Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: White House to unveil dire climate warning in new report [View all]seabeckind
(1,957 posts)I wasn't overly impressed with the "plan", tho. It looks too much like the shovel-ready stuff, basically instead of directing where we as a nation need to go and then usingthe power of gov't spending and contracts to force it, it turns much of the implementation to the local gov'ts. Since more than half the states are in denial because they are under control of the conservatives, I don't see a lot of progress.
For example, the legislature here in Indiana rescinded the credit and assistance programs the electric utility was doin to increase efficiency. Turning to this state to improve energy efficiency in homes doesn't fly well.
The next problem I have with it is that it is doing the same thing and trying to make it more efficient. Raising fuel standards is a great idea...what about my 17 year old vehicles? Secondly, what good does it do to increase efficiency pervehicle if the number of vehicles on the roads increases at the same time? Net effect zero.
What steps are being taken to reduce the number of vehicles? Or a more efficient use of the systems we already have. Eg, reducing the transportation of goods across the country by implementing local productions. This not only reduces our footprint, it also provides regional jobs.
How about some mandates for sustainability and reuse? Do what some european countries do. You must have a use for a byproduct or pay a penalty. If a factory, like a steel mill (assumign there are any left in this country) or a fossil fuel generator has heat as a byproduct of its operation, use that heat for other purposes.
But it really was a nice looking report. Just didn't go very far. It seemed like the author was more worried about stepping on toes than stepping forward.