Excellent! Thanks Adam for the excerpts from Obama's speech.Its great to have American Presidency support environmentalism. Its good news to all green people all over the world.

Thank you America for coming back on board in time to save the planet. Most estimates suggest we have to fix CO2 emissions in the next 9 years, so this morning we might just manage it..... if it had been 8 more years like the last 8 we were all doomed.

A helpful update article as it was hard to catch the environmental cues amongst the economic concerns in the last part of the election race

Martin Scotland

Orthodoxy,

Interesting read...but how do we explain the two pieces of evidence? I point directly North and South...

So Obama wants to restructure the grid so electricity can be moved from North Dakota to Chicago! Maybe North Dakota doesn't want to become the energy supplier to an area that wastes it, especially if it means covering the state with wind generators. Where is the idea of conservation?

I also observed that in Obama's speech last night, his first mention of policy was "...we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime: two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century."

That "a planet in peril" is even in the list, and all three are tied together in this sentence seems important to me.

Hopefully...

Maybe North Dakota will earn revenue...and in a bigger picture help the country become less dependent on foreign energy...

How we conserve is first a personal choice framed by cutlural values who's emphasis is determined by events, past, present and percieved future.

You assume Chicago is wasting energy...? Why Chicagao? Why not some other city? Waste and efficiency must be balanced by effectiveness...

Well I think the North Dakota thing is a valid question. As a resident of "fly-over" country, there is a feeling that many of the areas pushing for more wind, no nukes, etc. and the greatest users of energy aren't willing to put the tubines in their back yard, but we should become the tailpipe of the country. I'll agree that the plains have some great wind resources, but it's also fair to say we don't want it all to be wind turbines. The coasts have some great wind sources too, but they have been blocked for being unsightly, I think it's fair for people to have the same objections here. Personally, I'm all for more wind, residential solar, and even some nukes. However, energy transport is a huge loss in efficiency. So let's put the tail pipe near the consumers and make them the think before they flip the switch.

Your point is more clear than Ken's and I agree with your idea(s)...Chicago is called "The Windy City", isn't it?

My last sentence above, however, suggests we look everywhere whilst not being shortsighted anywhere.

I personally do not place wind farms in the visualy unsightly category. Rather, I find these mechanisms much more tactile than say a hydroelectric dam. This sense of touch can in no small way boost conservation since the mechanism's work is nearly palpable! One can see it and hear it and feel it! Ubiquity, in no small measure, help here.

There needs to be a larger vision and message of conservation and reduced consumption.

We can talk all we want about alternative forms of energy for heating, electricity usage and transportation, but without conservation, it won't happen. As I drive to work I see many huge SUVs and 4x4 Trucks driven to work with only a single occupant, it is estimated that 75% of people commute to work alone. I rideshare. When the price of gas rose, the rideshare parking lot was full. Now it is less than one-third full. Higher costs for fuel and heating promotes conservation-perhaps dare I say it-a carbon tax?

Never mind the wasteful street, highway, and night lights on buildings and now TVs in the grocery store. I could go on and on with the addition of all our new electronic devices, but I think you know the story.

Hopefully Obama can inspire people to be environmentally responsible before it is a planet in peril..

Everyone has to make a living somehow. The trick is to offer people real (clean, beneficial) alternatives to environmentally damaging activities and to make clinging to the status quo so less and less attractive. Promoting wind, solar, geothermal and other clean (or at least cleaner) ways to meet our energy needs makes a whole lot of sense. And we have to do it all fast enough so that we all don't poison ourselves, bake, or starve in the meantime.

"My biggest concern, I suppose, is that Obama hasn’t yet really sold his environmental vision to the American public. "

I'd like to think that environmental action can be taken sold to the people in the current economic atmosphere, but it will be a tough sell. A good plan will be needed. People want to feel economically more secure, and I'm afraid environmental issues are lower on their lists.

Honestly, most people will choose good environmental policies, as long as it does not cost them too much. As soon as it calls for sacrifice, most people will start to tune out, depending on the amount of sacrifice.

I hope Obama can come up with a plan that will gain public support. I fear that he will be “just more of the same.” I sincerely hope I am wrong. I’d like nothing better than to see good environmental policy become popular with everyday people.

@michael

Actually, Chicago was named "the windy city" not for its wind (which it does have some of) but for the "hot air" of its politicians. (Actually the first reference was with regards to a Cincinnati rivalry) Amusing given where we just elected a president from... (joke, not flame)

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windy_City,_Origin_of_Name_(Chicago)

There is no question that the pervading theme is that we have a problem, we need solutions and now we have leadership that says 'Yes We Can'. This elected leader is also looking to each of us for ways to conserve, do more with less, and essentially asks us to consider that these are going to be different days ahead. More like the days we heard following the Great Depression. I am quite enthused to hear that these can all be addressed in the central theme of repowering America. The next thing that needs to happen is a retraining of the uses of the American wallet. I'm just waiting for the light to come on concerning the debt being financed by China at the same time that nearly all American goods being consumed are now originating there. If we keep supporting cheaper produced goods (including buying decisions made by national chains) then we're goind to be hard pressed to pay for all the needed infrastructure improvements and energy related changes. We as a country need to refocus on local, American made goods and get this country back to work.

As for me and mine, we'll see you out there on our American made bicycles, of course... JD Howell, Eugene, OR

In mentioning Nixon's Project Independence, Adam claims that the present crisis is different from the early 70s because of its magnitude, and because of this more realistic solutions will be created today. I don't want to sound cynical, but I am too realistic to think that Americans will somehow see things differently today. In the early 70s, all the same signs of impending disaster and crisis were clearly present for anyone willing to pay attention: the Club of Rome Reports, detailing the path of destruction humanity was hellbent on following; population crises throughout Asia (Bangladesh), Africa, and Latin America; climate catastrophes; the rise of the international ecology movement (Rachel Carson, Margaret Mead and the UN); and so on.

The US is at least 20 years behind Germany and northern European countries in developing a sustained, lasting, infrastructure for serious social- and individual (education)-anchored environmental thinking. While Reagan told us it was silly to set your thermostats to 68 degrees, Europe began a concerted widescale development of its green industries (solar, recycling, etc).

We see how reflexive Americans respond with the current temporary drop in gas prices: once again Ford is ramping up production of its pickups and SUVs, and people are driving more again.

Can Obama do what the Europeans did in the 80s and introduce permanent development of a national environmental framework? 45 million Americans voted for McCain/Palin and their mantra of Drill, baby, drill...

I appreciate Obama's perspective on creating new jobs, and having survived The Blackout, I think a new energy grid is a no-brainer. Unfortunately, Obama and every other well-read policy-maker seems to completely ignore what it would take from an educational/training perspective to retrain those 5 million people. Sure, there are a lot of recently laid-off workers who could be easily plugged back in with energy jobs, but most of issues with poverty and chronic unemployment are directly linked to the fact that the uneducated children and adults out there in need of employment (currently or in the future) are not ABLE to advance at the speed our industries demand. Our economy has changed faster than non-profit literacy programs can keep up. Before we can have a new energy infrastructure, we need a new educational/training infrastructure.

...on the job training.

I agree in spirit as many of the problems with our country lay findamentally with what is expected from us - or made available to us - as a culture - education being one. But if a new infrastructure has to twidle its thumbs while some of us catch up, we'll have missed the boat...any system that wishes to keep its head above water has to move ahead with what it has now...as a country we geared up pretty fast for WWII. When a clear goal galvanizes this country we have proven that we are up to the task. Though the country is different in many ways today, I beleive we still posses the potential to change with the time and reaffirming ourselves as leaders.

Technology is quite different now than it was in WWII - even since I was in law school 30 years ago and wrote for my school's Environmental Law Journal on the Clean Air Act of 1977. Many young people cannot write or spell - or write a clear concise sentence. The drugs that are still far too prevalent were not even available that many generations ago.

Thankfully we do have the gift of instant communication. The Clean Air Act is taken as a given these days - it wasn't at one time.

We do need to change: conservation and conversation will both help. See - a little change can make a big difference. I have been surprised how people are willing if they know what is needed.

And by the way, I voted against an initiative here in Washington State that would have used HOV lanes and other measures to reduce congestion. We don't know yet whether the measure for expanded trains and light rail passed in Seattle - a better way to reduce congestion!

At the risk of being "inappropriate" I will take a moment to point out your hipocracy. You state that Richard Nixon "launched Project Independence," and "he declared that by 1980 the U.S. would no longer rely on any other country for its energy needs. Nixon also kicked off a program to design a “virtually pollution-free automobile” by 1975." Somehow, however, he gets little to no credibility, but Al Gore gets plenty.
You are not taking into consideration the "climate" of the 70's, when people weren't near as concerned about the state of the earth as they are today. And with all of Al's preaching and handwringing -- not much has changed in the past 30+ years. Even Al doesn't practice what he preaches.
So I caution you to not put too much hope in Obama's plans for a greener tomorrow. The hope is in the average Joe who cares enough about the earth to protect it for his kids.

...the average Joe has his place as does our government...I cannot pass legislation that will begin re-building our grid for example. But I can use fewer resources and buy smarter...if, while hoping the grid is improved to a point my electrical bill reflects a bit more sustained efficiency from these shores.

...I like Al's message, but it has been self serving and a bit hypocritical, agreed!

Adam,

Being a leader means leading by walking the talk, or in the least, pretending to. Leaders do not act otherwise, not in my world. Leadership in my office begins with me and my actions, not with my mouth or my wishes.

Yes, Al Gore has raised the profile of the issue, no argument. But if Al wants to earn credibility, then Al must immerse himself in the walk. He is otherwise insensitive and disinterested and out of touch.

We've all contributed here by repsonding in some way by writing, it begins with us, we as individuals...Al should be held to the same personal standard, no less no more.

Michael -- I couldn't have said it better!
And Adam, while Nixon's plan might have been unachievable, remember, he was forced to resign shortly after making those commitments. Not much time to try much of anything.
I was in 6th grade for the first Earth Day (I know I am dating myself!) and remember all the warnings and the promises that came shortly after. I lived thru the first "gas crisis" and vividly remember the lines waiting for gas and the rationing that went on.
After almost 40 years of promises from politicians, I want to see them walk the walk -- and make real change.
Energy independence is a "right" goal -- as is energy conservation. Americans need to make a commitment to the future generations that they will stop the waste and the excess and strive to be better stewards of the earth.

The exchange here is working at two levels: the macro level that has national leadership developing a long-term strategic plan for infrastructure (which is what Adam's posting is about), and the personal level in terms of changing behavior and personal habits. It would seem irrelevant to bring in the personal with Adam's posting, but there is a relationship: since the declaration of the first Earth Day by the UN in 69-70, Adam is correct in pointing out the woeful absence of national- and state-level leadership in the United States. At the same time, with the US being a populist democracy (as opposed to the social democracies of the northern European countries), it has been very difficult to generate anything approaching a general recognition that there is even a problem with the human relationship to nature and the environment, let alone our wanton waste of natural resources. The feeble attempts (with Nixon as the example here) at generating some traction among a broader mass of the electorate have all fell to ridicule and willful ignoring of there even being a problem. Until recently, it would have been the death-knell of an American politician's career to have been labelled 'green'.

Things are different now, as Adam points out, and Obama's presidency does kindle hope that skillful leadership can both develop a rational national energy infrastructure with broad support, and permanently change American behavior at the personal level. It's going to take a lot of educating to turn the 'Drill, baby, drill' mindset around, and to get people to generally recognize how obscene SUVs really are. It's taken countries like Germany over 20 years to cultivate a general personal environmental awareness, so it will be interesting to see if Obama can establish the foundation to get things going.

I am a chemical and environmental engineer who came into my career hoping to become an environmental attorney and change the world. Having worked on both the process and the remediation side of the table, I understand the need for change at both the macro and micro levels, and for policy to further drive it. Let's face it, we Americans can be quite singularly focused - a lot of us want the American dream and we're not willing to make a lot of sacrifices. Isn't that why we're in the state we're in right now?

That said, I'm about to come across somewhat hypocritical, but hear me out first then judge. I am a wife and mother of three, so I have an SUV. But despite having one, I use considerably less gasoline than friends with hybrids and small cars because I'm not driving all over the place because I can. I plan out my activities and make the most of my resources - I live within 5 mi of work, my hubby and I work together so we carpool and drop off the kids in the mornings and pick them up in the afternoons together. Once we're home, we're home. We brown bag it and don't run around during lunch and all that; we haven't bought into all the gizmos that we're told today that we have to have. We don't have TVs in every room or even watch the ones that we have more than a few hours on Sats and Suns. We keep the thermostat down and have it programmed to optimize energy use. On the whole, we're careful and not wasteful with our resources - environmentally, fiscally, and even time-wise. And I think that's the bottom line. Until we as Americans learn to think for ourselves and stop accepting the bill of goods that highly-paid marketing execs sell us about what it means to live "the good life", things will not change. But I think there is a good chance for change now.

Until now, much of our leadership has been by people of wealth who've never really known what it was like to feel the crunch of the time - they didn't have to look at how to conserve to save and seen the sense in it once engaged in it. But now we do. Now we have someone credible - who's been there - who can say, "I've been abased and abound... and I know from personal experience that it doesn't take all of that." We have someone who can paint the rational picture for change and can articulate in laymen's terms for everyone to understand what is needed. And not only that, he has the gift of persuasion, heart of sincerity, and the willingness to lead by example, to actually get people to try it. That, I think, is where our potential success this times comes from.

What a scam. There is not ONE shred of evidence to support or prove manmade global warming. I can't believe all the suckers that want to believe. But you are all the same people that believe in hope and change as preached by your new lord and savior B. Hussane Obamma. Wake up suckers..global warming is NOT caused by people it is caused by natural events. In fact, we are on a cooling trend at this time.

ferreted out a new porn link sum1 could be interested in, should have something to cater to your tastes or not... but had to give it out anyway :) fappityfapfap

[url=http://5gdpjx6w.bidsex.net/black-wet-porn.html]black wet porn free[/url]