Green New Deal

[mspohr]

Looks like this idea is gaining traction in Congress.

The concept of a Green New Deal – a massive public works program aimed at reducing emissions in part through massive, rapid deployment of zero-carbon generation – is not new. The proposal has been in the public sphere since at least 2007, and has been promoted by author and non-profit founder Van Jones as well as being on the platform of the Green Party in several presidential campaigns.

35 members of Congress support 100% renewable energy, Green New Deal

Text of the resolution
FINAL Select Committee for a Green New Deal

The Green New Deal (GND)[1][2] is a planned[3] economic stimulus program in the United States that aims to address both economic inequality and climate change. The name refers to the New Deal, a combination of social and economic reforms and public works projects undertaken by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in response to the Great Depression.[4] Supporters of a Green New Deal advocate for a combination of Roosevelt's economic approach with modern ideas such as renewable energy and resource efficiency.[5]

Green New Deal - Wikipedia

 

[SageBrush]

Nice idea ... but I imagine it would suffer the same fate as the VW money in California -- wasted via political correctness. One HUGE pork barrel.

The New Deal worked because people on a massive scale were homeless, unemployed and starving. The New Deal was the Only Deal.

 

[mspohr]

A solution to the problem of nuclear plant closures

Aren’t there any other ways to avoid this catastrophe? Is there a plan out there to dramatically convert our aged energy infrastructure to a clean, efficient and reliable marvel while creating thousands of guaranteed jobs? Yes, there is. It’s called the Green New Deal. The work done by the NEC should be applauded because it points to the problems that our old policies cannot address but they don’t have the solution. We need a Green New Deal.

What to do about the epidemic of nuclear plant closings? | PennLive letters

 

[mspohr]

Nice idea ... but I imagine it would suffer the same fate as the VW money in California -- wasted via political correctness. One HUGE pork barrel.

The New Deal worked because people on a massive scale were homeless, unemployed and starving. The New Deal was the Only Deal.

I think climate change presents us with a similar dilemma. It's the only option.

 

[mspohr]

House Republican surprised when top officials support Green New Deal’s efficiency goal

Government officials working in the Trump administration told lawmakers on Wednesday that they believe making federal buildings energy efficient within a 10-year time frame — a core part of the Green New Deal championed by Rep-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) — is both a reasonable and achievable goal.

 

[mspohr]

Scientists stand behind youth climate activists in support of Green New Deal

...the American Geophysical Union’s (AGU) fall meeting was happening in Washington at the same time the youth-led Sunrise Movement was conducting a major climate lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill. So, in addition to presenting her research at the meeting, Gold was also able to lobby members of Congress for the creation of a select committee on the Green New Deal.

“There are 24,000 earth scientists, many of whom have devoted their lives to understanding climate change and care very much about the planet, attending the AGU meeting,” Gold told ThinkProgress. “And here at the Capitol, there are 1,000 youth activists who have devoted their young lives to the climate and care deeply about the planet. It feels like we should be working together. We’re fighting, in some way, the same fight.”

 

[mspohr]

More Than 300 Local Officials From 40 States Call For Green New Deal, End Of Fossil Fuels | HuffPost

311 State and Local officials have signed a letter of support for a Green New Deal.

The letter ― published Friday online and shared in advance with HuffPost ― was organized by Elected Officials to Protect America, a nonprofit formed in 2015 to rally support for local climate action. It lays out three demands. It calls for 100 percent renewable energy, though does not specify a timeline. To buttress that, it proposes ending “public subsidization of fossil fuels,” and divesting from fossil fuel companies to “shift public investments to accelerate the transition to 100 percent clean energy and pay for the harm fossil fuels cause our states and municipalities.”

In its most specific demand, the letter urges the “end of permitting of new oil, gas, and coal projects and infrastructure” and proposed “phasing out production within 2,500-foot public health buffer zone of occupied buildings and vulnerable areas” ― a policy that would essentially severely restrict new drilling.

 

[mspohr]

Green New Deal Has Overwhelming Bipartisan Support, Poll Finds. At Least, For Now. | HuffPost

Ninety-two percent of Democrats supported the idea, including 93 percent of liberal Democrats and 90 percent of moderate-to-conservative Democrats. But 64 percent of Republicans ― including 75 percent of moderate-to-liberal Republicans and 57 percent of conservative Republicans ― also backed the policy goals outlined in the Green New Deal. Eighty-eight percent of independents endorsed the policies as well.

 

[voyager]

I think climate change presents us with a similar dilemma. It's the only option.

Always difficult to get hold of relevant people who matter. Would love to, as I share the Green New Deal thought that we need bold new initiatives supported by as many people, which will contribute to curbing Climate Change...

That seems to be lacking on this forum: a bit more activist stance and genuine concern about Climate Change. Zero emission does not end with driving a Tesla. The number of responses here says a lot IMO.

 

[SageBrush]

That seems to be lacking on this forum: a bit more activist stance and genuine concern about Climate Change.

Speaking for myself, I am quite a bit more progressive and activist than your average progressive activist but I'm not in favor of massive pork barrels. I just want the externalized costs of fossils to be exposed and accounted for. Spend the money on efficiency and clean energy infrastructure in the form of a national grid and high power transmission to resource rich areas of the country.

 

[Yinn]

Always difficult to get hold of relevant people who matter. Would love to, as I share the Green New Deal thought that we need bold new initiatives supported by as many people, which will contribute to curbing Climate Change...

That seems to be lacking on this forum: a bit more activist stance and genuine concern about Climate Change. Zero emission does not end with driving a Tesla. The number of responses here says a lot IMO.

I would venture to bet the percentage of Tesla drivers - and by extension Prius drivers, heck all PEV and HEV - that acutally care about being "green" in terms of actual climate change is quite small. I encounter people who are enamored by the technology of Tesla rather than the environmentally friendliness of it. Admittedly, I myself am in that category. But I'm also a great example of how alternate incentives, stimulus, and broad appeal can bring people on board with climate change - whether the individual is an activist or not.

I didn't purchase solar or an EV because I wanted to be green; I bought it because of stimulus, incentives, and a long term view of cost reduction. To that extent, this deal excites me.

My progression went, I got solar because I wanted to reduce my electric bills and saw a 12 year breakeven with a 20-25 year lifespan. The reality is that the breakeven was almost immediate due to incentives. Which led me to increase my consumption by purchasing an electric car; which led me to purchase more solar and lowers my total cost of ownership. And since this whole solar incentives thing is working out so well; I'm now really interested in geothermal technologies so I can power it from essentially free solar electricity. But I don't want to pay the outrageous costs of geothermal; so I tightened my building envelope - which is also eligible for an incentive.

So despite not being an activist, I learned a whole bunch about "green" technologies, building, and efficiencies. I have personally saved over 5000 gallons of gasoline usage in the past three years. Instead I consumed electricity for a total (car+home) of nearly 60mWh of electricity; and most of which was covered by solar generation. According to Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator | US EPA that's the equivelant of planting nearly 1200 trees of carbon offset. Now if we can get the overall cost of geothermal down, I'd be able to switch off of heating oil and save an additional 3000 gallons of oil per year and almost double my impact.

That's not too shabby for a single individual who isn't a climate activist and is just looking for ways to save some money in the long term. In that manner this green deal might just get it done. You don't have to be an activist, so far it seems broad reaching enough to hold multiple audiences. You just need to recognize the personal, economic, and social benefits of the deal. The climate stuff, that's just a huge plus for some.

 

[Merrill]

I have some thoughts on this subject, first of all I’m concerned about the future and as stated above did not do solar and buy 2 Tesla’s totally for the environment. Having said that I’m getting more and more pissed off buy what is happening to our government and that fact that they seems not to care about our future. I grew up in the 60’s when we had lots of protests, and as the very articulate young lady from Sweden says we must do that again. I have to be careful when I talk to friends and others because I do not want to alienate them so I take the more the route of education. Not sure what a climate activist is but I definitely want to do what I can to help the situation.

 

[Uncle Paul]

Politicians LOVE to propose great sounding programs that will give them trillions of dollars to spend in the way they wish.
Republicans will give the money to their friends and Democrats will give money to their friends.

They could achieve the same goals by simply re-prioritizing the money they currently have, but they refuse to take money away from any of their existing pet projects.

Example is that in California, all the money they can get is being funneled into building a train that will go from La to SF. It is billions over projections, and moving slowly. Some say that this project is more to pay back the Unions that put Brown into office than to provide train service to the states two major cities. There is already Amtrack service, but it is slow and loosing money. Very few would ever use such a train when airplanes already provide cheap and more efficient transport.

Would be far better, from a green standpoint, to build Elon's Hyperloop. Faster, cheaper and could run along existing freeways. Nobody has explained why another train rail would be better for the citizens than a Hyperloop. Hyper loop is much cleaner and could transport both people and cargo much quicker and cleaner than planes.

 

[mspohr]

Washington Post is on board:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...d3874f1ac36_story.html?utm_term=.73224ee4f243

A Green New Deal might even make a climate ally out of Joe Manchin III, the West Virginia Democrat slated to become the ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. It would enable Democrats to help the coal miners whom candidate Donald Trump promised to protect but betrayed as president. Like oil and gas workers and others whose jobs make climate change worse, coal miners under a Green New Deal would receive paid retraining and placement in climate-friendly, well-paying alternative jobs, such as constructing zero-energy buildings or retrofitting water systems for climate resiliency. All members of Congress should take note: Retrofitting our buildings to make them super energy efficient is a labor-intensive task that needs doing in every district in the United States, and it cannot be outsourced. These jobs will stimulate additional local economic activity by keeping workers employed and spending paychecks.
Predictably, Republicans are squawking about who would pay for a Green New Deal. They should learn some history: The original New Deal’s deficit spending is what pulled the U.S. economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. They should also check their hypocrisy: Republicans just passed President Trump’s $1.7 trillion tax cut, which grew nothing except the federal deficit and their rich donors’ investment portfolios.

 

[Canuck]

I think climate change presents us with a similar dilemma. It's the only option.

Yes, but despite that fact we've chosen to find out what's behind door number 2. Sorry goes to our kids who will really find out.

 

[ohmman]

I would venture to bet the percentage of Tesla drivers - and by extension Prius drivers, heck all PEV and HEV - that acutally care about being "green" in terms of actual climate change is quite small.

Maybe so, but in order to assure you that the small percentage does exist, I'm a climate activist (that is, I am part of two local climate action groups), and I bought my cars because of climate change realities. I'm in the process of swapping out my fossil fuel appliances for the same reason, and installing more solar. But I don't think my actions really make a huge difference; I believe legislation is the most efficient way to move the needle. We can point to the great success of Tesla in getting people to buy the car simply because it's a good car, and voila! market forces are the real solution, but the truth is that the Tesla story is the exception. It's how we want things to work out, but it's not the reality. We have to twist arms, unfortunately, or at a minimum, use the nudge technique to get humans to do the right thing.

 

[Yinn]

Maybe so, but in order to assure you that the small percentage does exist, I'm a climate activist (that is, I am part of two local climate action groups), and I bought my cars because of climate change realities. I'm in the process of swapping out my fossil fuel appliances for the same reason, and installing more solar. But I don't think my actions really make a huge difference; I believe legislation is the most efficient way to move the needle. We can point to the great success of Tesla in getting people to buy the car simply because it's a good car, and voila! market forces are the real solution, but the truth is that the Tesla story is the exception. It's how we want things to work out, but it's not the reality. We have to twist arms, unfortunately, or at a minimum, use the nudge technique to get humans to do the right thing.

I completely agree with this. I think we’re two very different perspectives, but if the legislation can change and can invest enough for it to appeal to the broad views, then my behaviors along with many others would be changed.

 

[mspohr]

What the media’s coverage of the Green New Deal is missing

This is a new idea and has broad support but the details are still evolving.

 

[mspohr]

Democrat Tapped For Climate Panel Channels Exxon In Critique Of Green New Deal Plan | HuffPost

Looks like Pelosi has killed the Green New Deal.

 

[mspohr]

Calls for Green New Deal select committee get cold shoulder from Democratic leadership

The Democrats are failing us here... again.