As per Grist:

The Four Trillion Dollar Plan

Google unveils plan to move U.S. off fossil fuels by 2030

Posted at 10:30 AM on 02 Oct 2008

Google.org, the philanthropic arm of the search giant, has unveiled a plan to move the U.S. to a clean-energy future. The vision: In 2030, electricity will be generated not from coal or oil but from wind, solar, and geothermal power. Energy demand will be two-thirds what it is now, thanks to stringent energy-efficiency measures. Ninety percent of new vehicle sales will be plug-in hybrids. Carbon dioxide emissions will be down 48 percent. Getting there will cost $4.4 trillion, says the plan — but will recoup $5.4 trillion in savings. The Clean Energy 2030 plan would require ambitious national policies, a huge boost to renewables, increased transmission capacity, a smart electricity grid, and much higher fuel-efficiency standards for vehicles. But hey, says the report: “With a new administration and Congress — and multiple energy-related imperatives — this is an opportune, perhaps unprecedented, moment to move from plan to action.”

sources: 
Greentech Media,

San Francisco Chronicle,
Sacramento Business Journal,
PC World

straight to the plan: 
Clean Energy 2030

see other plans, in Grist: 
Al Gore’s plan,

T. Boone Pickens’ plan

Make Hay While the Solar Subsidy Shines
Congress and Bush OK extensions of renewable-energy tax credits

Congress last week passed long-awaited extensions to tax credits for solar, wind, geothermal, and other forms of clean energy; they were attached to the financial bailout package that President Bush signed on Friday. Renewable-energy companies let out a big sigh of relief, happy that months of delays and petty squabbles over the tax credits were over. The legislation also provides incentives for the development of oil shale, tar sands, and coal-to-liquid fuels, which environmentalists are less happy about. But overall, renewables advocates and enviros are delighted that Congress finally got the tax-credit extensions through, just before adjourning for election season. As for how happy they feel about the bailout package in general, well, that’s another story.
Congress and Bush OK extensions of renewable-energy tax credits.

Congress last week passed long-awaited extensions to tax credits for solar, wind, geothermal, and other forms of clean energy; they were attached to the financial bailout package that President Bush signed on Friday. Renewable-energy companies let out a big sigh of relief, happy that months of delays and petty squabbles over the tax credits were over. The legislation also provides incentives for the development of oil shale, tar sands, and coal-to-liquid fuels, which environmentalists are less happy about. But overall, renewables advocates and enviros are delighted that Congress finally got the tax-credit extensions through, just before adjourning for election season. As for how happy they feel about the bailout package in general, well, that’s another story.

 http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/10…

Bail to the chie: House passes bailout plan with extensions for renewables, sends to Bush’s desk.

Posted by Kate Sheppard  - October 3,  2008.

If at first you don’t succeed, try again. After failing to muster enough votes on Monday, the House on Friday approved the financial market bailout plan by a vote of 263-171, sending the bill to the desk of the president.

The final version of the bailout included the extensions for renewable tax credits that Congress has been struggling with all year (the House and Senate disputed how to offset the credits with new revenues).

The $17 billion in tax credits includes an eight-year extension of the investment tax credit for solar energy, a one-year extension of the production tax credit for wind, and a two-year extension of the PTC for solar, biomass, and hydropower. The residential energy-efficient property credit would also be extended through 2016, and the definition of the systems that qualify for that credit would be expanded to include small wind investment and geothermal heat pumps. There are also incentives for bicycle commuting and plug-in electric vehicles.

The bill also includes provisions for carbon capture and sequestration, oil shale, tar sands, and coal-to-liquid fuels, which enviros are less happy about. But the final passage of the various tax credits is a welcome win for renewable industries, which have been begging all summer for Congress to come to agreement on the package.

UPDATE: “This bill is a major step in our long journey toward energy independence and ensures that solar energy will be a significant part of America’s energy future,” said Solar Energy Industries Association president Rhone Resch in a statement. “This long-term extension of the solar tax credits will create a domestic solar industry with hundreds of thousands of jobs while providing clean, affordable, carbon-free energy to millions of American families, businesses, and communities.”

UPDATE: President Bush signed the bill Friday afternoon.

From:              info@climatecrisiscoalition.org
Subject:     Earth Equity News (9/30/08)
Date:     September 30, 2008

Click the highlighted headlines for links to these stories.
Bailouts’ Failure May Buy Time for Renewables. By Kate Galbraith, NYTimes, September 29, 2008. “Strange as it may sound, the surprise rejection of the Wall Street bailout package in the House may have breathed new life into the renewable energy industry’s waning hopes that Congress will extend important tax credits that expire at the end of this year. ‘Ironically, the failure of the bailout may have given negotiators more time,’ said Paul Bledsoe, communications director of the National Commission on Energy Policy, a bipartisan group of energy experts. The House was planning to adjourn Monday after passing the bailout package, and possibly not to return until the inauguration of the next president. That didn’t happen, so legislators will be forced to stay on — and they could get other work done in the meantime. Both the House and Senate last week approved broadly similar tax credits for renewables, but there is fierce disagreement over provisions within each bill — including how the credits should be funded. Should the credits not be renewed, Mr. Bledsoe suggested they might be passed next year — and put into effect retroactively. The industry, however, hates this idea. ‘We’ve already seen a downturn in solar and in wind in the last three months’ due to the looming expiration of the tax credits, said Rhone Resch, president of the Solar Energy Industries Association.“

Automaker Bailout Slid By Unheralded. Posted by Jesslyn Taylor, TaylorPaper.com, September 30, 2008. “Only in the shadow of a proposed $700 billion Wall Street intervention could a $25 billion bailout of the auto industry be considered a minor news event and excite little comment. The bailout of the automakers occurred last week. General Motors, Ford and Chrysler say they need help in transitioning from big cars and SUVs to fuel-efficient vehicles. The $25 billion is just half of what the Big Three were requesting. But it still dwarfs the $1.5 billion bailout of Chrysler in 1980. And there are far fewer strings attached than in 1980… There are striking similarities between the automaker bailout and the Wall Street measure; both are a response to bad business practices. In Detroit’s case, the auto industry failed to react quickly to increased consumer demand for smaller, more fuel-efficient cars. Now they say they need help responding.”

PV and Thermal: A New Combined Cycle. By Matthew L. Wald, NYTimes, September 30, 2008. “One of the limitations of solar photovoltaic systems is that, at the current state of the technology, no more than a quarter of the energy from the sun is converted to electric current. Most of the rest of the energy is lost as waste heat. But Vinod Khosla, the founder of Sun Microsystems and now a technology entrepreneur and alternative-energy venture capitalist, says he’s found a solution that doubles or even triples the energy yield — a gargantuan leap in a field where engineers exult over the most incremental gains. Mr. Khosla is funding a company called PVT Solar, of Berkeley, Calif., where engineers two years ago began trying to harness that wasted heat. In a sense, it was already being collected, either in the solar modules themselves, or underneath. (Solar arrays are often installed at an angle, to face the sun, thus creating a wedge-shaped space below for heat to collect.) PVT’s founders decided the heat could be harnessed and pumped into the home for climate control, water heating and other uses. It is a sort of combined cycle for solar — a marriage of solar photovoltaic technology and solar thermal systems, which gather the sun’s energy in the form of heat.”

 First US greenhouse gas auction set for Thursday, September 25, 2008.

The Associated Press September 21, 2008, By MARY ESCH for BUSINESS WEEK -  from ALBANY, N.Y.

A coalition of 10 northeastern states this week will take steps to check global warming when it conducts the nation’s first carbon auction, taking the same approach that curbed lake-killing acid rain.

The cap-and-trade greenhouse gas reduction program, which aims to hold carbon dioxide emissions steady through 2014 and then gradually reduce them, is widely viewed as a model for future programs around the globe.

***

“With the leadership vacuum in Washington, it has fallen to the states to take the lead on combating climate change,” said Richard Revesz, dean of the New York University School of Law and an expert on environmental law.

Both John McCain and Barack Obama support cap-and-trade programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, seen as key contributors to global warming.

The approach is patterned after the acid rain-reducing program targeting sulfur dioxide that began with a New York law in 1984 and was expanded nationally with amendments to the Clean Air Act in 1990.

RGGI caps the total amount of carbon that power plants in the 10-state region can pump out of their smokestacks at the current level — 188 million tons. Electric power generators must pay for allowances covering the amount of carbon they emit and RGGI will provide a market-based auction and trading system where the generators can buy, sell and trade the emissions allowances.

The initiative will gradually reduce carbon going into the atmosphere by lowering the cap in several steps, until it is 10 percent below the current level in 2018. During that 10-year span, businesses will have to reduce their emissions. Those that can’t, because of cost or technical hurdles, can buy allowances from companies that have achieved cleaner emissions.

Companies have a financial incentive to curb emissions because they won’t have to buy as many credits and because they can sell any they don’t need. The price of credits is likely to rise as the cap is lowered. That gives companies more incentive to curb emissions sooner rather than later so they can buy and use credits at a lower price and sell them at a profit.

In addition, generators can make up for a small percentage of their emissions by purchasing narrowly defined carbon offsets, such as investing in energy-efficient building technology or planting trees to absorb carbon from the atmosphere.

The overal goal is to give utilities an economic incentive, rather than a regulatory mandate, to burn less coal, fuel oil and natural gas, while at the same time making carbon-free energy alternatives such as wind and solar power more economically attractive.

While power plants account for only a third of the carbon dioxide generated in the region, they’re the easiest source to regulate because their emissions are already monitored in other pollution programs, said Peter Iwanowicz, director of the state Department of Environmental Conservation’s Climate Change Office.

“We’re very much in favor of a national cap-and-trade system for reducing carbon emissions because we believe climate change is real and that it requires a national, and really international, solution,” said Don McCloskey, environmental policy manager for Public Service Enterprise Group, a power generator in Newark, N.J.

***

While other carbon-curtailing programs have been proposed, including a carbon tax, McCloskey said PSEG supports cap-and-trade because it allows companies to use their ingenuity and knowledge of markets to achieve environmental goals.

Proceeds of the auctions are to be invested in programs to increase energy efficiency, support non-carbon-generating renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, and develop carbon abatement technologies.

***

Peter Cramton, a professor at the University of Maryland with a research focus on emissions auctions, said the RGGI program is a good basis for a national cap-and-trade program. But he said a national program should include all sources of carbon emissions, from automobiles to industries.

The auction isn’t limited to electricity generators. Investors or public interest groups also may participate.

For the first auction, only one public interest group has registered in hopes of buying carbon credits and taking them out of circulation, Iwanowicz said.

“We want to purchase and retire some allowances,” said John Sheehan, spokesman for the Adirondack Council, a group dedicated to preserving the wilderness character of the 6-million-acre Adirondack Park. “We set a goal of 1,000 tons initially.”

Carbon dioxide emissions are of concern in the Adirondacks, Sheehan said, because global warming could transform the region’s fragile boreal ecosystem to a temperate zone similar to Richmond, Va.

 From:    ipsun at aol.com
Subject: IPS Terra Viva UN Journal - 19 September 2008
Date: September 19, 2008
Iranians Hope for Temperate President at the U.N.
By Omid Memarian

BERKELEY, California, Sep18 (IPS) - When Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad attends the 63rd session of the General Assembly next week in New York, many Iranian academics and political activists hope he will avoid the kinds of controversial statements that have hurt Iran’s international image since he was elected to the office in 2005.

In his third visit to U.N. headquarters in the United States, Ahmadinejad will address heads of state from around the world amid objections from human rights organisations and at least one pro-Israel rally that is scheduled to take place in front of the U.N. building.

Ahmadinejad’s controversial remarks about Israel and description of the Holocaust by Nazi Germany as a “myth” have provoked a tremendous backlash by the international community during the past three years.

Asked what Iranians expect their president to say, and not to say, at the United Nations, Sadegh Zibakalam, a political science professor at the University of Tehran, told IPS in a telephone interview that he should avoid discussion of the Arab-Israeli conflict and especially the Holocaust.


“He mustn’t discuss the Holocaust issue. He must refrain from discussing Israel’s annihilation and its leaders’ demise,” Zibakalam said.

“He should not discuss Iran’s eventual victory over the United States and its attempts to teach humanity a lesson — he must seriously stay away from this type of rhetoric,” said Zibakalam.

“He must move towards language through which he can demonstrate the Iranian people’s respect for Americans and their elected leaders, respecting whomever will be the elected president of the U.S., whether Democrat or Republican, demonstrating [Iran’s] willingness to seriously negotiate about Iran’s regional and nuclear issues with the next president,” he added.
Pres. Ahmadinejad has repeatedly said that he is willing to talk to the United States and other nations. However, his aggressive tone and Iran’s dismissal of a series of U.N. Security Council resolutions against its nuclear programme, coupled with Washington’s repeated accusations of meddling in Iraq, have sent a somewhat different message.

“He has announced on numerous occasions his desire to negotiate or to reach a resolution through negotiations,” Ali Mazroui, a former member of Iran’s Parliament, told IPS. “His rhetoric and his actions, however, have fallen short of providing assurances [to those countries], enlisting their response.”

“There is a kind of contradiction between Mr. Ahmadinejad’s verbal and actual policies. I have no hope for any kind of change regarding new avenues for Iran during this trip,” added Mazroui.

Regarding plans by human rights and Jewish groups to stage news conferences to protest the situation of human rights in Iran and Ahmadinejad’s speeches against Israel, Dr. Elaheh Koulaee, also a former parliamentarian and now a professor at the University of Tehran, told IPS that the determining factor in international politics has always been the consensus among powerful countries of the world.

“Street protests and civil society activities have not been terribly influential in Iran-U.S. relations,” she said. “Therefore if Iran and the U.S. use opportunities available to them to discuss their needs within the framework of their interests, I doubt these types of protests will affect those dialogues.”

Last month, Esfandiar Rahim Mashaie, Iran’s vice president, said that Iran is “friends of all people in the world — even Israelis.” His remarks were widely denounced by Iran’s hardliner establishment. Mashaie later claimed that his comments were misrepresented and clarified that that no one inside Iran recognises the Zionist regime. Surprisingly, the president has resisted intense pressure from the Parliament and some of the hardliner Ayatollahs and has not yet commented on the controversy.

The Islamic Republic has never recognised the state of Israel, and it remains unclear whether Mashaie’s remarks and Ahmadinejad’s silence denote a policy shift, or whether it was simply a gaffe.

“[Ahmadinejad] has said things in international circles which have led those countries to assume a negative position vis-a-vis Iran, as opposed to improving our relations with them. For example, what he said about Israel and Holocaust and the tensions he created on international and regional political levels,” said Mazroui. “I think none of these discussions can help Iran.”

*****

Hooshang Amirahmadi, president of the American Iranian Council and a professor at Rutgers University, told IPS that the Iranian people are wary of war and have been badly hurt by years of sanctions.

“They want nothing more than peace and are yearning for prosperity. U.S.-Iran relations have been their key concern for years and at present over 90 percent of Iranians, including those in the government, want the relations normalised and quickly.”

Amirahmadi, who is going to meet the Iranian delegation during their time in New York, has traveled to Iran several times during the past six months and has visited with President Ahmadinejad. He believes that the majority of the Iranian people want their president use the opportunity of his presence on U.S. soil to build goodwill with the U.S. people and government.

“This means that they do not want Pres. Ahmadinejad to use words and terminologies that will be annoying to his host,” said Amirahmadi. “More importantly, they want the president speak of the Americans very highly and with utmost respect.”

“I think Mr. Ahmadinejad should also use the opportunity to mend relations with a key player in U.S.-Iran relations, namely Israel,” he added. “Here is an opportunity for him to reinforce the view expressed by one of his VPs that Iran is a friend of the Israeli people and that Iran consider the Jewish people as friends of Iran, though there are those in that community who are inimical toward the Islamic Republic.”

However, it appears unlikely that this will come to pass. At a press conference in Tehran this week, Ahmadinejad repeated his assertion that the Holocaust was a “fake” and said the Jewish state would not survive in any form.

——————

Professor Amirahmadi is a nice man. We know him for years and he is a sworn optimist. He is right about the majority of the Iranian people, but the problem is with the rulling minority and the Gordian knot could be broken by a President Obama who will be ready to accept the invitation to negotiate with those in power, in order to show to the others, in concrete terms, what they are losing by hanging on to the civil leaders chosen with the help of extreme clerics.

There can be no progress with a Sarah Palin that just has no information about the problems, and is under the influence of advisors that have no interest in lessening the confrontation. Have they ever spoken to Ahmiramdi or with the academics and clerics in Tehran who actually are looking forward to the day that Iran will start doing something for its own people?

Roberto Savio, and the IPS organization, are a second potential conduit for exchanges with Iranians.

 The letter mentioned here - an Alaskan Conservative Republican’s intrusion on a Californian Centrist Republican’s way at looking at the State’s and the world’s Needs. That Alaskan Palin does not believe that the environment should get priority, and that the “Polluter Pays Principle” is a God-given right to a Governor we knew. She believes that corporations have a God-given right to do as they wish. We knew that and thus the article does not present new insight in Governor Palin’s view of the Public domain. But what is new is the timing.

As above letter was sent out just one day before the announcement that the GOP chose her to be their first VP Lady, one could say that she did not know yet what was coming, but as Maria Bartiromo from the Wall Street Journal already knew days earlier that things are in the making - proof - she went ahead of time to speak with the Governor on her pipeline - pro-petroleum ideas - we can only agree that the letter was timed so that it will arrive when Mrs. Palin was going to be hot news - so her point of view should have extra weight on the Governor of California and the Republicans of that State. 

/www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-ports12-2008sep12,0,2115458.story

Palin Asked Schwarzenegger to Veto Fees Aimed at Cutting Port Pollution. By Patrick McGreevy, LATimes Staff, September 12, 2008 .

“Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican candidate for vice president, has urged Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to veto a fee on cargo containers going through the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, setting off a wave of criticism from California environmentalists. Palin’s letter to Schwarzenegger is dated Aug. 28 — one day before presidential candidate and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) announced that he had picked her as his running mate. The letter argues that both consumers and the economy in California and Alaska would suffer as a result of the fee. Though the issue might otherwise be viewed as a relatively parochial port matter, Palin’s newfound status as a national political figure has raised the stakes in what state environmentalists consider to be their most important pollution reduction effort this year. They say Palin has no business getting involved in the California issue. ‘Why should Gov. Schwarzenegger take into account what out-of-state interests are saying?’ said Lisa Warshaw, a spokeswoman for the Coalition for Clean Air. ‘It’s unfortunate that she is using her popularity to push her agenda on this state’… The bill would create a $60 fee for each 40-foot cargo container moving through the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland, which together handle more than 40% of the nation’s goods. The fees would raise $400 million annually for such pollution-reduction projects as installing cleaner-burning truck and train engines and building roadways under or over railroad tracks to avoid long lines of idling vehicles.”

———-

The full article:

Palin asks Schwarzenegger to veto fees aimed at cutting pollution at California ports.

A container ship sits idle at the Port of Los Angeles. Vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, who is Alaska’s governor, has asked Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to veto a proposed container fee at California ports, saying it would burden her state’s shippers, who are already reeling from high fuel prices.
She says the new fees for Long Beach, L.A. and Oakland ports would harm the economies of Alaska and California.
By Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer, September 12, 2008.
SACRAMENTO — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican candidate for vice president, has urged Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to veto a fee on cargo containers going through the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, setting off a wave of criticism from California environmentalists.

Palin’s letter to Schwarzenegger is dated Aug. 28 — one day before presidential candidate and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) announced that he had picked her as his running mate. The letter argues that both consumers and the economy in California and Alaska would suffer as a result of the fee.

Though the issue might otherwise be viewed as a relatively parochial port matter, Palin’s newfound status as a national political figure has raised the stakes in what state environmentalists consider to be their most important pollution reduction effort this year. They say Palin has no business getting involved in the California issue.

“Why should Gov. Schwarzenegger take into account what out-of-state interests are saying?” said Lisa Warshaw, a spokeswoman for the Coalition for Clean Air. “It’s unfortunate that she is using her popularity to push her agenda on this state.”

The bill’s author, state Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), said Palin appears not to appreciate how important the proposal is for the health of Californians.

“She certainly displays a lack of understanding,” Lowenthal said.

Palin’s missive attacks Senate Bill 974, which has been approved by the state Legislature but needs Schwarzenegger’s signature to become law.

The bill would create a $60 fee for each 40-foot cargo container moving through the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland, which together handle more than 40% of the nation’s goods.

The fees would raise $400 million annually for such pollution-reduction projects as installing cleaner-burning truck and train engines and building roadways under or over railroad tracks to avoid long lines of idling vehicles.

“Enactment of Senate Bill 974 will have negative impacts on both Alaska and California,” Palin wrote. “For Alaskans, a very large percentage of goods [90% or more] shipped to Alaska arrive as marine cargo in a container.”

Palin said many Alaskan communities lack road access and depend entirely on goods shipped by container, something that has significantly increased in cost in recent years. Many of those containers pass through the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports before arriving in Alaska, and Palin argues that the fee will add even more to the cost of goods shipped to her state.

“This tax makes the situation worse,” Palin wrote. “Similarly, the tax may harm California by driving port business away from its ports.”

The letter concludes by requesting that “due consideration be given to our state and that you not sign Senate Bill 974.”

Schwarzenegger has not yet responded to Palin’s letter, nor has he made a decision about whether to sign or veto the legislation, said spokeswoman Rachel Cameron.

“The governor will take it into consideration,” she said of Palin’s letter.

But she said Schwarzenegger has warned that he will not sign any bills until the state’s overdue budget is approved by the Legislature.

“Right now the governor’s top priority is getting a responsible budget approved,” Cameron said.

Schwarzenegger has had concerns about the port fee and threatened to veto it last year unless Lowenthal met with retail and shipping representatives to address their complaints that it will harm business.

Lowenthal said he offered to amend the bill this year to address Palin’s concerns by cutting the fee in half for containers loaded from one ship to another without leaving California ports by rail or truck.

Schwarzenegger’s staff did not agree to the proposed change, the senator said.

On Thursday, with the Palin letter hitting the Internet, Lowenthal invited the Alaskan governor to travel to the Southern California ports to see first-hand why the fee is needed.

“We are losing about 3,400 Californians each year because of pollution,” Lowenthal said. “No matter what Gov. Palin would like to see happen, the impact is killing Californians. I don’t think Gov. Palin truly understands the impacts going on here.”

John Casey, a spokesman for Lowenthal, added: “Maybe Sarah Palin doesn’t care about Californians.”

Palin’s office in Juneau did not return calls late Thursday seeking comment.

Schwarzenegger, a Republican, has endorsed McCain for president, but Lowenthal said he hopes that politics will not play a role in the decision on the legislation.

“I’m hoping the governor sees above it. He says he is an independent. This will be a test,” Lowenthal said.

Cameron denied that the governor’s support for McCain will play a role.

“The governor is committed to doing what’s best for Californians,” Cameron said.

 patrick.mcgreevy at latimes.com

It’s a Fiesta, But You’re Not Invited
Ford won’t sell 65-mpg diesel car in U.S.
Posted at 1:34 PM on 05 Sep 2008
The Ford Fiesta ECOnetic, a small, sporty five-seater that gets an impressive 65 miles per gallon, will the hit the road in November — but only in Europe. “We just don’t think North and South America would buy that many diesel cars,” says Ford America President Mark Fields. The new generation of diesel cars, which are dramatically cleaner than old-school diesels and are at least 30 percent more fuel-efficient than gas-powered vehicles, haven’t managed to shake Americans’ longstanding aversion to the fuel: only 3 percent of cars in the U.S. are diesel-powered. But other automakers are betting that Americans can be swayed. Mercedes-Benz will by next year have three diesel vehicles on the market, and a handful of other automakers will introduce diesel models to the U.S. in 2010.

source:  BusinessWeek
see also, in Gristmill:  Diesels will outsell hybrids in the U.S. by 2012, says report
see also, in Grist:  Umbra advises on converting your diesel car to biodiesel and straight veggie oil, and discusses diesel hybrids

  Permalink | Printer Friendly |