Energy Literacy Advocates Newsroom
Energy Literacy Advocates (ELA) is a non-partisan, non-profit, public education and advocacy group dedicated to improving the energy literacy of all sectors of our democracy in order to empower a comprehensive national energy policy that is responsible and sustainable. Stay tuned for updated energy news!
Friday, October 2, 2009
Senators Reveal More Plans for Climate Legislation
Labels: climate change, economy, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 12:22 PM
0 comments
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Carbon Emission Reduction Methods Debated
A new study conducted by the University of Texas at Austin, and issued as supplemental research by the National Academy of Sciences, reveals that by decreasing the weight of vehicles nationwide, much greater gains can be made in decreasing carbon emissions. If all US vehicles were decreased in weight by 0.1 percent, this would make a 10 times greater reduction in carbon emissions than an 0.1 percent change in housing density.
To read the study, which outlines options for emissions control of greenhouse gases, click here.
Labels: climate change, efficiency, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 12:11 PM
0 comments
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
As Congress Returns, Energy Policy Debate Heats Up
Looming largest is the Senate decision on the House bill capping emissions, passed before recess began. Various utility groups, which support the decision, are planning to begin lobbying corporate America this week, by demonstrating the necessity of promoting clean energy.
Follow the energy policy discussion in D.C. here with Energy Literacy Advocates.
For more on this story, click here.
Labels: climate change, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 12:03 PM
0 comments
Monday, August 24, 2009
International Energy News: Power Europe via the Sahara?
The technology behind Desertec involves collecting energy from solar rays gathered in the Sahara desert and transmitting it via undersea cables to Europe. Supporters are promoting the project's non-carbon footprint and economic benefits for Northern Africa.
The project does face some opposition. Detractors are wary of investment in new technology in an unstable political region, and doubtful that intercontinental transmission of solar energy is more effective and efficient than local photovoltaic production.
To read more, click here.
Labels: climate change, electricity, energy sources, global warming, renewables
posted by Amanda Voss at 4:41 PM
0 comments
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Review from the National Clean Energy Summit
Promoting the Obama administration's energy policy, Energy Secretary Steven Chu emphasized the need for a carbon tax to support many of these policy goals.
Other policy discussions included mandating a renewable energy portfolio for the US electricity supply and modernizing the electricity supply grid.
While the agenda during the second National Clean Energy Summit focused largely on policy supports for the green energy industry, it featured former vice president Al Gore's case for quick action.
Gore warned that the planet's petroleum reservers are falling faster than predicted, which can only lead to more price spikes and shortages.
For a more in-depth review of the Summit, click here.
Labels: climate change, energy policy, gas tax, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 1:48 PM
0 comments
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Addressing Greenhouse Gas from Electricity Will Need Broad Effort
The report paid special attention to the pocketbooks of consumers, and found that a "full technology portfolio" is needed to avoid penalizing the average household. EPRI endorsed building 45 new nuclear reactors, increasing energy efficiency and employing carbon capture technology to help reach greenhouse gas goals.
Still, the report warns that to meet environmental goals, energy prices will have to rise, impacting households at up to $400 additional per year over the next thirty years.
To read more, click here.
Labels: climate change, efficiency, electricity, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 11:40 AM
0 comments
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Energy Secretary Urges China to Cooperate in Climate Efforts
Labels: climate change, efficiency, energy, global warming
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:15 AM
0 comments
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Climate Change Hearings Take Center Stage for Democrats
Labels: climate change, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:20 AM
0 comments
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Obama Looking Forward to Senate Action on Energy Bill
Labels: climate change, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 9:13 AM
0 comments
Friday, June 26, 2009
American Clean Energy and Security Act Gets Boost from President
Labels: climate change, environment, global warming, renewables, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:30 AM
0 comments
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Consensus Nearing on Climate Legislation
“It is quite possible and maybe even probable we will go” to the floor with the measure at the end of this week “and complete the energy legislation,” Steny Hoyer, House Majority Leader and Maryland Democrat, told reporters in Washington today.
The American Clean Energy and Security Act would establish a market system for trading U.S. pollution permits as a way to control greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change.
To read more, click here.
Labels: climate change, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 7:56 PM
0 comments
Monday, June 22, 2009
Budget Office Releases Controversial Energy Bill Costs
The CBO calculated average cost to be $175 per household per year. To calculate these expenses, CBO evaluated only the cap and trade legislation portions. Costs will be higher for wealthier households, based on a net cost of $22 billion.
Critics have cited the CBO's estimates as overly optimistic. The costs calculate expenses for only part of the bill, and count benefits like free permits to offset costs. Without these provisions, total cost may reach beyond $110 billion in 2020, or $890 annually per household.
HR 2454 is expected to be put up for full debate in the House by July.
To read more about this issue in The New York Times, click here.
Labels: climate change, environment, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 1:32 PM
0 comments
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Energy Secretary Pushes Climate Bill
Labels: climate change, environment, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 9:50 AM
0 comments
Monday, June 15, 2009
"Clean" Coal Again in America's Energy Portfolio?
The government will offer 2 to 1 funding alongside private investors to create a prototype coal plant which captures the carbon dioxide it produces. Initial government funding estimates are over $1 billion for the joint research effort.
To read an opinion article about this policy reversal, click here.
Labels: energy sources, environment, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 12:02 PM
0 comments
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
US Climate Chief Pledges Emission Cuts, Help for Poor
To aid developing countries, Stern said clauses on emissions trading in the Waxman-Markey Bill being debated by the US Congress would provide $15-$20bn a year in allowances annually to poor nations, based on a carbon price of $15-$20 a tonne.
To read the full interview, click here.
Labels: climate change, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 9:32 AM
0 comments
Monday, June 1, 2009
Debate Resumes Over Waxman-Markey Climate Bill
To offer a counterpoint to the debate, we are posting a link to a Washington Post article, which discusses some of the possible negative points of the Waxman-Markey bill.
To access the article, click here.
Labels: climate change, energy, energy policy, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 9:09 AM
0 comments
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
EIA Releases Extended Energy, Pollution Outlook
While substantial growth is expected in the use of renewable energy sources such as hydropower, wind and solar, the EIA maintains that overall growth in demand will require continued reliance on fossil fuels, especially oil and coal.
The biggest increases in energy use will come from economically developing countries such as China and India.
To read more, click here.
Labels: energy, energy policy, energy sources, environment, global warming
posted by Amanda Voss at 12:37 PM
0 comments
Thursday, May 21, 2009
2008 Data Reveals Record Drop in U.S. Carbon Emissions
Much of this decrease may be attributed to the drop in travel caused by soaring gasoline and diesel costs last summer and the general economic decline later in the year, which added up to a 2.2 percent drop in energy consumption. The largest previous drop in travel related emissions was 1.3 percent in 1991.
Overall, the government reported Wednesday that energy-related carbon dioxide emissions declined by 2.8 percent last year compared to 2007, the largest annual drop since the government began regular reporting of greenhouse gas pollution.
To read more, click here.
Labels: climate change, energy, environment, global warming
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:26 AM
0 comments
Monday, May 18, 2009
Energy Committee Opens Debate Today
Sponsored by committee chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Energy and Environment Subcommittee chairman Edward Markey (D-MA), the bill offers some sweeping changes in U.S. energy policy, including limits on carbon emissions and a government-run permitting system.
Committee Republicans are expected to offer an alternative measure and amendments during today's hearings.
To read more, click here.
Labels: climate change, energy policy, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:27 AM
0 comments
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
House Democrats Seek Party Consensus for American Clean Energy and Security Act
This legislation will have to please both environmental and industry groups and have the support of moderate Democrats on the House Energy Committee.
The bill, which includes "Cash for Clunkers" and other environmental provisions, is slated for a Memorial Day release from Committee. To help ensure its survival, Democrats have lowered targets for renewable energy, will require a smaller reduction by 2020 in the emissions blamed for global warming, and will give away valuable permits to release pollution to electricity distribution companies and auto manufacturers.
To read the full article, click here.
Labels: environment, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 9:29 AM
0 comments
Monday, May 11, 2009
Energy Legislation Draft Possible This Week
The subcomittee has pledged to maintain its Memorial Day deadline for release.
While agreement exists over provisions like "Cash for Clunkers," dissension remains over climate policy. Lawmakers have focused on four critical areas: targets and timetables for domestic cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, distribution of valuable emission allowances; use of offsets to ease industrial compliance costs; and a nationwide renewable electricity standard.
To read the full article, click here.
Labels: automakers, energy policy, environment, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 9:33 AM
0 comments
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Democrats Seek Consensus on Energy Legislation
While policy provisions instituting a strategy for replacing gas-guzzling cars with more fuel-efficient models met with general support, much tougher negotiations lie ahead on a bill that would, for the first time, limit emissions linked to global warming.
The Obama administration has endorsed pending energy legislation broadly, saying it would advance key parts of the president's domestic agenda, namely slowing global warming and transitioning to a clean energy economy. The House Energy committee, which is still working on the final language for the possible combined energy bill, has postponed a vote due to cost concerns raised by the panel's moderate Democrats.
To read the full article, click here.
Labels: automakers, energy, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:42 AM
0 comments
Friday, April 24, 2009
Weighing the Cost of Proposed Energy Legislation
These higher prices would come as the result of proposed cap and trade legislation, currently under consideration in Congress. The proposed plan puts a price on the gases linked to global warming, and establishes a paid permit system for emissions.
While energy providers proposed that initial permits be offered free of charge, the president's budget assumes that allowances will be sold and uses the projected $650 billion in revenue to help people pay for higher energy costs and to develop new, more climate friendly energy sources.
"It should not be legislation that is designed to raise revenue. ... It should be something that is trying to achieve its objective of reducing carbon emissions in the country and that alone," said Glenn English, CEO of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, which represents 42 million consumers in 47 states.
To read the full article, click here.
Labels: climate change, energy, environment, gas tax, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:48 AM
0 comments
Monday, April 20, 2009
Congress Sets Deadline For Energy Bill
"I do know this, at the end of this first year of Congress there will be an energy bill on the president's desk," White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel told ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos."
This week the House Energy and Commerce Committee will begin hearings on one of the more controversial proposed legislation pieces, that would limit greenhouse gas emissions and require companies to acquire permits to release carbon into the atmosphere.
Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman has said he wants the bill, which includes measures to boost energy efficiency and develop clean energy technology, to pass the committee in late May and the House of Representatives later in 2009.
To read more, click here.
Labels: global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 11:38 AM
0 comments
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Administration Adviser Elaborates on Climate Change Policy
Current cap-and-trade legislation is under consideration in the House, with a goal voting date falling before Memorial Day.
While Obama lobbied heavily for auctioning off all emissions permits issued at the outset of a cap-and-trade system, the compromised economic situation has brought a re-evaluation of that strategy. Many industry leaders say that having to pay for all the allowances at first would drive up energy costs too quickly.
To read the full article in the Washington Post, click here.
Labels: climate change, economy, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:58 AM
0 comments
Monday, April 6, 2009
Two Viewpoints on the 2009 Energy Bill
To offer further insight into this bill, and to allow for a study of contrasting opinions surrounding this legislation, we are linking to two articles - one supporting, one against - the ACES draft.
Arguing against this proposal is an article from Nicolas Loris, Research Assistant and Ben Lieberman, Senior Policy Analyst in Energy and the Environment in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation. They contend that "The architects of ACES argue that the bill will create millions of clean energy jobs and help Americans save on energy costs, but in reality it will do just the opposite. Using taxpayer dollars to invest in inefficient energy sources while artificially driving up the costs of reliable energy with a cap-and-trade program will only cause more economic pain for the consumer—with no environmental benefit to show for it." To read the full article, click here.
In support of the ACES bill is an article from David Doniger of the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), published in the Huffington Post. He states that "The draft combines standards and incentives for rapidly deploying clean energy and energy efficiency technologies with firm economy-wide limits on the carbon pollution that is driving global warming." To read the full article, click here.
Labels: climate change, economy, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:09 AM
0 comments
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Global Warming & Energy Bill Released by House Democrats
Sponsored by Reps. Henry Waxman of California and Ed Markey of Massachusetts, the bill would establish a cap-and-trade program curbing U.S. emissions to 20 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. It also creates a nationwide renewable electricity standard that reaches 25 percent by 2025, new energy efficiency programs and limits on the carbon content of motor fuels, and requires greenhouse gas standards for new heavy duty vehicles and engines.
To read the full article and learn more details about the bill draft, click here.
Labels: energy policy, environment, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 9:46 AM
0 comments
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Climate Lobbyists, Climate Bills Escalate in D.C.
According to the New York Times, since January politicians have introduced more than 20 bills mentioning climate change, including proposals that would prohibit taxes on the emissions of domestic animals and would require metropolitan planning organizations to incorporate climate in their transportation blueprints. In the 109th Congress, by comparison, members of Congress introduced only 60 or so bills on the topic over a two-year period from 2005 to 2006.
The surge in climate-related lobbying is also revealing how broad reaching many energy reforms can be, as diverse industries, interest groups and municipalities come to the bargaining table.
To read the full New York Times report, click here.
Labels: climate change, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:00 AM
0 comments
Friday, February 27, 2009
A Look Into Energy Measures in Proposed Federal Budget
Funding increases include more money to NASA for space-based monitoring of greenhouse gases, expanded support at the Energy Department for finding ways to economically capture carbon emissions from coal-burning power plants, and more money for the Interior Department to mitigate the impact of climate change on public lands and wildlife
To help with funding, the budge proposes imposing a new excise tax and fees on companies that take oil and natural gas from federal waters and reimposes a tax — again largely targeting the oil industry — to pay for cleaning up Superfund sites.
To be noted, however, $15 billion of the funding stream necessary for Obama's initiatives relies on carbon pollution permits, which have yet to be proposed by Congress.
To read the full article, click here.
Labels: climate change, gas tax, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 9:14 AM
0 comments
Friday, February 20, 2009
Framing the Peak Energy Debate
"Will we continue to use fossil fuels to the detriment of our planet and the human population? Or can we clean up our act in time to avoid calamitous change? That's the dilemma the world currently faces, yet in spite of efforts to transition to alterative energy sources, projections show that annual fossil fuel demand is likely to increase 45 per cent by 2030."
While focusing on the relationship between fossil fuel consumption and the climate, Kleiner also highlights the lack of information in the public domain, leading - in some experts' opionions - to the deepening of the energy crisis.
To read the full article, click here.
Labels: climate change, energy, global warming, renewables
posted by Amanda Voss at 12:54 PM
0 comments
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Energy Chair Speaks at National Clean Energy Conference
To watch the ten minute clip, click here.
Labels: election 2008, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:14 AM
0 comments
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Confirmation Hearings Offer Continued Insights Into New Administration's Energy Plans
Chu continued to stress the dire consequences of global warming, warning that "dramatic, disruptive changes to our climate system in the lifetimes of our children and grandchildren" could occur if we fail to speed up efforts to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. However, he softened his stance on using coal and nuclear power in America's future energy portfolio, and backed away from previous iterations on raising the gas tax.
To read the full Wall Street Journal report, click here.
Labels: election 2008, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:17 AM
0 comments
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
USA Today Offers Peek at New Energy Secretary
Of prime concern in the energy picture is global warming. Chu began studying global warming a decade ago, and his since taught himself economics to understand various options to slow environmental degradation. Chu coauthored a 2007 report about energy that in part concluded: "What the world does in the coming decade will have enormous consequences that will last for centuries. It is imperative that we begin without further delay."
To read the full article, click here.
Labels: election 2008, energy policy, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Amanda Voss at 8:44 AM
0 comments
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Americans More Concerned About Global Warming
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/20/warming.poll/index.html
Poll shows Americans getting more concerned about global warming
Survey finds more Americans believe phenomenon proven. Majority say U.S. should take action even if other nations don't. Most Americans believe emissions from cars, industries the primary cause.
(CNN) -- Most Americans blame emissions from cars and industrial plants as the primary cause of global warming and believe the United States should reduce levels even if other countries don't, a survey shows.
Fifty-six percent of poll respondents said the phenomenon of global warming has been proven, and can be largely blamed on human endeavors, such as power plants and factories, according to the CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll.
In comparison, 21 percent of those surveyed claimed global warming problems are caused either by natural changes or are unproven.
Sixty-six percent of Americans believe the United States should do what it can to reduce global warming, even if other nations ignore it. This compares with 52 percent of respondents who believed that way in 2001.
In that year, 34 percent thought the United States needed to reduce harmful gases only if other nations did. A much smaller proportion, 16 percent, responded that way in 2007.
The survey of 1,212 adults was conducted October 12-14 and has a sampling error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.
Labels: climate change, energy, energy policy, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Jamie Lang at 6:10 AM
0 comments
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Must-read - Our energy/global warming talk vs. our walk!
June 3, 2007Op-Ed Columnist, nytimes.comOur Green Bubble By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Surely the most glaring contrast in American political life today is the amount of words, speeches and magazine covers devoted to the necessity of “going green,” “combating climate change” and gaining “energy security,” and the actual solutions being offered by our leaders to do any of these things. You could very comfortably drive a Hummer through the gap between our words and deeds.
We are playing pretend — which, when you think about it, is really troubling. Here are the facts: Our worst enemies, like Iran, have been emboldened by all their petrodollars. The vast majority of scientists tell us that global warming caused by our burning of fossil fuels is a real danger. And with three billion new consumers from India, Russia and China joining the world economy, it is inevitable that manufacturing clean, green power systems, appliances, homes and cars will be the next great global industry. It has to be, or we will not survive as a species.
And yet ... and yet our president and our Congress still won’t give us an energy bill that would create the legal and economic framework to address these issues at the speed and scale required.
If you were President Bush, wouldn’t you want to leave behind something big, bold and important on energy, just in case — you know, just in case — Iraq doesn’t turn out so well? I sure would. But the president still has not challenged Congress or the country to undertake a radical departure on energy. So we still have only “energy politics,” not “energy policy.” Like previous energy bills, the packages working through the House and Senate today represent more “the sum of all lobbies,” as the energy expert Gal Luft, co-chairman of the Set America Free Coalition, puts it, not the sum of our best ideas.
Some lawmakers are pushing corn ethanol from Iowa, either because they hail from that area and are looking to give more welfare to farmers by wasting money on an alternative fuel that will never reach the scale of what is needed, or because they plan to run in the Iowa caucuses. Others are pushing huge subsidies to turn coal into gasoline, because they come from coal states. Those who don’t come from Michigan want higher mileage standards imposed on Detroit, while those who come from Michigan prefer to continue their assisted suicide of the U.S. auto industry by blocking tougher mileage requirements.
“The only green that they are serious about in Congress right now is the one with Ben Franklin’s picture on it,” Mr. Luft said.
Yes, it is helpful that Mr. Bush expressed a desire last week to work with other nations to limit greenhouse gases. His bully pulpit matters. But no one will — or should — take him seriously unless his government first leads by example. What would that look like? It has to start with a clear, long-term price signal. That is, a carbon tax or gasoline tax — or a cap and trade system with a binding national ceiling on carbon dioxide emissions — which would set a price for dumping carbon into the atmosphere or driving a gas-guzzling car.
Get Washington to signal that gasoline is never going to retreat from a level of $3.50 or $4 a gallon — and that wind and solar subsidies will be there for a decade, not stop and start as they always have before; get Washington to commit to buying a fixed volume of solar and wind power for government buildings and Army bases for 10 years, with only U.S.-based manufacturers able to compete for contracts; get Washington to set a new fleet average of 35 miles per gallon for Detroit within 10 years — with no loopholes; establish government loan guarantees for any company that wants to build a nuclear power plant; and, finally, build a national transmission grid — a green power superhighway — so that solar energy from Arizona or wind from Wyoming can power homes in Chicago. Do all that and our private sector will take America from green laggard to green leader.
Unfortunately, Congress is brewing instead a hodgepodge of incrementalism. This is particularly disappointing when America’s corporate icons — G.M., G.E., A.I.G., DuPont, PepsiCo — “have all come out in favor of a national mandatory limit on carbon emissions,” notes Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense. “But Democrats and Republicans in the Senate have not risen to their challenge.” We have a multigenerational problem that requires a systemic, multigenerational response, and that can happen only if we get our energy prices right.
Only that will guarantee green innovation and commercialization at scale. Anything less is wasted breath and wasted money — and any candidate who says otherwise is only contributing to global warming by adding hot air.
Labels: economy, energy, global warming, u.s. energy policy
posted by Chris Atwood at 10:39 AM
1 comments
