Politics Romney - Is he ready?

Loves me some "Onion."

 

What percent of power in Germany is solar?

I don't argue that there have been some incremental developments and that there will continue to be some in the area of solar energy - and that some areas on the planet it can be employed better than in some other areas. However, solar is not cost effective on a large scale currently and requires a redundant grid for backup, cloudy days, and night. If Germany is willing to bet its economic future on solar, that is their choice, but I doubt Germany would remain an economic powerhouse in the world it they did.

No I don't. I generally have a binary view, so success is success, failure is failure. I do not put any subjective values moral judgements on success or failure.

Yes. It should be part of a comprehensive energy plan. If there is a vision for something like solar, no one is communicating it in a manner that will lead to any type of major accomplishments on the scales of hydro-power, i.e. Hoover Damn, Niagara Falls.

 

Solar and Wind have grown quite a bit in the past few years in the US. It might not be a fast as it could be, but there are large scale installations of solar panels and wind turbines that I have seen in MI, OH,, FL, NV, and AZ.

Germany is doing really good with solar power, because they realize if the tax the polluting forms of energy and offer a guaranteed and above market price for solar power sold back to the grid, will get individuals and companies to invest a bigger upfront cost.

 

I see the UK press finally agrees Mitt is doing something right... he's leaving.

 

Mitt Romney would support Israeli military strike against Iran, says aide | World news | guardian.co.uk

and mitt goes to israel, where he drops to his knees in front of the israeli far right and begins the vigorous movement of his head back and forth along their, um, well you get the idea.

 

No surprise, given Romney's foreign policy advisers....many former Cheney cronies.

• the belligerent John Bolton, who served briefly as Bush's UN ambassador but resigned when he knew he wouldnt be confirmed...and being rumored as Romney's Sec. of State
• Eric Edleman, former Cheney aid behind the outing of Valerie Plame
• Elliot Cohen, co-founder of the Project for a New American Century
• former CIA office Cofer Black, who led Bush's torture program
• Robert Kagan and Dan Senor of the Foreign Policy Initiative, the new and improved version of the Project for a New American Century

These chicken hawks even have Colin Powell saying:

"I don't know who all of his advisers are, but I've seen some of the names and some of them are quite far to the right. And sometimes they might be in a position to make judgments or recommendations to the candidate that should get a second thought..."​

 

Over the last few days "Mitt The Twit" is proving to be a gigantic International asshole - not just an American one. At the Olympic Ceremony he states something about whether the UK would be able to keep "it safe" but had to voice his own small minded concerns. Ouch! The UK used to be our allies. After him going there, I bet they're worried what kind of egocentric President if (Gawd-forbid!) he were to get elected here.

He embarresses us at every turn and his little friendly "Campaign" visit in Israel ---- saying the Israelis have His backing to bomb Irona was waaay out of line. And dangerous as hell.

Why did he go there and act like they need his approval on ANYTHING?

 

The crap he's saying overseas is disturbing but something he said about a week ago really gave me the chills-

Yeah, just what the US needs... another Cheney type VP. Fuck me.

 

Some context. Germany is subsidizing solar power to the tune of about $130b. Subsidies they are going to cut. Here is an interesting article.

Why Germany is phasing out its solar-power subsidies. - Slate Magazine

Solar has issues, perhaps one day those issues will be addressed. I stand by my point - Germany will need to carefully measure future investments in solar, if they "speculate" their economic future on solar, it is their choice, but no one I would make.

 

first off, if the present situation is accurately characterized as a balance-sheet recession, driven by collapse of asset value which freezes up borrowing and is for this reason not likely (based on the history of other such balance sheet recessions--japan in the 90s, the depression of the 30s) to respond to monetarist policy and will definitely be worsened by ill-considered moves toward what for politeness sake we'll call "fiscal consolidation" then it follows that investment on the part of the state not only in solar technology but in a whole host of other areas of economic activity is a very good idea because, if the model is accurate, the state will function as the motor for economic activity in this kind of recession. and if you like this nitwit socio-economic form we call capitalism, you should like the state filling this role in this context because without it, we are well and truly fucked. look at the record. hooverite lunacy is the worst imaginable idea in this context. and this is one of a long list of reasons why romney is not ready to be elected to anything at all.

 

One can not ignore inefficient investing. When done by government everyone pays a proprtioanal price. When done in the private sector, private investors bear the brunt of the costs.
--- merged: Jul 30, 2012 4:21 PM ---

I agree with having a comprehensive energy plan. I agree with an incremental approach involving investments in alternatives to fossil fuels and "clean"/cleaner use of fossil fuels, but as long as fossil fuels are cheap and abundant, fossil fuels will dominate. My primary point is that the US does not have a comprehensive plan and that the US lacks visionary leadership in this regard.

 

Fossil fuels aren't really cheap. Just that they don't have to pay for all of the costs associated with them.

You are right that the US has a very ineffective energy plan. Even though we have reduced coal use and are using a lot more renewable energy, we could be doing a lot more. And even a worldwide plan would be a good idea. But, a state by state plan for what would be best is something that the Sierra Club or some group should be doing. It might be more insulation to reduce energy use, or using solar and solar thermal in the Southwest.

Energy Perspectives, Total Energy - Energy Information Administration

And individually, people can change their mix by installing their own solar panels, buying into the power companies renewable power, or getting more efficient.

 

I agree with this also. I think tax policy should account for hidden social costs often not factored into market pricing. If burning coal does $X/heating unit "damage" - a tax should be applied to reflect as best we can the unaccounted social costs (including environmental, health and safety of miner's etc.) - then the cost of other forms of energy with less unaccounted for social cost can accurately be compared. I fear we are just playing a guessing game. I think we would be better served by spending money up front so we get the numbers right. Then we can make informed decisions as opposed to the speculative nature of throwing billions into things that may have no lasting value.

 

Nixon was the first president to call for a national energy policy with a goal of making the US energy independent by 1980. Instead of meeting that goal, he and every president since then has done little to achieve that goal.



Until (surprise) Obama -- domestic oil and natural gas production has increased each of the last three years . In 2011, American oil production (and more drilling opened) reached the highest level in nearly a decade and natural gas production reached an all-time ....despite the rhetoric of the right of Obama being anti-oil and anti-drilling.

And at the same time, Obama’s investment in clean energy...the largest ever in the US...has resulted in nearly doubling renewable energy generation from wind, solar, and geothermal sources since 2008.

In 2010, the goal was also to break ground on at least four commercial advanced biorefineries by 2013....done this year.

And since the stimulus bill, more innovative and cutting edge energy research and grants were at an all time high.



The Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future may not be comprehensive or "visionary" enough for some, but the results speak for themselves.

Particularly when compared to "drill, baby, drill."
--- merged: Jul 30, 2012 at 4:30 PM ---
The Romney energy policy, as much as it has been elucidated and changing with the wind is:

So, domestic production is up since 2009 (despite most regulations the Rs love to hate), drilling leases are up since 2009, nuclear is up since 2009, but Obama's energy policy is a job killer.

 

Has the increase been a result of any of Obama's policies?

How long is the "tail" regarding policy implementation and results? 0 years, 1 year, 2 years, 4 years?

What does the Congressional Research Service (CRS - non-partisan) say about oil production on federal controlled land vs.. non-federal controlled land over the past 4 years?

Are you sure you want to stand on the premise that Obama deserves credit for the increase in domestic oil production in the past 3 years?

Note - these are just questions. I hesitate to give my views, I am sure my views would be off topic or something.