Comments on: Update on Waxman vs. Dingell

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 20:11:44 +0000

Hal — Nicely put.

By: Rick C

Rick C — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 17:37:17 +0000

Yes Waxman would be a terrible choice because, after all, John Dingell has really made the auto industry what it is today?

By: Hal

Hal — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 02:21:04 +0000

David – Not entirely “off-topic” if you read the whole post there, but some real concerns on my part about putting heavy batteries in cars – more energy required to move them around. Why not put extra battery requirements in the garage or use the grid to store extra production.

Back to this post — and your comment on peak fossil fuel — “Peak atmosphere” is already here and has been here for decades now. Time to stop focusing on oil (and other combustible sources of energy) other than to apply them toward creating infrastructure for the post-oil era. That’s the point of the linked blog post and a valid point.

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 00:42:56 +0000

Sorta off-topic.

Atmoz does ok in

http://atmoz.org/ blog/ 2008/ 11/ 05/ the-future-distributed-energy-production-and-storage/

and it is a good reminder that peak fossil fuel is coming.

Useful links, too.

By: John Denton

John Denton — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 00:08:04 +0000

Dingell is clearly in the way of progress and should step aside to help Obama. Along with the board of GM.

By: Susan Kraemer

Susan Kraemer — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 00:05:51 +0000

I hope Waxman can replace The Dingelosaur. Why be tied down, now of all times. We will not have another chance before the tipping point on climate. Go for it, Henry Waxman.

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 23:41:56 +0000

What johninoregon just wrote!

By: johninoregon

johninoregon — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 23:31:31 +0000

On a related note: Joe Romm for Secretary of Energy!