More

Obama: Clean Energy Shift Will Boost Jobs, Decrease Oil Dependence

Obama Energy

DARLENE SUPERVILLE   04/ 2/11 09:03 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama says shifting the U.S. away from imported oil and toward cleaner forms of energy will add momentum to a trend that has led to 1.8 million new jobs in the past 13 months.

Obama used his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday to promote his ideas for bringing down gasoline prices by decreasing U.S. dependence on foreign oil. A blueprint he outlined in a recent speech calls for increasing domestic oil exploration and production, making cars and trucks more energy efficient and building vehicles that run on alternative fuels or electricity.

Noting that the U.S. doesn't have enough oil reserves to meet its needs, he set a goal of reducing imports by one-third by 2025.

"By doing so, we're going to make our economy less vulnerable to wild swings in oil prices," Obama said. "We're going to use cleaner sources of energy that don't imperil our climate. And we're going to spark new products and businesses all over the country by tapping America's greatest renewable resource: our ingenuity."

The address was Obama's third in recent days on the issue. On Wednesday, he travels to the Philadelphia area to visit an arm of the Spanish company Gamesa, maker of giant turbines that generate electricity from wind.

Oil prices have climbed because of increasing demand in China and instability in some oil-producing countries in the Middle East. That, in turn, has pushed U.S. gasoline prices to new highs. The national average for a gallon of gas hit $3.619 on Friday, the highest price ever for this time of year, according to AAA and other sources. Prices have climbed 23.2 cents in the past month and more than 81 cents in the past year.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell agreed with Obama on encouraging more domestic energy production. But he accused the administration of stifling that industry's growth by cancelling drilling leases, halting drilling off the Gulf Coast after last summer's oil spill and increasing permit fees.

"As a result, thousands of U.S. workers have lost their jobs, as companies have been forced to move their operations overseas. That must end," the Kentucky Republican said. "We must do more to find energy here at home, and the jobs that go with it."

Obama said that sparking new products and businesses during a transition away from imported oil will help create jobs. The government reported Friday that 230,000 private sector jobs were created in March, bringing the total number created in the past 13 months to 1.8 million. The national unemployment rate also dipped to a two-year low of 8.8 percent last month.

"That's a good sign," Obama said. He recorded the address at a UPS shipping facility in suburban Maryland, where he examined all-electric and hybrid vehicles used by AT&T, Verizon, PepsiCo and other companies.

"But we have to keep up the momentum, and transitioning to a clean energy economy will help us do that," Obama said.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, focused his party's weekly message on steps he said the government must take to encourage small businesses to create jobs. Among those steps are continuing to cut spending, blocking tax increases, reducing the bureaucracy and eliminating regulations. Boehner once owned a small plastics and packaging business in Ohio.

Boehner said Congress also needs to pass a bill funding the government through Sept. 30, when the budget year ends, and avoid a shutdown. The government's authority to spend money expires next Friday.

"Washington's inability to get spending under control is creating uncertainty for our job creators," Boehner said. "It's discouraging investment in small businesses and eroding confidence in our economy. To put it simply, the spending binge in Washington is holding our country back and keeping our economy from creating jobs."

___

Online:

White House: http://www.whitehouse.gov

Republicans: http://www.gop.com

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama says shifting the U.S. away from imported oil and toward cleaner forms of energy will add momentum to a trend that has led to 1.8 million new jobs in the past...
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama says shifting the U.S. away from imported oil and toward cleaner forms of energy will add momentum to a trend that has led to 1.8 million new jobs in the past...
Filed by Joanna Zelman  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 991
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (19 total)
  1 of 2  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
anniegirl9 09:58 PM on 04/02/2011
 Germany is dedicating a good chunk of its national budget to getting off oil and nuclear.  What’s funny, and by funny I mean sad, is that they are bemoaning what they can do as such a small country land wise.  I read one article where an energy expert in Germany said that if only they had the land area that the US had, they could transition to wind, solar, and geothermal much  Read More...
photo
rodjard
I Update my brain frequently
01:27 PM on 04/17/2011
WHY IS THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA NOT TALKIING ABOUT THIS?
"The amount of power that could be produced from ocean currents almost defies comprehension. The currents flowing through San Francisco's Golden Gate alone, for instance, could produce an estimated 2 gigawatts per day -- more than twice what the city needs at times of peak demand. The global potential is some 3,000 gigawatts, according to the United Kingdom's Department of Trade and Industry. The agency estimates that 3 percent of that total, or 90 gigawatts, is economically recoverable using current technologies.
photo
rodjard
I Update my brain frequently
01:03 PM on 04/17/2011
There is a lot of complainin­g here with not enough pointing out of and
researchin­g solutions to the problems.
If everyone would research the present solutions of under Water Mill
energy in the St Lawrence seaway and other rivers, wave energy,
wind and solar; these comments would be a more intelligen­t
conversati­on. Too much complainin­g, not enough commentiin­g.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:33 AM on 04/08/2011
If you really want to know where energy is headed, read some Richard Heinberg.
Here's an excellent start: http://www.postcarbon.org/report/44377-searching-for-a-miracle
01:23 PM on 04/06/2011
Ladies and gentlemen, a reality check - from one of your own - John Muir Trust - OUCH!
http://www.jmt.org/news.asp?s=2&nid=JMT-N10561

We better plan to pave the world with wind turbines since the payback is like - FOREVER!
03:54 PM on 04/06/2011
Ha! I just came in here to post that. Thank you.
absolument
Debate the policy. But first, LEARN the science.
03:22 AM on 04/13/2011
Too bad for SCOTLAND, but in the United States we have significantly more land to spread out our wind farms, and 'the wind is always blowing somewhere' in more than enough places in the United States for wind to be a perfectly viable option here.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:37 AM on 04/05/2011
How about we cut our defense spending in half, and spend it on sustainable energy R & D, building infrastructure, and education and training....

Can you just imagine the impact this would have on the economy?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Matthew Christopher
07:25 AM on 04/05/2011
Windmills and solar panels can't make my car drive 300 miles at once at 80mph. When they can let me know.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:36 AM on 04/08/2011
Or when you lose your job because the economy cratered because every cent of the gas price means about $1 billion taken out of the consumers' pockets.
absolument
Debate the policy. But first, LEARN the science.
02:33 AM on 04/13/2011
And the car that I own only needs to get me around town. Then I can rent a gas-burner for road trips. Relying on gas is just a bad habit. It can be broken.
01:56 PM on 04/04/2011
It is interesting to me that one of the main consultants for our alternative energy policy has been Jeff Immelt, CEO of GE. The large corporations are putting their claws into our alternative energy future so they can manipulate the price, the same way they do with oil now. Sage brush is 3 times more efficient than corn at producing ethanol and requires no water or fertilizer to grow yet because there is no commodity market for sagebrush it is not promoted for use as a fuel. Monsanto owns most of the patents for corn seeds and fertilizer sold in our Country and it is one of the most controlled commodities on the planet. If we started burning a 30% mix of ethanol in our fuel the price of oil would drop overnight.
It has been proven that a more local grass roots approach to fuel, food and economic issues is better for communities than large corporate controlled solutions. We could grow and distribute enough low impact fuel in our communities to get us off foreign oil in 5 years, not the 25 years that President Obama is lying to us about, now.
02:02 PM on 04/04/2011
Meant to attach this link http://alcoholcanbeagas.com/
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:32 AM on 04/04/2011
One thing I am sure of.....if promoting alternative energy will increase jobs but decrease the profits of Big Oil and Big Coal, the Republicans will do everything in their power to prevent it from happening. They might as well change their name to Exxon.
01:29 PM on 04/06/2011
NO, they die of their own accord - economics trump feelings and emotions - take it from John Muir Trust in their scathing review of the UK wind generation system.
http://www.jmt.org/news.asp?s=2&nid=JMT-N10561

No amount of dreaming will replace facts.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:44 AM on 04/08/2011
So just because the Scots didn't get their balancing right wind is suddenly bad?
Cost of new power ($/kW, without fuel costs), according to Richard Heinberg:
Coal 1900-5800
Natural gas 500-1500
Nuclear 4500-7500
Wind 1300-2500
Solar PV 3900-9000
Geothermal 2600-3500
Solar thermal 3000-5000
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:09 AM on 04/04/2011
What President Obama should have said regarding energy policy
http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2011-04-01/what-president-obama-should-have-said-regarding-energy-policy
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PotomacOracle
The Solution:debt free credit clearing systems
02:36 AM on 04/04/2011
Ah crappoollaa I forgot the link. ?So sory/

http://www.nrdc.org/onearth/05spr/gorlov1.asp
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PotomacOracle
The Solution:debt free credit clearing systems
02:34 AM on 04/04/2011
Here's a detailed and objective assessment of the Gorlov Helical Turbine. Hydropower at its best.
And why the Fossil Fuel Freaks don't want it to proliferate.
photo
pewty
Psych RN, & wisenheimer
04:02 AM on 04/04/2011
nice ...ty... cant see why usa is all over this.....
04:38 AM on 04/04/2011
Vertical turbines are inefficient and prone to material failure due to vibrations and high tensile forces.
Nice try though.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PotomacOracle
The Solution:debt free credit clearing systems
11:38 AM on 04/05/2011
Please site your source regarding the inefficiency of the GHT.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PotomacOracle
The Solution:debt free credit clearing systems
02:12 AM on 04/04/2011
Did you know that one square mile of the Gulf Stream five miles off shore east of Jacksonville, FL can supply enought eletrical energy to power the entire world?

Dr. Alexander Gorlov, an American engineered invented what is now called the Gorlov Helical Turbine. It's been alleged that the fossil fuel folks talked" to the company licensed to market and produce the Gorlov Turbine and it never quiet got to the production stage. there successful trials in 2001 & 2002. Even operational projects in the Amazon.

It went the way of the Electric Car GM destroyed.

Google Gorlov Helical Turbine and visit the site below to get a grasp on why we don't have viable, inexpensive, carbon rducing, renewable technologies which wean us from Fossil Fuel Freaks.

http://www.gcktechnology.com/GCK/pg2.html
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Matthew Christopher
07:27 AM on 04/05/2011
Did you know the water depth in the gulf stream is something like 4000 feet in that area? Good luck placing a water turbine in that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PotomacOracle
The Solution:debt free credit clearing systems
12:16 PM on 04/05/2011
Well then lets just do it where the flow rate is at least 1m/sec at a depth of at least 3 meters. Problem solved. Let's do it.
photo
Rasebiho
You're getting tea. Do you want sugar or lemon?
11:00 PM on 04/03/2011
This program is going to be worse than CFL's. Once again the government has chosen a technical solution based on how it plays in the press rather than choosing a good solution.

Wind and solar just don't work that well yet. They are worth R&D investment, but throwing money at them to to force them into production is going to be a major failure. Of course it's the government so it won't be talked about as a failure. They'll just throw more money at them to cover up the failure.

We were told we would have flat panel TV's soon since the 1950's, and they didn't come. Then the technology came together and all of a sudden they were everywhere. If something is a good idea and it works then it doesn't need major subsidies to make it happen.

The current electrical grid wastes a lot of electricity as heat between the power plant and your house. It's like a lot of toaster wires running around the country. The government could take a fraction of what they will spend on wind and solar to encourage power companies to upgrade their grids. It would save more electricity than the "green" plan will generate and there wouldn't be any doubt about whether it would show benefits immediately.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PotomacOracle
The Solution:debt free credit clearing systems
01:45 AM on 04/04/2011
You commented, "If something is a good idea and it works then it doesn't need major subsidies to make it happen.".

I know this needs to be updated but how long must these major subsidies continue if we presume that these legacy systems ($1 billion for coal and nuclear) work?

EIA reports that in 1999 the DOE budget for energy programs was $2.02 billion, of which $49 million was allocated to oil-related research. This apparent oil subsidy is 2.4 percent of the total
R&D budget for energy programs.

The largest share of the DOE’s energy budget was used for electricity-related technologies, such as coal ($404 million), nuclear ($640 million), and renewable energy and energy conservation ($327 million).
photo
Rasebiho
You're getting tea. Do you want sugar or lemon?
09:55 AM on 04/04/2011
They all sound like spending cut candidates to me. There might be something in there that is a real R&D candidate, but most of them can probably go.

But I do think there is a difference between the oil and coal industry trying to get the government to pay for their R&D and wind and solar trying to get the government to pay enough of their operating costs to make them competitive.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Matthew Christopher
07:29 AM on 04/05/2011
R&D is different from making a technology viable; the research being funded by the DOE is no different than research for new drugs or whatever other research the government supports. You didn't quote numbers for how much the DOE spends for wind/solar/water/geothermal, etc research each year. I bet it is substantial.
10:21 PM on 04/03/2011
It will do nothing of the sort. It won't help us eliminate any coal plants either. It's rarely windy enough to turn wind farms. ERCOT says just 8% of the time. Solar is only available 21% of the time after you account for things like night and clouds. Neither technology will ever be viable for any sort of production on earth.

http://www.rationalpublicradio.com/the-green-jobs-fantasy.html
photo
BlueGreen55
Capitalism w/o Morals is like Faith w/o Works-dead
11:43 PM on 04/06/2011
and Thus Spoke Zarathustra
05:06 PM on 04/03/2011
TIme for people to expand their knowledge.
http://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/8/4/985/pdf