Comments on: McCain on energy efficiency: He is Cheney’s third term!

By: msn nickleri

msn nickleri — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:44:44 +0000

> Joe’s deeply partisan, willfully misleading posts on McCain

By: John Hollenberg

John Hollenberg — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:31:22 +0000

> He offers specifics.

It doesn’t help that he offers specifics when they are in virtually all cases the wrong way to go (corn ethanol subsidies would be the only exception–thanks for pointing that out). While nuclear is good for climate, I don’t think the expense, risks and problems with waste disposal make it a prime option compared to wind and CSP.

> Joe’s deeply partisan, willfully misleading posts on McCain

Perhaps you can point out where he has been willfully misleading? If his facts are in error, I’m sure we would all appreciate it if you would refer to an independent source that contradicts him. I think the candidates stated positions are the best place to start (although both are likely to be worse in practice than in promise).

By: Paul K

Paul K — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 22:12:04 +0000

John Hollenberg,
Compare Obama’s career long support for corn ethanol subsidies to McCain’s career long opposition. Obama intends to raise capital gains taxes, stifling deployment. Personally, I would eliminate capital gains taxes on all alternative investments, but there is a much better chance to reduce them under McCain.

Yes, I have read all of Joe’s deeply partisan, willfully misleading posts on McCain. I expect it to be a near daily occurrence until election day. Compare the two campaigns. McCain talks about these issues all the time. He offers specifics. He takes questions from reporters and regular citizens about his positions every day. What have we heard from Obama? “I will keep the oceans from rising.”

Obama has not proposed or cosponsored any climate related legislation in either the Illinois or U.S. Senate. You can put your faith in a primary campaign, meant to please the base, doubtful that he’s ever read position paper on a back page of the his website. Intelligent voters will look at the actual record.

By: John Hollenberg

John Hollenberg — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 19:00:05 +0000

> Yes, those who vote on climate issues alone should choose McCain, an opinion not widely shared here.

That’s because there is no data to back this up. If you compare the policies of the two, it is a clear choice for Obama if you are voting on climate issues alone. Read Joe’s many articles on McCain’s position, plus his details some time ago on Obama’s position. It’s all here on ClimateProgress.

By: Paul K

Paul K — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 04:22:04 +0000

Graeme Bird,
As far as I can tell the climateprogress position on nuclear is acceptance of it as 6 – 10% of future energy output, while so far being against any particular proposal for its deployment. Yes, those who vote on climate issues alone should choose McCain, an opinion not widely shared here.

By: Graeme Bird

Graeme Bird — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 01:51:10 +0000

If you were serious about your CO2-hysteria McCain would be your man. Since McCain is in favour of more nuclear plants.

By: Paul K

Paul K — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 01:26:46 +0000

David B. Benson,
That’s right. We can all get together to make it go that way. I’m asking people to act, to be part of the solution through the engine of association. As they say, the longest journey begins with a single step.

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 00:57:30 +0000

Paul K wrote “The long run goes wherever you want.” Only if we all get together to make it go that way.

By: Paul K

Paul K — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 23:10:49 +0000

The long run goes wherever you want. Today’s goal is to fund a 2KW installation on a habitat for humanity house.

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:45:57 +0000

Paul K — I presented a plan to not only stabilize CO2, but to reduce the concentration to the 1958 CE level of 315 ppm. In only aboout 70 years.

But I now think that for the long run, even 315 ppm is too high.