Global Confusion
Our current obsession with smash mouth talk radio/TV combined with sound bite policy has given birth to some ludicrous debates that serve no purpose other than to raise the blood pressure. The heat generated from these shouting matches rivals the man-made toxins that are polluting our atmosphere and causing, oops; global warming. Could the scientific community be more confused about this phenomenon, its causes and its ultimate outcome? Their confusion is only matched by the conviction of the Hollywood brain trust that has thoroughly reviewed the data and unleashed Chicken Little to look for ozone holes and the consequent pieces of falling sky.
The debate around global warming is at best, distracting; at worst, detrimental. The planet’s temperature has moved up and down across history, including during the last century. The current emotional and hysterical debate has completely clouded the merits of clean-tech and alternative energy in a haze of fog and hot air. Instead of arguing the merits of these emerging technologies and their benefits to us; the pundits scream at each other like school children arguing over the only box of toys in the playroom.
The real question is whether or not reducing pollution, breaking our reliance on oil and creating new jobs is a good idea. Who would argue with this? Regardless of whether you think glaciers are melting irreversibly or simply breaking from natural growth and cavitation, we rely upon a diminishing resource for our energy needs, and this is a bad thing. Seeking alternatives to pulling coal, oil or shale out of the ground strikes me as a good idea.
While government policy may look to the debate around global warming as one data point; there are many others of a far more compelling and immediate nature that support the development of a vibrant alternative and green energy industry. Tax incentives to support R&D around fuel cells, nuclear energy and ethanol production are a simple place to start. Detroit has asked for government assistance in accelerating battery research for the next generation of hybrid automobiles. Government mandates that further accelerate the pace of innovation are another, non-budget-busting way to induce action.
A concentrated effort focused on the entire spectrum of alternative energy possibilities with the growth of our economy and the defense of our nation as its goal and motivation is more tangible and appeals to a broader base of voters and citizens than any incendiary, confused international shouting match. And, oh by the way, such efforts might reduce carbon effluent, if you cared about that.
Gotta Start Somewhere
Interesting stuff, thanks. The sooner we can move to a discussion of the practical aspects of re-energizing (no pun intended) this industry, the better off we will all be. The debate is still stuck on who is right about global warming - a total waste of time. Let's talk about lower costs, more efficient engines, new technologies and re-emerging as the leader in alternative energies for this next century.
You make a strong argument and a resolution coming before us in Stratham gets to your point, it reads:
"New Hampshire Climate Change Resolution
To see if the town will go on record in support of effective actions by the President and the Congress to address the issue of climate change which is increasingly harmful to the environment and economy of New Hampshire and to the future well being of the people of Stratham .
These actions include:
1) Establishment of a national program requiring reductions of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions while protecting the U.S. economy.
2) Creation of a major national research initiative to foster rapid development of sustainable energy technologies thereby stimulating new jobs and investment.
In addition, the town of Stratham encourages New Hampshire citizens to work for emission reductions within their communities, and we ask our Selectmen to consider the appointment of a voluntary energy committee to recommend local steps to save energy and reduce emissions.
The record of the vote on this article shall be transmitted to the New Hampshire Congressional Delegation, to the President of the United States, and to declared candidates for those offices."
Nuclear fits in here as a solution, and the R and D gets to alternative energy solutions and the price points we need to see to make sure a market for benign technologies is created and grows. Regarding required reductions in CO2, the resolution makes a point of 'protecting the US economy" - which means our long-term economic health must be taken into account - that is, if carbon is capped, the price of carbon is not allowed to escalate until the US economy can absorb it, and/or countries like China and India also move in this direction. As for asking my selectmen to consider appointing a vcoluntary energy committee I'm all for it - and would hope to find taxpayer savings to boot. Claremont is an excellent example - working with PSNH they changed out 1016 street lamps and are saving $1 million over ten years . . and the CO2 savings are a bonus.