Cape Cod wind farm

There is currently a lot of debate about putting a wind farm up in Cape Cod. And the top reason for opposing it is the views it will cause that would drive away tourists. While it’s hard for me to step outside my environmental views on this one, I still find it hard to believe tourists wouldn’t come because of this. I actually think it would make some kind of a landmark. The windmills are 6 miles offshore, and supposedly will look “like a spec.” I’ve got to think that it comes down to providing 400,000 homes with renewable energy, and saving a whole load of carbon emissions. I think it’s a great project, and hope that Ted Kennedy and Mitt Romney will allow this one to go through.

All about Oil

The President today put out a half-hearted speech about reducing the prices of gasoline for consumers. One part that resonated with me was reducing the massive tax breaks that we pay oil companies – but he only suggested we get rid of $2 billion in breaks for offshore drilling. That’s a start I suppose, but his energy bill from last year gave away over $12 billion to oil/gas/coal companies, so we’re far from progress.

The flip side of this was a reduction in environmental standards for gasoline production to last throughout the summer. The President has used catastrophes to promote his agenda before, as catalogued by Susan G at Daily Kos.

If the President truly wanted to reduce energy costs across the board, not just for gasoline, he could have done many things. The Democrats plan for energy independence by 2020 would be a huge way. Another idea would be increasing CAFÉ standards dramatically, which would require companies to innovate/use current technologies. Adding hybrid cars, diesel engines, or going toward smaller cars are all ways to do this without the government getting directly involved. What I like most about this is that it would encourage companies to drop gasoline-only versions of cars that have a hybrid counterpart (for example, no longer sell the Honda civic, but only the Honda civic hybrid). The CAFÉ standards function by requiring the average fuel economy of the entire fleet of cars to reach a certain goal, instead of mandating standards for each car.

Profit Tax on Oil Companies revisited

Republican Arlen Specter has helped renew the call for a profit windfall tax on oil companies. The windfall tax was an idea promoted by Hillary Clinton after Hurricane Katrina, which would tax excessive profits in the industry. The idea behind the tax is the prevent price gouging, where companies seize on political events to inflate the price of oil and gasoline.

What was surprising about Specter’s call for the tax is that, as a Republican, he has come out against corporate control. “They get together, reduce the supply of oil, and that drives up prices.” He has called for stricter anti-trust laws preventing huge oil mergers, such as the Exxon-mobile merger a few years ago. Anyone who studies basic economics knows that monopoly and oligopoly businesses are bad for consumers, and good for profits. And anyone who read my post, or other similar news reports, knows that profits don’t mean employment. It’s good to see a Republican speaking out for the common good, even if this is political grandstanding. It shows that cooperation is possible in solving some common problems for all Americans.

The Bush Administration used Earth Day to give lip service to environmental concerns. There was a conference to discuss ways that the private sector can develop new technologies that reduce emissions. They also laid out a whopping $58 million to help fund the project. Note: The proposed military budget for 2007 was $540 billion, before budget talks derailed. It will probably end up higher.

Here are some ideas of technology that can be invented to help reduce emissions. A “solar panel,” which creates energy from the sun. A wind turbine which would use principles of lift to generate power. “Hybrid cars,” which run on a battery engine as well as gasoline. These ideas could dramatically reduce emissions. But wait! They exists – the market has failed to use them. The market is not the way to do this until oil is $150 a barrel (twice today’s historic high of $75), then these technologies will be economically competitive. Government support is needed to implement technology that we already have. Then we will have progress. And thats why we need Democrats in office.