|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 2:09 pm Post subject: Strategic Energy Independence by 2025 |
 |
|
MCCAIN: THE LEXINGTON PROJECT
Wed June 25, 2008 12:50:11 ET
| Quote: |
In recent days I have set before the American people an energy plan, the Lexington Project � named for the town where Americans asserted their independence once before. And let it begin today with this commitment:� In a world of hostile and unstable suppliers of oil, this nation will achieve strategic independence by 2025.
This pledge is addressed to all concerned -- to those abroad whose power flows from an accident of geology, and to you, my fellow Americans, whose strength proceeds from unity of purpose. Together, we will break the power of OPEC over the United States. And never again will we leave our vital interests at the mercy of any foreign power.
Some will say this goal is unattainable within that relatively short span of years -- it's too hard and we need more time. Let me remind them that in the space of half that time -- about eight years -- this nation conceived and carried out a plan to take three Americans to the Moon and bring them safely home. In less than a third of that time, the gathered energies of my father's generation built the industrial might that overcame Nazi Germany and imperial Japan. That is the scale of our achievement when we set our minds to a task. That is what this country can do when we see a danger, and declare a purpose, and find the will to act.
As president, I will turn all the apparatus of government in the direction of energy independence for our country -- authorizing new production, building nuclear plants, perfecting clean coal, improving our electricity grid, and supporting all the new technologies that one day will put the age of fossil fuels behind us. Much will be asked of industry as well, as automakers and others adapt to this great turn toward new sources of power. And a great deal will depend on each one of us, as we learn to make smarter use of energy, and also to draw on the best ideas of both parties, and work together for the common good.
This Project is not a plan calibrated to please every interest group or to meet every objection. That is how we arrived to our present predicament. That is how energy policy in Washington became a long list of subjects avoided, options ruled out, and possibilities foreclosed. Nor can I promise you that the long-term success of this Project will bring instant relief.� In the mission of energy security, some tasks are the work of decades and some the work of years. And they will take all the will and resolve of which we are capable. But I can promise you this. Unless we begin this mission now, nothing will change at all, except for the worse. And when we succeed in the hard reform ahead, your children will live in a more prosperous country, in a more peaceful world.
|
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash6.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
However, Obama says:
Mr. Obama illustrated the gap between the candidates by giving a speech at a water plant in Las Vegas that laid heavy emphasis on $150 billion worth of alternative energy, including wind and solar power and hoped-for clean coal technology (Mr. Obama acknowledged, in response to a question, that he was not ruling out nuclear power, but he strongly suggested it was a distinctly lower priority). He asserted that these investments in technology would yield five million new jobs.
He also proposed to charge oil companies an undefined fee for every acre that they lease but fail to drill on. Oil companies now lease but are not drilling on about 68 million acres, according to the Obama campaign.
�If that compels them to drill, we�ll get more oil,� Mr. Obama said. �If it doesn�t, the fees will go toward more investment in renewable sources of energy.�
The goal, Mr. Obama said, would be to catch and replicate the success of the world leaders in this field.
�Germany, a country as cloudy as the Pacific Northwest, is now a world leader in the solar power industry and the quarter-million new jobs it has created,� Mr. Obama said. �To truly harness its potential, we urgently need real leadership from Washington � leadership that has been missing for decades.�
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/us/politics/25campaign.html?_r=2&ref=politics&oref=slogin&oref=slogin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not discounting McCain's plan. I don't know the details, and as we all know, that's where the devil dwells. But I am apprehensive for historical reasons. His party typically leans to Big Business. I'd like to see the emphasis away from centralized power sources where big companies can dominate more easily--and enemies can attack more easily.
If Big Oil were smart, they'd be investing their profits in massive R & D in alternative energy sources. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
He also proposed to charge oil companies an undefined fee for every acre that they lease but fail to drill on. Oil companies now lease but are not drilling on about 68 million acres, according to the Obama campaign.
�If that compels them to drill, we�ll get more oil,� Mr. Obama said. �If it doesn�t, the fees will go toward more investment in renewable sources of energy.� |
Ewwww. Industry specific taxes are even more loathsome than industry specific subsidies.
I like the McCain plan, but I have some worries. First of all, he bills it as 'Energy Independence.' This may be for political purposes (much of his base does not believe in Global Warming). However, true Energy Independence would be easily achieved by mimicking China and building a great many coal plants. And it would help jobs: America is the Saudi Arabia of coal, and impoverished regions like West Virginia and Eastern Kentucky are our Ghawar Fields. However, this would be an environmental catastrophe.
I think McCain believes in the environment, and there's a political explanation for why he is selling Energy Independence instead of a more explicit environmentally-based Lexington Project. And its clear that McCain recognizes that Energy Independence means more than freedom from foreign sources, it means emancipation from non-renewable resources. I guess, in that sense, I've talked myself into approval of McCain's position. Its a good plan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
doc_ido
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sounds like an excellent plan - though I imagine the odds are good it'll be quietly swept under the carpet after the election should McCain win. 
I like his parallels to similar rapid projects with specific goals in mind - they could have been lifted straight out of books on how we might drastically reduce our carbon emissions, which suggests he's not going to beg the "it's too difficult" excuse. The idea of energy independence seems to be a good way to sell green technology to people who don't like the environment - though "strategic" independence has been used in the past to justify military action (largest cheap sources of uranium: Australia, Canada and Kazakhstan). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| doc_ido wrote: |
Sounds like an excellent plan - though I imagine the odds are good it'll be quietly swept under the carpet after the election should McCain win.
I like his parallels to similar rapid projects with specific goals in mind - they could have been lifted straight out of books on how we might drastically reduce our carbon emissions, which suggests he's not going to beg the "it's too difficult" excuse. The idea of energy independence seems to be a good way to sell green technology to people who don't like the environment - though "strategic" independence has been used in the past to justify military action (largest cheap sources of uranium: Australia, Canada and Kazakhstan). |
Why would it be swept under the carpet especially since McCains policy advisor is James Wosley. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
