Comments for re: A Hard Sell at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 15 out of 15 comments http://www.theind.com Tue, 21 May 2013 12:39:27 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4535 I would just like to remind everyone that there already is a CAP and Trade protocol in place in the United States along with most other countries. It is the Cap on Sulfur Dioxide emissions. You might remember those nasty buggers as the chemicals that caused acid rain. This began with the 1990 Clean Air act. It has worked. However, there is some debate as to whether a Carbon Tax on emissions or a Cap/Trade/Reduce system is the best option to reduce emissions. Around the same time as the SO2 cap, the Montreal protocol was established to Tax the production of CFC's. You might remember those as the terrible ozone destroying chemicals, that put holes in our atmospheric defense against the sun's UV rays. While preparing this comment, I searched online and read the following source which provides some background to this matter: http://uscarbonreport.com/what-worked-for-acid-rain-won’t-work-for-climate-change/ And then there are those of you doubt any approach is necessary. Regardless of climate change, peak oil/gas/coal will still be issues for us to deal with, along with retooling our national infrastructure for moving and powering our cities and farms (much less global trade). We will still have local environmental degradation from mountain top removal mining and coal ash, coal slurry, and coal sludge ponds. These are threats to water and air quality, ... threats to our health, threats to the health of the food we eat, farm, fish, hunt, etc. Many think the push to develop renewable energy is based on vague and blurry communo-socialist/fascist, totalitarian-du-jour, the goals of an underground trickster-elite. That's hogwash. Renewable energy, and a more sustainable economy are nothing more than ensuring that we can live within the limits of what our planet can handle, and returning America to its traditional economic values of free-markets. The presence of transnational global corporations controlling the political process is not the manifestation of the free-market. It is corporate socialism. These entities exploit us by taking wealth out of our communities disproportionately greater than what they create, they manipulate our government, these entities deplete our natural resources as well as those of "3rd World" countries through the creation of free trade zones and the removal of non-tariff barriers to trade, and they exploit the people all around the world and their governments through the international trade and banking institutions which heretofore have had a bad record of forcing countries to grow single crops for export and loaning funds only for export related infrastructure projects. If anything, the elites in the 3rd world benefit and the little people, (which one would think is us type o' folk here in Lafayette, Louisiana) are the ones to suffer through mandated structural adjustment programs, forcing their governments to privatize public health, education and utility services, in order to see their governments pay back the foreign debt owed. One could consider this approach with respect to the issues of sugar-cane and catfish growers and the shrimp and crawfish harvesters. How many no-regulation Republicans down in Louisiana would really care to down those Chinese imports, and who's pocket are you putting your money in to? This isn't meant to be a xenophobic appeal, but a little-guy appeal. So sorry for the huge ramble. JP mentioned conspiracies, so I had to indulge. It's no conspiracy, but simply the daily affairs of what's going on in this world, behind the scenes. Simon Johnson and other former economists at the World Bank and IMF have a lot to say about this trade issue, as well as the follies of Wall Street and it's control of Washington and the subsequent bail-outs. Do some reading and research. You'll find the "leftists" and the "rightists" often have a lot in common. Their supposed "extremes" are of scale when compared to centrist policies. Really, if the other countries are going to get the jobs from the wind/solar bonanza, at the expense of the domestic US fossil fuel production industries, then what does that say for the US if we'll be forced to buy and uncompetitive to produce wind and solar? Doesn't something not add up? - Jason D. Faulk Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:54:18 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4469 Where are you getting your talking points, Jeffrey? The focus of these groups is not some nefarious scheme to turn us into a communist state, but a simple desire to have energy that doesn't pollute and destroy the environment that nurtures us, or warm the planet. And, the emails of a half dozen scientists, however bad they are, do not refute the entire body of evidence. Let's look at the studies they participated in and if they are flawed, then throw them out. There's still a vast amount of other evidence for our influence on warming. Partisan hacks trying to say these emails change everything already had it in their mind before this that it's all a big conspiracy. - JP Wed, 02 Dec 2009 08:16:09 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4462 Starring Bill Clinton and Howard Dean The Green Mask Is Being Peeled Away From The CO²mmunists – All Eyes Now On Copenhagen http://biggovernment.com/2009/11/30/the-green-mask-is-being-peeled-away-from-the-communists-all-eyes-now-on-copenhagen/ The new green is the old RED! - Joe the Poster Tue, 01 Dec 2009 22:33:42 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4444 >Natural gas isn’t part of the Repower pitch Why not, because it burns clean and with the Haynesville, Bossier, and other formations coming on line, there are hundreds of years worth of reserves? And it burns clean. And why not nuclear? Because it's not part of the ideology of this group, which is funded by the Alliance for Climate Protection, an Al Gore wacko-founded group: http://www.climateprotect.org/about/ Recognize that the main focus of these groups is not so much environmental as it is to use the issue to bring the private sector under control of the government. And as, the recent unveiling of the effort among climate change hawks to cook the data and stifle dissent has corroborated, based on, at best, questionable science, at worst, junk science. - Jeffrey Sadow Tue, 01 Dec 2009 18:18:14 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4441 ETEE, reading your post I find it hard to believe that you would be an objective source of information on green jobs and renewable energy. Too many partisan talking points. The amount of cynicism and downright vitriol expressed in these comments is atrocious. One even compared "Greens" with "Islamic terrorists." Coal production actually requires less manpower than it used to due to technology, especially with the efficient yet environmentally devastating form of mountaintop removal. Renewable energy does have great job potential...maybe not much more than conventional energy but certainly not the dismal outlook that you portray. The fossil fuel industry is entrenched in this country and has bought off a big chunk of lawmakers in both parties, which is part of the reason why we are not already on a better path to renewables. Of course we will have to still use fossil fuels, but the transition to a renewable energy paradigm will have to come sooner or later...and we will all benefit from less pollution. It ain't a "left/right" issue. - JP Tue, 01 Dec 2009 17:54:57 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4423 Take it from someone that works in the Renewables field, there will not be any "Green Jobs". In comparing a proposed 500MW Wind Generation Plant to a current Coal-Fired Electrical Generating Plant, we will eliminate 3 out of 4 jobs. Everything from Mining Equipment manufacturers,Coal Miners, Coal Train Engineers,and the list goes on.The people we do hire will be experienced former Plant Operations personnel of those Coal-Fired Plants that will be forced out of operation by Cap & Trade Carbon Taxes. Wind Generators are made in India,the EU or China; American manufacturers, soon to be strapped with Cap & Trade Carbon Taxes will never be able to compete with them. The only "Green Jobs" available from Obamas Administration seem to be tilling the rows in Michelle's Organic Whitehouse Vegetable Garden.Perhaps they can buy Harris a hoe............ - ETEE Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:02:07 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4375 GOSH! Dolly Llama, YAH must be AH LAGCOE OIL DROP or ah LAGCOE QUEEN ? - NORTHSIDIAN SHOTGUN Sun, 29 Nov 2009 01:41:41 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4362 THERE IS NOT EVEN ENOUGH SUGARCANE GROWN IN AMERICA TO FUEL THE CARS IN LAFAYETTE FOR 1 YEAR!!!!!!!!!!! WHY, would you think that ethanol wouldn't cause harm to the environment? Digested cud by cattle, causing methane, does!! - NORTHSIDIAN SHOTGUN Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:09:18 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4357 Repower America should probably canvas Louisiana by foot in the middle of August. Then they would understand why we need to keep energy cheap and plentiful--in addition to feeling it for themselves, they would see the ubiquity of air conditioners and the generators that have become standard home features in post-hurricane Louisiana. They will have even more success if they keep the politics out of the discussion. They should dismiss and ignore the discredited global-warming excuses that are being used to drive legislation and silence opposition. Do they promote nuclear power, which powers Europe? Noticeably absent from the article is any mention of ethanol. What happened to it? Why aren't we talking about getting biofuels from sugarcane? - Jay Bienvenu Thu, 26 Nov 2009 21:47:01 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4350 A problem with the Greens is their fanaticism prevents them from being wrong; similar to an Islamic terrorist. They might as well yell Allāhu Akbar. Green energy will not work unless the numbers add up. Some ideas, like better insulation and building design do; these are passive but the investment is worth it. Others like wind energy and solar can not compete. Until the economic equation tilts, oil, gas, and coal will remain with us. - Dolly Llama Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:59:22 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4323 That worthless group better not knock on my door. The man-made global warming scam is being exposed for the fraud it is, bit by bit. The latest exposed emails go a long way to show how dishonest the global warming scam artists really are. Drill now, drill here, drill everywhere.......... - Pocketfullofaces Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:36:04 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4322 29000 jobs? How do you get that number? And, how many jobs will it cost? Wind turbines? Are you kidding me? Ask T Boone Pickins about wind turbines! At this point, I think most people just need protection from the government. - Billy Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:22:32 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4321 Jason, the climate needs protection from the human activities that are destroying it. - Caitlin Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:50:42 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4317 More "power" to you, Jack. There are enough rational people in this state, too, who realize the necessity of transitioning to clean power. It will take decades, so why wait until the last minute and have to scramble? It's just a shame that the money is a pittance relative to what we spend on the warfare/welfare state, or the money we recently gave to Wall Street robber barons. Imagine if our priorities REALLY shifted from entrenched interests into real solutions. I wonder how much it would cost to put a solar roof on every house? - JP Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:58:24 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/5255#comment-4316 How does a person working for a non-profit climate protection afford to eat? What does our climate need protection from? - Jason K Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:35:43 +0100