Via Matt Yglesias, ThinkProgress’s Brad Johnson takes a look at National Security Adviser-designate Jim Jones’s work on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s energy task force and finds it to be pretty disturbing stuff:
The institute deserves credit for having its first strategic priority be energy efficiency, but its other priorities and specific policy suggestions are wrongheaded and reflect the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s typical anti-regulatory, pro-pollution industry agenda. Jones’ Transition Plan calls for billions of dollars in subsidies for the nuclear and coal industry, a dramatic expansion in domestic oil and natural gas drilling into protected areas, and massive new energy industry tax breaks and loopholes.
Meanwhile, the plan argues that Congress should prevent regulation of greenhouse gas emissions under any existing state or federal law, and that “any new national climate change policy should be conditional on an international agreement that requires full international participation.” In short, the Institute’s climate change policy looks stunningly like that of the Bush administration: “Don’t just sit there, do nothing.”
As someone who’s praised Jones on energy issues, allow me to take my lumps on this. All this looks pretty bad. Is Jones’ support for alternative energy sources less than meets the eye?
Crossposted to The Streak.
Login Here




2 Comments
Spotlight


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
Advanced search
RSS/XML Feed
WTF is that statement included for, as though it’s a bad thing ?
This is something I hope Obama continues. Bush’s opposition to the Kyoto protocol. In fact, the best thing he could do for the environment would be to derail Kyoto and kill it.
For all the cheap criticism that’s been leveled at the US for opposing Kyoto on whatever grounds, one simple fact remains: Kyoto is a formal agreement to embrace this “doing nothing” stance that’s mentioned.
I live in Australia, a first world nation that has one of the highest per-capita CO2 emission levels in the world. This also means we have the greatest scope for reducing that. If we reduced it to nil, this wouldn’t do shit for anyone since we account for around 2% of the world’s emissions.
Hence, it amounts to little more than window dressing.
An agreement that exempts China and India, the world’s largest emitter and the 2nd most prominent emerging economy, simply amounts to agreeing that CO2 emissions will not be tackled. Whatever tipping point exists for emissions that cannot be reversed, Kyoto embraces that fate rather than avoids it.
So I went to the supercomputing conference last month, was talking with some colleagues that work at DOE administered National Laboratories about DOE under Obama. The name for Energy Secretary that was floated was Arnold Schwarzenegger. Which might not be that bad, he’s been strong on global warming as Governor, he’s got charisma enough to possibly make conservation sexy. his lacks as a scientist aren’t that bad, he’d have undersecretaries that understand the science, and Obama will be pushing for science based policy.
I wanted to get this out there, as I haven’t seen much speculation. I got this from a research director at a Lab in Illinois that had worked as a senior researcher at LANL and is well connected with the entire DOE Labs system.