Consumers Union campaign "A Greener Future" is working for clean, renewable, affordable energy.
The battle over more clean energy and less dependence on fossil fuels is being fought right now in Congress – though you might not have heard much about it.
In January, the President laid down a national challenge that 80 percent of our electricity come from cleaner sources by 2035. His just-released budget shows a strong commitment to that goal by supporting research and development of renewable energy, alternative fuels and efficiency.
But the House majority has taken a U-turn on clean energy, passing a budget that cuts renewable energy and energy efficiency programs by nearly $900 million.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s budget was slashed by $3 billion, and the House voted to kill all funding in the current budget that would allow the EPA to enforce greenhouse gas rules. The House budget also makes deep cuts into scientific research at the Department of Energy, and public health research at the Centers for Disease Control and National Institutes on Health.
And the fight over a clean energy future isn’t just about the money. Many House members also are trying to stop enforcement of anti-pollution laws already on the books, including the Clean Air Act. Several draft bills would weaken restrictions on industrial releases of pollutants such as lead, mercury, arsenic, carbon dioxide, and particulate-matter.
Those trying to rollback the Clean Air Act claim that reducing pollutants is too hard and costly on industry, despite the historical record that shows the law is both affordable and effective. Since 1970, the Clean Air Act has cut emissions by more than 60 percent, while the U.S. economy and its businesses have boomed, growing by more than 200 percent.
The non-political Office of Management and Budget has shown that the benefits of the Act far outweigh the compliance costs. By reducing pollutants and preventing adverse health effects, countless Americans avoid asthma attacks, heart attacks and even premature death. In 2010 alone, the Clean Air Act saved an estimated 160,000 lives.
Economic times are tight, and federal and state budgets will have to undergo intense scrutiny to eliminate deficits. But stripping away public health protections and under-investing in clean energy development, just continues our overreliance on polluting fossil fuels, unstable foreign governments and unstable energy prices.
Many line items in the federal budget pay for themselves in future savings even after using a realistic interest rate to discount to present dollars. These items should be kept in the budget. Don’t the corporate leaders have any more sense than to foul our nest with pollution. Do they really want to kill the bottom 90% of the population? What makes them think they won’t take themselves down along with the hoi poloi fouling our nest.
Quansor Corporation is on the verge of leaving Kentucky. Why?
According to the Mayor of Hazzard, water pollution from coal does not exist. Trying to get the State of Kentucky to even acknowledge there’s a problem with Mercury and other contaminents is like talking to a brick wall. So Quansor is looking elsewhere for another State to move to.
The problem is our Government is run by BIG BUSINESS. They are bought and paid for by Big Oil and Coal. Big business now owns TV and radio and lies to the American public so they vote the way Oil wants them to. They are to stupid to think about there health, there children’s health or any one else’s. It also comes down to FEAR of change and I don’t give a damn about anything except WHAT’S IN IT FOR ME!
We as people need to get to gather and make our on gas with sugar cane and corn We are very smart if we listen to the government we will not survive we know better we are our own people
When renewable energy is cost effective people will flock to it in droves. I invested $38000 in solar panels a few years ago. It was a stupid economic decision, with a payback period that was about the life of the equipment. I did it because Pennsylvania was facing exponentially rising electricity costs due to some very bad policies instituted about 10 years ago. Then the Fed and State gov. came to my rescue with rebates and renewable energy credits. So now I’m getting a 6%+ return. Thanks all for your contributions.
Congress never gave EPA statutory authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions as a pollutant because CO2 is not a pollutant in the usual sense of the word. It causes no harm to anyone. In fact increased levels of CO2 are likely one of the major reasons food production has increase in the past few decades. I fully endorse removing the EPA’s ability to regulate CO2 emissions because it is based on faulty science, underscored by the fact that the IPCC reports the EPA cited in its endangerment finding specifically said that actual effects of CO2 increase were highly uncertain over the long term.
The use of cropland to produce fuel is pure insanity. Talk about big business- Archer Daniels Midland(ADM) the primary large company behind this idea, has made many billions of dollars off this futile idea. Oil from food has resulted in large increases in food costs, hitting the poorest people the hardest. The energetics of photosynthesis simply cannot produce enough energy to fuel the world economy, even if every acre of arable land was used for energy production.
The best energy policy would be to use the fossil fuels we have(and have yet to discover) to help the world as a whole get up to a decent standard of living. With another 3 billion human minds focusing on the problem we’d have it solved in short order, while giving all the world’s people a chance at a better, longer life.
I appreciate the positive effects of the Clean Air Act on actual air pollution. As an asthma patient I appreciate the fact that I can breathe easier now. Controlling pollutants such as lead, sulfur, ozone, small particulates, and other poisonous substances coming from power generation to levels where their health effects are minimal is a great idea and should not be watered down.
Since we are facing shortage and scarcity right now, government tried to increase VAT.
Government always find a way to earn money,i just don’t like the idea that they are using that to corrupt.
Clean energy is energy produced from renewable resources in a way that does not create environmental debt.
“Clean energy is energy produced from renewable resources in a way that does not create environmental debt.”
I know of no way to produce energy without incurring an environmental debt. The closesest option I know of is nuclear power from a thorium-fueled reactor. The earth has an abundant supply of thorium, the decay sequence does not produce any byproducts that could be used for weapons, and virutally all the thorium can be ‘burnt’ in the reactor. That makes is hugely efficient, which is the only way to make it practicable. The Atomic Energy Agency operated a thorium reactor for some 30 years. The main reason we are stuck with light water reactors. such as the ones damaged in the Fukushima tidal wave or the one at 3 Mile Island in Pennsylvania, is that they produce plutonium for atomic weapons. During the Cold War that was a primary consideration. The Atomic Energy Agency has never pursued any reaearch, beyond the thorium reactor, aimed at finding the best methods of producing electrictiy from atomic power.
The best methods of producing power(electricity, oil or other fuels) from biomass(photosynthesis) require 2 watts of energy from the biomass to produce 1 watt of power. This is incredibly inefficient. According to Wikipdia the energy available from photosynthesis(biomass) world wide , approximately 100 terawatts,[3] which is about six times larger than the power consumption of human civilization.[4] Using the 2:1 ratio, that means that about 1/3 of the earth’s surface would have to be devoted to energy production. That would have terrible environmental effects and destroy the planet.
By comparison the amount of energy available from fission is staggering. 1 gram of thorium is equivalent to 25.0 million kilowatt-hours, 2.5*10^10 watts of electricity. World wide energy consumption is approx. 15 terawatts (1.504×10^13 Watts).[1](Wilipedia). About 1000 grams( 1 kg. or 2.2 lb.) would supply all the energy used in the world last year. Clean nuclear power is the only way to go.
Thank you Phil for explaining your thoughts.Its a bit long but valuable content.
Renewable energy sources consist of solar, hydro, wind, geothermal, ocean and biomass.
Energy in water can be harnessed and used. Since water is about 800 times denser than air, even a slow flowing stream of water, or moderate sea swell, can yield considerable amounts of energy.
“Renewable energy sources consist of solar, hydro, wind, geothermal, ocean and biomass.”
Nuclear- is the only truly renewable form, since some types of reactors can transmute other elements into fuel. Also, nuclear can produce so much energy from so little mass it is nearly trivial.
Solar- land-based solar power is just barely economical. Paving over square miles of open space has large environmental consequences.
Hydro- we are using it, nearly to the maximum economical level. It has destroyed the ecosystems of the many streams that were dammed. It had huge detrimental effects on the salmon fisheries on the west coast.
Wind- so limited and variable it is a joke. Each Kw of wind energy requires 1 Kw of back up power supply, such as coal, gas, or nuclear.
Geothermal- probably the most effective and potentially type. We don’t know that it is truly renewable and it is limited as to location.
Ocean- very low density and erratic like wind. Needs kw for kw backup.
Biomass- The most biomass comes from the best farmland, so it becomes a food or fuel quandary. Ethanol from corn and sugarcane has already had a huge, negative effect on food prices.
It seems like they do have a progress with regards to Clear Energy.
They should give more priority and more funds for clean energy projects. We are all going to benefit from this in the future.
Just what types of “clean” energy would you fund? Solar will be economically effective in a few years as a supplementary source. I installed solar panels(thank you all for your help paying for them) to offset our airconditioning expenses. But even with cheap solar panels solar requires watt for watt backup capacity for those cloudy days.
Try a little at-home experiment to evaluate clean energy. Try living for a few days walking every place you go. Use no more than two 100 watt lights for 2-3 hours in the evening. Cook using natural gas or propane, but no more than 30 minutes of use per day. Limit heating to 2 hrs a day in the cold months. That is a rough approximation of the level of energy “clean, renewable” non-nuclear energy can supply.