Probably the biggest news piece this week was Obama’s State of the Union address. David Roberts of grist seemed to hate it. Whereas often like-minded and equally critical Joe Romm of Climate Progress actually seemed to love it.

Dan Harding of CalFinder had mixed reactions, first “feeling passion stir deep within [him] and tingles of inspiration buzz beneath [his] skin,” then thinking that “[Obama's] speeches have grown more and more centrist.”

Immediately after reading those first two reviews (David and Joe’s), the idea for this article came to my mind. Who’s more powerful than the President of the United States of America?

Read more of this story »

That’s right, you read the headline correctly. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham from South Carolina is getting censored by his own colleagues because of his clean energy, reduce greenhouse gases and carbon pollution, improve energy security message, but he is not letting up.

The Senator gave a speech this week that looks like it could have been given by Obama or Al Gore.

Read more of this story »

Not only that, but it would also give a monthly refund of about $100 to a family of four, refunding approximately 75% of all revenue to US residents.

Read more of this story »

In total, the report showed that China, Japan, and South Korea will invest about $509 billion in clean tech over the next 5 years, whereas the US (with our greenest President in decades, maybe ever) is only expected to invest $172 billion (about 3 times less) — this is assuming the climate and energy legislation in Congress passes.

If the US were to invest the same percentage of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as South Korea, it would invest almost $140 billion per year ($700 billion over this five year period)! Compared to China, the anticipated per-GDP investment ratio is 1:4 (US to China).

In 2008, Japan almost matched US R&D spending on energy and achieved almost the same number of international clean energy patents despite having dramatically lower GDP.

The financial investment is not the only thing giving these countries a major advantage in this field, though.

Read more of this story »

With hope of the US Climate Bill being cleared before the Copenhagen Summit in December there are substantial doubts over the successful negotiation of an international climate treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol. However, the pressure on developing countries to do their bit has resulted in announcements of many national climate goals and regional cooperation deals. It would be interesting to see if these regional agreements infuse momentum into the negotiations for a global climate treaty.

The Indian and Chinese officials recently signed a memorandum of understanding which aims at increased cooperation in renewable energy and energy efficiency projects. The two countries also agreed to jointly study the impacts of global warming and climate change in the Himalayan region. The deal is crucial since it is the first major deal between the two countries after China broke ranks from other developing countries and expressed intentions to take up voluntary sectoral emission cuts.

Pressure Tactics: In the recent months there has been virtually no significant activity on the part of the developed countries with regard to emission reduction goals being set up or announcement of financial aid to poor and developing countries. There is still no consensus on the technology transfer and intellectual property rights issue. These issues are central to the goal of reducing carbon emissions worldwide. The developing countries demand adequate funds and technology as they see mandatory emission cuts to be financially non-feasible for there growing economies.

With these regional deals the developing countries seek to increase pressure on the developed countries not only to agree to bold mitigation measures but also provide for adequate resources to the developing countries to reduce their own emissions.

Read more of this story »

With ‘clean coal’ and nuclear power likely to play a larger-than-expected role in climate change legislation, are we heading for an iceberg? Literally, no–they’re all melting. Figuratively, maybe…

Follow Mean Joe Green on Twitter at @GreenCartoons

Mean Joe Green Cartoon Archive

The Senate climate bill is coming out any day now, and it’s time to get heard! With a new tool from 1Sky, it’s easier than ever to call your Senator and let him or her know you support a strong clean energy policy.

Read more of this story »

It is not clear that President Obama and Majority Leader Harry Reid (pictured left with New Mexico Democrat Jeff Bingaman - another key climate voice) can win a simple majority for carbon-capping climate change legislation this year, with industrial state Dems already defecting, but the lift for Reid and his whips will be even tougher: they cannot overcome a GOP filibuster without a 60 vote super-majority.

If those Senators in favor of climate legislation get the 60 votes they need to block a filibuster and pass a climate bill, they likely can’t do it without a little help from these six. These are the six Senators that lobbyists will be courting, the White House will be pressing, and you should be watching in the coming days and weeks as the Senate addresses climate change.

Read more of this story »

Given the recent track record of Bonner and Associates (fake letter writing, fake health care opponents, phony “FACES” of Coal…) this tactic may very well be next.

Related Articles

Greenpeace Exposes Oil Industry’s Really Dirty Face
Bonner’s Dishonest Tactics Date Back a Decade Plus
Bonner & Associates: the long and undemocratic history of astroturfing

Mean Joe Green Archive

We can’t expect much from the oil industry, but Greenpeace’s newest finding is as ugly as it gets.

Read more of this story »

The Markey Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming is investigating the fake letters sent by the lobbying firm Bonner & Associates claiming the elderly were opposed to the climate bill for fear it would raise utility costs. Five more suspected forgeries were released today bringing the grand total to 58 letters under investigation. 

Read more of this story »

Iowa. In 2006, according to the Iowa Utilities Board, wind power provided 5 percent of the state’s electricity. Now, just three years later,  Iowa produces between 15 and 17 percent of its own electricity from wind power.

MidAmerican Energy, Iowa’s biggest utility, pays farmers $3,500 a year (plus 2% increase annually) to rent locations for 102 wind turbines. To scout the best locations, they paid $5 an acre to survey likely farmland, and will pay $10 an acre per year to keep those options open for future additional wind turbines.

Photo: Sonia Fridman

Read more of this story »

We know a bit about the current situation on climate change. We know which countries are emitting the most global warming emissions. We know that the EU is actively implementing policies to get their emissions down and are serious about keeping climate change at the top of the priority list, even in one of the biggest economic struggles in history. We know that little nations like Tuvalu are working to address climate change. We know that ambitious and engaged countries are running into unseen problems and are unsure where to go in the future. We know that the US is looking to pass a climate bill for the first time and could change history in the process, and the USDA supports it but climate change groups, consumer advocate groups, and social equity groups are quite concerned about some of the changes made by the House of Representatives at the last minute. We know that China, India, and Brazil’s growth in greenhouse gas emissions have skyrocketed (several times faster than developed countries’ still growing emissions) in the past two decades.

Read more of this story »

Economic problems today are in many ways a result of environmental missteps in the past. If we want a healthy economy in the future, we have to take the environment into account more than we have. The Swedish Minister of the Environment agrees and says that there should be no hesitation to combat climate change due to the current economic situation.

Read more of this story »

Cows Operate Power Company as Side Business
Onion Farmer takes $2.5 Million to Bank For Electricity Production
More Carbon Sequestration Needed: Farmers Paid to Not Plant

Every day there’s more news of the alternative energy that farms can make. From cow poop. From crop residues. From onion skins. From chicken feathers. From wind royalties. From solar power.

But you read cleantechnica.

Of course farmers will benefit from the climate bill. HR2434 is designed to make it cheaper to switch to low carbon energy than to keep using fossil fuels that destroy our future.

Farmers; however, are stuck with Fox News and Rush and the Heritage Foundation and CATO. They are told

Your energy cost will soar under socialist Al Gore climate bill!

So they worry. What Fox News and Rush won’t let them know is that…

Read more of this story »

Much has been said in opposition to the cap and trade climate legislation that is currently on the Senate’s plate. Opponents have argued repeatedly that the legislation will do nothing but increase the cost of energy, which will force companies send jobs over seas, where labor is cheaper, in order to keep up with production demands. Senator Kit Bond (R-Missouri) even went as far as to call the Waxman-Markey Bill “a pig in a poke.”

A few days ago another Senator challenged the bill, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Senator Mike Johanns (R-Nebraska) said, ”USDA knows what cap and trade will do to energy prices…Let me repeat that: USDA says energy prices will increase, but they think the opportunities from climate legislation will likely outweigh the costs.”

So we’ve heard from opponents. But what about proponents? What does the USDA have to say for itself?

Read more of this story »

According to Missouri Senator Kit Bond (R) the cap and trade Waxman-Markey Bill “is really a pig in a poke.” That’s what he told the committee on Tuesday, anyway. Given the opportunity to speak in front of a committee on the financial impacts that the climate bill would have on farmers, Senator Bond wasted no time calling the bill a hoax.

Senator Bond told committee members on Tuesday that the proposed bill would end up costing farmers up to $30,000 per year with the increase in energy costs. These costs work into every detail of a farmers life, from diesel fuel to power their tractors and combines to natural gas in order to make fertilizer. Farm equipment uses energy for irrigation pumps and drying grain before storage.

Read more of this story »

With the historic passage of climate legislation through the House of Representatives, many concerns have trickled forth. Does the climate legislation do enough? Will it even work? Does it have the right aim? With the issuance of similar concerns have come proposed solutions and substitutions. The republicans have proposed that 100 nuclear power plants be built by 2030 in place of the proposed cap-and-trade climate bill. I’ve recently written two articles on the Republican “solution” to both the climate and economic crises. And today I’m writing more.

Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) announced his own personal blueprint for the nation’s recovery. He began by re-stating the Senate Republicans’ plan that would replace the cap-and-trade legislation passed by the House, which includes building 100 nuclear power plants within 20 years, the encouragement of electric cars for conservation, offshore exploration for natural gas and oil and doubling energy research and development to make renewable energy cost-competitive.

Read more of this story »

The recent passage of the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACESA) through the House of Representatives has sparked a number of debates. Opponents and proponents of the Waxman-Markley Bill have thrown words around, trying to gain support for their side.

House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio stated that, “By imposing a tax on every American who drives a car or flips on a light switch, this plan will drive up the prices for food, gasoline and electricity.” Meanwhile President Obama urged the passage of the bill in the Senate, saying that we can’t “believe the misinformation out there that suggests there is somehow a contradiction between investing in clean energy and economic growth.”

Read more of this story »

H.R. 2454 the American Clean Energy And Security Act of 2009 (aka Waxman-Markley) aims “to create clean energy jobs, achieve energy independence, reduce global warming pollution and transition to a clean energy economy.”  One goal of the legislation is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050.

It is “the most ambitious energy and global warming legislation ever debated in Congress.”  The House Energy and Commerce Committee has begun marking up the bill, and it is headed to the full House of Representative some time this month.  H.R. 2454 is expected to be weakened significantly through the process.  One would expect Republicans and lobbyists to water down the bill, but farm state Democrats are also vying for home state protection for ethanol.

Read more of this story »