Fifty days have passed since the Deepwater Horizon Rig first exploded, and oil continues to seep into the Gulf of Mexico, with no viable plan to cap it in sight. Efforts on behalf of BP to restrict access to images of the spill have not borne fruit, and terrifying images of oil-soaked pelicans are making their way around the web. Five different people have sent me the photo, and many more friends have posted them to Facebook or on Twitter.
People are outraged. Millions of Americans feel powerless to stop the problem, and so are dedicating this Tuesday to take action where they live--some are planning house parties, where they will gather with friends and neighbors to help fundraise for Gulf residents. Moveon.org has put out a call for candlelight vigils. With primary elections in 14 states, vigils are planned to take place after polls close.
Others will dedicate Tuesday to plan additional local actions, including Hands Across the Sand on June 26, when hundreds of beaches across the country will be host to local residents joining hands in their commitment to a transition to clean energy.
This marks the most widespread day of action since the rig first exploded.
There have already been a series of protests nationwide in response to the oil spill. New Orleans has been host to many. Gulf musicians have toured the county to help raise funds. Youth across the country hosted Crude Awakening rallies, including one in front of the White House, with a banner signed by Gulf residents. On Friday, environmental groups organized a Citizens Arrest at BP's Washington DC headquarters. Tuesday will see the most widespread response, from all corners of the country.
And the message is getting out--President Obama has responded with lots of speechmaking, as well as moratoria on additional offshore drilling, and calls upon the Senate to pass comprehensive climate and energy legislation this year. But the public needs to make sure these promises are followed up on.
Dear Sir and Madam,
For novel energy development, a plan with its theoretical prediction and design schematics is proposed whose name is given by Solid Active Power System (SAPS). SAPS will replace fossil-fuel by which today’s economy is mostly evolved, and will solve the global warming issue. Hopefully we can construct this plan together, since it is ready to be launched. The theory shown in the below link is to predict that there exists a new energy resource, solid energy, in our world. Most people however do not realize this expertise, and even don't know how to extract this resource for use. Of course, it is possible to get rich and to win the Nobel Prize once this plan is accomplished. So, why not change the world for a greener, better future? I am looking forward to your response via solid_energy@hotmail.com Thank you for your valuable time.
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0Bx2LFxQaz2wNYzI3MmM5MTItZGQxMS00OWM1LTllZGEtYTkxY2IwNGViMGNl&hl=zh_TW
Yu-Chun Kuo, Chief Researcher
Solid Energy Research Center
You know, plaster your car with your messaage and then actually drive the speed limit -- or speed minimum.
Enough people and this will cause a major slowdown and draw some attention... .
... okay, so I'm crazy... but, well... nevermind.
Rooftop PV Solar,
Offshore wind, and
Waste Bio char,
can supply the worlds energy and fuel needs: cleanly, safely, Forever, within 12 years and cheaper in the long run; 26$ per barrel bio oils, 2-6 cents now, .
http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/solar_panels.htm
about 1$ per Wp solar panels, new.
install solar plants for about $1.30 per watt, compared with an industry average of about $1.75, according to Hardy." http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20602099&sid=a7K1FZoNgJ0w
Wind: “between two and six cents today, depending on location.12 Wind power approaches competitiveness with conventional generation at this price point. “
http://www.repp.org/articles/static/1/binaries/wind%20issue%20brief_FINAL.pdf
http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/publ/BiofBioproBioref%203,%20547-562,%202009%20Laird.pdf
26$ per barrel bio oil from waste bio char.”
why don't you read the links and come back when you know something.
EVERYTHING we grow and harvest from the land, eventually get's dumped.
It pollutes and costs us money to dump.
Waste Bio fuels thus uses the entire output of the land, and stops the dumping.
The amount of energy available is huge, and easily enough to fill in for Solar and Wind.
http://www.grist.org/article/2009-09-11-how-much-energy-does-the-us-waste/
http://www.seas.columbia.edu/earth/wtert/sofos/Waste_to_Worth_-_CEFWC_submission.pdf
good paper on existing landfill versus bio fuels.
http://www.alternative-energy-news.info/technology/garbage-energy/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refuse-derived_fuel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste-to-energy
http://www.covantaholding.com/big_waste.shtml 50% of Municipal waste is landfilled 14 sq km per year.
In total, the upper limit of the bio-energy potential could be over 1000 EJ per year. This is considerably more than the current global energy use of 400 EJ.
http://www.uce-uu.nl/index.php?action=1&menuId=1&type=project&id=3&
Are all these people protesting, yourself included, going to be organizing with handwritten messages delivered via the pony express? Or are they going to be hypocrites like yourself and dial up their friends, get on a blog, offer air conditioning or heat at their homes, drive together to get to the location, etc?
Cause if that's the case, then I guess you don't really care and you are confused about your big idealogy that you are sooooo in support of... GREEN!!!
The day that a greenie shows me that he/she is not a hypocrite by living in the wilderness with zero modern day products is the day I support "green".
Until then, keep filling Al Gore's pockets and pursueing your "passions". The real world isn't listening.
Also, the idea of going green has nothing to do with Al Gore...I could give a flying F&*k about Gore. It is to become SUSTAINABLE. Seriously what is the point of continuing to use virgin materials instead of recycling them? Our consumption patterns right now are completely LINEAR--we mine/drill, process, transport, consume, and then throw out. There is no circular part of this. So what happens when we run out? Maybe you forgot that we live on a single planet, but have grown to 7 billion people that inhabit every corner of the earth. And, oh yea, the average citizen in developed countries uses 4 times the amount of resources the earth is capable of supporting, if everyone were to use the same quantity. And as we bask in our hugely resource-intensive lives, the developing world is growing at a rate of 10% per year to become just like us...
I completely agree with you.
The 350 ppm bit is a load of crap though. Sorry. "climate" data is fraudulant.
I'm all for developing EFFICIENT, ECONOMIC renewable resources.
However I'm NOT for subsidizing it when it is NOT efficient or economic in order to make it "appear" to be so.
Further, I'm not for demonizing the people who have taken all the risks to provide everyone with their lifestyles currently, and are also the leading groups in renewable research as it is.
It would be amazing if the "green" community took a minute to understand how everything works together in terms of economies and their daily lives.
Then, maybe, just maybe, there would be a realistic goal that could be achieved.
But relying on "climate" data from fraudulent scientists and acting like the end of the world is at hand and thus we must push all this stuff and tank our economies even further in doing so? Please. Logic people. Logic.
nope.
wishing so does not make it so.
Protesting against BP or the oil industry in general deflects focus from the real problem - our insatiable thirst for oil. If we didn't consume so much oil, BP wouldn't have to drill anywhere. Only the individual citizens of the US can have a real impact on the demand for oil. If you really want to solve the problem, point the finger at the real problem.
Although I would add that oil and gas goes to far far far more than plainly transportation.
If you want to stop oil from being a mainstream product, unfortunately you will have to give up modern life as you know it, not just modern transportation.
Eventually things will go towards renewables, and I think that's great. But until that is actually economic and efficient (newsflash greenies-not even close yet), the responsible and efficient and economic use of oil and gas should be enacted to get "energy independence".
Even when renewables become efficient, they won't be able to meet the demands for energy, let alone all of the other products that aren't energy related that oil and gas contribute to.
Thus, it's safe to say, everyone had better either learn to deal with the 0.00001% of accidents that occur, or trade in their 21st century lives for the 18th century.
"In the United States in 2007 about 70% of petroleum was used for transportation (e.g. gasoline, diesel, jet fuel), 24% by industry (e.g. production of plastics), 5% for residential and commercial uses, and 2% for electricity production."
Therefore, I'd say that JShep (fanned btw) is correct that *we* need to make the difference. I work in Houston, TX and I'd say that at least half of the people driving to their *office* jobs every day either drive a pick-up truck or an SUV--this is absolutely ridiculous. If all of these folks listened to JShep, and traded their trucks in for fuel-efficient cars or public transportation, we'd make a huge dent in our oil consumption while retaining our 21st century lifestyles.
Point of use solar within our built environment is the ONLY solar we can support. Not only will it stabilize and democratize our grid, but it will reduce GHG emissions, encourage conservation and improve local economies with local well-paid jobs and property value improvements. Local solar is cheaper, faster and cleaner and will not require SF-6 spewing transmission infrastructure which will accelerate global warming beyond belief.
There is an enormous difference between CLEAN LOCAL POWER like rooftop solar and GREENWASHED REMOTE INDUSTRIAL POWER like Big Solar and Big Wind. Please make sure that you and all your supporters come out on the right side of this battle, or the whole 350 thing will have not only been in vain, but will have encouraged millions of acres of desert-cide. Nobody wants that...
Second, I don't think you grasp how much energy we consume as a society. Even with hundreds of large scale wind farms across America, wind only represents 2% of our entire electricity production. Replacing this with much less efficient small scale production would require much more infrastructure to produce the same output.
Regarding solar, roof-top solar hot water is great and PV is a good second. However, this will not produce the energy needed to drive major industry/agriculture/transportation in America. By contrast, CSP has huge potential. Yes it may destroy certain desert eco-systems--much like our major cities have done. But deserts have relatively low biodiversity, and the footprint relative to the energy output is tiny. 350ppm will NEVER become a reality without big renewables.
My only "beef" with you would be the 350 ppm. That's your opinion and it coincides with the opinions of some "scientists" and some scientists.
My opinion rests with other "scientists" and scientists and my own experience and interpretation of the information made available.
That's primarily that CO2 has not been proven to be driving any "warming", and that "warming" in fact isn't happening outside of normal global patterns anyways.
I do share the goal of reducing our need of oil and gas, but for the reason that it will eventually run out, and that we should reduce it to where DOMESTIC supply is all we need, because, quite frankly, proping up the tryant and hateful societies elsewhere by buying their oil and gas is shameful.
Anyways, fanned. Keep posting in an educated fashion! :)