The Race Is On for Clean Energy

This week the Obama administration took up the clean energy baton and called for the U.S. to get in the race to become a world leader in clean energy.

The statements by the President, Vice President and top officials all echoed the same message: America must transition to a clean energy economy that creates jobs, provides greater national security and reduces harmful global warming pollution.

At a recent speech at MIT, President Obama called for the U.S. to become a global leader in clean energy and called for "the passage of comprehensive legislation that will finally make renewable energy the profitable type of energy in America." On Tuesday, he followed up the call for leadership by announcing a $3.4 billion stimulus investment to modernize the electric grid at an event in Arcadia, Florida. Meanwhile, Vice President Biden visited an auto plant in Delaware that will produce electric vehicles and talked about the potential for clean energy to create jobs. And Wednesday, the White House hosted an energy forum where top-level cabinet members revealed strategies for clean energy reform.

As President Obama has said many times: the nation that leads in the creation of a clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy. The administration's leadership and embrace of renewable energy technology thus far puts America on the path to becoming that global leader. But the President is right: in order to fully realize the potential that clean energy offers we must pass comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation.

Appearances by the President and Vice President put climate and energy initiatives center stage, just as the Senate kicked off hearings on the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act. On Oct. 27, five senior administration officials backed up President Obama's vision with expert testimony. They appeared before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and confirmed that this comprehensive legislation would not only reduce pollution but also increase the nation's economic competitiveness.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu told the Senate panel "When the starting gun sounded on the clean energy race, the United States stumbled... but I remain confident that we can make up the ground."

History has shown Americans to be strong competitors and the desire to win this race and protect the planet continues to build. A recent CNN poll showed that six in ten Americans support a "cap and trade" proposal to cut pollution. In recent weeks, military veterans traveled across the country on a 21-state bus tour to talk to citizens and local community leaders about the dangers of climate change and its threat to national security.

Senators Kerry and Graham also demonstrated bipartisan support for clean energy legislation by authoring a joint Op-Ed in the New York Times saying "even with separate accents, we speak with one voice in saying that the best way to make America stronger is to work together to address an urgent crisis facing the world."

The business community is calling for clean energy loudest of all, which demonstrates the economic opportunity at hand. Executives from 150 corporations recently came to Washington to urge lawmakers to pass clean energy legislation, saying a shift to a clean energy economy could lead to a new industrial revolution and create millions of jobs related to renewable technologies. Apple and a number of utility companies -- such as PG&E Corp., Exelon Corp. and PNM Resources -- have decided to drop their membership with the Chamber of Commerce based on its opposition to climate legislation.

Senators Kerry and Boxer have provided the Senate with an excellent starting point for achieving comprehensive legislation that can reduce global warming pollution and repower America's economic recovery. And, just as important, the EPA has reaffirmed that transitioning to a clean energy economy is affordable: analysis showed the legislation would cost less than $120 per year per household.

We heard it this week -- the race is on and the lead is ours for the taking. The Senate must work to pass a clean energy and climate bill that makes President Obama's vision of a clean energy future a reality and positions the U.S. as a global leader in the new energy economy.

Comments

[Eggsackley]

I love the fact that some corporations are voting for green power by withdrawing from the Chamber of Commerce and other organizations that oppose it. I look for their products when I shop. Our future job base should be built on green products. The government needs to support all fields scientific research, especially nano-technology. But we need to put more people back to work right now, and educate our own population about green technology. The bloggers are well aware of the potential, but the masses are not.
I think our country should consider hosting a new world with a green technology theme. I have suggested elsewhere that the people in Chicago who were hoping to get the next Olympics mighty look into hosting a World Fair. It would have the same potential for creating jobs and and bringing in revenue from tourism. It would allow us to show off new green products and boost our exports. It also has great potential for educating our own people and creating more domestic demande for green products.
If we can get some high speed rail links operating quickly enough, more than one city could co-host a worlds fair. A ride on a high speed train is a great educational experience in itself.

[SonofLiberty1]

Why is it that in many venues, we Americans miss the real opportunities?

We seem to love those scenic night skylines don't we?

(Forgetting of course that we pay for them dearly)

We seem to colllectively forget what our Mothers always told us...

TURN OFF THE LIGHT!

ESPECIALLY IF IT'S JUST WASTED!

[Overtone]

How to lower the cost of green energy!.

Hydrogen is the simplest atom: one electron revolving around one proton. Imagine an atom of Hydrogen enlarged so that the proton is as big as a golf ball and the circling electron will be three hundred yards away!

It has been discovered that Hydrogen’s electron orbit can be made to collapse, becoming a much smaller sphere. A tremendous amount of energy is thus released. One barrel of water can yield as much energy as two hundred barrels of oil - just by making clever use of collapsing Hydrogen orbits.

Disbelief and skepticism are understandable, as this disagrees with textbook science.

Rowan University published results of collapsing Hydrogen experiments that can only be explained by this new source of energy. They should be rapidly reproduced at other laboratories.

That will cost competitively change much of what is believed about energy.

The article: 5 Steps to Revive the Auto Industry and the Economy on the website http://www.aesopinstitute.org also outlines an equally hard to believe magnetic parallel.

Imagine the positive impact on the economy of future cars and trucks that need no fossil fuel and may pay for themselves over time by selling electricity while parked.

Energy from Collapsing Hydrogen Orbits – ECHO, promises an alternative that can power hybrid engines – providing cost-competitive electric power.

These revolutionary possibilities will be developed more rapidly than might be imagined.

[TryToBeFlexible]

I want solar power on my house, but not if there is a 20 year payback. I don't know if I will even live 20 more years.
My power company apparently has some sort of option to go solar, but the details are really hazy on line. You would have to "start the process" before you really start to get answers to questions, such as how long for payback, how much it costs, how much it would save you on power, etc.. Who wants to invest hours, days, or weeks into it, just to find out that it still does not make sense?
Plus, here in central Florida, one has to wonder what will happen when the next hurricane comes through. Is this going to lift off of my house? Is it going to pull the roof with it? Will my insurance cover it?

[Rmoen]

Mr. Karpinski-

We all want clean energy -- it goes well with Mom's apple pie. But your vision will cost taxpayers and consumers billions, possibly trillions, of dollars; from my vantage point less than 20% of America wants cap-and-trade; and, still we won't make a dent in global warming. We need to take a second look at the global warming issue and a second look at the United Nations' opinions.

There's been no global warming for a decade, according to the BBC, New York Times and Christian Science Monitor (links follow). The UN's climate scientists are back-pedaling like crazy. One of their own even says we are looking at another decade of cooling.

Frankly, I don't see the majority of Americans supporting cap-and-trade or any CO2 regulation until we have our own 'Climate Truth Commission.' ...and no longer rely upon the opinions of the United Nations. Outsourcing our climate science to the UN makes no sense. It is more concerned about politics and funding than science. Plus, UN forecasts for the last 10 years do not fit what actually happened. The United States needs our own objective, transparent climate commission to think-through global warming.

-- Robert Moen, www.energyplanUSA.com

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8299079.stm
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/science/earth/23cool.html?_r=3&em
http://features.csmonitor.com/discoveries/2009/10/10/biggest-news-youve-never-heard-earth-isnt-warming/

-- Robert Moen, www.energyplanUSA.com