Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ron who wrote (203384)	1/26/2011 10:55:47 AM
From: T L Comiskey	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 361700

re..liars and idiots...safe speech.. If I had my way... I would have started with your line.. "These ..other guys/gals.. are both... Idiots and Liars..............."

To: Ron who wrote (203384)	1/26/2011 10:58:03 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361700

"...and vague." You, me, and Lawrence O'Donnell. More newsworthy for what wasn't in it, like 31 bullet magazines and Obama calls for massive boost in low-carbon energy, but doesn’t mention carbon, climate or warming. "This is our generation’s Sputnik moment.... I challenge you to join me in setting a new goal: by 2035, 80% of America’s electricity will come from clean energy sources." January 25, 2011 The good news: Barack Obama delivered a powerful State of the Union speech advocating an aggressive clean energy strategy (text here). And he acknowledged a fundamental truth: advances in clean energy “will only translate into clean energy jobs if businesses know there will be a market for what they’re selling.” Research and development by itself is ineffectual — hence the need for the standard. The bad news: The President could not bring himself to utter the words “climate change” or “global warming.” These omissions were depressingly predictable (see “Can you solve global warming without talking about global warming?“) and thus, predictably, depressing to climate hawks. The ‘ugly’ news: The phrase “clean energy” has been redefined. Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them all…. Clean coal, of course, doesn’t exist, and it remains a big stretch to call nuclear ‘clean’, but at least this proposal moves the debate forward significantly. I don’t know whether a serious clean energy standard has a chance, but this appears to be the only plausible way forward in the climate/energy arena, given the death of a serious carbon price and GOP opposition to any funding increases for R&D or deployment. climateprogress.org