The full implications of S.B. 310 and H.B. 483 will become clearer over the course of the coming year. However, the initial evidence indicates that the legislation is saddling Ohioans with economic harms and will come to represent a missed opportunity for Ohio to lead the country in building a clean energy economy. Other states across the country are currently considering similar actions to roll back or repeal their renewable energy standards, energy-efficiency standards, or programs to promote clean energy. For those states, Ohio should serve as a cautionary tale about the detrimental consequences of regressive energy policies.
“I imagine that as long as there are ALEC members in Colorado, they’ll continue to push the priority agenda that ALEC has,” Elsner says. “And right now, a lot of ALEC’s energy members have an interest in weakening clean energy policies.”
“Coal and oil are only cheap ways to power a nation in the very near term. But if you look a little further down the road, you begin to see an entirely different story,” he said. Kerry said the real costs of oil and coal “actually pile up very quickly” in the effects of climate change and pollution, both of which are much greater with fossil fuels than with other energy sources.
It is “viable” and “economically compelling” to push for deployment of wind at that level as consumers would see almost $800 billion in benefits from avoided greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. Those benefits would include an increase in the amount of natural gas available — lowering prices — for uses outside of the electric sector such as heating or chemical products, according to the main projection of Wind Vision’s report.
“Want to put people to work? This is the way you put people to work,” Kerry said in the speech to the Atlantic Council. “The global energy market of the future is poised to be the largest market the world has ever known. This is not a choice between bad and worse,” Kerry said. “Pursuing cleaner, more efficient energy is actually the only way that nations around the world can build the kind of economies that are going to thrive for decades to come.”
With certain government and private-sector actions, wind power could provide 35 percent of the United States’s electricity needs by 2050, a new federal report found.The Wind Vision report released Thursday by the White House and the Energy Department is an update to its 2008 report and maps out the current state of wind energy and its potential over the coming decades.
Building on this progress, today the Department of Energy released Wind Vision: A New Era for Wind Power in the United States, a comprehensive analysis of the U.S. wind energy industry. The report shows that the nation can deploy wind power to economically provide 35% of our nation’s electricity and supply renewable power in all 50 states by 2050.
Today is an exciting day for wind power. The White House has announced the release of the U.S. Department of Energy’s highly anticipated Wind Vision Report. I wish to express my heartfelt gratitude for the critical role you played in making this effort a reality. The Wind Vision Report would certainly not have been possible without your involvement and thoughtful participation.
The conglomerate owned by conservative activists Charles and David Koch said it won’t cooperate with Senate Democrats’ investigation into its potential funding of skeptical climate research. The company’s top lawyer released a letter late Tuesday that he sent last week to Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), invoking the First Amendment to fight the probe. He further accused the senators of trying to infringe upon Koch’s free speech and free association rights.
The industrial conglomerate run by the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch is refusing to provide Democratic lawmakers with information on whether it has paid for climate change research. Last month, three Democratic senators sent 100 letters to an assortment of fossil-fuel companies and organizations seeking information on whether they have backed research into global warming and other environmental topics.