Comments redpanda has made

  • Why the surprise?

    This is exactly what he said he'd do throughout the campaign:  15 billion dollars a year for 10 years for developing clean alternative energy.

    I know that since then we've seen the passage of a 700 billion dollar stimulus law, but 150 billion dollars is still a lot of money.On What percentage of auction revenue is rebated? posted 9 months ago 10 Responses

  • That's what I'm talking about

    Every time I hear green energy or green infrastructure is priority one, I get goosebumps.On Rahm Emanuel: First Obama priority is stimulus via green infrastructure posted 1 year ago 6 Responses

  • From a strictly economic standpoint...

    There are two ways to bring down cost in a free market.  Increase supply or decrease demand.  If we control 3 percent of the world's oil reserves but consume 25 percent of the world's oil, we don't have a lot of leverage to bring down the price of oil by increasing production.  We DO have a lot of leverage to bring down the price of oil by consuming less.

    I think Palin is trying to imply that if we crack open ANWR, all that oil will flow straight into American gas tanks, which is wrong.  It's going to be sold to the highest bidder based on global oil prices, and there's not enough oil there to bring those prices down.On Palin gives first big speech on 'strategic energy independence' posted 1 year, 1 month ago 4 Responses

  • the "all-of-the-above approach"

    Obama has put a dollar figure on how much he wants to spend on R&D for getting off fossil fuels.  It's a very concrete kind of support.

    When McCain talks about supporting carbon-free energy, I don't know what kind of support he's talking about.  Obviously McCain is for deregulating everything, but beyond that, what resources is he willing to commit to energy when he's reducing federal revenue with his tax cuts to the wealthy?

    Is he only offering moral support?  I think we can do better than that from the federal government for one of the top two or three challenges the country faces for the next two or three decades.On McCain/Palin nuclear plan would make U.S. more dependent on Russia for energy posted 1 year, 1 month ago 5 Responses

  • Being Serious about Global Warming

    Considering the massive amount of infrastructure already in place for coal extraction, transportation, and burning, it's unrealistic to suggest that the next president will flip a switch and end coal as a component of our energy mix.

    There are a lot of reasons for environmentalists to hate coal.  Ecosystems and natural hydrological systems are ruined by mountaintop removal, coal-burning power plants emit dangerous levels of mercury and other pollutants, and of course, coal is one of the top contributors to global warming.

    But if environmentalists are going to have any credibility on the seriousness of global warming, we can't use carbon emissions as a backdoor to attacking coal because we don't like it for other reasons.

    From everything I've read on Grist and elsewhere, I doubt that carbon sequestration is technically and economically feasible.  But we don't know, because nobody has actually built a CCS coal plant.  For all the lip-service that carbon sequestration has received and all the hope that some politicians have pinned on it, I don't think it's a bad idea to try it out and see how it works.  But the fights against mountaintop removal and mercury emissions should be fought on their own merits.On McCain and Obama campaigns trade jabs over who's a bigger coal supporter posted 1 year, 2 months ago 7 Responses

  • Fool me once...

    The people who are telling you that you can drill for oil without ecological impact are the same people who told you we could have a war without civilian casualties.On McCain says fish love oil rigs posted 1 year, 2 months ago 10 Responses

  • Green Roofs

    I work in the Loop, and I can see a couple of green roofing projects from my office.  But I was up on the observation deck of the sears tower a few weeks ago, and looking down at the city I realized how few and far between they are.  I certainly hope we can get more.On Chicago unveils detailed climate plan posted 1 year, 2 months ago 3 Responses

  • For Palin, Energy = Oil, Gas...

    ...and nothing else.

    I happened across a Charlie Rose interview from 2007 yesterday, and it was remarkably unremarkable.  Charlie Rose's format usually allows guests to demonstrate a degree of depth and thoughtfulness that never otherwise sees the light of day on television, but she was quite bland.  She was asked a question about education and she talked instead about tapping oil reserves.  It seemed like the only subject she cared about.

    If this is the kind of thinking that McCain wants to elevate in his administration, then the democratic ticket and the republican ticket couldn't be further apart on energy.On GOP VP candidate says she'd be in charge of McCain's energy policy posted 1 year, 2 months ago 6 Responses

  • Implement baby implement?

    Wasn't there a government report some weeks or months ago that said wind could supply 20 percent of our energy needs with no technological innovations?  Plug-in hybrids and full electrics should be on the market in two to three years.

    Why don't we just pull out all the stops on the technology that already exists?On Markey on House Dems' energy bill posted 1 year, 2 months ago 4 Responses

  • I agree entirely...

    ...and she's comparing a job Obama took in 1985 when he was just out of school to a job Palin began in 1996.  In 1985, Palin was just a year removed from the Miss Alaska pageant and transferring from college to college for reasons that still haven't come out yet.

    I know that republicans want a debate about who has more experience in order to shift attention from McCain's hypocrisy on the subject, but I don't really care.  But they need to be called out on their distortions of fact.On The dynamic behind the GOP's mockery of community organizing posted 1 year, 2 months ago 22 Responses