<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for CAP releases interactive U.S. map of per-capita emissions]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by EnviroFan http://www.grist.org/article/states-with-head-start-favor-racing/ Sun, 26 Oct 2008 06:54:43 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/states-with-head-start-favor-racing/1 Brookings

Marilyn Brown and some others have an interesting analysis of carbon footprints for metro areas in the US too, which Brookings put out:

http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2008/~/media/Files/rc/re ...

Let's make this place better.

]]> Brookings

Marilyn Brown and some others have an interesting analysis of carbon footprints for metro areas in the US too, which Brookings put out:

http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2008/~/media/Files/rc/re ...

Let's make this place better.

]]> Comment #2 by energy engineer http://www.grist.org/article/states-with-head-start-favor-racing/ Sun, 26 Oct 2008 07:59:02 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/states-with-head-start-favor-racing/2 Green power

A couple of things jump out at me looking at the map:

The lowest emmiters have a total of 137 electorial votes, while the highest have 59 (yes, I've been staring at way too many electorial maps lately!).  When you take out the 2 each for Senators, I think they have a 117-39 House of Rep. advantage.  So are we underestimating the ability to get emissions limits at the federal level?
The top 2 emitters (Wyoming and North Dakota) have tremendous opportunities for wind power, and are starting to pursue it in a big way.
The juxtoposition of those wind states and the hydro states.  One way that countries like Denmark have been so successful with high penetrations of wind power, is that they have paired their grid with countries with high levels of hydro.  This is good for everyone.  The amount of total hydro energy available is in part governed by the amount of water built up over long periods of time (seasons). Wind allows you to stretch out the use of the hydro-powered enegery that you have available.  And while it is cheap power, its intermittant, and benefits from quick-dispatch hydro.

The map format is a great way to see the solutions available, and the political ability to get them implimented.





]]> Green power

A couple of things jump out at me looking at the map:

The lowest emmiters have a total of 137 electorial votes, while the highest have 59 (yes, I've been staring at way too many electorial maps lately!).  When you take out the 2 each for Senators, I think they have a 117-39 House of Rep. advantage.  So are we underestimating the ability to get emissions limits at the federal level?
The top 2 emitters (Wyoming and North Dakota) have tremendous opportunities for wind power, and are starting to pursue it in a big way.
The juxtoposition of those wind states and the hydro states.  One way that countries like Denmark have been so successful with high penetrations of wind power, is that they have paired their grid with countries with high levels of hydro.  This is good for everyone.  The amount of total hydro energy available is in part governed by the amount of water built up over long periods of time (seasons). Wind allows you to stretch out the use of the hydro-powered enegery that you have available.  And while it is cheap power, its intermittant, and benefits from quick-dispatch hydro.

The map format is a great way to see the solutions available, and the political ability to get them implimented.





]]> Comment #3 by David Roberts http://www.grist.org/article/states-with-head-start-favor-racing/ Sun, 26 Oct 2008 08:32:30 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/states-with-head-start-favor-racing/3 EE,

I'm not sure the total number of electoral votes is the way to look at it. High emission states need enough representation to gum up the works (e.g. filibuster) and they need representation on the crucial Congressional committees, and they have both. I share your overall optimism though!

grist.org

]]> EE,

I'm not sure the total number of electoral votes is the way to look at it. High emission states need enough representation to gum up the works (e.g. filibuster) and they need representation on the crucial Congressional committees, and they have both. I share your overall optimism though!

grist.org

]]>