Latest Articles

A sampling from the 2006 Seafood Summit

by Katharine Wroth Tuesday, 31 Jan 2006 Seattle, Wash. Seattle is for fish-lovers. Photo: iStockphoto. This week, 235 hardy soles braved the rains of Seattle to attend the 2006 Seafood Summit, a gathering of sustainable-seafood advocates. On Sunday, at a reception that transformed the city’s aquarium into an otherworldly nightclub, they sampled West Coast delicacies, […]

Umbra on eco-friendly paint

Dear Umbra, I just bought a home that needs lots of TLC, and would like to do it in a way that is best for the environment and my health. Do you have any advice about the best choice of interior paint? Every room in the house desperately needs new paint, but I’d like to […]

In brief: no

Earlier, I guessed that Bush's "Advanced Energy Initiative" amounted to a promise of $264 million in new money to EERE. Mike Millikin at GreenCarCongress seems to think it's more -- specifically, $996 million. Since he's smarter than me, I suppose I'll accept his breakdown of the funding, though he doesn't say where he got it:

New solar funding is almost comically inadequate

As part of the SOTU hoopla, the Bush administration released some details of a major new initiative:

The President's Solar America Initiative.
The 2007 Budget will propose a new $148 million Solar America Initiative -- an increase of $65 million over FY06 -- to accelerate the development of semiconductor materials that convert sunlight directly to electricity. These solar photovoltaic "PV" cells can be used to deliver energy services to rural areas and can be incorporated directly into building materials, so that there can be future "zero energy" homes that produce more energy than they consume.

It strikes me as a bit of an Austin Powers "ONE MILLION DOLLARS" moment. The solar industry is unlikely to turn down the money, but let's face it: The total, not to mention the increase, is peanuts. It gets us back up to the level of R&D funding during the Carter Administration.

More to the point, what we need is not R&D, but deployment. California just passed a $3.2 billion program to put solar on 1 million rooftops in the next 11 years. Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but if you take seriously the fact that global warming has the potential to destroy the foundations on which our current way of life is built, and we need to seriously reduce carbon emissions now, then this remedy is so pathetically inadequate to the problem that it seems more like an insult.

Pier Pressure

Dockworkers’ union pressures seaports to cut emissions Sittin’ on the dock of the bay, gettin’ lung cancer … wait, that’s not how the song goes? Tell it to the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, representing 60,000 dockworkers on the West Coast, which this week is kicking off a campaign to pressure ports and shipowners to […]

The Pain in Maine Falls Mainly on the, Uh, Salmon

Maine salmon teeter on the edge of extinction Endangered Maine salmon don’t get as much press as their sexy Pacific Northwest cousins (what, you don’t find salmon sexy?). But they may be closer to extinction. Currently only about 80 adult salmon return from the ocean each year to spawn in the eight Maine rivers where […]

Might as Well Face It, You’re Addicted to Oil

In SOTU speech, Bush decries oil addiction, promises half-measures Those expecting bold, groundbreaking environmental policy from President Bush’s fifth State of the Union address were, uh, deluded. The big “news” is Bush’s stark declaration that “America is addicted to oil.” Though he’s made remarks about dependence on “foreign oil” in every SOTU he’s delivered, this […]

SOTU: Omissions

Two terms not used in last night's speech: "global warming" and "Hurricane Katrina."

Wonder why?

The cat is out of the bag

Despite the modesty -- not to say wimpiness -- the Bush's proposed energy initiative, the real news of the night will be this line:

America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world.

I don't know if this is Nixon-goes-to-China territory, but it's every bit as significant as Clinton acknowledging that "the era of big government is over." This kind of cat cannot be put back in the bag.

Humorously, Bush tried to put it back in the bag with his very next line:

The best way to break this addiction is through technology.

Those who know how to parse Bushese will understand this sentiment immediately. Translation: "The best way to respond to this problem is to hand out some public money to corporate interests." This is, here as so many other places, terrible public policy. Matt Yglesias concisely captures why:

Bush’s goal is timid

Last night the president uncorked what to casual ears might have seemed an ambitious and inspirational proposal :

Breakthroughs on this and other new technologies will help us reach another great goal: to replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025.

"75% of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025." Hmm. As usual, the closer you look at the language, the more hedged you realize it is.

There are two basic problems with the goal -- aside from the unlikeliness of Bush competently following up on it, that is.

First: Just under 24% of our oil imports are from the Persian Gulf (Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates). Canada is our biggest supplier, followed by Mexico. There are only three Middle Eastern countries in the top 10, and Saudi Arabia alone accounts for 15 of those 24%.

Oil imports constitute somewhere around 60% of our oil use, so Persian Gulf oil amounts to around 14% of our total oil use. Cutting that 14% by 75% would amount to reducing our overall oil consumption by 10.5%

That what Bush's grand energy initiative amounts to: A reduction of U.S. oil consumption by 10.5% over 19 years. That's really the best he thinks we can do?