There is currently no strategy or proposal on the table for the needed energy conversion to renewable sources for transportation and energy production. For all the hoopla about Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" and given Senator Gore's own background in the Executive and Legislative branches of the Federal Government, there is little in the way of concrete policy proposals that have been introduced as a cornerstone of a new energy policy.
What is needed?
This issue requires a political settlement that involves large, capital-intensive sectors of the American economy. It is pure folly to expect there to be a negotiating table set up as things stand. The governors and mayors of American have initiated much of the current activity. There needs to be a political mandate that is defined through the Congressional and Presidential elections specifically to move from no-action to a Preferred Scenario that will have the needed impact on global warming. This leaves out both the Democratic and Republican candidates. It leaves open the options of Unity '08, the Greens and any others who hold the potential for a comprehensive package of recommendations to enact. http://www.unity08.com/ An independent candidate needs to have defined supporters that endorse the proposal for a national package in order to coordinate the strategy to enact legislation in Congress.
The Green Party current political leadership remains complacent and more focused on the Iraq war then it is on environmental concerns regarding the adoption of a strategy that is based on climate change. James Howard Kunstler, author of THE LONG EMERGENCY, would certainly be a candidate that could unite conservatives and others around the oil peak and energy transition issues. Bill Richardson, a favorite son here in NM, has certainly provided little concrete leadership in addressing energy transition, resource management or national leadership on the Climate Change issue. Arnold Schwarzenegger appears to have usurped that crown quite vigorously with little competition.
After a brief compiling of a White Paper http://www.energywhitepaper.gov.au/ addressing the various mechanisms needed for a transition, it is imperative that there be established bio-regional, intercontinental and ocean-atmospheric interaction entities to increase data and develop recommendations for interventions to reduce gas house emissions and mitigate the impacts of global warming. Just as necessary is an international accord to update Kyoto and establish mandatory international requirements for the reduction of greenhouse emissions. http://www.climatechoices.org/impacts_overview/index.html
The development of a serious effort in this regard has not even begun. The first necessary steps is to establish a broad-based coalition of organizations that establishes a common, working strategy for the writing, passing and implementation of an Energy Transition Legislative Package. A five-year target date should be established at an appropriate Founding Congress of political action groups. Political action during that time needs to be prioritized in regards to the passage in Congress, and State Legislatures of the US. Presidential candidates need to be established in the context of presenting this issue on the political agenda in a serious and credible manner.
Time is not on our side. That does not negate the critical element of transformation that can take place rapidly and efficiently once the political will has been consolidated and institutionalized. The complexities are already being addressed.
The alternatives are already modeled in locales and nations around the world. Sweden, Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands have already established energy transition to renewable energy as national priorities.
The unfortunate thing is that most people are not even spectators in this particular matter. The Liberals and Progressives prefer movies to legislation. The Neo-Cons never met a war they didn't like. The Conservatives have left their posts and rejected the Imperial Mandate of King Bush II but are asleep at the switch in regards to the science surrounding global warming. The Libertarians want to laissez-faire our way out of the oil peak and global warming. The Greens focus a little too much of our energy on demonstrations that are no longer renewable, and not enough time demonstrating workable plans for renewable energy and reduction of oil consumption. http://www.progress.org/2007/oil32.htm
In the meantime European Union is pledging to cut greenhouse emissions by 25% by the year 2025. Euro Greens have suggested that it didn't go far enough click here and that is certainly fair enough from their vantage point. But in the US, we have not even put our toe in the water regarding the transition to renewable energy applications. This complicates the task, as we saw when we failed to heed Jimmy Carter's call for the moral equivalent war on oil consumption as President in 1977. http://www.mnforsustain.org/energy_speech_president_carter.htm As the Europeans and others are demonstrating addressing global warming takes concrete action in Congress. It takes the political will demonstrated through establishing new priorities for all political parties. It takes investment by the private sector in transition, as recently demonstrated in the TXU buyout deal. http://freeinternetpress.com/story.php?sid=10831 It takes action by the Governors of multi-state regions click here
It is clear that the preliminary work has already been done. The issue at hand is this: Are we at all disposed to construct a work plan that others will sign on to in order to change current energy policies 180 degrees? Or do we content ourselves with the fatalism of the damsel tied onto the railroad track watching her destiny get closer and closer with the resignation of the doomed. The prioritization of these proposals is not something that can be assigned a place on the backburner for convenience sake. Even making the ratification of Kyoto a minimum threshold for candidate support is insufficient in addressing the profound impacts that climate change has already demonstrated the planet's bio-spheres. There has been action by the EU and European nations, but since this is a global issue it requires a global solution. It remains to be seen where the political leadership will come from on this issue.
Martin Zehr is an American political writer in the San Francisco area. He spent 8 years working as a volunteer water planner for the Middle Rio Grande region. http://www.waterassembly.org
His (more...)
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
The transition certainly is not nuclear. Nuclear power is not the answer. On top of that the supply is limited. Does not make much sense spending all the money they do in building next generation nukplants for a limited supply. Of course there is the waste issue, although they could use the waste to make their own dirty nukbombs and strap them to missiles. To me that is not positive. Infact we should be working toward dismantling.
Al Gore made a good movie and an award, but fell very short in providing answers. I think that is why no one takes him serious, because those very people have no idea either.
I think I have the answer and nobody knows I exist. Anyone can go visit my website: http://www.sugarcitycane.com this is a remarkable plan, and I know it will work. Not only does it provide transportation fuel we also produce charcoal from the bagrasse. And the supply is not limited. It is safe clean energy that does not pollute the air, the ground water, or uses fertilizers and pesticides distributed on land.
It has no waste product. Also it will give Ethanol its own distinction in the market in not being connected to the other commodites that are grown to make ethanol. Starch grown from corn and cellulosic debris is more expensive to grow and process, forcing rising prices to food and building materials such as plywood. Sugarcane grown on land also has the same characterisitcs, in that it pollutes the land and water from fertilizer and pesticides, and the growing region is limited. Growing on land sugarcane is mainly used for sugar production and they burn the fields first causing air pollution in order to harvest the canes easier. Sugarcane only grows well in hot climates. Not many acres of hot regions in the USA.
People think I am crazy growing this on the ocean. How can growing on the ocean be less expensive than on land? Because although money is used to build the supporting Aquatic rafts, they last for many years. Sugarcane is planted one time every 5-7 years depending on the variety and strain. Hydroponic solution is piped to the site from land, or hard bricks are made and thrown into the aquatic rafts where it dissolves from the abundance of rainwater that falls on the equator. No hurricanes, cyclones, or typhoons, materialize. It is safer there than on the mainland. Just think no crop insurance.
The Ocean is my story. This plan would create millions of jobs. I should run for President! I don't because people like killing more than living.
Hope we see the light. Funny I have the idea but no exposure like Al Gore. The planet is getting hotter, and colder. But the cold is not where it should be. The Artic is melting, Mt. Everest Snow cap is melting, and we go on with a stupid war in Iraq for oil in order to burn more of it in wrecking our atmosphere. What a terrible set of circumstances we have. President Bush will be calling me someday, and that day is getting to be a bit to late, on his part.
I just hope people study this and realize that God made this planet a certain way, and it is up us to realize the potentials for its use in sustainability. Winning elections over limited supplies of energy while destroying the planet is no winner in my mind. They are big time losers.
by
Dom Jermano (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 40 diaries, 930 comments) on Sunday, Mar 25, 2007 at 7:04:36 AM
(0+)
Want to post your own comment on this Article?
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Contact Author
View Authors' Articles
(0+)
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0) 
