Green Green Business

“Green” power transmission to move renewable energy to population centers will be part of the economic stimulus bill Democrats move early next year, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said today.

Capitol Hill Democrats hope to have a large economic stimulus package ready for President-elect Barack Obama to sign when he takes office in January. The package, which is projected to reach into the hundreds of billions of dollars, is expected to include investments in various infrastructure projects and energy programs.

Reid said the major energy bill approved in 2007 represented “baby steps” toward expanding renewable energy and energy efficiency, and promised robust efforts in the upcoming Congress, in which Democrats will have a greater majority and will have Obama in the White House.

“We must … find new and efficient ways to get it [renewable power] from the source to the market,” Reid said

http://climateprogress.org/2008/12/02/reid-wants-green-transmission-included-in-stimulus-bill/#more-4343

What do you think of this part of the economic stimulus plan?

House shifts billion toward renewable energy!
Republicans called it a "no-energy bill" because it lacks new drilling incentives, and they derided the new emphasis on renewables as "green pork." The White House threatened to veto the bill on concerns that it could boost energy prices.

Didn’t Bush say that the USA is addicted to oil and needs to find alternate energy sources? Or was he just refering to ethanol?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070805/pl_n…

(sorry if this is a repeat, I posted it in the wrong category)

The new energy bill does nothing to increase competition against oil and coal, instead protects these industries from competition while giving Wal-Mart a financial shot in the arm.

This bill does nothing to reduce green house gases. Oil and coal will still reign as kings of energy for many years to come.

If congress pushed nuclear power, then we could actually reduce ghg’s no matter how many incandescent light bulbs were used.

Instead congress places the burden on the user rather than the producer while at the same time not giving us the option to choose a cleaner burning source of power.

Which proves my point. Global warming is not about the reduction of ghg’s, as politicians will always need polluters so they can maintain a source of power.

The people will be the ones to feel the abuse of power from the politicians.

First it’s the light bulbs, then it will be the SUV’s, then bottled water.

Meanwhile we will still be building coal generators.

Anyone else agree?

Has anyone suscribed to the green chip review and found it usefull?

Recently loaded up on some alternative energy and solar stocks (wfr, solf, csun, tsl) since congress has the energy bill vote in a couple weeks

comments?

1. I'm interested in knowing how much savings on your energy bill… insignificant or quite noticeable.
2. Have you experienced anything negative in comparison to the regular light bulbs?
3. What were your reasons for buying the light bulbs? Cheaper energy bill? Reduce green house gases causing global warming? or Trendy?

House shifts billion toward renewable energy!
Republicans called it a "no-energy bill" because it lacks new drilling incentives, and they derided the new emphasis on renewables as "green pork." The White House threatened to veto the bill on concerns that it could boost energy prices.

Didn't Bush say that the USA is addicted to oil and needs to find alternate energy sources? Or was he just refering to ethanol?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070805/pl_nm/usa_energy_house_dc_3