• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Midterm election results could mean bad news for climate change, renewable energy leg

Prof. Peabody

Debate MMA
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
1,361
Reaction score
325
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Midterm election results could mean bad news for climate change, renewable energy legislation - Yahoo! News

Midterm election results could mean bad news for climate change, renewable energy legislation

Amanda Carey - The Daily Caller Amanda Carey - The Daily Caller – Mon Oct 4, 1:54 am ET

The political winds do not bode well for renewable energy and climate change policy.

Sure, President Obama told Rolling Stone that “we’re going to stay on this [energy policy] because it is good for our economy, it’s good for our national security, and, ultimately, it’s good for our environment,” but what does it matter if members of Congress don’t feel the same passion to pass an Obama-style energy plan?

Advocates for cap and trade legislation spent an agonizing summer watching the Kerry-Liebermann bill go up in flames in the Senate. Despite the massive lobbying by environmental groups and the fact that Democrats hold a majority in Congress, cap and trade died in the Senate for the fourth time since 2003.

Last year, the House did manage to narrowly pass their version of cap and trade – also known as Waxman-Markey – but that bill got so bogged down with exemptions and concessions for utilities and oil companies that its net impact was less than ideal for most environmental advocates.

I am confused as to how the Democrats energy policy is "good" for the economy. It will surely raise prices on consumers who will then have much less money to spend and stimulate the economy by purchasing manufactured goods.

Back in the 1970's Liberals wizzed and moaned over Nuclear Power. Carter and the Democrats steered us toward coal to break the grip from foreign oil. Today, they propose making the public pay for their bad decision called "cap and trade". France went the Nuclear Power route and today produces 85% of their power with clean non CO2 emitting Nuclear Power. I can't think of a single reason we should listen to them again with their energy policy. Can you?
 

Councilman

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
4,454
Reaction score
1,654
Location
Riverside, County, CA.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: Midterm election results could mean bad news for climate change, renewable energy

If this stops the Cap and Trade nonsense it will help along with the much needed roll back of the "Obama I don't Care about your Health Plan" that will rape the citizens & economy then it's a wonderful thing.

As I said before: The Environmentally ill movement is not about
saving anything any more except their cash
machines the heads of these money pits do
very well by and never have to lift a damn finger
because the rank and file who get out raise hell

and even risk jail on occasion are all volunteers,
who still think they are out fighting for mother
nature, when in fact that hasn't been the case i
n many years.

Look at the pay just a few CEO's I listed all get
and keep in mind the Average American worker
is about, $32,140 each year.

This makes the cushy jobs look a whole lot less
than being a some idealistic altruistic noble
cause an clearly all about the Benjamins to
me. And all the facts showing widespread
manipulation of facts from the about 11 found
in Gores In-Convenient propaganda film to all
the emails leaked or stolen ans so much more
I really do wonder how those like Obama with
his agenda to sink the economy so he can push
his Socialist/Marxist agenda can actually get up
with a straight face ans lie his ass off about it
time and again knowing that many of know he's
full of sight up to his brown eyes.

Environmental Defense Fund
Budget: $25.4 million
Staff: 160
Members: 300,000
Salary of CEO: $262,000, including benefits

National Audubon Society
Budget: $44.9 million
Staff: 300
Members: 550,000
CEO Salary: More than $180,000 including benefits

National Wildlife Federation
Budget: $80 million
Staff: 600
Members: 5 million
CEO salary: More than $180,000 including benefits

National Resources Defense Council
Budget: $27.5 million
Staff: 172
Members: 350,000
CEO salary: More than $200,000, including benefits

The Nature Conservancy
Budget: $337 million
Staff: 1,200
Members: 720,000 individuals; 220 corporations
Salary of CEO: More than $196,000, including
benefits

We need to have systems put in place that are based on reality and facts and done logically so as not to screw over the economy with scare tactics ans fake or faulty science.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
6,468
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Re: Midterm election results could mean bad news for climate change, renewable energy

Back in the 1970's Liberals wizzed and moaned over Nuclear Power. Carter and the Democrats steered us toward coal to break the grip from foreign oil. Today, they propose making the public pay for their bad decision called "cap and trade". France went the Nuclear Power route and today produces 85% of their power with clean non CO2 emitting Nuclear Power. I can't think of a single reason we should listen to them again with their energy policy. Can you?

Is France's nuclear power industry private or nationalized?
 

Morality Games

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
3,733
Reaction score
1,156
Location
Iowa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Re: Midterm election results could mean bad news for climate change, renewable energy

If this stops the Cap and Trade nonsense it will help along with the much needed roll back of the "Obama I don't Care about your Health Plan" that will rape the citizens & economy then it's a wonderful thing.

As I said before: The Environmentally ill movement is not about
saving anything any more except their cash
machines the heads of these money pits do
very well by and never have to lift a damn finger
because the rank and file who get out raise hell

and even risk jail on occasion are all volunteers,
who still think they are out fighting for mother
nature, when in fact that hasn't been the case i
n many years.

Look at the pay just a few CEO's I listed all get
and keep in mind the Average American worker
is about, $32,140 each year.

This makes the cushy jobs look a whole lot less
than being a some idealistic altruistic noble
cause an clearly all about the Benjamins to
me. And all the facts showing widespread
manipulation of facts from the about 11 found
in Gores In-Convenient propaganda film to all
the emails leaked or stolen ans so much more
I really do wonder how those like Obama with
his agenda to sink the economy so he can push
his Socialist/Marxist agenda can actually get up
with a straight face ans lie his ass off about it
time and again knowing that many of know he's
full of sight up to his brown eyes.

Environmental Defense Fund
Budget: $25.4 million
Staff: 160
Members: 300,000
Salary of CEO: $262,000, including benefits

National Audubon Society
Budget: $44.9 million
Staff: 300
Members: 550,000
CEO Salary: More than $180,000 including benefits

National Wildlife Federation
Budget: $80 million
Staff: 600
Members: 5 million
CEO salary: More than $180,000 including benefits

National Resources Defense Council
Budget: $27.5 million
Staff: 172
Members: 350,000
CEO salary: More than $200,000, including benefits

The Nature Conservancy
Budget: $337 million
Staff: 1,200
Members: 720,000 individuals; 220 corporations
Salary of CEO: More than $196,000, including
benefits

We need to have systems put in place that are based on reality and facts and done logically so as not to screw over the economy with scare tactics ans fake or faulty science.

1. Systems are implemented by people.

2. People tend to be unresponsive to logical arguments.

People are exploiting climate change to make money, but that doesn't mean much in light of the fact other people are downplaying climate change to make money. The climate change movement was never widely celebrated for its altruism, just its cause.

But putting that aside, you are reducing the complexity of the issue. Since climate change is at least theoretically a development which requires the full attention of a certain group of people, those people would have to form organizations and receive some compensation for their labor. Are you suggesting that if the people urging action on climate change aren't altruistic then their calls for action are invalid? That itself isn't a logical premise.
 
Last edited:

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Re: Midterm election results could mean bad news for climate change, renewable energy

Is France's nuclear power industry private or nationalized?

Quasi. France provides an exceptionally large amount of public financing. Rarely is this ever brought up. My problem with Nuclear is that taxpayers are likely going to be tapped to finance at least some of these projects. With the average nuclear loan (or guarantee) in excess of $2 billion apiece (yes, BILLION), nuclear power is frankly anything but "free market." And that's not counting the subsidies nuclear gets per kilowatt.
And France subsidizes the bejeezus out of its industry.

France's Nuclear "Miracle" is More Fantasy that Fact - The Hill's Congress Blog
Hooked on Subsidies | Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren | Cato Institute: Commentary

It is hard to be a consistent limited government conservative and support nuclear power.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
76,849
Reaction score
33,907
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Midterm election results could mean bad news for climate change, renewable energy

Quasi. France provides an exceptionally large amount of public financing. Rarely is this ever brought up. My problem with Nuclear is that taxpayers are likely going to be tapped to finance at least some of these projects. With the average nuclear loan (or guarantee) in excess of $2 billion apiece (yes, BILLION), nuclear power is frankly anything but "free market." And that's not counting the subsidies nuclear gets per kilowatt.
And France subsidizes the bejeezus out of its industry.

France's Nuclear "Miracle" is More Fantasy that Fact - The Hill's Congress Blog
Hooked on Subsidies | Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren | Cato Institute: Commentary

It is hard to be a consistent limited government conservative and support nuclear power.

I wonder how their approval process compares to ours. I know a huge part of the costs of a US plant is they all have to be individually designed and approved, and the red tape for that can take years. We could definitely bring down the costs by streamlining the process.

And, really, we don't have any other choice. Wind and solar power are nifty and all, but they're going to lose out to sheer volume, and they can't be relied on 100% of the time. Climate change issues aside, we have to replace the vast majority of our fossil fuels with something else eventually, because those fossil fuels are not an unlimited resource. Nuclear power is the only source that reasonably can fill that volume. There's enough uranium around to last basically forever, especially if we reprocess the waste.
 
Top Bottom