Saturday, March 12th, 2011
JOHN M. BRODER, - The New York Times
Stephan: It is almost impossible to overemphasize the stupidity of the Republican position. In another 10 years people will be screaming, 'why didn't we do something?' But, by then, it will be far too late. We are all -- Republicans, Democrats, Independents -- going to live with the benighted attitudes this vote represents. This is not a partisan comment. I would say the same thing if the Democrats had voted in that way. The facts are clear, ideology is just noise.
WASHINGTON – A House subcommittee voted on Thursday to strip the Environmental Protection Agency of its power to regulate greenhouse gases, chipping away at a central pillar of the Obama administration’s evolving climate and energy strategy.
The sharply partisan vote was preordained by the Republican takeover of the House. Republicans and their industry allies accuse the administration of levying taxes on traditional energy sources through costly environmental regulations, threatening the economic recovery and driving jobs overseas.
Many Republicans also argue that global warming is an unproven theory and that no action is needed to combat it, and they are backed by lobbies representing manufacturers; small businesses; agriculture; and the chemical, coal and oil industries; all of which have a big financial stake in hamstringing the E.P.A.
A parallel bill has been introduced in the Senate, although passage remains uncertain. President Obama has vowed to veto such legislation, which would undercut his administration’s policy of encouraging clean energy innovation with billions of dollars in support and rules that make it more costly for industry to keep spewing carbon dioxide.
Some coal state and oilpatch Democrats in both chambers also support the legislation, so it is not certain that the president’s allies could prevent a veto […]
No Comments
Saturday, March 12th, 2011
TERESA COTSIRILOS, - Salon
Stephan: We should have done this years ago.
In an effort to cut costs, the Government Accountability Office recently suggested that the federal government eliminate the one dollar bill. According to a report released last week, using a dollar coin instead could save up to $5.5 billion over the next 30 years. Here’s the argument in favor of the switch:
* Coins are cheaper and more durable: Due to rising cotton prices, the dollar bill is now literally worth less than the paper it’s printed on. Dollar coins cost considerably less to produce and last much longer. Dollar notes only last two to three years; dollar coins can last up to 30 years or more.
* All the cool people are doing it: The European Union, Canada, and Britain have already made the switch, and now use mostly coin money. Their transitions took a coordinated government effort, but were also relatively painless. And given how easily Americans have adapted credit cards, online bill payments, and other forms of ‘digital money,’ the switch might not be too jarring.
* Coins are more eco-friendly: Retiring greenbacks could actually make the U.S. economy more green. Because of the paper […]
No Comments
, - The Wall Street Journal
Stephan: We just fall further and further behind in technologies we initiated, and this has enormous consequences for consumers. My analysis of the energy trends led me to predict two years ago that we would have $4 a gallon gas by this summer. The unrest in the Middle East has sped up that trend; I now think $5 a gallon fuel may occur in some parts of the U.S. In light of that this report about hybrids becomes even more meaningful.
HOUSTON — The U.S. lags far behind Asian countries in developing lithium ion battery technology for hybrid electric cars, forcing auto makers to depend on overseas technology and manufacturing as they try to sell more of the alternative fuel vehicles.
Every major U.S. automaker will have a hybrid vehicle model available on the market by 2012. But even as crude oil prices spike past $100 a barrel, the high cost of lithium batteries in the U.S. will force companies like General Motors (GM) and Ford Motors (F) to maintain a higher price, undercutting competitiveness.
Hybrid vehicles use engines powered by electricity and gasoline to achieve higher fuel efficiency. The vehicles could drastically cut gasoline demand in the U.S. if they win widespread popularity, but the high cost of batteries–the most expensive part of a hybrid vehicle–keep their sales price high.
But GM, Ford and other U.S. auto manufacturers are at a disadvantage in growing their hybrid sales because they depend on importing batteries or licensing technology from China, Japan and other Asian countries that dominate lithium ion battery technology and production, said Menahem Anderman, president of research firm Advance Automotive Batteries.
‘If there is a battery race, the U.S. is number four, behind […]
No Comments
TONY BARBOZA, - The Los Angeles Times
Stephan: Reality sets in at the local level, whatever the Deniers may proclaim.
Cities along California’s coastline that for years have dismissed reports of climate change or lagged in preparing for rising sea levels are now making plans to fortify their beaches, harbors and waterfronts.
Communities up and down the coast have begun drafting plans to build up wetlands as buffers against rising tides, to construct levees and seawalls to keep the waters at bay or to retreat from the shoreline by moving structures inland.
Among them is Newport Beach, a politically conservative city where a council member once professed to not believe in global warming. Now, the wealthy beach city is considered to be on the forefront of preparing for climate change.
Though some in Newport Beach remain skeptical that global warming caused by humans is elevating sea levels, city planners are looking at raising seawalls by a foot or more to hold back the ocean. New homes along the city’s harbor are being built on foundations several feet higher than their predecessors as a precaution against flooding.
‘I feel a real sense of urgency to begin planning for this right now,’ Mayor Michael Henn said. ‘To me it’s irrelevant what the causes of global warming are. What we are dealing with is the reality […]
No Comments
Stephan: Long time SR readers know I have been writing about the deeply flawed decision to base American ethanol on corn for almost a decade. Finally it is beginning to dawn on people just how bad this decision really is.
SYDNEY — Spectators at February’s Daytona 500 in Florida were handed green flags to wave in celebration of the news that the race’s stock cars now use gasoline with 15 percent corn-based ethanol1. It was the start of a seasonlong television marketing campaign to sell the merits of biofuel to Americans.
On the surface, the self-proclaimed ‘greening of NASCAR’ is merely a transparent (and, one suspects, ill-fated) exercise in ‘greenwashing2’ for the sport. But the partnership between a beloved American pastime and the biofuel lobby also marks the latest attempt to sway public opinion in favor of a truly irresponsible policy3.
The United States spends about $6 billion a year on federal support for ethanol production through tax credits, tariffs, and other programs. Thanks to this financial assistance, one-sixth of the world’s corn supply is burned in American cars. That is enough corn to feed 350 million people for an entire year.
Government support of rapid growth in biofuel production has contributed to disarray in food production. Indeed, as a result of official policy in the United States and Europe, including aggressive production targets, biofuel consumed more than 6.5 percent of global grain output and 8 percent of the world’s vegetable oil in […]
No Comments
