A substantial amount of our nation’s disease and death burden is directly due to many avenues (and roads) of public and ecosphere contamination. Clean energy is a transforming concept that directs us toward ecological economics that will ultimately eliminate the need to set mined or imported materials on fire. (We still need to work on the uranium addiction and security threat part.) The national security, health benefits and jobs creation potential of the bill are underestimated by many conventional economic models, which are based on twentieth century paradigms that no are longer functional. Let’s hold our noses, continue progress in the spirit of American Revolution and vote yes.

A note to the administration: mined coal, oil, gas and uranium have nothing what-so-ever to do with clean, renewable energy. Anyone telling you different is either ignorant of sustainable energy policy economics or vested in the ideology of transnational dirty energy. Sincerely, JRN.

RealClimate has a post up on “carbongate” for those interested.

Currently, “profit” and “wealth” is anchored in the dynamics that became possible when OPEC’s chose to denominate its oil sale in US dollars. This decision facilitated corporate America’s “need” for the US continued to tread away from being a nation of thrift to one of credit. OPEC’s decision complimented the abandonment of the vestiges of a constitutional currency that occurred around the same time. In 1971, didn’t the US currency fully became a fiat debt-based one? Wasn’t that when the dollar, as a silver certificate, joined the rest of the printed currency and became a Federal Reserve Note? Didn’t this completed change constitute an alignment of purpose relative to profit and wealth as debt that wealth; that measure of what profit is in our society.

Is it helpful to remember that corporate citizenship, as a social concept, was 40-50 years old when consumer credit first got going; 80-90 at the time of the transition to a debt-based fiat currency; and now a century and a quarter old as the fears a loss of its sense of wealth inspires economic focuses re: this non -climate changing climate change bill? If Sapiens become sapient due to age, and the oldest living man is 113, whose dirty wisdom is now socially dominate? Can us/US relative youngsters learn to think for ourselves; think different; to feel and think clean; to imagine a just wealth?

Not as long as we feel and think of “profit” as we do; trust in the “wealth” as we do. Darn the hard truths of paradigm shifts!

The President is right. ACES/W-M is a jobs bill. It is a stimulus bill. Comparing it to Scotland’s legislation, it is NOT a climate change bill. http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/ s3/ bills/ 17-ClimateChange/ b17bs3-aspassed.pdf

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/ 2008/ 06/ 30/ bush-epa-suppression/
“Bush Hiding Truth: Global Warming Regulations Worth $2 Trillion Benefit”

It has to do with a study of EPA GHG regulations that the Bush administration kept under wraps for a while. One of its findings was: “Assuming gas prices in the range of $3.50 per gallon, the net benefit to society could be in excess of $2 trillion through 2040.”

Another person who is pretty concerned is David Fridley. He is now a staff scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; Chu was his boss. He believes to a certainty that society is literally running out of gas and that, perhaps within years, the trucks will stop rolling into Safeway and the only reliable food available will be that grown in our backyards.

There is an interesting article about the “Transition Movement” (of which he is a part) here:

http://www.bohemian.com/ bohemian/ 06.17.09/ feature-0924.html

There are a variety of paths for ’spinning the dial backwards’. For example, biochar/agro-char: sequestering carbon in ‘black soil’ via agricultural processes (take agricultural waste, charcoal it, and dig it into the soil). If CCS actually works, could take the carbon directly out of the atmosphere and sequester it. Etc …

I am not so sanguine.