Saturday, March 8, 2008


DST actually COSTS energy

So much for saving energy from “springing forward” this weekend.

Up until 2006, only 15 of Indiana’s 92 counties went on Daylight Saving Time in the spring. Then, the state legislature mandated it statewide.

That gave University of California-Santa Barbara economics professor Matthew Kotchen and Ph.D. student Laura Grant a brainstorm: see how the time change affected energy consumption:

Their finding: Having the entire state switch to daylight-saving time each year, rather than stay on standard time, costs Indiana households an additional $8.6 million in electricity bills. They conclude that the reduced cost of lighting in afternoons during daylight-saving time is more than offset by the higher air-conditioning costs on hot afternoons and increased heating costs on cool mornings.

Why, then, in the past, has Congress claimed, and some private studies seemed to show, that DST saved energy?

In a word, or two: air conditioning.

Back in World War I, when the first DST system was implemented, Willis Carrier hadn’t yet introduced America to modern air conditioning. Because of the Depression, then World War II, it wasn’t until the late 1940s that it started becoming a regular residential feature.

Now, you have it in all sorts of places it’s not needed.

Los Angeles? How often does it get that hot there? Albuquerque? Use a swamp cooler instead. Michigan? Please. Not needed. Get box fans for the occasional hot day.

Phoenix? It’s going to keep getting hotter; by 2020, we’ll have nights in Phoenix that never get below 100. Move away, back to Michigan.




There's more: "DST actually COSTS energy" >>

Sunday, January 6, 2008


Energy & Environmental news you need to know before New Hampshire

Evangelicals are greening up.
Apparently, God has tasked the people to be stewards of the Earth. Who knew? Richard Cizik discusses the importance of the environment to evangelicals on YouTube last November. [Genesis 2:15] [h/t Ozark Politics]

Compare what they said...
The Grist Mill transcribes the Dem's Carbon policy from the ABC/Facebook/WMUR debate on Saturday. Do read this if nothing else.

...with what they meant to say
Then compare to what they reported on the Issues Questionnaire for POTUS when not under duress. Did they get it right?

I'll agree with Grist... in that Hillary best tied Greening Up... to the economy. In my line of work, we're always told... frame your message in the lines of 'how will this affect me?'. She did that very well... but more importantly, better than the others.

Finally, Obama gets a climate award (sort of)
DeSmogBlog trounced the O (will we see this instead of 'W'?) over a weak climate policy. Climate Progress says DeSmogBlog owes O three apologies. And 'clean-burning coal' (cough choke gag) from Illinois has something to do with it.




There's more: "Energy & Environmental news you need to know before New Hampshire" >>

Thursday, November 29, 2007


Kay Bailey Cheerleader speaks in Dallas

This comes from a story from my newspaper editor’s day job. Four southern Dallas County cities, all covered by my suburban weekly newspaper group, have a join umbrella chamber of commerce. That chamber holds a quarterly luncheon with a keynote speaker. Today, it was Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison,

I had a few minutes of media time with her after her luncheon speech. I didn’t extremely grill her, given the situation, but I did ask questions on some things she said on major topics, and I otherwise “backgrounded” other statements she made.


Iraq, taxes, immigration and health care — U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison hit all the primary political notes in her Best Southwest Chamber of Commerce speech Nov. 29.

Senatorial harmony
“The atmosphere in Washington is not so good right now and I don’t like that. There are beginning to be deep divisions in so many areas,” she said.

She referred to the process of filibustering in the Senate as one concern, specifically citing a largely-Democratic threat of filibuster blocking attempts to open a portion of Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Under Senate rules, 60 of 100 Senators, not a bare majority of 51, are required to end debate on a bill in the Senate, unless the bill has already been brought to the floor on a unanimous consent device. Speaking against cloture, the ending of debate, is a filibuster. It has been used at times in the past, but now — especially among Republicans — the mere threat of a filibuster, by an advance announcement of intent to vote against cloture, has slowed the progress of many bills in the Senate.

Hutchison later addressed filibustering and filibustering threats by both parties in the Senate.

“It’s so important for us to do away with the toxic atmosphere; everything seems to be a political issue,” she said, mentioning she had been in the minority party in the Senate in the past, as well as the current Senate, and had not seen things hit this level before.
“I would very much like to see us move forward. It’s not a healthy atmosphere where everything takes 60 votes.

“But I can’t give you the right formula, because we’ve tried a lot.”

More below the fold.


Taxes
Hutchison then talked about taxes in general and the estate tax in particular. The estate tax, a federal tax, with a standard deduction as in federal income taxes, is the tax the government assesses on an estate when it is inherited from a parent or other deceased person. Because of the nature of when the tax is assessed, Hutchison and other Republicans have taken to calling it the “death tax” in recent years.

She mentioned 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, sought by President George W. Bush and passed by Congress, as a factor in economic growth earlier this decade. She said that worries about how the current, Democratically-controlled, Congress would change various tax rates, were hurting the economy, and if passed, would hurt small business. She mentioned the estate tax as part of this and indicated she wanted its deduction raised.

Under the current law, the federal estate tax deduction is supposed to rise to $3.5 million by 2009, then the estate tax disappears entirely — but for just one year — in 2010. It would then reappear in 2011, with its 2001 deduction level of $1 million.

Hutchison later said she did not have an exact dollar amount in mind for the increase, but did say, due to a Democratic Senate filibuster threat, she was not, at this time, trying to get the estate tax eliminated.

A more likely scenario than permanently eliminating the estate tax deduction would be making permanent the 2009 deduction of $3.5 million, even though two of America’s richest people, investor Warren Buffett and Microsoft founder Bill Gates, are on record as against raising the deduction too high, let alone repealing it.

On how the estate tax affects farms, and the ever-shrinking number of traditional family farms, current law allows farmers to leave up to $4 million per couple in nominal farm assets to their heirs without the heirs having to pay any estate taxes. With provisions that let farms be valued at less than full market value, some farmers can pass farms whose actual value is almost $6 million without the heirs paying estate taxes.

Energy
Hutchison then moved to energy issues, including the ANWR filibuster threat she mentioned earlier.

“The energy issue is not looking very good,” she said.

She called for America to become more self-sufficient in oil, pointing out the fact that America now imports 60 percent of its oil. She added that many people may be unaware that Venezuela, led by socialist President Hugo Chavez, who has been in the news recently for actions that got him called a “lunatic” by Hutchison, is a bigger importer of oil to the U.S. than any of the Arab oil states of the Persian Gulf.

For alternative energy sources, she said America needed more ethanol, but needed to look at other sources besides corn, which she said simply will not be able to meet a mandated major increase in alternative fuels that Congress is considering. The current standard of 7.5 billion gallons per year, met largely by ethanol and biodiesel, could be raised as high as 30 billion gallons a year.

Hutchison said the country simply couldn’t get that much more ethanol out of corn without eliminating corn as a food source. She called for increasing efforts into getting ethanol from cellulosic sources, such as wood, leaves, weeds and other plant “waste.”
But, Hutchison also called for more domestic oil drilling.

She decried potential Democratic tax changes she said would eliminate tax relief for companies building oil refineries, including one in Port Arthur.

She also called for an end to Democrats blocking oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which she noted was about as big as the state of South Carolina. She said the area that would be the focus of exploratory oil drilling was only about the size of Love Field, the Dallas airport.

As for environmental issues, she said the refuge didn’t have a single tree.

Specifically, the 1002 Area within the refuge that the Bush Administration wants to open for oil drilling is about 8 percent the size of the whole refuge, at 1.5 million acres. Environmentally, though it doesn’t have any trees, it is the heart of summer calving grounds for the 128,000 strong Porcupine Caribou herd. And, while a majority of Alaskans are on record as favoring drilling there, American Indians on the south side of the refuge remain opposed; Inuit on the north side are of mixed views.

Environmentalists also say that at maximum production, it would probably meet just 2 percent of American oil demand. Government estimates of oil reserves in the area increased greatly from the administration of President Bill Clinton to President Bush.
After the luncheon, Hutchinson was asked what her stance was on energy conservation issues, most notably, a bill currently in Congress to raise the Corporate Average Fuel Economy, the average gas mileage for all its makes of automobiles each car manufacturer must meet, from its current 27.5mpg for cars to 35mpg by 2020. Light trucks have a current standard of 20.7mpg; some versions of the CAFÉ standards bill would make them meet the same standard as cars. Currently, cars and trucks combined, sold in 2004, had a fuel economy average of 24.6mpg.

Hutchison said she was in favor of looking at CAFE standards in general, but did not want to adopt any specific standard that would hurt American automakers.

Immigration
She next tackled illegal immigration, and politely signaled her differences with President Bush’s recent series of raids on employers, such as meat-packing plants.

“We have many jobs that need to be filled that aren’t being filled by Americans,” she said. “We need a guest worker program.

“I’m annoyed when we say, ‘We need to crack down on employees who hire illegals.’ We can’t lay that burden on our employers.”

Iraq/national security
The final topic on her agenda was Iraq and national security issues.

“Terrorists are trying to take away our freedom and our diversity more than anybody ever did before,” she said.

Without naming any senators or party affiliations, she then said she was concerned by what she called an attitude of “cutting and running” on Iraq.

Hutchison was later asked if she was worried about the Iraq government not appearing to step up its efforts at better governance, and how she would respond to other people who had the same concerns.

“I worry about that myself,” she said. “I think we need to bring in the surrounding Arab countries (for regional talks on Iraq’s future and stability), and that has not yet happened. There have been some regional summits, but I think the Arab states need to do more.”

As for the current Iraqi government, led by Nouri al-Maliki, she said, “We can’t dictate who the Iraq leaders are.”

On other national security issues, she said she liked what she called the change in European attitude by new French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. She decried the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and member states for not getting involved in Iraq, even though non-U.S. NATO countries immediately got involved in Afghanistan and now supply the majority of troops there.

Endnote: It was a pretty partisan speech, especially given her opening cries for a more bipartisan Congress. (That said, Hutchison isn’t John Cornyn, who is a right-wing hack.) She has the right answers on some things, definitely on not relying on corn-based ethanol, and is trying to find some sort of middle on illegal immigration. She also clearly conflated Iraq and Afghanistan on trying to guilt-trip NATO about not being in Iraq, showing she’s still drinking a full share of winger Kool-Aid on Iraq. On Iraq, I could have asked half a dozen questions, but there wasn’t time, and given the nature of the engagement, didn’t want to harsh up too much on the questioning.

And, she’s supposed to be a more sensible, more moderate conservative than many GOPers. Other than on reproductive choice, you look at her, look for moderate, and just have to shake your head, because it ain’t there, except in style compared to an attack dog like Cornyn.




There's more: "Kay Bailey Cheerleader speaks in Dallas" >>

Monday, November 19, 2007


Rudy Vroom Vroom

Unabashed plagarism, shameless pandering, staggering disingenuous BS from a megalomaniac, or the the epitome of irony... You decide:

HOMESTEAD, Fla. (AP) — As pit crews made last-minute inspections to their cars Sunday at NASCAR's Ford 400 at Homestead-Miami Speedway, Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani stressed the need for America to break its dependence on foreign oil.
Giuliani likened the pursuit of energy independence and the development of alternative energy sources to the race to put a man on the moon several decades ago.
"Now it's a matter truly of national security," Giuliani said. "We have to pursue all of those alternatives that exist."
In the meantime, Giuliani said, the U.S. needs to focus on domestic sources of oil, as well as oil from friendly countries like Mexico and Canada. He said conservation also will have to play a role.
Clearly, Rudy is no Al Gore, who for years, has repeatedly "likened" the challenge of solving global warming, fostering energy alternatives, and reducing oil dependency to the incredible feat of putting "a man on the moon."

Unlike Al, however, the press will probably forgive Rudy for "corny invocations of America's can-do, put-a-man-on-the-moon spirit" and continue to hype Giuliani as America's mayor and hero of 9/11. Will the media notice that Rudy borrowed from Al Gore? Nah. When did the press treat Al fairly?

Also unlike Al Gore, Rudy chose a sports event to deliver his energy message where gas-guzzling racing cars speed along at 100+ MPH for hours. Essentially, Rudy communicated, "Listen up, NASCAR fans. We need to quit suckling off the Mideast oil teat for the sake of national security, innovate other fuel sources, and conserve. But what the hell. Start your engines after I take a few laps in the official pace car."

Meanwhile, Rudy has pocketed "more money from the energy industry — $477,208 through the first half of 2007 — than any other presidential candidate" and he remains partners with a DC energy industry lobbying firm that successfully thwarted a tax on oil company windfall profits. The relationship has translated into millions for Giuliani's growing fortune.

So what gives? [Keep reading...]

My local newspaper, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, wrote that Rudy's gone NASCAR, "hoping for a Southern hug":
...some folks in the land of y'all have cottoned to a GOP presidential candidate from the land of youse guys....
...For Giuliani, like an anthropologist currying favor in another culture, it's another day of mingling at a tribal ritual.
"No question about it," Barry Wynn, a South Carolina banker and chairman of Giuliani's campaign in that early-primary state. "There are a lot of NASCAR followers in South Carolina. Whether it translates into votes I'm not sure, but it certainly translates into some common interests."...
...Fundraising reports also show southern financial support for the New Yorker. Giuliani is the top GOP fundraiser in six of the 12 southern states, including the big two (Texas and Florida) as well as Alabama, Louisiana and both Carolinas.
And he has supporters among the NASCAR elite. Top drivers Jeff Gordon, Jimmie Johnson and Casey Mears each have given him $2,300, the maximum allowed by law. Other donors include NASCAR Chairman Brian France and Rick Hendrick, head of Hendrick Motorsports, a top NASCAR team.
Some of Giuliani's fund-raising prowess in Dixie flows from his deep business ties in the region through his affiliation with the Houston-based Bracewell & Giuliani law firm. Pat Oxford, the firm's managing partner, is in charge of Giuliani's fundraising operation.
The firm's client list includes or has included several major utility companies in the South, including TXU, Florida Power and Light, the Southern Company and Duke Energy.
According to a recent Survey USA poll, Rudy outpaces Mitt Romney by six points and Fred Thompson by eight in South Carolina. He also leads "the GOP field in Virginia, North Carolina and Florida, and [runs] a close second to Thompson in Alabama." He trails Thompson in Georgia by 19 points but his favorability rating runs higher than Fred's.

When southern conservatives get wind of Rudy's pro-gay, pro-choice social positions, will they bolt? If Giuliani clinches the GOP nomination, I suspect a majority of southern rubes will line up for Rudy in the general election. A Democrat in the WH elicits more fear than a social liberal Republican, even if he's a flip-flopper with a pathological tendency to lie about exaggerate his credentials and tough guy record. Remember George W. Bush? Uh-huh. The Deep South's kinda quaint and prone to tribal overtures, something Rudy hopes to exploit.




There's more: "Rudy Vroom Vroom" >>

Thursday, May 31, 2007


Chet Edwards speaks

Edwards, a fairly Blue but not purplish Blue Dog Democrat, spoke earlier today at the local chamber of commerce luncheon. Here's a summary of highlights of his talk for my newspaper article for next week.

Precis: He’s OK with his vote in favor of the second Iraq supplemental May 24; is pushing hard on conservation, on energy matters, but favors opening the Florida Gulf to drilling; and favors some sort of immigration bill, and did not mention a “return” requirement as part of that.

Iraq
The serious issues on his list of topics did begin with Iraq, then. Edwards said he was glad Congress sent a new Iraq funding bill to President George W. Bush, even though it did not have timetables or benchmarks that an earlier House bill, vetoed by Bush, did have.

“I’m glad we got the bill passed to fully fund the president’s request. I think it would be a mistake to pull all our troops tomorrow,” he said.

Edwards was one of the House Democrats who voted yes May 24 on a House vote concurring with a Senate amendment, the effect of which was to approve an Iraq spending bill without timetables for troop reductions or withdrawals, and without Congressionally-binding benchmarks on the Iraqi government. The overall vote was 280-142. Edwards also voted for the original House supplemental spending bill May 10, later vetoed by Bush, that did have timetables.

“Can we guarantee stability in Iraq? No … not even with a million troops,” Edwards continued. “That’s the job of the Iraqi people. I want to send a message to Iraqi leaders: Clean up your corruption. Take more responsibility. We’re not going to write a blank check of $10 billion a month forever.”

Energy
With $3 a gallon gas, this was bound to be his second topic.

“I’m afraid we’re paying the price for having a long-term energy policy,” Edwards said.

He said a major portion of the problem was lack of new U.S. gasoline refineries.
Referring to a 2005 energy bill that made it easier to build refineries, Edwards said we needed another one. He said he wanted to make it easier to build nuclear power plants, open up more of the Gulf coast, especially the Florida portion, for oil and natural gas drilling, and get automakers to make some serious improvements in fuel economy.

“If they can’t do a better job, we may not have an American car-manufacturing industry,” he warned.

Later, during audience questioning, Edwards said he was open to the idea of the government developing a strategic reserve for refined gasoline similar to the one it already has for crude oil.

Immigration
Edwards picked up the thread from the Senate committee-level action on this issue.

“My guess is more than 50-50 we’re going to have an immigration bill this year,” he said.

He then explained what he thought needed to be addressed, and how.

“It’s not practical to think we’re going to hire enough agents to round up 12 million people,” he said.

He said he thought new legislation needed stronger border security and illegal immigrants in the country being put on a path to citizenship after paying a fine and being put on a waiting list (the Senate bill as it now stands also requires them to return to their country of origin).

Grimes County Democratic Party Chairman Larry Snook asked Edwards if he didn’t think this would require more bureaucracy, namely, things such as monitoring immigrants to make sure they did not have criminal backgrounds before putting them on a citizenship path, than would a “roundup” policy.




There's more: "Chet Edwards speaks" >>