Print
E-mail
Share
digg
Newsvine
Facebook
Stumble
Technorati
reddit
Fark
twitterLetter to the editor:
Commend the House for clean energy bill
Thursday, July 2, 2009 | 2:03 a.m.
Last week the House of Representatives made history by passing a comprehensive clean energy policy that will create jobs and help end our dependence on foreign oil. The stakes are high — America’s place in the world, the health of our planet and millions of new clean energy jobs hang in the balance.
With the help of Congresswomen Dina Titus and Shelley Berkley, the House took a step in the right direction. We look forward to working with Majority Leader Harry Reid on similar legislation in the Senate.
Thanks to Congresswomen Titus and Berkley for putting America on the path of clean energy and millions of new jobs.
Discussion: 13 comments so far…
Post a comment
- Most Read
- Discussed
- Most E-mailed
- Ensign moves out of home on C Street
- Cada and Moon emerge as Main Event’s final two
- Fight snapshot: Reviewing “24/7 Pacquiao/Cotto,” episode 3
- Life in the Limelight: Wayne Newton
- Cities, county find buying valley homes isn’t easy
- Motorcyclist dies in Summerlin crash
- Six people share their stories of what led them to jobs at CityCenter
- Fedor Emelianenko TKOs Brett Rogers in second round
- Two injured in shooting in central valley
- Buchanan was one of the city’s truly flamboyant characters
Blogs
Robin Leach's Las Vegas Celebrity Watch
Final Five have two routines each on Dancing With the Stars
The Coin Bucket
Blue Man Group at half price for locals
Elsewhere
Findlay Prep's Bradley fitting in at Texas (2 Comments)
Now and Then
I went to a hockey game and a New Mexico women's soccer match broke out (1 Comment)
Politics: The Early Line
Attention in D.C. focuses on health care proposals
Elsewhere
Fedor v. Rogers delivers solid ratings on CBS (5 Comments)
Bloggity, Bloggity, Bloggity
If you can rebuild the whole car, then why not allow an engine change? (1 Comment)
Calendar »
- 9 Mon
- 10 Tue
- 11 Wed
- 12 Thu
- 13 Fri
-
Jo Dee Messina at the House of Blues
House of Blues | 7 p.m. to 10 p.m.
-
The Revival Tour at Beauty Bar
Beauty Bar | 9 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
-
DJ Tina T at Prive
Prive | 10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
-
The Automatic Tour at The Square Apple
The Square Apple
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
The babblings of an enviro whacko. This nutty plan will raise energy costs by several times. We will freeze in winter and burn in the summer because we will not be able to afford power. We cannot go anywhere because we won't be able to afford gasoline. You fools voted for change and you are going to get some big changes you do not want.
Can you say shill for Big Energy? How ironic that so called environmentalists support a bill that will reward big energy companies by giving tax payers the burden of buying the carbon credits for the big energy companies. This bill does nothing for climate change and will change the landscape of Nevada with ugly renewable energy projects. No coal-burning power plants will be decomissioned. The bill is clearly a give away to big buisness while screwing the little guy and leaving a big environmental footprint.
jlb101,
Your logic puzzles me. We can take both wind turbines and solar panels. They cost money to build, just as fossil fueled plants also cost money to build.
There is however one slight, well its not "slight", its a big difference. Lets assume a coal fired plant stands for lets say 50 years, what kind of fuel does it use, and what is the cost of the fuel, the transport of the fuel from the mines, the mining process, and finally the sludge that is the result of any coal fired station, this too has to be disposed of as well. Now adding all these things up, I would assume that energy from a coal fired powered station over 50 years must be ginormous. Erecting a wind turbine or a solar panel is also expensive, but at that point the outlay for producing energy stops there, from then onwards, lets say 50 years the cost is ZERO, a big round O.
Are you getting the picture or do you want me to carry on.
It's high time for polluters to pay for the stuff they spew into our environment, causing asthma in our kids, cancer and who knows what else.
JLB is wrong, though. This bill DOES recognize that families can't afford huge hikes in their power bills, and there are provisions to reduce electricity costs even as we institute cap and trade.
I'll pay the cost of a postage stamp a day in order to avoid drastic climate change. I think anyone who cares about future generations would gladly do that. Thanks, Rep. Titus.
Windmills have been around for 20-30 years now and have not become economically competetive. Solar panels have not worked either. Coal has privided this country with economical power for about a hundred years now and proven itself. This stupid plan will cost this country almost a trillion dollars a year, the detractors. The best alternative is nucleur power which has provided economical power to Europe for years now. I personally am going to use wood stoves and a fireplace to cook and provide warmth. Screw the white house chimp.
If this bill is such a good idea, then why isn't China, India doing this? As matter of fact they are telling Obama they will not do this, because it will be a burden on their economy, they want theirs to start to thrive and not burden their people. Here is something that the mainstream media is not reporting much on, there is a individual in the EPA that was threatened by his boss if he did not "shut up" about a report they the EPA is trying to burry about the junk science Obama and the democrats in Congress are using to pass this bill. This bill will not do anything for the climate, only raising money for Obama's true intention of national health care. Jlb is correct, windmills and solar panels are expensive and do not work (do the research). DI DI how can you say that about the bill? It has not even been written yet! No one has seen the completed bill yet. This bill if passed will be another disaster. Obama is again breaking his campaign promise of no new taxes, not a penny to anyone making under $250,000, yes I know that you are going to say, this is not a tax, technically your right, but we the people will have to pay as much as $3000.00 more a year to turn on the light. It will all add up, if they pass the health care and tax my care at the rate they say, it will cost me and my family another $5000.00 a year. The way the economy is going, I am not getting a raise any time soon and adding $8000.00 to my budget will hurt. Thank god he is not raising taxes.
The "cap-and-trade" program (i.e. the energy legislation) promises the largest across-the-board increase in taxes in our nation's history on EVERY American. The ill-conceived legislation will not pass in the Senate. Too many senators, even those in the Democrat party, recognize this expansive legislation as an overt attempt to garner more power for the federal government and will not create jobs but burden EVERY American family with thousands of dollars in increased energy costs every year.
Also, a provision in the legislation demands that each home must be "retro-fitted" to be more "green" and energy efficient prior to a sale of the house. The inspections will be done by the omnipotent EPA and impose even further expenses on the prospective home-seller.
Fellow Nevadans - Call, email or write our two US senators urging them to oppose Barack Obama's "cap-and-trade" fiasco when the legislation comes up for a Senate vote later this year.
The onerous plan can be defeated, but must be done by voices from the people that will suffer the brunt of the increased costs on all forms of energy - the TAXPAYERS!
jlb,
""The best alternative is nucleur power which has provided economical power to Europe for years now""
You know this is not true, just more lies. There are only 2 countries in Europe that looked into the future of energy, and started large nuclear programs, France and Sweden. France relies hugely on nuclear power, whereas Sweden its about 50%, the other 50% comes from hydro power.
Just some more funny facts,
Science, the American way.
Intelligent Design in the classroom.
Americans are a notoriously superstitious people. According to a recent gallup poll, only 7% of Americans believe in gravity, while 79% believe "God is keeping them on the ground with his vast mental powers," and 10% remain undecided. Canada however still believes that American politicians are stupid as(h)holes, which turned out to be true.
Most scientists believe that most Americans are too stupid to excel at anything academically and turn out to be abusive alcoholics. This was concluded while running tests on Homer Simpson, the "Perfect American"
A recent debate arose in the Kansas school system as to whether teachers should teach evolution alongside the god revealed cretinism. A nasty little document called the Constitution of the United States of America - something to do with absolute freedom for all - screwed everything up. The debate became so heated that the creationists began flinging their poop at outsiders to mark their territory
mws517,
""If this bill is such a good idea, then why isn't China, India doing this?""
Did anyone come to the USA after the 2nd WW and tell YOU how to run your own business, no, so why should anyone want to tell the Chinese or India how to run their business. These 2 countries with almost half the worlds population would like to get a taste of what the Americans have had for the past 50 years, but Im sure they will not make the same mistakes as the USA has done. China does have a much tighter control of what goes on in their country.
uddeboda
Clearly you missed my point. As you have stated these two countries have about half of the world's population. My point was if those two countries would not even think of doing what the great messiah wants to do to our country, because of the junk science that congress has accepted as gospel. The cost is just to great for what they think can be gained. This nothing more than a power grabbing tax that the ole great one needs to fulfill his national health care.
mws517
I do understand your concern about the cost of such a program or programs, but the problem here is not what can be done or cant be done or when it should be done. The USA has not done anything to tackle the problem with Greenhouse gases, whereas other countries in Europe have been tackling this problem for decades. Sweden was on the ball when it went Hydro/Nuclear 40 yrs ago, and is now NON reliant of fossil fuels for energy production. Since 1990, after signing the Kyoto treaty, we introduced a Carbon tax which now stands at about $1.10 on a gallon of gas, for ex. Since 1990 Sweden has reduced CO2 emissions by 9%, and at the same time increase exports by 44%, despite the economic downturn in the mid 90s. Swedens CO2 tax is not devoured by other things, it is ploughed back into industry and labour reducing costs and benefiting exports. The USA cant do these things overnight, it will take several decades, gradually changing.