The United States presidential election of 2008 is scheduled for today, November 4. While the campaign was dominated initially by foreign policy and more recently by the financial crisis, there are other issues including energy. The likely new President, Barack Obama, has promised $150 billion for renewable energy, while Republican hopeful, John McCain, has promised 45 new nuclear power stations and to expand domestic oil and natural gas exploration and production.
The Obama "New Energy for America" plan also includes: short-term relief to American families facing pain at the pump; the creation of five million new jobs by strategically investing $150 billion over the next ten years to catalyze private efforts to build a clean energy future; within 10 years save more oil than is currently import from the Middle East and Venezuela combined; put 1 million Plug-In Hybrid cars -- cars that can get up to 150 miles per gallon -- on the road by 2015, cars that Obama will work to make sure are built in America; ensure 10 percent of electricity comes from renewable sources by 2012, and 25 percent by 2025; Implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050.
It's over.
Obama and the Dhimmicrats have won.
The Dark Ages return.
This is serious. Because you need capital to get energy and energy to get capital and so forth. The point being is that you can fall into a capital-energy vortex that will be very difficult to come out of. An energy crisis is not time to start wishboning over alleged renewables. You might think about them after the 45 nuclear power plans are built, and with the coal liquification plants beside them.
America is already set up to have brownouts all over the place. We here don't appear to be in such a great position either. Four years of a Marxist coterie running things could do a great deal of damage.
Paul
"Obama also plans to bankrupt the coal industry"
As I said in my post above
Obama also plans to bankrupt the coal industry:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/11/03/obamas-energy-plan-bankupt-coal-power-plants-skyrocketing-electricity-rates/
Geoff
Clean coal? Given the belief that coal is compressed vegetation, then the anomalous trace elements of uranium, iridium and other nasties comes as a surprise.
Well, no, bituminous coal is not what most of us believe it to be. The heavy hydrocarbons are mantle exhalations, not compressed daffodils.
Grendel,
1. Drowning occurs from inhalation of a liquid, water, into the lungs. Is water thus a pollutant?
2. A snow flake landing on my head is a minor enjoyment, but a hailstone probably an incovenience, or if large enough, a danger. Is solid water this a pollutant?
3. An ice cube in my glass of spirits is enjoyable, but a lump of ice the size of an ice-berg would freeze me to death. Is solid water (ice) a pollutant?
And your quote from Paracelsus - are you sure the interpretation into English from the Greek is correct?
So Grendel, do you think Obama should also declare water and oxygen to be pollutants.
"All things are poison and nothing is without poison, only the dose permits something not to be poisonous"
(Paracelsus)
This is true even of water, oxygen and CO2. In a sense anything of which there is a too much becomes a pollutant.
Barack also is against clean coal. Is there clean coal?
http://www.westernroundtable.net/mail/util.cfm?gpiv=1999871461.126406.127&gen=1
"What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it. So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them."
Barack Obama has also promised to have CO2 officially declared a pollutant.
Death to plants and us