The Politics of Spilled Oil and the Morality of Drilling
In a paradoxical turn of events, Jonathan Weismann is reporting this morning in the Wall Street Journal that the Deepwater Horizon oil spill may make an energy bill in the Senate less likely:
Key Democrats said the spill should drive Congress forward on legislation to address climate change and promote alternative energy sources and electric cars. They also have called for regulations that would require more-robust safety technology on offshore rigs, such as remote-control acoustic shut-off switches….
But some Democratic and Republican senators said the incident makes progress on energy and climate legislation less likely. Coastal senators, such as Democrats Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Bill Nelson of Florida, vowed to block expanded drilling in any bill. Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.) said legislation can't move forward without three "pillars": expanded oil and gas exploration, more nuclear power and a price on carbon-emissions in exchange for the first two.
New Energy Technology Should Be the American Mission for the 21st Century
The steam-powered engine launched the industrial revolution in the 19th century; the automobile drove the America’s petroleum-based economy into post World War II prosperity; and the development of the personal computer and the internet launched nothing less than a information revolution in at the end 20th century. The next great technology-driven revolution in the American economy in the 21st century is going to be the development green energy technology.
We, in the United States, are at a unique moment in history to change the way we power this country, but the opportunity is slipping out of our grasp. That is why Tom Friedman lamented this morning in his New York Times column that ”America’s Democratic and Republican leaders [are] conspiring to ensure that America cedes the next great global industry to China.” Referring to the development of green energy technology, Friedman rightly chastised Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, for pushing immigration reform ahead of the bipartisan climate/energy bill that was supposed to be unveiled on Monday. That is, until Senator Lindsey Graham justifiably stalled it in protest because an immigration bill doesn’t even exist yet, and Reid moved it up on the agenda for his own obvious electoral advantage in Nevada.
Getting to the Bottom of Cap-and-Trade
Over the weekend, Paul Krugman wrote a fantastic article in the New York Times Magazine discussing the economics of climate change. Among other things, he made the keen observation regarding a market-based approach to curbing green-house gas emissions, such as the kind of cap-and-trade system devised in the American Clean Energy and Security Act (H.R. 2454). He noted that it is already being used effectively in the United States to limit the emission of sulfur dioxide, a known contributor to acid rain.
Krugman writes that:
The Clean Air Act of 1990 introduced a cap-and-trade system in which power plants could buy and sell the right to emit sulfur dioxide, leaving it up to individual companies to manage their own business within the new limits. Sure enough, over time sulfur-dioxide emissions from power plants were cut almost in half, at a much lower cost than even optimists expected; electricity prices fell instead of [rose]. Acid rain did not disappear as a problem, but it was significantly mitigated.
Feed Me
Capital Gains and Games
Ezra Klein
Hendrick Hertzberg
Jonathan Chait
Kevin Drum
Marginal Revolution
National Review
Policy Matters
Politics | The Atlantic
Pundits Blog
Slate Magazine
Talking Points Memo
The Beat
The Daily Beast
The Daily Dish
The Huffington Post
The Spot
Washington Wire
Yglesias
About Me
Recently Posted
- “You’re So Cool!”: Jared Polis on Repealing DADT
- FOX News Misinforms? Say It Ain’t So!
- Senator Bernie Sanders’ 9 Hours of Fame
- Debunking the Liberal Purists on Health Care Reform and The Bush Tax Cuts
- Why Passing the Tax-Cut Deal is a Political Must-Do for Democrats