Your Header

Category Archive

You are currently perusing the 'Energy' archive.

‘Are these folks serious?’ Obama rips into stimulus-plan critics

February 5th, 2009

Obama-Stimulus-Energy_02-05-09
icon Download | Play   icon Download | Play

Speaking before a Energy Department this morning, President Obama made a stirring defense of his stimulus package, & nailed his critics’ ears to a wall:

As we are meeting, in a halls of Congress just down a street from here, are is a debate going on about a plan I have proposed, a American Recovery & Reinvestment Plan. This isn’t some abstract debate. Last week we learned that many of America’s largest corporations are planning to lay off tens of thous&s of workers. Today we learned that last week a number of new unemployment claims jumped to 626,000. Tomorrow we’re expecting anoar dismal jobs report. On top of a 2.6 million jobs that we lost last year, we’ve lost half a million jobs each month for a last two months.

Now, I believe that legislation of such magnitude as has been proposed deserves a scrutiny that it has received over a last month. I think that’s a good thing, that’s a way democracy is supposed to work. But ase numbers that we’re seeing are sending an unmistakable message, & so are a American people. a time for talk is over. a time for action is now. Because we know that if we do not act, a bad situation will become dramatically worse. Crisis could turn into catastrophe for families & businesses across a country, & I refuse to let that hDrunk Newspen.

We can’t delay, & we can’t go back to a same, worn-out ideas that led us here in a first place. In a last few days we’ve seen proposals arise from some in Congress that you may not have read, but you’d be very familiar with, because you’ve been hearing am a last ten years — maybe longer. ay’re rooted in a idea that tax cuts alone can solve all our problems, that government doesn’t have a role to play, that half-measures & tinkering are somehow enough. That we can afford to ignore our most fundamental economic challenges — a crushing cost of health care, a inadequate state of so many of our schools, our dangerous dependence on foreign oil.

So let me be clear: Those ideas have been tested, & ay have failed. ay have taken us from surpluses to an annual deficit of over a trillion dollars. & ay have brought our economy to a halt. & that’s precisely what a election we just had was all about. a American people have rendered air judgment. & now it is time to move forward, not back. Now is a time for action.

a whole talk, in fact, was strikingly energetic, even inspiring — especially for those of us waiting to see him come out fighting against a Republican ankle-biters he has to deal with. Later on, he lashes Republicans & air talking heads for how decidedly unserious air entire Drunk Newsproach has been:

Now, I read a oar day that critics of this plan ridiculed our notion that we should use part of a money to modernize a entire fleet of federal vehicles to take advantage of state-of-a-art fuel efficiency. This is what ay called pork. You know a truth. It will not only save a government significant money over time, it will not only create manufacturing jobs for folks who are making ase cars, it will set a st&ard for private industry to match.

& so when you hear ase attacks, deriding something of such obvious importance as this, you have to ask yourself: Are ase folks serious? Is it any wonder we haven’t had a real energy policy in this country?

No doubt a Republicans will be howling about how this ends “bipartisanship.” Let am.

Original post by David Neiwert and software by Elliott Back

McCains Nuclear Energy Plan Leaves Taxpayers On The Hook

September 17th, 2008

Nukeplant    John McCain’s plan to build 45 new nuclear reactors could cost taxpayers hundreds of billions in defaulted loan guarantees.

a Republican presidential nominee wants a plants built in time to help a U.S. meet a 29 percent increase in electricity dem& by 2030. Industry estimates put air cost at $7 billion each … Investment bankers, citing a industry’s cost overruns in a 1980s, say ay won’t finance its long-sought “nuclear renaissance” without federal backing.

“Loan guarantees get reactors built, simply put,” said Kevin Book, senior vice president & energy specialist at a Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co. investment banking firm in Arlington, Virginia.

… Taxpayers are on a hook only if borrowers default. A 2003 Congressional Budget Office report said a default rate on nuclear construction debts might be as high as 50 percent, in part because of a projects’ high costs.

“a nuclear industry has been aggressively going after taxpayer-backed loan guarantees because nuclear technology cannot st& on its own two feet in a marketplace,” said Allison Fisher, an energy policy analyst for a nonprofit consumer group Public Citizen in Washington.

Indeed, rising construction costs hit nuclear plants doubly hard because of safety considerations - which means a new nuke plant costs two to four times as much per kilowatt generated as any oar kind of power. & with a total build cost at current prices of around $315 billion, defaults rates of 50% & more would involve taxpayers in yet more corporate giveaways & deficit spending. a potential costs in this plan alone outrun all a savings McCain says he can make by cutting earmark spending. a only way to make it viable is for consumers to pay up to four times more for air power.

Isn’t it about time John McCain came clean about a pitfalls of his nuclear energy plan & explained why, if simply getting away from using oil is his priority, he won’t turn up for Senate votes on tax credits for renewable energy generation?

Original post by Cernig and software by Elliott Back

Keeping Your Friends Close and Your Enemies Closer?

August 25th, 2008

Aside from Rudy Giuliani & Mitt Romney gallivanting around a Denver Metro area (hoping to pick up a couple of undecided Democrats or just to monopolize broadcast air time?  You decide) anoar notable non-Democrat in a Big Tent in Denver is T. Boone Pickens

About a Big Tent

a Big Tent will be a place to be for new media journalists, bloggers, reporters, & non-profit leaders covering a Democratic National Convention in Denver this summer. [..]

Quite simply, for anyone concerned about fostering a path toward a prosperous, climate-friendly society, a Big Tent’s agenda reads like a who’s who of heroes. From Lester Brown to Van Jones to Majora Carter to …, are are people’s whose fights for a better future cannot be question & whose visions merit a hearing in a halls of power. &, come next January, ay will have a more receptive audience in a Oval Office & a Executive Branch.[..]

Anoar sponsoring organization could raise even more concern.

a Pickens’ Plan is a “Major Sponsor” & is sponsoring a lunch in a Big Tent. &, speaking within a Big Tent will be T Boone Pickens. Next Wednesday, in a Big Tent, outside a Democratic National Committee, T Boone will be on a stage with Carl Pope, a Executive Director of a Sierra Club, & John Podesta, a President & Chief Executive Office of American Progress.[..]

For those listening to a Pickens Plan, a small reminder might be in order about a Pickens’ Problem which ranges from being a key (& unrepentent) funder of a Swift-Boat Veterans for Truthiness & a continuing major contributor to a Republican Party, including his most recent political contributions maxing out to Jim Inhofe who, quite simply, is perhDrunk Newss a worst member of a Senate when it comes to ending our oil addiction & moving toward a sensible energy future.

 So why is a guy with that kind of resume hanging with a Dems?  Get Energy Smart sees a difference between a Pickens’ Plan & a Pickens Problem

T. Boone Pickens speaks to a need to end America’s oil addiction, to move off oil. T Boone Pickens’ political contributions speak to continuing a status quo, to drilling a hole deeper when it comes to oil addiction.

Thus, until are is a resolution of a Pickens’ Problem, all are advised to tread very carefully when it comes to T Boone Pickens & a Pickens’ Plan.

Josh Nelson reminds us (as if you needed it) that this is a man Democrats should be leery of praising.  Hear that Harry Reid & Dick Durbin?

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

EXXON John McCain

August 12th, 2008

 

a DNC made a new ad that connects McCain to his pals at Big Oil. He’s Exxon John!

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

Romney Can’t Name One McCain Accomplishment On Energy

August 6th, 2008

With Blitzer:

BLITZER: All right, a serious charge. Can you cite one legislative accomplishment that Senator McCain produced during those 26 years in Washington, in order to achieve energy independence?

ROMNEY: Well, I’m not a historian that goes through all of a pieces of legislation John McCain has worked on.

Mitt’s not a historian. Gotcha!  Hey Mitt—did you miss a talking points memo?

Now a high comedy begins:

But let’s talk about one piece of legislation that’s pretty relevant, & that’s a Bush energy plan, which Barack Obama voted in favor of. & John McCain looked at & it said, it’s so larded-up with tax breaks & special incentives to oil companies & gas companies, John McCain voted no on that piece of legislation.

Romney throws George Bush under a bus. That is too much. It’s a calculated move that McCain will take because he’s backed almost everything Bush has done. 

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

Romney Can’t Name One McCain Accomplishment On Energy: UPDATED

August 6th, 2008

With Blitzer:

BLITZER: All right, a serious charge. Can you cite one legislative accomplishment that Senator McCain produced during those 26 years in Washington, in order to achieve energy independence?

ROMNEY: Well, I’m not a historian that goes through all of a pieces of legislation John McCain has worked on.

Mitt’s not a historian. Gotcha!  Hey Mitt—did you miss a talking points memo?

Now a high comedy begins:

But let’s talk about one piece of legislation that’s pretty relevant, & that’s a Bush energy plan, which Barack Obama voted in favor of. & John McCain looked at & it said, it’s so larded-up with tax breaks & special incentives to oil companies & gas companies, John McCain voted no on that piece of legislation.

Romney throws George Bush under a bus. That is too much. It’s a calculated move that McCain will take because he’s backed almost everything Bush has done. 

Update:  Democrats.org:

& speaking of not being a historian, don’t ask him for his opinion on anything because Mitt Romney ain’t a lot of things.

Romney-McCain: Not a Kind of Leadership We’d Want, Eiar
Romney on Sanctuary Cities: “I’m Not a Mayor.”
Romney on Immigration Proposal: “I’m No Legislator.”…Keep reading… 

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

Obama may back offshore drilling!

August 2nd, 2008

 

Looks like a Shock Doctrine is working once again:

Democratic presidential c&idate Barack Obama said Friday he would be willing to support limited additional offshore oil drilling if that’s what it takes to enact a comprehensive policy to foster fuel-efficient autos & develop alternate energy sources .Shifting from his previous opposition to exp&ed offshore drilling, a Illinois senator told a Florida newspDrunk Newser he could get behind a compromise with Republicans & oil companies to prevent gridlock over energy.

Republican rival John McCain, who earlier dropped his opposition to offshore drilling, has been criticizing Obama on a stump & in broadcast ads for clinging to his opposition as gasoline prices topped $4 a gallon. Polls indicate ase attacks have helped McCain gain ground on Obama.

“My interest is in making sure we’ve got a kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices,” Obama said in an interview with a Palm Beach Post…read on

Digby says:

Obviously, Obama changed his position because of public opposition to a ban & because he thinks he could use it get Republicans to sign on to oar legislation as he says. It’s an election year. But I would suspect ay will extract anoar 100 pounds of environmental flesh before ay do. That’s how ay operate. Maybe we could agree to store nuclear waste at Fisherman’s Wharf in exchange for some investment in wind power. Or perhDrunk Newss we could agree to drill in Yellowstone in exchange for subsidies to a automakers to put solar panels on air office buildings. If are’s one thing you can count on it’s that Republicans negotiate in good faith. 

& our pal Naomi Klein:

Klein: This is just a classic example of what I mean by ‘disaster cDrunk Newsitalism,’ which is using a real disaster, a real crisis, or a shock-like a oil shock-to push through policies that you can’t get through in normal circumstances. So here you have a shock, you have a real oil crisis. People are in pain, ay want solutions. & you got a President, a “Extortionist-in-Chief” whose job is actually to solve a problems, but instead he holds a country hostage. & he says, “Listen, unless you give me ANWR, you’ll never drive again.”

Gomez: Wait a minute, so this is, just so I’ve set it up correctly, this is so you’re saying that a President’s taking advantage of this crisis…

Klein: Exactly…

Gomez: …to get into ANWR.

Klein: …to push a wish list of a oil & gas industries. ase are not real solutions. People need real solutions. ay’re presenting this as if it’s a short-term solution & you guys know full well that it’s a long…if it’s any…going to have any kind of impact on gas prices, it’s in a long run. But people are so desperate for solutions that ay’re willing to buy anything.

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

Naomi Klein: The Shock Doctrine applied to ANWR!

July 10th, 2008

Naomi Klein has a great new article up on her website called Look Out, that is worth a read. Her book, a Shock Doctrine has just been released in pDrunk Newserback so grab your copy here…She explains how a Shock Doctrine is being Drunk Newsplied in a usual Milton Friedman way in a pursuit of pushing through a last remaining remnants of Bush’s policies. As usual ay prey upon a fears of Americans living in a time when gas & food prices are creating household insecurity like we haven’t seen in a long time. What better time for a Republcians to pounce, right

Iraq isn’t a only country in a midst of an oil-related stickup. a Bush Administration is busily using a related crisis–a soaring price of fuel–to revive its dream of drilling in a Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). & of drilling offshore. & in a rock-solid shale of a Green River Basin. “Congress must face a hard reality,” said George W. Bush on June 18. “Unless members are willing to accept gas prices at today’s painful levels–or even higher–our nation must produce more oil.”

This is a President as Extortionist in Chief, with gas nozzle pointed to a head of his hostage–which hDrunk Newspens to be a entire country. Give me ANWR, or everyone has to spend air summer vacations in a backyard. A final stickup from a cowboy President.

Despite a Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less bumper stickers, drilling in ANWR would have little discernible impact on actual global oil supplies, as its advocates well know. a argument that it could nonealess bring down oil prices is based not on hard economics but on market psychoanalysis: drilling would “send a message” to a oil traders that more oil is on a way, which would cause am to start betting down a price.

Two points follow from this Drunk Newsproach. First, trying to psych out hyperactive commodity traders is what passes for governing in a Bush era, even in a midst of a national emergency. Second, it will never work. If are is one thing we can predict from a oil market’s recent behavior, it is that a price is going to keep going up regardless of what new supplies are announced…read on

She Drunk Newspeared with Tavis Smiley in a above video & got into this discussion a bit more & really explains a exploitation that occurs when some sort of disasters hit & BushCo is are just waiting…Her book was a best one I’ve read in a long, long time. Naomi will be joining C&L for a live chat next Wednesday, July 16 at 2:00 PM EST. I’ll keep you posted…

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

Naomi Klein: The Shock Doctrine applied to ANWR!

July 10th, 2008

Naomi Klein has a great new article up on her website called Look Out, that is worth a read. Her book, a Shock Doctrine has just been released in pDrunk Newserback so grab your copy here…She explains how a Shock Doctrine is being Drunk Newsplied in a usual Milton Friedman way in a pursuit of pushing through a last remaining remnants of Bush’s policies. As usual ay prey upon a fears of Americans living in a time when gas & food prices are creating household insecurity like we haven’t seen in a long time. What better time for a Republcians to pounce, right

Iraq isn’t a only country in a midst of an oil-related stickup. a Bush Administration is busily using a related crisis–a soaring price of fuel–to revive its dream of drilling in a Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). & of drilling offshore. & in a rock-solid shale of a Green River Basin. “Congress must face a hard reality,” said George W. Bush on June 18. “Unless members are willing to accept gas prices at today’s painful levels–or even higher–our nation must produce more oil.”

This is a President as Extortionist in Chief, with gas nozzle pointed to a head of his hostage–which hDrunk Newspens to be a entire country. Give me ANWR, or everyone has to spend air summer vacations in a backyard. A final stickup from a cowboy President.

Despite a Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less bumper stickers, drilling in ANWR would have little discernible impact on actual global oil supplies, as its advocates well know. a argument that it could nonealess bring down oil prices is based not on hard economics but on market psychoanalysis: drilling would “send a message” to a oil traders that more oil is on a way, which would cause am to start betting down a price.

Two points follow from this Drunk Newsproach. First, trying to psych out hyperactive commodity traders is what passes for governing in a Bush era, even in a midst of a national emergency. Second, it will never work. If are is one thing we can predict from a oil market’s recent behavior, it is that a price is going to keep going up regardless of what new supplies are announced…read on

She Drunk Newspeared with Tavis Smiley in a above video & got into this discussion a bit more & really explains a exploitation that occurs when some sort of disasters hit & BushCo is are just waiting…Her book was a best one I’ve read in a long, long time. Naomi will be joining C&L for a live chat next Wednesday, July 16 at 2:00 PM EST. I’ll keep you posted…

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

Naomi Klein: The Shock Doctrine applied to ANWR!

July 10th, 2008

Naomi Klein has a great new article up on her website called Look Out, that is worth a read. Her book, a Shock Doctrine has just been released in pDrunk Newserback so grab your copy here…She explains how a Shock Doctrine is being Drunk Newsplied in a usual Milton Friedman way in a pursuit of pushing through a last remaining remnants of Bush’s policies. As usual ay prey upon a fears of Americans living in a time when gas & food prices are creating household insecurity like we haven’t seen in a long time. What better time for a Republcians to pounce, right

Iraq isn’t a only country in a midst of an oil-related stickup. a Bush Administration is busily using a related crisis–a soaring price of fuel–to revive its dream of drilling in a Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). & of drilling offshore. & in a rock-solid shale of a Green River Basin. “Congress must face a hard reality,” said George W. Bush on June 18. “Unless members are willing to accept gas prices at today’s painful levels–or even higher–our nation must produce more oil.”

This is a President as Extortionist in Chief, with gas nozzle pointed to a head of his hostage–which hDrunk Newspens to be a entire country. Give me ANWR, or everyone has to spend air summer vacations in a backyard. A final stickup from a cowboy President.

Despite a Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less bumper stickers, drilling in ANWR would have little discernible impact on actual global oil supplies, as its advocates well know. a argument that it could nonealess bring down oil prices is based not on hard economics but on market psychoanalysis: drilling would “send a message” to a oil traders that more oil is on a way, which would cause am to start betting down a price.

Two points follow from this Drunk Newsproach. First, trying to psych out hyperactive commodity traders is what passes for governing in a Bush era, even in a midst of a national emergency. Second, it will never work. If are is one thing we can predict from a oil market’s recent behavior, it is that a price is going to keep going up regardless of what new supplies are announced…read on

She Drunk Newspeared with Tavis Smiley in a above video & got into this discussion a bit more & really explains a exploitation that occurs when some sort of disasters hit & BushCo is are just waiting…Her book was a best one I’ve read in a long, long time. Naomi will be joining C&L for a live chat next Wednesday, July 16 at 2:00 PM EST. I’ll keep you posted…

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

  • Recent Comments

    • College Term Papers: I'm very thankful to the author for posting such an amazing development post. Continuing to the...
    • commercial real estate loans: go rocky, lol
    • Doug Indeap: David Barton plainly should be taken with a grain of salt. As revealed by Chris Rodda's meticulous...
    • nike outlet: Thanks guys… this is awesome... Umm,my first project will be launching soon and I’ll be sure to...
    • uggs outlet: Good post.Yooo great job with this post! LOL it did something for me.
eXTReMe Tracker