it’s a long road to being a bill but a recent act did make its way through the snaking trail of the US Senate.
i was shocked to read the target reduction level: 70% of 2005 levels by 2050.
i’ve been a long time stockholder of Evergreen Solar (ESLR), and First Solar (FSLR) and SunPower (SPWR) have been getting mucho-press lately (and rocketing stock prices). this is on top of blue chip companies like BP, GE, and Shell making big moves into solar and wind power. i won’t get into the technological advantages to one company over another and just be happy to see that the US government and its ruling elite is finally taking a real stance on global warming.
this really is a mini-victory for the ecologically mindful citizen (which everyone should be!). i mean, it really wasn’t that long ago that republican officials were claiming that global warming was not a proven result of human activities and that the science behind those findings needed to be re-evaluated. i still hear talk among the less educated people that global warming isn’t proven but it’s only a matter of time before the general populace accepts their actions as having ecological consequences. obviously, it will take acts (and bills) pushed through congress, signed by the president (regardless of political affiliation) to change the mind of skeptical people–people only skeptical because political talking heads couldn’t stand to think that their lavish lifestyles actually affect other people (because that would go against the American capital ideology). here’s an interesting example of how this issue is affecting the right. (notice the difference between giuliani and mccain!)
the markets will definitely reward the early investors in those segments:
- 5 year movement of ESLR: $1.92 to $13+
- 5 year movement of FSLR: $27+ to $220
- 2 year movement of SPWR: $32+ to $126
sexy green segments to keep watching: geothermal, wind, solar
un-green segments disguised as green: “clean coal”, ethanol, nuclear 
10 responses so far ↓
1 sswenviron // Dec 6, 2007 at 6:29 pm
First off my friend, I never said that global warming isn’t hapening. I said it may not be man made and I’ve been clear about that for years.
I said so in the link you referenced but why expect a lib and a global warming advocate to actually, you know, report the truth.
If you’re going to report, adhere to the blogger credo in which you report your links with some semblance of accuracy.
If you don’t, you look like an idiot and I have to waste time setting your sorry ass straight.
Now, if you’d have taken a secong to read my previous posts on global warming, you’d find that I attended UCSD and am an environmental consultant. You didn’t and that says to me that your theories are weak and unproven. A click here or there is too much trouble but I should accept your hypotheses and conclusions. OK.
Take a few minutes and read what I’ve written, you may be enlightened. Oh, and by the way, 90% of the environmental regulations (RCRA, OPA-90, SARA, CAA, you can look it up) and myriad others have been signed by Republican Presidents.
Take a minute, learn something and keep your weak-ass links to yourself unless you’re really ready to discuss global warming.
E-mail me if you choose to take your tail out and respond. I would imagine since you have registration this won’t even get posted because you lack the huevo’s to do so.
2 sswenviron // Dec 6, 2007 at 6:31 pm
Moderating……..
Uh, I’m a guy who is so unsure of my opinions I have to moderate.
Go to my site, dude. Post whatever comment you want I’ll eviscerate you.
Have a geat night.
3 Mr K // Dec 6, 2007 at 7:38 pm
I am going to jump in this for a moment only to say that we are here to learn and educate. If any of us say something that is incorrect, we welcome the correction. We moderate because of Spam and you can’t deny that it is a pain to deal with. Anyway, Welcome.
4 sswenviron // Dec 7, 2007 at 3:43 am
What is correct and incorrect in the GW debate? There’s theory and there’s fact.
Fact–The earth is warming
Fact–The earth and warmed and cooled myriad times throughout history
Fact–The polar icecaps on Mars are melting, which would indicate that it may be the sun causing warming as has happened in the past as well.
Theory–Global warming is man-made caused by an increase in CO
It’s a cottage ndustry that the media perpetuates. Note that Newsweek had to correct an article that ran 20-years ago that warned of global cooling with just as much alarmism.
It is not a proven theory by a long shot.
5 messels // Dec 7, 2007 at 7:12 am
i think the comments on sswenviron’s post (linked in my post) address this guy’s concerns and comments better than i really can.
just for the record, global warming is not a THEORY. theories, like gravity, are not really up for discussion about their plausibility. technically, they can be revised but the likelihood is close enough to zero that it’s statistically improbable and dismissed. global warming is an effect. just like dropping a rock into a pond will create oscillation waves. cause & effect.
sometimes tracing the cause can be quite difficult, and i think with climate change in particular, that’s def’ the case. but, once identified, humans with our ability to THINK and PLAN can control their actions (at least some of us can!), thereby empowering us, at least potentially in the case of global warming, to avoid the behaviors causing it.
i’m sorry that as a professional consultant representing the scientific community to our government, you don’t know these basic givens…though i suppose if you’re advising gov’ officials for my country (USA) i shouldn’t be too surprised with misinformation given the pandering to lobbyists taking place in D.C.–and global warming scientists are a paltry example next to the lavishness of the pharmaceutical and food industries!
you, sir, are failing to see the forest through the trees.
6 sswenviron // Dec 7, 2007 at 7:35 am
Messels,
I disagree with the cause and effect. That would imply that GW is a man-made phenomena and that is far from proven. As I noted, the world has been warming and cooling for millenia, the only “cause” is that the sun gets nearer or changes energy output so it is not really a “cause” at all but simply another stage in the life of the planet.
More here with great new stories of environmental hypocrisy at the UN summit in Bali:
http://environmentalrepublican.blogspot.com/2007/12/more-on-un-global-warming-charade.html
7 Mr K // Dec 7, 2007 at 7:43 am
sswenviron:
I understand what you are trying to explain over and over again. But how can YOU be so sure? Can you deny that there are too many cars releasing CO? Can you deny that there are LESS trees creating oxygen today than 100 years ago? Can you deny that CO is bad for the environment? If you can answer YES to any of those, well, then you are wrong. I understand and agree that the sun has a huge part to do with GW, but there is NO WAY it is the ONLY cause.
I had a professor tell me once that I will always run across those people that believe one way or another in any subject. And I have no problem with your beliefs. But come on, really? I have not read all of your posts to know what your true thoughts are, but you have to know that people (and business) has definitely but a dent on the environment. Can you deny that?
8 sswenviron // Dec 7, 2007 at 8:22 am
Now we’re getting somewhere. Yes, people and business have indeed had a detrimental effect on the environment and I would never dispute that. I clean up contaminated sites for a living and there are thousands of them.
However, that is soil, water and air pollution, they are not at all indications that global warming is man-made.
I’m assuming that when you say “CO” you don’t mean carbon monoxide but you really mean CO2 or carbon dioxide. I’ll proceed on that premise. CO2 is not yet fully understood with regard to its effect on the earths atmosphere. Life forms have been exhaling CO2 since they’ve existed and the levels have increased as we’ve proceeded along the evolutionary path and into the industrial age.
What I am saying and I can’t be plainer is that the role of CO2 in the warming of the planet is not only not proven but is not understood enough to pinpoint it as the reason we are seeing (slightly and eratically) increasing temps.
I know people who make a killing off this issue by convincing clients that GW is a fact. I laugh every time I see someone driving a hybrid thinking they’re saving the environment when a Prius leaves a much larger carbon footprint than even the Hummer.
Source: http://clubs.ccsu.edu/recorder/editorial/editorial_item.asp?NewsID=188
The world is being duped and they don’t even notice. Scientists are given grants to prove GW exists and those grants are their income. Would you prove otherwise if it meant losing your income?
The point is about moot at this site it seems but i guess I’ve proven that I’m not the one who’s less educated. Take some time, open your eyes and do what those who espouse global warming hysteria do not do: read dissenting opionions and give them the scientific benefit of the doubt they deserve. Not all is what it seems and I see it from the inside.
9 Mr K // Dec 7, 2007 at 9:09 am
Neither you nor I know if IN FACT GW is caused by humans or not. Period.
10 Energy Bill Stalled Out in Senate — “Big” Surprise | The Position Makers // Dec 7, 2007 at 12:04 pm
[...] that i recommend anyone to checkout (at least for a laugh or two)–especially our new found enthusiast for arguing with us! the reason i recomend it is that there’s about 30 examples (and growing) of how [...]
Leave a Comment