« Will Radical Transparency Save the Earth? | Main | Why Best Buy Is Rooting for the Smart Grid »

June 24, 2009


Marc Gunther

Great post, Joel. I was at Sunil's Washington announcement this morning where there was a lot of energy, no pun intended. Van Jones, Kathy Zoi, David Sandalow and John Holdren--when you get four top administration officials to show up for your event, you must be doing something right.And you nailed it, what he is doing right is asking big questions.

The Obama administration folk didn't stay around for questions, unfortunately. I would have liked to know what they think about including nuclear as a clean energy solution.

Peter Hess


Absolutely agree with your comments about Gigaton Throwdown. It seems that there are several requirements in order to effectively address the policy piece, especially with Waxman-Markey going to the Senate:
1) We need transparency about the groups bringing (past & present) pressure to bear on Senators; imagine a billboard similar to the CO2 one in Times Square with the amounts donated by Utilities, NFIB, etc.
2) The range of estimates, along with their sources, of the projected impact of ACES on individuals, should be pushed out through mainstream media.
3) The major NGOs and business organizations (e.g. USCAP) which are proponents of dealing with Climate Change need to pool their efforts to increase their lobbying leverage.
I’m sure there are more. These are the ones that I think provide the best short-term leverage. Would love to know your thoughts.

Joseph Gentry

The public would be better served by reporting up-front the costs for the alternative technologies, rather than the purported technical feasibility. Our global standard of living and well-being will be far better without any of these 'giga-ton' technologies. By common definition, alternative technologies are not economical, else they would be widely adopted and become the norm. Factoring in the government sponsored incentives and taxes, most of these will never become economical under any scenario.

The fundamental driver for the global alternatives is a fear of global warming caused by CO2 emissions. I challenge the premise that gigatons of reduction in CO2 emissions will make any difference in our climate to decrease, or increase global temperatures.

The comments to this entry are closed.