Obama Administration Says Energy Reform Not Negotiable

By Philip Elliott  from AP

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama’s aides say the administration will work with Congress on his budget proposal, but energy independence is not subject to wheeling and dealing.

Obama planned to make the case Monday for a budget proposal that invests billions in research designed to reduce climate change and guarantees loans for companies that develop clean energy technologies. Obama has tied his first budget proposal as president to a renewable energy program to help the United States move toward energy independence.

In a fact sheet released Monday, the White House said Obama’s meeting with “clean energy entrepreneurs and leaders of the research community” will outline an energy program that draws on the administration’s $787 billion stimulus package for $39 billion at the Department of Energy and $20 billion in tax incentives for clean energy.

It also disclosed that his 10-year budget proposal contains spending of nearly $75 billion to make permanent existing tax cuts for energy research and experimentation.

“The president is prepared to negotiate on this budget with folks like those at this table … and the president’s been very clear about this, as has our budget director: We don’t expect these folks to sign on the dotted line,” said Jared Bernstein, Vice President Joe Biden’s economics adviser.

“What we do expect and what we are going to stand very firm on _ because this president, this vice president have made this clear _ that there are these priorities that brought them to the dance here: energy reform, health care reform, education, all done in the context of a budget that cuts the deficit in half over our first term.”

Obama and his aides plan an aggressive push to deliver a $3.6 trillion budget that contains many of his campaign promises. He plans to speak about the energy portion of his budget at the White House on Monday, highlighting research and development in clean energy. He also will highlight how part of the $787 billion economic stimulus package already is working to create much-needed jobs.

Obama plans to follow that with a prime-time news conference on Tuesday. The president is back in campaign mode as he stumps for a budget proposal that, so far, has faced opposition from members of both parties.

Democrats worry the plan inflates deficit spending; the Congressional Budget Office estimates Obama’s budget would generate $9.3 trillion in red ink over the next decade. Republicans say it would impose massive tax increases, including on polluters; Washington could raise billions from companies that use unclean fuels, what GOP leaders called a carbon tax.

Obama said the country must provide incentives for so-called green businesses.

“I realize there are those who say these plans are too ambitious to enact,” Obama said in his weekly video and Internet message. “To that I say that the challenges we face are too large to ignore. I didn’t come here to pass on our problems to the next president or the next generation. I came here to solve them.”

Bernstein spoke Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

AROUND THE WORLD IN A SOLAR POWER CAR

As reported in Huffington Post Green

Swiss adventurer Louis Palmer drove a solar-powered car 32,000 miles (52,000 kilometers) around the globe, ending his journey at the U.N. climate conference in Poznan. As Vanessa Gera of the Associate Press reported,

Palmer rolled into the climate conference in his solar car Thursday, a man with a mission: To prove that the world can continue its love affair with the car without burning any polluting fossil fuels and still enjoy a smooth ride. Story continues below

Palmer, a teacher on leave from his job, spent 17 months driving his own creation _ a fully solar-powered car built with the help of Swiss scientists _ through 38 countries. The two-seater travels up to 55 mph (90 kph) and covers 185 miles (300 kilometers) on a fully charged battery.

Palmer says there’s no reason why car companies couldn’t make a much better version of his solar-powered car if they set their mind to it.

“These new technologies are ready,” he said. “It’s ecological, it’s economical, it is absolutely reliable. We can stop global warning.”

Our Perspective:

I admire this man, he has proven that the technology exist, we just have to take the steps to refine it and implement it.

The Green Evolution has begun!

Let us know your thoughts?

New unemployment claims surge unexpectedly

Thursday December 11, 11:03 am ET
By Christopher S. Rugaber, AP Economics Writer
New unemployment claims rise more than expected as layoffs continue amid recession

WASHINGTON (AP) — New claims for jobless benefits rose more than expected last week, exceeding even gloomy expectations for an economy stuck in a recession that seems to be deepening.
The Labor Department reported Thursday that initial applications for jobless benefits in the week ending Dec. 6 rose to a seasonally adjusted 573,000 from an upwardly revised figure of 515,000 in the previous week. That was far more than the 525,000 claims Wall Street economists expected.

ADVERTISEMENT

Elsewhere, the U.S. trade deficit rose unexpectedly in October as a spreading global recession dampened the once-strong sales of American exports and the volume of oil imports surged by a record amount, the Commerce Department said.

More layoffs were announced Thursday. New Britain, Conn.-based tool maker Stanley Works said it plans to cut 2,000 jobs and close three manufacturing facilities, while Sara Lee Corp., known for food brands such as Jimmy Dean and Hillshire Farm, said it will cut 700 jobs as the Downers Grove, Ill.-based company outsources parts of its business.

New jobless claims last week reached their highest level since November 1982, though the labor force has grown by about half since then.

The trade deficit rose to $57.2 billion in October, from an imbalance of $56.6 billion in September. Analysts had been looking for the deficit to decline to $53.5 billion on lower oil prices. Oil prices did drop by a record amount, but that was offset by a record surge in the volume of oil imports.

The reports, along with investor concerns that an auto bailout bill may not pass the Senate, sent stock markets slightly lower. The Dow Jones industrial average fell about 15 points in morning trading.

The jump in initial jobless claims is partly due to a rebound in claims from the previous week, which included the Thanksgiving holiday, a Labor Department analyst said. Government offices were open for fewer days that week.

Still, the four-week average, which smooths out fluctuations, was a seasonally-adjusted 540,500, the highest since December 1982, when the economy was emerging from a steep recession.

“Stepping back from the short-term noise … it is very clear that the underlying trend in claims is still rocketing, as companies throw in the towel and prepare for a long, deep recession,” Ian Shepherdson, chief U.S. economist for High Frequency Economics, wrote in a note to clients.

The number of people continuing to claim jobless benefits also jumped much more than expected, increasing by 338,000 to 4.4 million, the Labor Department said. Economists expected a small increase to 4.1 million. The figure for continuing claims lags initial claims by one week.

As a proportion of the work force, the number of people continuing to receive benefits is the highest since August 1992, when the U.S. was recovering from a relatively mild recession. The increase in continuing claims was the largest jump since November 1974, the department said.

Economists consider jobless claims a timely, if volatile, indicator of the health of the labor markets and broader economy. Last year, initial claims were 337,000.

The figures come a day after the Treasury Department reported a record budget deficit for November, driven by lower tax revenues and higher spending on programs such as unemployment insurance and food stamps.

In just the first two months of the budget year that started Oct. 1, the budget deficit totaled $401.6 billion, nearly matching the record gap of $455 billion posted for all of last year, the department said Wednesday.

Economists expect the deficit will top $1 trillion in the current budget year, which would be a post-World War II high when measured as a percentage of the economy.

The economy has been hit hard by the ongoing housing slump and financial crisis, which have sharply reduced household wealth as stock prices and home values have declined. Consumers and businesses have dramatically cut back their spending. The National Bureau of Economic Research said this month that the economy fell into a recession in December 2007.

The Labor Department said last week that employers cut a net total of 533,000 jobs in November and the unemployment rate reached 6.7 percent, a 15-year high. The rate would have been higher, except that more than 400,000 Americans gave up looking for a new job and weren’t counted in the labor force.

The latest jobless claims figures indicate that the December unemployment report could be at least as bad as November’s, Abiel Reinhart, an analyst at JPMorgan Chase Bank, wrote in a client note.

Companies have eliminated a net total of 1.9 million jobs this year, and some economists project the total cuts could reach 3 million by the spring of 2010.

A number of large U.S. employers announced layoffs this week, including Dow Chemical Co., 3M Co., Anheuser-Busch InBev, National Public Radio and the National Football League.

Our Perspective:

President Elect Obama is faced with a serious issue. With the economy in the tank and with unemployment projected to increase, his new administration must present a stimulus package that will help restore confidence and stabilize this downward slide. This may present an opportunity to think outside the box.

Let us know your thoughts? You may leave a comment or email george@hbsadvantage.com

Studies Suggest More Gains for Green Building in 2009

December 5, 2008 As reported in CoStar Advisor
Written by Andrew C. Burr

New Numbers Revealed on Worker Productivity, Cost Premiums, Energy Efficiency

It is difficult to imagine economic turmoil as a good thing for any business sector, but as markets have steadily worsened this year, the outlook for the green building industry appears to be trending the opposite direction.

November was an exceptionally robust month for the publication of green building data, with more than 10 surveys and reports exploring an array of topics such as worker productivity in LEED buildings, the impact of construction declines, cost premiums and payback periods, and perceptions of the business case for green.

Though polling and research has increased in the past few years, new data has been even more in-demand lately as property stakeholders attempt to gauge how the credit crisis and a full year of recession have affected green building.

Almost universally, the data points to another good year in 2009.

One of the more insightful reports is the “Green Building Impact Report 2008” from Greener World Media, which quantifies the overall effects of LEED on industry and the environment.

In its boldest conclusion, the report said that companies in LEED building have realized annual employee productivity gains exceeding $170 million as a result of improved indoor environmental quality — a cause and effect that has been difficult to quantify. That figure is predicted to jump well into the billions by 2015 as the number of employees in LEED buildings grows more than 10-fold, the report said.

On the industry side, LEED-certified projects have specified more than $10 billion of green materials to date, which has been a boon for the manufacturing sector, according to the study. Environmentally, LEED buildings have cumulatively saved 400 million vehicle miles traveled, 9.5 billion gallons of water and 0.03 quadrillion quads of energy.

The report predicts an overall “flattening” of the rate of LEED growth as it begins to saturate markets, but continued growth in the amount of floor area that is certified. “The current economic situation coupled with increased stringency in the LEED requirements will contribute to an expected slowdown” in LEED growth, the report said.

Three studies report on how the downturn in construction will affect green building development — which is not very much, they conclude.

McGraw Hill’s “2009 Green Outlook” study said green building seems to be insulated from the recession and is growing “in spite of the market downturn.” The value of green construction increased five-fold from $10 billion in 2005 to as much as $49 billion this year, and could triple by 2013 to nearly $150 billion, the study reported.

In Turner Construction Co.’s “2008 Green Building Market Barometer”, more than 80 percent of real estate executives said they would be “extremely” or “very likely” to seek LEED certification for new projects in the next three years. And at an Ernst & Young roundtable of construction company financial executives, 99 percent of survey respondents said interest in green development would increase next year, or at least remain the same as it is this year.

All of that is good news for architects, who were polled in the recent “2008 Autodesk/AIA Green Index” survey by the American Institute of Architects (AIA) trade group and architecture software firm Autodesk.

For the second year in a row, architects said that sustainable design is being driven by client demand, which is in turn being driven primarily by perceived energy savings and marketing benefits. More than 20 percent of architects also said that “market demand” was motivating clients to build green. Only 10 percent said that was a factor last year.

Nearly three-fourths of architects polled were concerned that clients are still not willing to pay cost premiums for green design, although according to a new global study written by sustainability expert Greg Kats, premiums for new buildings average just 2 percent.

Called “Greening Buildings and Communities: Costs and Benefits”, the report found that most green buildings cost less than 4 percent more than conventional buildings, with the greatest concentration of premiums in the 0 percent to 1 percent range.

As a CoStar study revealed earlier in the year, key indicators of building value such as occupancy, sale prices and lease rates tend to be higher in green buildings than in conventional buildings, the Kats study reported.

It also said that green buildings reduce energy use by an average of 33 percent, and that cost savings from energy efficiency would more than offset the green development premium, often in five years or less.

Kats said those factors have made green buildings remarkably resilient to the economy. “The deep downturn in real estate has not reduced the rapid growth in demand for and construction of green buildings. This suggests a flight to quality as buyers express a market preference for buildings that are more energy efficient, more comfortable and healthier,” he said.

That notion is not lacking for supporters.

Eighty percent of respondents in a survey by the Building Owners and Management Association (BOMA) International, the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) and the publication Real Estate Forum said that energy efficiency measures have defrayed costs, and 65 percent said their green investments have generated a positive ROI, which is up about five percent from last year.

Nearly 70 percent of corporate real estate executives responded that sustainability is a “critical business issue” in a survey by Jones Lang LaSalle and corporate real estate trade group CoreNet Global in a recent survey, which is up almost 20 points from last year.

And a majority of North American corporate sustainability executives believe capital remains available for sustainability projects, respondents told Panel Intelligence, a research company, in a survey last month.

Apparently however, green building data could afford to spend a little more time away from the office. Autodesk and research firm Harris Interactive recently asked 2,600 U.S. adults if they knew that buildings are the nation’s leading source of greenhouse gas emissions. About 4 percent said they did.

Our Perspective

The movement to Go Green is coming to the forefront. With the growing demand for energy and the lack of facilities to support this growing demand, steps are finally being taken to address this issue. The alternative energy market is poised to explode and this will also lead to more energy efficient buildings being built or retrofitted.

This issue should not be taken lightly, America faces a grave challenge in the near future. We must all work together to spread the awareness and present viable solutions.

Let us know your thoughts? You may leave a comment or email george@hbsadvantage.com

Ocean currents can power the world, say scientists

 

By Jasper Copping
Last Updated: 2:39PM GMT 29 Nov 2008

Existing technologies require an average current of five or six knots to operate efficiently, while most of the earth’s currents are slower than three knots Photo: AP

The technology can generate electricity in water flowing at a rate of less than one knot – about one mile an hour – meaning it could operate on most waterways and sea beds around the globe.

Existing technologies which use water power, relying on the action of waves, tides or faster currents created by dams, are far more limited in where they can be used, and also cause greater obstructions when they are built in rivers or the sea. Turbines and water mills need an average current of five or six knots to operate efficiently, while most of the earth’s currents are slower than three knots.

The new device, which has been inspired by the way fish swim, consists of a system of cylinders positioned horizontal to the water flow and attached to springs.

As water flows past, the cylinder creates vortices, which push and pull the cylinder up and down. The mechanical energy in the vibrations is then converted into electricity.

Cylinders arranged over a cubic metre of the sea or river bed in a flow of three knots can produce 51 watts. This is more efficient than similar-sized turbines or wave generators, and the amount of power produced can increase sharply if the flow is faster or if more cylinders are added.

A “field” of cylinders built on the sea bed over a 1km by 1.5km area, and the height of a two-storey house, with a flow of just three knots, could generate enough power for around 100,000 homes. Just a few of the cylinders, stacked in a short ladder, could power an anchored ship or a lighthouse.

Systems could be sited on river beds or suspended in the ocean. The scientists behind the technology, which has been developed in research funded by the US government, say that generating power in this way would potentially cost only around 3.5p per kilowatt hour, compared to about 4.5p for wind energy and between 10p and 31p for solar power. They say the technology would require up to 50 times less ocean acreage than wave power generation.

The system, conceived by scientists at the University of Michigan, is called Vivace, or “vortex-induced vibrations for aquatic clean energy”.

Michael Bernitsas, a professor of naval architecture at the university, said it was based on the changes in water speed that are caused when a current flows past an obstruction. Eddies or vortices, formed in the water flow, can move objects up and down or left and right.

“This is a totally new method of extracting energy from water flow,” said Mr Bernitsas. “Fish curve their bodies to glide between the vortices shed by the bodies of the fish in front of them. Their muscle power alone could not propel them through the water at the speed they go, so they ride in each other’s wake.”

Such vibrations, which were first observed 500 years ago by Leonardo DaVinci in the form of “Aeolian Tones”, can cause damage to structures built in water, like docks and oil rigs. But Mr Bernitsas added: “We enhance the vibrations and harness this powerful and destructive force in nature.

“If we could harness 0.1 per cent of the energy in the ocean, we could support the energy needs of 15 billion people. In the English Channel, for example, there is a very strong current, so you produce a lot of power.”

Because the parts only oscillate slowly, the technology is likely to be less harmful to aquatic wildlife than dams or water turbines. And as the installations can be positioned far below the surface of the sea, there would be less interference with shipping, recreational boat users, fishing and tourism.

The engineers are now deploying a prototype device in the Detroit River, which has a flow of less than two knots. Their work, funded by the US Department of Energy and the US Office of Naval Research, is published in the current issue of the quarterly Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering.

Will Obama Create National Energy Council?

Would Barack Obama convene a National Energy Council? The chances appear to be good. Such a council’s first task, CAP says, “should be to support the president in preparing energy legislation for delivery to Capitol Hill within 60 days of the inauguration:”

“The Council’s mission will be to coordinate the relevant policy of all the agencies of the federal government, outreach with states, localities, and the private sector, and U.S. leadership and partnership in international efforts to reduce global emissions,” CAP writes.
Dan Weiss, director of climate strategy at the CAP Action Fund, says the council would be based on the model of the National Economic Council, which Bill Clinton created via executive order in 1993. It would bring together top officials from relevant agencies — the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Interior, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Agriculture, the Council on Environmental Quality — as well as leaders from the National Economic Council and the National Security Council, in the interest of coordinating work on energy and climate issues.

 

John Podesta, who is heading up Obama’s transition team, has been in favor of a National Energy Council. His organization, the Center for American Progress, has outlined who they think who would be on a National Energy Council:

 

* Secretary of State 

* Secretary of Treasury
* Secretary of Defense
* Attorney General
* Secretary of the Interior
* Secretary of Agriculture
* Secretary of Commerce
* Secretary of Labor
* Secretary of Health and Human Services
* Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
* Secretary of Transportation
* Secretary of Energy
* Secretary of Homeland Security
* Chair, Council on Environmental Quality
* Chair, National Security Council
* Chair, National Economic Council

Our Perspective:

I believe it is critical that Pres Obama create the National Energy Council. We have backed ourselves up against the wall and it has devistated our economy. A plan should be layed out to incorporate multiple technologies, all working together to achieve a goal of energy independence within 10 years.

Let us know your thoughts? You may email george@hbsadvantage.com or leave a comment.

Who Wins, Who Loses Under Proposed Bailout Plan?

 As reported by Tom Raum in AP

WASHINGTON — The proposal to bail out U.S. financial markets to the tune of up to $700 billion creates a lot of potential short-term winners, as well as some losers.

Wall Street and the banking industry are perhaps the biggest winners. Scores of banks and other financial institutions faced with going under stand to gain a lifeline that should allow them to start making loans again.

Under the plan that congressional aide sought to put into final form Sunday, the Treasury Department can start buying up troubled mortgage-related securities now held by these institutions.

These securities are clogging balance sheets, leaving banks without the required capital to make new loans and putting the banks dangerously close to insolvency.

Banks not only have slowed lending to individuals and businesses, they have stopped making loans to each other. The rescue plan should help restore confidence to financial markets.

There are other winners, too, if the bailout works as intended: anyone soon trying to borrow money _ for cars, student loans, even to open new credit card accounts.

Top executives at troubled financial institutions, on the other hand, are in the losing column because the proposal would limit their compensation and rules out “golden parachutes.”

Of course, these executives may take solace in knowing their jobs still exist.

Investors, including the millions of people who hold stock in their 401(k) and pension plans, should benefit. Failure to reach a deal over the weekend could have sent stock markets around the world tumbling on Monday.

Homeowners faced with foreclosure or those who have lost their homes get little help from the agreement. Nor will it help people whose houses are worth less than what they owe get refinancing or take out equity loans.

It would do little to halt the slide in home values that are one of the root causes of the current economic slowdown.

“It doesn’t deal with the fundamental problems that gave rise to the problem _ or alleviate the credit crisis,” said Peter Morici, an economist and business professor at the University of Maryland

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke are potential winners.

In just a few months, they have remade Wall Street. If the plan helps to get the economy moving again, they may be remembered for having kept the financial crisis from spreading throughout the economy.

“When I see Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke on TV, I see fear in their eyes. Like on a battlefield when people are shooting at you. I think they are afraid to say how serious the problem is for fear of making it worse,” said Bruce Bartlett, an economist who was a Treasury official under the first President Bush.

Bartlett said the plan is flawed, yet the alternative of doing nothing could be catastrophic.

After the heavy dose of new regulation in the agreement, New York will have a hard time claiming it is the center of the financial universe. That title may have shifted to Washington.

If the plan stays together, Congress _ with approval ratings even lower than those of President Bush _ may be seen as having acted decisively at a time of national emergency.

Congressional leaders added new protections to the administration’s original proposal. That was only three pages long and bestowed on the treasury secretary almost unfettered powers.

Instead, the agreement would divide the $700 billion up into as many as three installments, creates an oversight board to monitor the treasury secretary’s actions and set up several major protections for taxpayers, including a provision putting taxpayers first in line to recover assets if a participating company fails.

The president, on the other hand, probably would get little credit for the deal. He allowed Paulson and Bernanke to do the heavy lifting. The only time he called all the players to the White House _ late Thursday afternoon _ the wheels almost came off the process entirely.

It’s hard to tell which presidential candidate benefits the most from an agreement they tentatively endorsed Sunday, a little more than five weeks before the Nov. 4 election. Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain each sought to claim some credit for the deal, even though they played active roles only over the past few days.

Hard economic times traditionally work against the party that holds the White House, and in recent polls Obama has inched ahead of McCain. Furthermore, there is widespread consumer resentment over being asked to bail out Wall Street and lawmakers have learned the proposal has not been popular with their constituents.

That may help Democrats in general. The strongest opposition to the original bailout plan came from House Republicans.

Lawmakers and presidential candidates alike are “trying to orchestrate everybody jumping off the cliff together,” said Robert Shapiro, a consultant who was an economic adviser to President Clinton. “I think we’d have a different plan if we weren’t five weeks out from the election.”

And ordinary taxpayers?

Nothing that potentially adds $700 billion to the national debt _ already surging toward the $10 trillion mark _ can be considered a winner for those who foot the bills.

But lawmakers did put in taxpayer protections, including one to require that taxpayers be repaid in full for loans that go bad.

The package could even end up making money for taxpayers, supporters claimed.

But only if the loans and interest on them are repaid in full. Few expect that provision to be a winning proposition, however.

Our Perspective:

We are facing one of the biggest financial challanges. Congress in the midst of approving a $700B financial recovery package and no one can gaurentee what the results will be.

All we can do is hope that the voices of reason will prevail and the necessary check valves will be put in place going forward so distress signals will be sent, stating that action needs to be taken immediately to correct a specific course. We can’t ignore these signals and wait until a collapse is imminent and then act.

Let us know your thoughts? Post a comment or send an email to george@hbsadvantage.com

Hutchinson Business Solutions…. Your CFO on the Go

Smart Solutions for Smart Business

Visit us on the web www.hutchinsonbusinesssolutions.com

San Antonio is going green with sewage

September 10, 2008 10:49 PM EST |  As reported in Huffington Post Green

 

SAN ANTONIO — The city plans to turn the stench of its residents’ waste into sweet green cash and renewable energy.

The San Antonio Water System will sell captured methane gas generated from the utility’s treatment of 140,000 tons of biosolids, or sewage, from customers each year.

The city-owned utility’s board of trustees approved a contract Tuesday to provide at least 900,000 cubic feet of natural gas daily for the next 20 years to Ameresco Inc., a Framingham, Mass.-based energy services company.

“Treating these biosolids generates an average of 1.5 million cubic feet of gas a day,” said Steve Clouse, the water system’s chief operating officer. “That’s enough gas to fill seven commercial blimps or 1,250 tanker trucks each day.”

The utility already sells for reuse a portion of the water that’s cleaned at its wastewater treatment plants. It also converts some biosolids into compost that’s sold for use in yards and gardens.

“As far as we know, SAWS is the only city in the United States that has completed the renewable recyclable trifecta,” Clouse said.

The water system will receive up to $250,000 a year for the methane, which will be drawn from the utility’s Dos Rios Water Recycling Center.

Clouse said it will take 18 to 24 months for construction of facilities needed for the contract.

“We’re very pleased that we can capture and sell this gas, which is good for San Antonio’s air quality and puts this renewable energy resource to work for San Antonio,” he said.

Our Perspective:

This is just another example of thinking outside the box. As we  have stated previously, there are multiple solutions available. There is no one silver bullet solution. Taken all together, multiple solutions will help lead the US to energy independence.

In 1960, John Kennedy challanged the US to put a man on the moon by the end of the decade. Energy independence is a challange we should all embrace and work for. Who will take the lead?

Let us know your thoughts? Post a comment or email george@hbsadvantage.com

US Senators Unveil Renewable Energy Tax Credit Package

As posted in CattleNetwork

9/11/2008 3:25:00 PM

 

WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)–A $40 billion package of tax credits for companies and individuals investing in renewable energy sources was unveiled Thursday in the U.S. Senate, with the cost of the package offset by new taxes on the oil and gas industry.

 

Sens. Max Baucus, D-Mont., and Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, the chairman and ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, crafted the deal and urged their fellow senators to get behind the package.

 

“This is crucial, this is vital, we’ve got to move on this, we can’t wait,” said Baucus, at a press conference announcing the deal.

 

Grassley said that he hoped his Republican colleagues in the Senate would vote for the package.

 

The renewable credits were part of a wider piece of tax legislation which became known as the tax extenders bill. The other parts of that package – including an annual patch for the alternative minimum tax and credits for research and development – were not part of the package released Thursday.  

 

A spokeswoman for the finance committee said that while Sen. Baucus was determined to get all aspects of the extenders’ package passed before Congress retires for the year in three weeks, he wanted to deal with the energy credits first.

 

The renewable energy tax measures are likely to be attached to a wider energy bill which will include provisions on drilling. That plan is expected to be introduced as soon as next week in the House of Representatives.

 

The package includes a new tax credit for nuclear energy production, and a credit for capturing and storing carbon dioxide. The wider renewable energy credits are extended to 2011 instead of just the one year extension that was included previously.

 

To pay for the credits, an existing tax credit for major integrated and state-owned oil companies will be eliminated, which is estimated to raise $13.9 billion over the next decade.

 

An excise tax will be applied to the removal of any taxable crude oil or natural gas recovered from the outer continental shelf, raising $17 billion over 10 years, as well as three other measures raising revenue.

 

Reacting to the announcement, Rhone A. Resch, the president of Solar Energy Industries Association, said he was cautiously optimistic.  

 

“We’ve been down this path eight times already in the Senate and not been able to get this done,” said Resch.

 

Resch said he hoped that the renewable credits weren’t attached to a larger energy bill, fearing that bill could be derailed in an election year.

 

Our Perspective:

 

Let’s hope this bill does not get caught up in party politics. That would be a shame.

 

The economy and energy is on everyones’ mind.

 

84% of Americans feel we are on the wrong track! 

 

This presents an opportunity to say, ” We hear you”!

 

The next great challange we face is the developement of Energy Technology. With the growing global economy and increases in demand, we must be able to explore all opportunities that present a viable solution. 

 

There is no silver bullet! We have put all our eggs in one basket over the years and look at the result.

 

By Congress passing this bill it will send a message to the American public that they do believe an issue exist and they are willing to provide incentives to help lead the exploration and promotion of technologies designed to decrease demand and introduce clean energy solutions.

 

Let us know your thoughts? You may post a comment or email george@hbsadvantage.com  

Can Young Green Voters Decide 2008 Presidential Election?

 As reported i Huffington Post Green

By Dan Shapley

How many is 1 million, when it comes to U.S. politics?

 

That’s about two-times as many votes as separated Al Gore and George W. Bush in the 2000 election, and about one-third as many votes as separated Bush from John Kerry in 2004.

And it’s how many votes a new campaign aims to win for the most climate-friendly candidate, at least in the eyes of those new voters.

(The 50 million so-called “Millennial Voters,” age 18-30, make up one-quarter of the electorate, and their numbers are growing more significant demographically: By 2015, 82 million voters in this age group will make up one-third of the electorate.)

The Energy Action Coalition’s Power Vote campaign officially kicks off Wednesday with a message from renowned NASA climate scientist James Hansen lending his voice to the nonpartisan effort, active on 300 college campuses. Its goal is to get those 1 million young voters to embrace a six-plank platform:

1. Create new green jobs
2. Invest in new clean energy technology, from public transportation to highly efficient vehicles
3. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions substantially
4. Break U.S. dependence on fossil fuels, and nuclear power
5. Engage in U.N. climate treaty negotiations
6. Refuse campaign contributions from coal, oil, natural gas or nuclear industries

Though the campaign is nonpartisan, if voters endorse that agenda, they are more likely to vote for Barack Obama, given John McCain’s support for offshore oil drilling and building new nuclear plants as the center of his energy policy. Obama’s energy plan calls for making renewable energy investments central.

Our Perspective:

I looked at the resuls that seperated the 2 elections that George Bush was involved in and it says loud and clear that your vote does count.

Familiarize yourself with the issues and know where each candidate stands on those issues. Let your voice be heard and Vote,

Let us know your thoughts? You may leave a comment or email george@hbsadvantage.com