Electing Obama

I'm just happy we have a President-Elect that actually wants to something about climate change. A, president who mentioned in Time Magazine, that creating a clean energy economy would be priority number one.

By Benjamin Worden

all i'm saying is we have to start working on the problem
: on how good it makes you feel to do goodness
like lennon said
only solutions
it was like the quiet whisper of the hydrogen joining together with the oxygen to fuel my vehicle
was like hearing millions of my of the future citizens on this planet thanking me for thinking of them
and making their world less poisoned
and it felt awesome
to do that for them
and everyone else on the planet here today
yeah?

White house claims executive privelege

can he do this?

Is Peak oil going to end the debate on global warming?

Experts are saying the reason for high gas prices is peak oil has set in.  Earlier this year an alternative fuels act was passed classifying liquefied coal as an alternative jet fuel.  With the problems of global warming already starting to show its effects, the question becomes will the end to cheap oil lead to a climate where energy is better for the environment of where energy has harsher effects.  

What is going to be the next generation of energy?  Will it be wind or solar or other renewables or is it more likely that we will continue to spiral down the rabbit hole of carbon emitting energy that gets dirtier and dirtier.

The next administration is going to have to decide weather or not to put a price on carbon, and which types of energy will get subsidized.  Currently, the oil and coal industry are the recipients of these subsidies.  Should there be a shift?

Or should we drill for more oil when we know the harsh effects it produces?  Bush said America needs to end its addiction to oil.  How should we end the addiction by drilling for more?

If scientist are saying the energy policy that we are heading on is mass suicide, do we need to choose cleaner alternatives?

Will the price of gas eclipse people's concerns about the environment?

The solution to global warming may be to go carbon negative.  Check out the link; carbon negative.

For any one with questions about if there is a difference between the Democrats and Republicans-here's one issue that may separate them-energy.  On February 27th the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Renewable Energy and Conservation Tax of 2008 with a vote of 236 to 182.  The split was largely along party lines.  

What was so interesting about the bill is that it repeals tax subsidies for big oil and coal to support renewable energy.  The Republicans are against the bill, and the white house has issued a letter saying they will veto it if it passes the Senate.

The issue that truly separates the democrats from republicans may turn out to be environmental and scientific in nature.  There is a scientific consensus that global warming is real, man made, and must be slowed, or by the end of the century, very few species will survive.  The Republicans consistent refusal to do anything about it, is completely irresponsible.  

This executive administration sucks.  Not only is it putting lives of Americans and Iraqis in jeopardy for bad economic and energy policy, it's putting the lives of ourselves and future generations at extreme risk.  Impeach.  Impeach. Impeach.

The book six degrees should be required reading for the entire world.  Honestly, the possibility that we have reached the tipping point of global warming is scary, but not even trying to do anything to stop it is scarier.  The author, Mark Lynas, went through all the papers that have been written on global warming recently and then put the effects into a degree by degree narrative of what will happen if we fail to act.  The conclusion is that this is a time for radicalism, because only radical thinking will save humanity.  

New data suggests summer sea ice might be gone from the poles in as little as 5 years.  Yikes.

Is it possible that both the 2000,and the 2004 presidential elections were stolen?  There's a lot of evidence to support this theory, but what's even scarier, is the company that produces the electronic voting machines haven't fixed them yet, and according to Rolling Stone Magazine they are so easily hackable, it's scary.  Farenheight 911 showed the election fraud of 2000, Hacking Democracy displayed it again covering 2004.  I want to make a film on the oncoming fraud  of 2008.  What should we call it?  Any suggestions.  

By the way there is one thing about voting machines that has been fixed, the name of the company that produces them.  Diebold has changed it's name, they now goes by Premier.  I wonder why they would do that, possibly so they don't leave a paper trail of all their misdeeds.

Why can't we just have a voting system with the accuracy of an ATM?  And why aren't people demanding a better system? How can you have a democracy if your not even sure if your vote counts?  And why haven't we gotten rid of the electoral college; it's as out of date as the horse draw carriage.  

censoring scientists

"Do you know that before a government testifies to congress the testimony is typically reviewed and editing by the White House Office of Management and Budget?" -James Hansen

What was the war in Iraq about?

What was the war in Iraq about?  According to James Howard Kunstler, author of The Long Emergency, "it was strategically about setting up a police station in the middle of a very large bad neighborhood.  It was also about dividing the Islamic world physically in half to create a buffer between the aggressive gangs on the east side of the police station (Iraq, Iran, and Pakistan) and the politically touchy gangs on the other side (Arabia,  Egypt, Syria, Yemen, and Libya, and of course, the anomaly Israel).  On a closer scale, the Iraq war was an attempt to establish a forward base adjacent to Iran and Arabia and to moderate and influence the behavior of both of them, to discourage adventures by Iran, and to be ready in case of trouble in Arabia.  One of the first things the US did after invading Iraq in 2003 was to station two armored divisions on the Iraq-Saudi Arabian border. 

And then there is the issue of Iraq itself.  Iraq possess the second-largest oil reserves after Arabia.  Replacing the Saddam regime with a less hostile and erratic government was obviously a high order of business for the United States where future oil supplies were concerned...of course it was about the oil". 

electric power deregulated?

"The telecom industry was once as regulated as the electric power industry".  IBM seems to believe people will start to have a more participatory job in their electric generation, and deregulation of the power industry might occur within the next 5 years.  Check out information on smart grids or go to IBM to find out more.  

HVDC in the US

 "HVDC lines are cheaper to build and require less land area than equivalent AC lines.  About 500 miles of HVDC lines operate in the U.S. today and have proved efficient.  No major advance seems to be needed... TransCanada, Inc. is proposing 2,200 miles of HVDC lines to carry wind energy from Montana and Wyoming south to Las Vegas and beyond"  (Scientific American, Jan. 2008).

HVDC

Where in the world are they using HVDC electricity grids?  I know they are using them to connect to connect Sweden and Poland.  It's also being used in Australia and Gotland and that 500 miles are open in the US today.  Will this HVDC system actually take over AC power grids.  Is this the technology that will bring green energy around the world.  TREC, The Trans-Mediterranean Renewable Energy Cooperation seems to thinks so and they published a 65 page white paper that explains their plans for worldwide cooperation, and how fossil fuels can be used solely to stabilize the grid and not run it.  Who is standing in the way?  Who is killing the HVDC electric grid, and who is trying to bring it into fruition.  Is this a David vs. Goliath story that might result in the survival of mankind if actually implemented?  Stay tuned.  Check out desertrec.org for updates.

Attacking the problem, offer a solution.  Some good advice that I heard today.   Problem; those in power have a monetary interest in non renewable sources of energy.  Solution?  Can we get the monied interests to invest fast enough in the renewable energy sector to make any difference, or for them to see that there is money in renewable energy as well.

Green Energy

   For less than half the cost of the war in Iraq the U.S. could be energy independent.  It's true.  Scientist at the National Renewables Energies Laboratory (NREL) did the math.  For 1 trillion dollars the US could be using alternative energy for everything from cars to homes.  The energy problem goes hand in hand with the war problem.  If we solve one we solve the other.  How do we get those in power to see the light, that this war will eventually lead to their destruction. 

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) just won the Nobel Peace Prize for a  report that says that we have to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2015, and we have to be on our way by 2012 if we don't want temperatures to rise by 6 degrees Celcius by the end of the century.  We really need to figure a way to overcome political hurdles that stand in our way of an energy independent green energy society and world.