How green is your stimulus?

Greenpeace assesses the carbon footprint of Obama’s stimulus plan 5

Muckraker: Grist on Politics

The Obama administration’s original stimulus proposal would reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by at least 61 million tons per year, according to an analysis commissioned by Greenpeace from the consulting firm ICF International. (Here’s the summary report and highlights.)

The report estimates that reductions resulting from the Obama plan would be equivalent to eliminating the emissions of 7.9 million American homes or 13 million cars.

“The fact that the federal government could spend so much money and actually help slow global warming means we’ve really turned the page as a country,” said Greenpeace Research Director Kert Davies. “This is a real sign that we’re starting to move beyond the era of fossil fuels.”

The report warns, though, that if the $30 billion in the plan for highways were spent on new construction, it would cause 10 to 50 times more greenhouse-gas pollution than if it were spent on highway repair or light rail.

But this is an analysis of the Obama administration’s original proposal. The version the House passed is somewhat different, and the Senate’s is likely to be more different still, potentially eliminating some green funding.

Still, there’s some good news from the Senate for enviros. The rumored amendment from Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and James Inhofe (R-Okla.) that would have funneled $50 billion more toward roads appears to be dead. And a proposal from Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wy.) to scrap the National Environmental Policy Act review process for some stimulus-related projects failed on the floor.

Kate Sheppard is Grist’s political reporter.

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. LPS Posted 11:35 pm
    07 Feb 2009

    "move beyond the era of fossil fuels" ?Surely Mr. Davies jests.

  2. FX Posted 5:41 am
    08 Feb 2009

    A Difficult Problem to SolveLet's face it there is no easy answer to this question. People must have access to transportation and building roads and infrastructure are essential elements to that process.

  3. jeffgreen11 Posted 9:28 am
    08 Feb 2009

    No Seriously!("move beyond the era of fossil fuels" ?
    Surely Mr. Davies jests)
    Actually the plans have been drawn up to expand alternative energy and decrease fossil fuels. One utility storage not discussed is CAES Compressed Air Energy Storage. This could be set up across the United States for highly reliable alternative energy production.

  4. Delay And Deny's avatar

    Delay And Deny Posted 9:34 am
    08 Feb 2009

    Oink, Oink Don't Tell Me

    BHO betrays Linux users, wastes taxpayer money:
    http://www.stimuluswatch.org/project/view/5084
    "SOFTWARE LICENSING FOR THESE 4,110 NEW COMPUTERS (MICROSOFT OFFICE SUITE) @ $50.00"

    Obama The Vapor President ?!?
  5. LPS Posted 11:37 am
    08 Feb 2009

    Best laid plansRenewable energies now contribute approximately twice what they contribued in 1850 (percentage-wise). Modern industrial civilization runs of fossil fuels, without equivocation. Those fuels are set to diminish and will not be supplanted or substituted in kind with renewables. Energy scarcity is the future. That is the future reality that we should be addressing.

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Advertisement