Comments on: New Energy Economy: Part 3, The Next Transition Team http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/21/new-energy-economy-part-3-the-next-transition-team/ The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics Sun, 08 Nov 2009 09:04:01 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Bob W http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/21/new-energy-economy-part-3-the-next-transition-team/#comment-22786 Bob W Sun, 23 Nov 2008 17:05:09 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/21/new-energy-economy-part-3-the-next-transition-team/#comment-22786 We can't get the cart before the horse with mass transit. An almost empty bus or light rail car is much more wasteful than a 40 mpg (or even 25 mpg) car, especially if its powered by fossil fuel or coal powered electric. I believe the most GHG efficient mass transit is in greater New York City, with its power mix including nuclear and hydro, and all those trains, buses and subways packed with commuters. In most other areas, converting personal transportation to hybrid, electric and diesel minicars might be more efficient. We shouldn't build mass transit systems that increase GHGs/person-mile. We need the GHG free baseload first. We can’t get the cart before the horse with mass transit. An almost empty bus or light rail car is much more wasteful than a 40 mpg (or even 25 mpg) car, especially if its powered by fossil fuel or coal powered electric.

I believe the most GHG efficient mass transit is in greater New York City, with its power mix including nuclear and hydro, and all those trains, buses and subways packed with commuters. In most other areas, converting personal transportation to hybrid, electric and diesel minicars might be more efficient.

We shouldn’t build mass transit systems that increase GHGs/person-mile. We need the GHG free baseload first.

]]> By: Alex J http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/21/new-energy-economy-part-3-the-next-transition-team/#comment-22759 Alex J Sat, 22 Nov 2008 23:39:12 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/21/new-energy-economy-part-3-the-next-transition-team/#comment-22759 If things really did get out of whack, with other countries (and American outsourcers) going on a fossil binge at relatively low prices, there is the option of linking trade policy with climate efforts. As much as the T-word is avoided in the U.S., uncooperative nations could be subject to a phased-in carbon tariff as a last resort. If things really did get out of whack, with other countries (and American outsourcers) going on a fossil binge at relatively low prices, there is the option of linking trade policy with climate efforts. As much as the T-word is avoided in the U.S., uncooperative nations could be subject to a phased-in carbon tariff as a last resort.

]]> By: A Siegel http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/21/new-energy-economy-part-3-the-next-transition-team/#comment-22719 A Siegel Sat, 22 Nov 2008 20:08:36 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/21/new-energy-economy-part-3-the-next-transition-team/#comment-22719 Oh ... by the way, JCH -- so what? The United States imports the majority of its oil. Every drop of oil less that Americans use means money that can stay in our economy and in our own society rather than being exported to enrich other nations. NOTE: Competitive advantage United States, not others. And, as well, if other countries are spending less on oil, that can free more resources that they can use to buy US goods or, in the developing world, lowers their requirements for outside aid (from, for example, the US). Competitive advantage: US. Etc ... Oh … by the way, JCH — so what? The United States imports the majority of its oil. Every drop of oil less that Americans use means money that can stay in our economy and in our own society rather than being exported to enrich other nations. NOTE: Competitive advantage United States, not others.

And, as well, if other countries are spending less on oil, that can free more resources that they can use to buy US goods or, in the developing world, lowers their requirements for outside aid (from, for example, the US). Competitive advantage: US.

Etc …

]]> By: A Siegel http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/21/new-energy-economy-part-3-the-next-transition-team/#comment-22718 A Siegel Sat, 22 Nov 2008 20:05:32 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/21/new-energy-economy-part-3-the-next-transition-team/#comment-22718 RE 'floor' on price of gasoline, is a "fixed price" what is really required or some statement of certainty that, all things being equal, tomorrow's price will be higher than today's? I don't see the path toward a $1.50 imposition, overnight, of a gas tax without a mass outcry. On the other hand, what if were to be a 20 cent immediate tax, 2.5 cents month after than (50 cents in a year), and then 1 cent/month for the next decade? This would place gasoline, everything else being equal, $1.70 higher than today. This would drive businesses and (thinking) individuals to plan their lives on a clear understanding that gasoline prices will be higher, in essence no matter what, with far less of a shock into the economhy. And, is $125 million enough for green jobs? What about creating/fostering 'green jobs' education within the public schools and within universities? At, let us say, $5k per person (after administration), $125 million means 25,000 people trained. Is that anywhere even within the ballpark of the types of numbers we want trained in the near term? RE ‘floor’ on price of gasoline, is a “fixed price” what is really required or some statement of certainty that, all things being equal, tomorrow’s price will be higher than today’s?

I don’t see the path toward a $1.50 imposition, overnight, of a gas tax without a mass outcry.

On the other hand, what if were to be a 20 cent immediate tax, 2.5 cents month after than (50 cents in a year), and then 1 cent/month for the next decade? This would place gasoline, everything else being equal, $1.70 higher than today. This would drive businesses and (thinking) individuals to plan their lives on a clear understanding that gasoline prices will be higher, in essence no matter what, with far less of a shock into the economhy.

And, is $125 million enough for green jobs? What about creating/fostering ‘green jobs’ education within the public schools and within universities? At, let us say, $5k per person (after administration), $125 million means 25,000 people trained. Is that anywhere even within the ballpark of the types of numbers we want trained in the near term?

]]> By: JCH http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/21/new-energy-economy-part-3-the-next-transition-team/#comment-22686 JCH Sat, 22 Nov 2008 05:43:39 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/21/new-energy-economy-part-3-the-next-transition-team/#comment-22686 The less oil that the United States uses, the cheaper it gets for everybody else. How do you address that? The competitive disadvantages are going to multiply like rats. The less oil that the United States uses, the cheaper it gets for everybody else.

How do you address that? The competitive disadvantages are going to multiply like rats.

]]>