Gleanings from the web and the world, condensed for convenience, illustrated for enlightenment, arranged for impact...

The challenge now: To make every day Earth Day.


  • TODAY’S STUDY: Who In Clean Tech Is Boosting New Energy
  • QUICK NEWS, January 17: New Energy’s Fight Against Climate Change Won’t Be Done; New Energy Jobs Leapt Again Last Year; Nebraska Gets Wind Power Economy Bump

  • Weekend Video: A Call To Climate Action From Al Gore
  • Weekend Video: A Closer Look At Wind And Solar
  • Weekend Video: Why Solar Beats Coal

  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-Does Climate Change Make Nuclear A Good Idea?
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-Who In The World Is Winning With Solar?
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-Wind Powers Scotland Four Straight Days
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-Will China Bust Open The Global EV Market?


  • TTTA Thursday-New Energy Mandates, Part 1 - Cleaner Air and Water
  • TTTA Thursday-New Energy Mandates, Part 2 - More Jobs
  • TTTA Thursday-New Energy Mandates, Part 3 - Better Health, Less Climate Change
  • TTTA Thursday-New Energy Mandates, Part 4 - The Great Deal

  • ORIGINAL REPORTING: Rates That Will Grow Energy Efficiency
  • ORIGINAL REPORTING: Big Utilities Like Solar’s Future
  • ORIGINAL REPORTING: How To Grow The U.S. Electron Superhighway

  • TODAY’S STUDY: The State OF The U.S. Energy Transition, Part 1
  • QUICK NEWS, January 10: Business Shows The Right Climate Path To Trump; New Energy Dominated 2016 U.S. Power Build; Tech Giants Leading In New Energy
  • --------------------------


    Anne B. Butterfield of Daily Camera and Huffington Post, f is an occasional contributor to NewEnergyNews


    Some of Anne's contributions:

  • Another Tipping Point: US Coal Supply Decline So Real Even West Virginia Concurs (REPORT), November 26, 2013
  • SOLAR FOR ME BUT NOT FOR THEE ~ Xcel's Push to Undermine Rooftop Solar, September 20, 2013
  • NEW BILLS AND NEW BIRDS in Colorado's recent session, May 20, 2013
  • Lies, damned lies and politicians (October 8, 2012)
  • Colorado's Elegant Solution to Fracking (April 23, 2012)
  • Shale Gas: From Geologic Bubble to Economic Bubble (March 15, 2012)
  • Taken for granted no more (February 5, 2012)
  • The Republican clown car circus (January 6, 2012)
  • Twenty-Somethings of Colorado With Skin in the Game (November 22, 2011)
  • Occupy, Xcel, and the Mother of All Cliffs (October 31, 2011)
  • Boulder Can Own Its Power With Distributed Generation (June 7, 2011)
  • The Plunging Cost of Renewables and Boulder's Energy Future (April 19, 2011)
  • Paddling Down the River Denial (January 12, 2011)
  • The Fox (News) That Jumped the Shark (December 16, 2010)
  • Click here for an archive of Butterfield columns


    Some details about NewEnergyNews and the man behind the curtain: Herman K. Trabish, Agua Dulce, CA., Doctor with my hands, Writer with my head, Student of New Energy and Human Experience with my heart




      A tip of the NewEnergyNews cap to Phillip Garcia for crucial assistance in the design implementation of this site. Thanks, Phillip.


    Pay a visit to the HARRY BOYKOFF page at Basketball Reference, sponsored by NewEnergyNews and Oil In Their Blood.

  • ---------------
  • TODAY AT NewEnergyNews, January 18:

  • ORIGINAL REPORTING: 4 Drivers Of Solar Growth Everybody Needs To Know
  • ORIGINAL REPORTING: The Maryland RPS And The National Divide On Clean Energy
  • ORIGINAL REPORTING: Why California Wants Western Electricity Delivery Organized

    Friday, November 16, 2007


    Because the fossil fuels economy is so unwieldy, the price of oil is through the roof and Americans are funding both sides of the war on terror.

    In the mid-1970s, the fossil fuel industries successfully fought down those who saw the future of energy coming and wanted government funding to go out and meet it. Because of that, New Energy is just now beginning to build an infrastructure.

    This week, in a surprise attack on the best effort to date to get legislation to (finally) face the future of energy, Big Oil came out swinging with fuzzy economics.

    There will hopefully be more detailed economic responses from more authoritative sources (and NewEnergyNews will report them), but here are a few questions for now.

    Pending energy legislation would require better gas mileage from US automakers’ car and light truck fleets. Did the study consider Detroit’s increased sales of better vehicles or only the reductions in fuel consumption? Did it consider the increases in Detroit jobs from the industry resurgence building plug-in hybrid cars would bring?

    Pending energy legislation would require utilities to obtain electricity from renewable sources. Did the study balance the cost of the hypothetical decrease in jobs (though most studies report New Energy would boost jobs) with the lower societal health costs as a result of moving from coal- and oil-polluted air to air unaffected by wind and sun?

    Pending energy legislation would require a whole new level of efficiency from buildings. Did the study consider the jobs that will come with retrofitting? Those aren’t energy industry jobs, those are jobs in building. Think some coal miners’ sons and daughters could be trained for that kind of work, even though it’s not in the energy industry?

    Pending energy legislation anticipates a whole new era when fossil fuel producers will be required to PAY for the harm they do to the air, the water and the atmosphere. Does the study consider the coming loss of jobs in the fossil fuel industries from the impacts of climate change? When the US joins the rest of the world in requiring emitters in the fossil fuel industries to pay for what they spew, it is going to slow oil and coal like a moving glacier suddenly melting.

    Union of Concerned Scientists sudy for a 20% by 2020 RES. (click to enlarge)

    When that happens, the infrastructure New Energy will build with the provisions in this pending energy legislation could be the only infrastructure America has to keep the lights on.

    Oil study: Energy bills would lead to job losses
    Jim Snyder, November 14, 2007 (The Hill)

    CRA International (W. David Montgomery, vice president), American Petroleum Institute (API)

    CRA was commissioned by API to analyze economic impacts of a combination of the pending energy bill’s provisions. Not surprisingly – since API and the fossil fuel industries would have billions in tax breaks taken away by the legislation – the study found the bill would do grave and lasting harm to Americans and the US economy.

    The study was released November 13. It examined hypothetical impacts of provisions in the energy bill through 2030.

    Wisconsin study for a 10% by 2020 RES. (click to enlarge)

    CRA used projections and data from the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Energy Information Association (EIA).

    - The contentious provisions in the energy bill new, higher mileage standards for US automakers, require US utilities to obtain electricity from renewable sources and shift tax benefits away from fossil fuel industries to fund New Energy development.
    - The study found that the bill’s provisions would cut the purchasing power of the average US consumer by $1700 by 2030.
    - The study found there would be a net loss of 4.9 million jobs and GDP would drop 4% between 2010 and 2030.
    - On the other hand, other studies conclude differently:
    A report from the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory in Berkeley found that renewable energy creates more jobs per megawatt (MW) of power installed, per unit of energy produced, and per dollar of investment, than the fossil fuel energy-based sector.” (click to source)

    The Union of Concerned Scientists concluded that [Washington state’s 15% by 2020 RPS] would create 2.6 times more jobs than fossil fuels, resulting in a net increase of 1,230 more jobs by 2025… (click to source)

    A 20% by 2020 RPS would create as many as 240,000 new jobs - in manufacturing, construction, operations, maintenance, shipping, sales and finance - versus 75,000 jobs if the energy were provided by fossil fuels. (click to source)

    Will it be business-as-usual buildings or buildings for the new century? (click to enlarge)

    - Montgomery, CRA: “[The bill provisions will cause] shocks to the economy over time…”
    - John Felmy, API’s lead economist, on the energy bill provisions for new fuels and energy: “All the wrong things we should be doing in a tight energy situation…”
    - Robert Westcott, Keybridge Research/Clinton chief economist, Council of Economic Advisors: “If [more fuel efficient] cars cost 10 percent more there would be 10 percent more jobs…[the] economy will balance over the years…”


    At 8:41 AM, Blogger FBB said...

    "Americans are funding both sides of the war on terror."

    To my way of thinking, referring to the morass in Iraq and Afghanistan as "the war on terror" gives credence to the administration's attempts to distract us from the real reasons we are trying to control the Middle East.

    At 1:55 PM, Anonymous Curt S. said...

    More I know, more sick I feel about this dirty topic of oil power.
    How could the President abuse his power to such extent, that all American citizens mean just 'buying petrol mass' to him?
    Is there any national security agency, which could protect the US citizens against such a devastating behavior of Oil Lobby?


    Post a Comment

    << Home

  • >