A perfect vomit-inducing segue ... I went from reading this great post and the NYT stories to my e-mail and found this from the Pretend League of Conservation Voters, claiming that raising CAFE standards 4% a year will help ensure a livable future for our children.

In other words, the $&#*#%^@! so-called CONSERVATION organizations are signing up for selling the message that keeping the automobile age going is GOOD for the planet.

I'm going to start calling coal-to-liquids "the Nazi approach," because that makes clear that anyone who is trying to keep the auto-centric planet going is a collaborator with pure evil.  Because keeping the auto age going means demanding liquid fuels, and anyone asking for liquid fuels is asking that more coal be burned, either to make biofuels or to make CTL fuels.

Dear JMG,

Gas prices have hit a record high. Let's hit back.

Help us get large corporate polluters to back off and Congress to step up!

Donate today!

How much did you pay at the pump this Memorial Day weekend?

Sky-high gas prices have made Americans uneasily aware of our dangerous dependence on oil ... and the critical need for fuel-efficient cars.

Right now, with the right resources, we can do something that would have been unthinkable a decade, or even a year, ago: pass critical clean energy legislation.

As early as June, Congress will be voting on bills that will go farther than ever to curb global warming and our reliance on oil.

LCV is on Capitol Hill, securing votes, but we also need to secure our own resources.

Donate $35, $50, or $100 today -- help us raise $25,000 by June 1.

Thanks to supporters like you, we are well on our way to our goal. We're off to a great start, but we need to pick up the pace if we're going to have the resources to ensure vital bills in Congress are passed in the next few weeks.

The battle for fuel-efficiency continues to intensify on Capitol Hill and a vote could come any day. It may sound revolutionary -- but the truth is: fuel efficiency is a simple, easy step we can take toward ensuring a healthy, livable planet for our children.

Here's why:

The benefits are tremendous. Increasing our fuel economy standards will save consumers billions of dollars at the gas pump, drastically cut our oil dependency, and curb dangerous global warming pollution.

The technology exists. The National Academy of Sciences says American industry is ready to increase fuel economy standards by 4% a year without affecting safety.

The drivers are ready. Americans have already started buying hybrid vehicles, and other fuel-efficient cars, in record numbers. Many models are so popular, consumers have to sign up for a wait-list!

It's an obvious solution, but the large corporate polluters and their allies are doing everything they can to stop it. Help us stop them. Give to LCV today, and invest in an answer to many of our country's energy challenges and opportunities.

Give now. Help us raise $25,000 by June 1 to help intensify our efforts for the coming weeks.

Thank you for your continued support.

Sincerely,

Gene Karpinski
President
League of Conservation Voters

Save the world: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 5% annually.

"Energy Independence!" is a battle-cry, for a cause which has nothing to do, basically, with combatting global warming.  I do not know if we know what all these energetic coal lobbyists are telling the folks in Congress, but I would guess a lot has to do with global politics and US strategy in the Middle East.  And needless to say, that is the subject that is highest in everyone's minds in DC.

Observe that the NYTimes columnist Tom Friedman (aka "the Mustache," at least in Gristmill) had always been interested in Middle Eastern politics, and the United States' involvement in them, as a geo-political issue.  It was only in the course of pondering all that, that he latterly hit on energy independence as an excellent strategic goal for the US.  Even then, he was not yet saying anything bold about "green" alternative energy sources.  That took further worrying about the fast-globalizing economy of India especially, and all that "the world is flat" business, to help him conclude that the US should resolve to become the global leader in green energy and green industry.

This evolution in fact reflects the very conservative values of the powers-that-be in this country: first, national security always comes first; second, the growth of American business always comes second; third, let the pointy-headed Friends-of-Al play with things like cellulosic ethanol, but the US should not invest serious money in it just yet.

Subsidizing CTL fits those values, foolish and misguided as they are, just fine.

Chickens are our cousins! So are other sensitive animals! Enough is enough! No more factory farms!

I wonder where their "electricity" figure comes from.

Since it seems like it must be either the grid average, or even straight coal.

I love Grist...I really do.  But then I see a banner ad from GE on liquified coal above the article where Grist is bashing liquified coal (as they should.)

I know it costs to run a site, and any other business, but could it be possible to be a bit more selective about either a) where some of that advertising income comes from or b) the decisions made to not so blatantly look like a sellout...

Coal, bad...lets remember that.

Anyone know where I could get the lifecycle CO2 per Megajoule info for various types of fuels?

For instance, I'd like to compare electric versus various types of biofuels.

However attempt to make it agnostic on vehicle weight.
(While including engine effeciency, and maybe other factors)

Renewable energy sources - wind, solar - are great, but they are intermittent.  The only way we are going to get clean, reliable electric power is to go nuclear.  You can charge your hybred car from a clean nuk source, and then you would not be taking bread from the mouths of the poor, and you would not be adding to the CO2 burden of the atmosphere.  

Charles Barton

Minus the golden terrorist target, nuclear might be good...oh yeah, if you ignore the waste for 10,000 years...

If people took up the responsibility for DECENTRALIZED power that is appropriate for their locales, be it solar, wind, hydrogen, whatever, and put that to use in their own backyards, there would be much less global impact, and no reason for a terrorist to ever target a powerplant...

Even at the neighborhood level, a small scale solar or wind or hydrogen fuel cell (any of which exist today), controlled by the neighborhood, is far and away more responsible than paying the fat cat utilities and being the perfect bullseye for those who would like to put a city, state, or country out of business...

  As blossoms fall, coal
Pleases me, not as liquid,
  But as electrons.

Chickens are our cousins! So are other sensitive animals! Enough is enough! No more factory farms!

[new] Lifcycle CO2 emissions

GreyFlcn, if you read Norwegian or German, here are a couple of sources:
"Energi- og miljødata for alternative og konvensjonelle drivstoffer - år 2010"

and

"ÖKOBILANZ VON ENERGIEPRODUKTEN: ÖKOLOGISCHE BEWERTUNG VON BIOTREIBSTOFFEN"

Thanks but I think I'll need to look for something in english.

In particular all I'm really looking for is a good way to compare various liquid fuels to electric fuels to hydrogen.
And then compare that to engine effeciency.

Sinjin32 write: Minus the golden terrorist target, nuclear

Why do you believe that nuclear power plants make for golden terrorist-targets?

Hey, all:

From D.R.:

"Why on earth would Congress do something so criminally stupid, so manifestly against the public interest? Why do they ever?

    Coal industry lobbying has reached a fever pitch. The industry spent $6 million on federal lobbying in 2005 and 2006, three times what it spent each year from 2000 through 2004, according to calculations by Politicalmoneyline.com.

There's your civics lesson from today's NYT, kids:

    * Energy efficiency: a financial boon and a cheap, fast way to reduce carbon emissions. But: no big industry lobby. Thus: ignored by the feds.
    * CTL: a financial boondoggle with few energy security benefits that will aggravate climate change. But: big industry lobby. Thus: plied with billions in taxpayer subsidies.

Looking for something to chat about with your Congressional representative? This seems like a good place to start."

This is a perfect illustration, yet another reason why we need a single strong central organization to cover all environmental fields to provide issues and a means of focused political action.  How about it?  Who has it?  Where is the environmental "MoveOn"?  Who'll set it up?

David
Sustainability For Life

Messages done with sustainable energy, with Wind and Sun!