Stories tagged with "barack obama"

OpenForQuestions - The Oil Drum Questions for Whitehouse.gov

Yesterday I was sent (numerous times) a link to whitehouse.gov, where the White House is inviting folks to participate in a community-moderated online town hall discussing the economy and administration. Today the President will answer some of the most popular submissions live at WhiteHouse.gov. After I read a large sampling of the questions submitted, it struck me that the growing chatter on TOD and elsewhere that this economic downturn may finally signal limits to growing the type of system we have had up until now, that this is exactly NOT the type of questions they are getting in this public survey.

Some Thoughts on the Obama Energy Agenda from the Perspective of Net Energy

The Obama-Biden comprehensive a New Energy for America Plan is designed to:

  1. Help create five million new jobs by strategically investing $150 billion over the next ten years to catalyze private efforts to build a clean energy future.
  2. Within 10 years save more oil than we currently import from the Middle East and Venezuela combined.
  3. Put 1 million Plug-In Hybrid cars -- cars that can get up to 150 miles per gallon -- on the road by 2015, cars that we will work to make sure are built here in America.
  4. Ensure 10 percent of our electricity comes from renewable sources by 2012, and 25 percent by 2025.
  5. Implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050

The Obama energy agenda focuses on - and these are not mutually exclusive - efficiency, electrification, and the promotion of alternative energy resources. Its five main goals are set up in a way so that success in any one of the five individual areas will reinforce the other 4, helping the overall agenda achieve success. For example, creating 25% of the U.S. electricity production from renewable resources (goal #4) will aid in decreasing the U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 80% (goal #5).

The energy agenda is a welcomed change showing a future outlook that is based, at least to some [small] extent, on the physical realities of the natural resource world. However, from the perspective of net energy, some potential problems do exist. My goal here is to discuss some possible shortcomings of the new administrations energy agenda from the perspective of net energy.

Advice to Pres. Obama (#5): One Engineer's Advice for Energy Policy

This article is one of a series of articles, offering energy advice to President Obama and his administration.

The incoming Obama administration has promised a much-needed change in the direction of US energy policy (or non-policy, as some see the current situation).  However, some of those changes appear to be campaign gimmicks or aimed at satisfying special interests rather than solving our various problems.  (The heavy-for-light crude swap in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve proposed in the Obama-Biden energy proposal appears to be one such gimmick.)

For much too long, US energy legislation (I hesitate to call it policy, because it lacks the coherence to justify the label) has been aimed at short-term patches on problems which have only gotten worse.  CAFE regulations have barely held fuel economy steady, while low fuel prices caused consumption to skyrocket.  "Free trade" allowed cheap oil imports to kill movement toward efficiency and substitutes.  The auto industry lobbied against fuel taxes to promote its short-term interest in selling profitable trucks, with the long-term result that all 3 US automakers will go bankrupt in the next year if nothing is done.

We've had change before, but the results put us where we are now.  It's time for the right change. 

Do you agree that President Obama should significantly raise US gasoline taxes during his term in office?

Yes, I agree.
82% (2631 votes)
No, I do not agree.
18% (567 votes)
Total votes: 3198

Advice To Pres. Obama (#2): Yes We Can, But Will We?

The below post/letter is very important to me, as it brings together much of what I have worked on the past few years. We are at a major crossroads in the history of our nation and our world - the juncture where financial capital no longer can function as an effective marker for real capital. The crisis we face is the product of our own success - therefore it is highly unlikely to be fixed with the same policies and thinking that steered us to the present precipice. There are dozens if not hundreds of salient aspects of our supply and demand situation, each with its own cheerleaders, opponents and unaware. Unless one casts a wide boundary net, myopic focus on any particular issue runs the risk of creating more long term harm than good. In this letter, I attempt to highlight our situation's most critical components, not claiming other issues are unimportant, but that the following principles likely trump/supercede the others:

1) It is energy, not money, that powers our economies. Money is only a marker for real capital.

2) All energy is not equal- each energy investment entails different input costs, and has different output quality, often not recognized by the market system, nor by many environmentalists. We are at peak oil globally and are likely approaching the net energy cliff for the USA

3)The highest odds for arriving at a better energy future lie in exploration of, understanding of, and ultimate jettisoning of our cultural addiction/habituation to conspicuous consumption. Ends and then means.

My Top 10 Energy Stories of 2008

Tis the season for Top 10 stories, and here are what I think were the Top 10 energy stories of the year.

1. Unprecedented volatility in the energy markets

Oil prices raced to nearly $150 a barrel, and then fell to the $30's by year end. This marks the highest ever prices for oil, followed by the lowest prices in four years. Gasoline, diesel, and natural gas prices demonstrated the same kind of volatility. There are multiple factors behind the volatility. The role of speculation was hotly debated, and the economic collapse - fueled by cash-strapped consumers who had overextended themselves - resulted in a sharp drop in demand. Some even argued that the real reason behind the plunge in prices was closure of the so-called "Enron loophole."

Obama's Energy Policy: Listening When We Disagree

Barack Obama has said that energy is going to be one of his top priorities. I believe he is completely sincere about this and that energy will get a lot of attention early on in his administration. I believe he is committed to moving the U.S. toward energy independence and a greener energy future. However, one can recognize energy as an important priority, yet sharply differ on the policy direction that is needed. For instance, some may have energy as a high priority because they feel that gasoline is too expensive. Their priority may be to keep gasoline prices low so people's budgets aren't adversely impacted by their fuel bills. Some can see energy as a top priority, and yet promote solutions like suing OPEC for more oil.

On the other hand, someone else may see energy as a top priority, but think low gasoline prices are not the solution, but instead a big part of the problem. This is the nature of my disagreement with some aspects of Obama's energy plans: We broadly agree on the big picture, but differ on how to get there. And since I recently heard him say “I may not agree, but I will listen”, here is my attempt to highlight what I feel are the flaws in his energy proposals.

New Cabinet Position-"Energy and the Environment"?

Last night on the Change.gov website, the major 'categories' for the transition administration included the usual headings: 'Commerce', 'Defense', 'Education', etc. But there was a curious entry in the list: "Energy and the Environment", (which is no longer there). My eyes expected to see "Energy" and "Environment" under separate headings. (Todays listing of cabinet positions is now identical to the current admininistrations.) But for a brief, heart pounding moment, I thought this might be a sneak preview into a sea change in the way policy leaders see the world, one unified Cabinet position, linking two critically interconnected areas, Energy and the Environment. I expect it was a snafu, or I misunderstood what I was seeing. As such, this brief post is not about advocating or predicting such a cabinet position will emerge. But as we go forward in these challenging Liebigs Law times, such a cabinet position might be the first step in recognition both of limits, and of the wide boundary impacts of our internalize profits / externalize costs social system. Of course there are risks with such a union...

McCain’s Energy Plan: Correct Diagnosis, Killer Prescription

With gas topping $4 per gallon and oil prices seemingly reaching new highs every week, more pain at the pump is certain in the foreseeable future, and energy policy is rightfully claiming its place as a major topic of the 2008 election. Indeed, John McCain gave a major campaign speech earlier this week in Houston specifically on energy (the full transcript can be found here) and addresses the issue again this week in Santa Barbara. It is worth looking in more detail at how he describes the current situation, and what he is proposing.

A quote from Obama in Oregon..."We can't eat as much as we want...and then expect other countries...to say OK"

OBAMA: 'We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK'...

Discuss. (AFP via Google via Drudge)