Friday, June 26, 2009

Cap and trade

In a June 26th column in the Houston Chronicle, Fred Krupp, president of the Environmental Defense Fund and Andrew M. Liveris, CEO and Chairman of the Board of the Dow Chemical Company lay out the benefits of such a policy.

Cap-and-trade is a free market way of ensuring environmentally and economically sound ways of reducing our dependence on carbon-emitting fuels while allowing companies to continue their business almost as usual. Companies are given carbon credits.

The column explains it thus:

"Companies that are under their emission targets can sell their allowances on a new carbon market. Companies that cannot meet their targets can buy extra allowances from the same carbon market. Cap-and-trade uses the efficiency of the marketplace to drive innovation, creating new carbon-reducing technologies at the lowest possible cost."

When acid rain became a true menace in the '80s, the Clean Air Act was instituted and "the cap-and-trade approach reduced emissions faster, and more cheaply, than anyone predicted. Under cap and trade, government doesn’t pick winners and losers — private markets do that job."

The tag team columnists go on to say, "This is how it should be."

For those who argue that this could be crippling to the economy, especially in its current state, the pair clarify:

"Opponents claim that this bill will result in higher energy costs. They are confusing price with cost. Although this legislation will lead to modestly higher energy prices, this, in turn, will lead to greater energy efficiency and new, cleaner energy technologies. This will, in all likelihood, result in lower overall energy costs. A true win, win, win — lower energy costs, greater energy security and fewer carbon emissions!"

Not only that, but the policy has the potential of creating new jobs in the lagging manufacturing industry.

"A single wind turbine, for example, contains 250 tons of steel and 8,000 parts, from ball bearings and electronic controls to gearboxes. Jobs manufacturing those parts can be created right here in America, especially in our manufacturing heartland, the Midwest. Ohio has lost more than 213,000 manufacturing jobs since 2000. For Michigan, the figure is almost 497,000 jobs lost. One way to jump-start our economy is with a cap-and-trade bill."

Another win, making it a win, win, win, WIN situation.

And keep in mind, one of the co-authors is the head of Dow Chemical, a company not exactly renowned for its environmental and social responsibility.

Wake up, America!


Climate Change

IS a reality. The only ones denying it are the politicians with their hands in the petroleum pocket and their pundits. The Bush administration is no longer in power and therefore not bullying scientists anymore but idiots like Rush Limbaugh are still in denial.

Today he stated that average temperatures have decreased over the last seven years. This is in direct conflict with scientific findings. Not only is that just plain dumb, it's tragically irresponsible. Take some more oxycontin and crawl in a hole, jackass.


Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Thomas Friedman has it right on (almost)

In his June 24th column, three time Pulitzer winner Thomas Friedman of the New York Times suggests that the "Green Revolution" in Iran could be best supported by a Green Revolution in the western world, particularly the US.

His column, titled The Green Revolution(s), states simply and directly that the student- and reformer-led revolution in the divided country would have the best support from the west if we would only lessen our dependence on foreign oil.

Despite our protestations of the treatment of his people, Jews, foreigners and anyone else not falling into the conservative Islamic line, the theologically backed Ahmadinejad's arrogant anti-western stance is only fueled by the fact that we need Iranian oil more than the Iranians need anything from us.

He proposes a $1 "Freedom Tax" on gasoline (with "rebates for the poor and elderly") that would have a three-fold effect:

"It would stimulate more investment in renewable energy now; it would stimulate more consumer demand for the energy-efficient vehicles that the reborn General Motors and Chrysler are supposed to make; and, it would reduce our oil imports in a way that would surely affect the global price and weaken every petro-dictator," he writes.

This is all well and good but there is one Leviathan-sized caveat that I can see: the current economy.

If Obama - who, in my humble opinion is doing the best he can with the huge pile of dinosaur dung that the Bush administration left him - even so much as proposed such a tax, the lynch mobs in front of the White House would not be far behind.

Some auto manufacturers are offering incentives and deals on hybrids and fuel effiecient vehicles (as well as not so efficient) and at this point, that's really all they can do.

While I agree with Friedman's assessment that reducing our dependency on foreign oil would pull the rug out from under said "petro-dictators", such a proposed tax is utterly unfeasible in this beleaguered economy.

Not everyone makes the kind of money a prize-winning NYT columnist pulls down.

It's like I've always said:

Idealism is great but usually falls only within the demesne of the weak and the rich. Those living paycheck to paycheck, the un- and underemployed simply cannot afford such lofty Utopian goals. Not now. But they (we as I'm among the jobless currently) CAN do something: use public transportation, walk to the corner store, use our bikes for short trips and do anything else to reduce our carbon footprint.

That said, Ahmadinejad is the truly evil one and, to quote Cpl. Maxwell Klinger of M*A*S*H, may the fleas of a thousand camels nest in his armpits.

And may the ghost of Neda Agha-Soltan haunt him in both this life and the next.


Monday, June 22, 2009

Houston recycling...

Is practically non-existent as far as the municipality goes. There are plenty of places to take recyclable materials (most schools have dumpster-sized paper recycling bins and private establishments exist) but there is no curbside service.

According to an article last year in the New York Times, Houston ranks last among the nation's largest cities in recycling, reprocessing only 2.6% of waste. San Francisco and New York (New York!) recycle 69 and 34 percent respectively.

While certain sections of Houston have been provided with bins, most have not and the outlying suburbs (where I currently reside) don't even seem to know what recycling is.

Houston has long been considered the "world's energy capital" (let not the ghost of Enron malinger too long in our memories) yet creates an abominable amount of waste. This is a city of culture - of museums, music, theatre and big business - yet still has the mentality of an over-consuming America of the '50s.

C'mon, people now!!!

Saturday, June 20, 2009

I'm back

Things have not been going well but I'm in a better place and getting my $h1+ together. Now I'm trying to decide whether I want a hybrid or a clean diesel car. Leaning toward a clean diesel VW. CDVW, yeah.

Monday, January 12, 2009

Gas prices on the rise. Again.

The price of gas is going up again.

Does this mean that the sale of gas-guzzlers will go down? Time will tell, but in the meantime, an aeronautic giant is testing ways to avoid petroleum based fuel.

The company conducted a test flight last week. A Boeing 737 flew two hours over Houston on a mixture of kerosene and algae. Pretty cool.

Monday, January 5, 2009

Dwindling gas prices = higher truck and SUV sales

Typical.

When gas was over $4 a gallon just a year ago, hybrids and other alternate/fuel efficient vehicles were all the rage. Everyone wanted them.

Now that gas has hit a less financially crippling price, many of the former prospective hybrid buyers are going back to big gas guzzlers. Very few care about the environment more than their pocket books.