)
Expedition 10mpg
.
# 1. His quaint Obama idea f drawing down the American oil reserves is laughable. By law, the U.S. president can order a full drawdown of the reserve to counter a "severe energy supply interruption." Several conditions allow for partial drawdowns, including "a circumstance ... that constitutes, or is likely to become, a domestic or international energy supply shortage of significant scope or duration." .
As at today, there is NO shortage of oil on the planet. If anything the Saudi?s etc, have increased production, in an attempt to take the sails out of our determination to drill here.
We use ore servers, and there is a war, and we get cutt off from Mid east oil, and we are totally in deep doo doo..
Using our strategic resrvres now , at a time when there is plentiful supply of oil, would be like using one?s 401K to throw a wedding party
# 2. The world consumes to the tune of 86 million barrels a day, with the US consuming 21 million barrels a day. Even if we used all the 700 million barrels of oil that we have in the reserves like {Pelosi/Obama are suggesting} , it will last us just 35 days. Only difference is, we?d have nothing to fall on if there was a break in the supplies of oil reaching this country. If we drew down 70 million barrels like the Democrats are suggesting, we?d use that up in just 3 ½ days.
# 3. Those 1 million hybrid cars by 2015 that Obama is talking about, won?t mean squat, when compared to the over 120 gas using cars that we have on our roads today. And by 2015, the US population would be quite a lot bigger, with even more cars on the road.
# 5. The Geological Survey and Congressional Research Service say it?s 95% likely that there are 15.6 billion barrels of oil beneath ANWR. With today?s prices and technology, 60% of that is recoverable. At $115 a barrel, that represents $1.1 trillion that we would not have to send to Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. It means lower prices and reduced risks of oil spills from tankers carrying foreign crude
And, all that oil at ANWR is in an area in the Arctic one-sixth the size of Dulles Airport that leaves untouched a refuge one-third the size of Britain
#6. The idea that Queen Pelosi is ?saving the planet? by even refusing to allow a vote on offshore drilling in the congress is laughable. We import a staggering 75% of our oil needs.
Where do we get our oil from? Well, from places like Nigeria, where chronic corruption, environmental neglect and resulting unrest and instability lead to pipeline explosions, oil spills and illegal siphoning by the poverty-stricken population - which leads to more spills and explosions. Just this week, two Royal Dutch Shell pipelines had to be shut down because bombings by local militants were causing leaks into the ground
.In the Gulf of Mexico, deep-sea US oil rigs withstood hurricanes Katrina and Rita without a single undersea well suffering a significant spill
So by not drilling here(where we have tough environmental regulations), we actually make the environment much worse off by importing oil from places like Nigeria
# 8, Entrepreneurs like T Boone Pickens ate hard at work already, building Wind Farms, and other alternative sources of energy for our energy needs. We don?t need Obama to come give even congressional largesse to their pals, in order to deploy alternative energy sources. High price of oil has already seen to that.
# 9, Befouls is a crock. The # 1 reason why the prices of corn etc have shot up is because huge quantities of maize, which should be used to feed the hungry, are going into biofuels, and the poor are going even hungrier.
A British government report concluded :
The rush to develop biofuels has played a "significant" role in the dramatic rise in global food prices, which has left 100 million more people without enough to eat.
. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/06/19/eabiofuel119.xml
The ?cure? is worse than the disease.
Plus biofuels are a devastating force for environmental degradation. It has led to the rape of "lungs of the world" rainforests in Indonesia and Brazil as huge tracts have been destroyed to make room for palm oil and sugar plantations
Here in the US, one out of every three ears of corn is stuffed into a gas tank (by way of ethanol), causing not just food shortages abroad and high prices at home, but intensive increases in farming with all of the attendant environmental problems (soil erosion, insecticide pollution, water consumption, etc).
What we need to do is go flat out for ALL options, Alternate energy(wind, solar, waver power etc), nuclear, oil shale, offshore drilling, ANWR, everything.
Also. American are too fat. That's why they need suv. I was surprise in my last trip to Florida to see so many fat people. America, wake up and look in the mirror. I am not saying this to offend but is true. I hope America change, and once again be a leader. I really hope all this new clean tech development finally changes the way we live.
You don't live in the US?
Hey, here is an idea clown face, why don't you concentrate on your own elections(f you even have free and fair elections in whatever country you come from), and continue to starve yourself so you can stay thin, and not be like us "fat Americans". what an idiot!
http://www.cgxenergy.ca/regionalOverview.html
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/09/20/business/CB-FIN-Suriname-Guyana-Border-Dispute.php
http://www.foleyhoag.com/NewsCenter/PressCenter/2007/09/20/Foley-Hoag-helps-Republic-of-Guyana.aspx
http://www.cgxenergy.ca/regionalOverview.html
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/09/20/business/CB-FIN-Suriname-Guyana-Border-Dispute.php
http://www.foleyhoag.com/NewsCenter/PressCenter/2007/09/20/Foley-Hoag-helps-Republic-of-Guyana.aspx
Pop quiz: From what country do we import most of our oil? Canada!
Obama on nuclear power- No. Obama on drilling- No.
What exactly is his plan again? Oh, yeah.....inflate your tires.
Judging by the crowds who go to see Obama, PT Barnum was indeed correct.
A few facts:
- The US currently uses 20.7 million barrels/day and we produce 8.3 million of that. New drilling would add only another 2-4 million, meaning we are still deficient 40% of our daily. Nearly 35% of our imported oil comes from Mexico and Canada (not OPEC).
- The OFFSHORE reserves are estimated to provide only 18 months of oil based on our current consumption rates... And it'll take us 10 years to get to it. (Worth the effort? I think not.)
- The major development areas would be the Gulf Coast and the Atlantic... where Hurricanes Katrina & Rita ripped up 124 platforms and spilled 741,400 gallons of oil. Consider climate change and the projected increase in hurricanes for this region. Duh.
- California's ocean economy (tourism, fisheries, etc.) brings in $73 BILLION to the FEDERAL economy and $14 BILLION directly to the state. In Florida, the state benefited from $37.2 BILLION. And we want to risk destroying this why???
PLEASE look at the facts, use some logic and critical thinking skills, develop your science & economic literacy. The desire to drill is entirely based upon desperate emotions and spoon-fed propaganda; the general public will not benefit from this - only the fat cats in Texas will. Get a clue.
-
by Eco_interpreter
August 18, 2008 11:32 AM PDT
- Wow, the commentary here is absolutely absurd! Do all of you really believe that proliferation of our addiction to oil is an answer? C'mon... Think about it - it would take at least 10 years for the infrastructure to be put in place for new offshore drilling, which translates to ZERO relief at the gas pump now AND an obligation to use that new infrastructure from thereon. If we're going to invest in infrastructure, shouldn't we do it in a way that promises longevity? Put the effort into sustainable and environmentally aware technologies and it will last far longer than the oil. For the immediate, we can CHANGE our personal energy consumption habits and experience IMMEDIATE relief. And why not put all of those folks in Detroit who've lost jobs onto this NEW technology, where their skills will be applicable and their economic status guaranteed.
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 24 Comments >>A few facts:
- The US currently uses 20.7 million barrels/day and we produce 8.3 million of that. New drilling would add only another 2-4 million, meaning we are still deficient 40% of our daily. Nearly 35% of our imported oil comes from Mexico and Canada (not OPEC).
- The OFFSHORE reserves are estimated to provide only 18 months of oil based on our current consumption rates... And it'll take us 10 years to get to it. (Worth the effort? I think not.)
- The major development areas would be the Gulf Coast and the Atlantic... where Hurricanes Katrina & Rita ripped up 124 platforms and spilled 741,400 gallons of oil. Consider climate change and the projected increase in hurricanes for this region. Duh.
- California's ocean economy (tourism, fisheries, etc.) brings in $73 BILLION to the FEDERAL economy and $14 BILLION directly to the state. In Florida, the state benefited from $37.2 BILLION. And we want to risk destroying this why???
PLEASE look at the facts, use some logic and critical thinking skills, develop your science & economic literacy. The desire to drill is entirely based upon desperate emotions and spoon-fed propaganda; the general public will not benefit from this - only the fat cats in Texas will. Get a clue.