Stop drooling over concept cars we’ll never own That is, as soon as we’re done gawking at this stackable, shareable, electric two-seater dreamt up by MIT’s Smart Cities team. It’s inspired by corralled shopping-carts, powered …
Woah. Tom Friedman is on fire. Of course you can't read it unless you pay for Times $elect, so here are the relevant bits: Sorry, but being green, focusing the nation on greater energy efficiency and conservation, is not some girlie-man issue. It is actually the most tough-minded, geostrategic, pro-growth and patriotic thing we can do. ... ... The biggest threat to America and its values today is not communism, authoritarianism or Islamism. It's petrolism. Petrolism is my term for the corrupting, antidemocratic governing practices - in oil states from Russia to Nigeria and Iran - that result from a long run of $60-a-barrel oil. Petrolism is the politics of using oil income to buy off one's citizens with subsidies and government jobs, using oil and gas exports to intimidate or buy off one's enemies, and using oil profits to build up one's internal security forces and army to keep oneself ensconced in power, without any transparency or checks and balances. ... No matter what happens in Iraq, we cannot dry up the swamps of authoritarianism and violent Islamism in the Middle East without also drying up our consumption of oil - thereby bringing down the price of crude. A democratization policy in the Middle East without a different energy policy at home is a waste of time, money and, most important, the lives of our young people. ... We need a president and a Congress with the guts not just to invade Iraq, but to also impose a gasoline tax and inspire conservation at home. That takes a real energy policy with long-term incentives for renewable energy - wind, solar, biofuels - rather than the welfare-for-oil-companies-and-special-interests that masqueraded last year as an energy bill. ... Green is the new red, white and blue. Amen, brother! Update [2006-1-6 11:11:0 by David Roberts]: Just as a tangential side-note: I know how (conservative populism) and why (9/11) it happened, but nonetheless I find it utterly galling how completely our national dialogue has come to be dominated by arguments about who is more macho and who is a "sissy." (Note to Friedman: "sissy" is not a word that genuinely macho people use.) What about intelligence? Pragmatism? Anyone?
Among the nifty things to read about in L.A. Weekly's List Issue is this: "8 New Very Alternative Energy Ideas" I particularly like the bit with the hamsters.
New York governor George Pataki (R) is delusional if he thinks he's going to win the Republican nomination for president. McCain might have a teeny tiny eensy beensy sliver of a chance. Giuliani, even eensier. But Pataki, no. The very things he's done to appeal to moderates in his home state will damn him irredeemably in the eyes of today's Republican base. That said, he does seem set to run, and as peakguy on Oil Drum NYC says, his final State of the State speech may well be setting up one of the central planks of his strategy: independence from "foreign oil." Not just here in New York, but across the nation, our reliance on foreign oil is hampering the financial freedom of our working families and their employers; it is hurting our economy, damaging our environment and enriching regimes that support, harbor and encourage the terrorists who threaten our national security. You'll be hearing this kind of stuff from members of both parties. It will be pitched to sound tough on national security and bullish on the economy. Environmental messages will be muted at best. I must say I'm skeptical about the electoral efficacy of energy independence, at least at present. While it is carefully calibrated to appeal across a number of demographics, I don't think anybody but environmentalists really feel fired up about it. Like most environmental issues, its appeal is broad but shallow. We've had high gas prices this year, and that put oil on everybody's radar. And of course there's, you know, the Iraq war, which according to a new study may run this country up to $2 trillion. But most folks still don't connect that to oil. Most people have not have their lives directly affected by our dependence on oil -- at least in ways they perceive as such. Most people are still living their comfortable, driving, suburban, middle-class lives just fine. It will take a huge, sustained price spike, I think, before "energy independence" gets any real traction as a campaign slogan.
Well, damn. Kevin Drum stole my thunder. I wanted to draw special attention to a post by John Quiggin, which announces: More significantly, perhaps, 2005 saw the final nail hammered into the arguments climate change contrarians have been pushing for years. The few remaining legitimate sceptics, along with some of the smarter ideological contrarians, have looked at the evidence and conceded the reality of human-caused global warming. He also makes this crucial point:
Jonathan Adler defends Samuel Alito against the attacks of environmental groups.
The latest global warming debunkery, debunked, as always by the tireless Tim Lambert.
Thanks to Kit Stolz for pointing me to an Onion item I missed: "Public Outraged As Price Of Fast-Depleting, Non-Renewable Resource Skyrockets"
The New York Times discovers that the market for green building supplies (flooring, paint, etc.) is booming. As usual with puffy trend pieces like this, there is frustratingly little actual information, just a series of mini-profiles. One thing the piece does make clear is that this market is still the province of wealthy suburbanites. But, you know, the promise of economies of scale, blah blah ...
We've devised the world's shortest survey to find out what kind of actions our readers are taking. You know you want to.