Kerry Offers 10-Year Plan for U.S. Energy Independence
08-06-04, 02:37 PM
#1
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
Kerry Offers 10-Year Plan for U.S. Energy Independence
Kerry Offers 10-Year Plan for U.S. Energy Independence
Fri Aug 6,11:30 AM ET Add Politics to My Yahoo!
By Thomas Ferraro
KANSAS CITY, Mo. (Reuters) - With crude oil prices at a record high, Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry (news - web sites) on Friday offered a 10-year, $30 billion proposal to move the nation toward energy independence.
Under the measure, aides said, American companies and consumers would receive financial aid to develop and buy more fuel-efficient motor vehicles.
In addition, it would set twin goals to have, by the year 2020, an even 20 percent of the nation's motor fuel and electricity come from alternative sources such as solar, wind, ethanol and biodiesel fuel.
Kerry, on a cross-country campaign tour, arranged to formally announce the proposal during a visit to a family farm outside Kansas City.
The measure would provide $10 billion to help automakers retool plants to build high-technology, fuel-efficient vehicles, and give consumers a tax credit of up to $5,000 to buy them.
It would also earmark $5 billion for a research partnership between government and industry into fuels made from agricultural waste, and $10 billion to transform the current generation of coal-fired utility plants into cleaner and more efficient facilities.
The Massachusetts senator has made energy independence a centerpiece of his campaign for the White House and his proposal fleshed out earlier ones he has promoted on the campaign trail.
The cost of the measure would be partially offset by reinstatement of a tax on polluters, aides said.
Kerry has contended greater energy independence would create jobs, provide for a cleaner environment, bolster security and make sure American soldiers do not have to go to war over Middle East oil.
President Bush (news - web sites) has said a massive energy bill blocked by Kerry and other Senate Democrats would help reduce the demand for foreign oil largely by opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.
In early trading Friday, oil prices climbed close to $45 a barrel, the highest level in 21 years for U.S. light crude futures on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
Fri Aug 6,11:30 AM ET Add Politics to My Yahoo!
By Thomas Ferraro
KANSAS CITY, Mo. (Reuters) - With crude oil prices at a record high, Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry (news - web sites) on Friday offered a 10-year, $30 billion proposal to move the nation toward energy independence.
Under the measure, aides said, American companies and consumers would receive financial aid to develop and buy more fuel-efficient motor vehicles.
In addition, it would set twin goals to have, by the year 2020, an even 20 percent of the nation's motor fuel and electricity come from alternative sources such as solar, wind, ethanol and biodiesel fuel.
Kerry, on a cross-country campaign tour, arranged to formally announce the proposal during a visit to a family farm outside Kansas City.
The measure would provide $10 billion to help automakers retool plants to build high-technology, fuel-efficient vehicles, and give consumers a tax credit of up to $5,000 to buy them.
It would also earmark $5 billion for a research partnership between government and industry into fuels made from agricultural waste, and $10 billion to transform the current generation of coal-fired utility plants into cleaner and more efficient facilities.
The Massachusetts senator has made energy independence a centerpiece of his campaign for the White House and his proposal fleshed out earlier ones he has promoted on the campaign trail.
The cost of the measure would be partially offset by reinstatement of a tax on polluters, aides said.
Kerry has contended greater energy independence would create jobs, provide for a cleaner environment, bolster security and make sure American soldiers do not have to go to war over Middle East oil.
President Bush (news - web sites) has said a massive energy bill blocked by Kerry and other Senate Democrats would help reduce the demand for foreign oil largely by opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.
In early trading Friday, oil prices climbed close to $45 a barrel, the highest level in 21 years for U.S. light crude futures on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
I thought maybe we could have an election thread that isn't about the Viet Nam war.
Here's the energy policy section of Kerry's website:
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/energy/
I especially like the head-to-head comparison with the current administration entitled "Moving Towards Energy Independence vs. Putting Enron First."
Finally.
08-06-04, 02:45 PM
#4
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 23,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but he threw his medals... or ribbons... and he didn't really serve in vietnam - he was in china. Why isn't the press covering this??! Damn liberal media... 
Oops - wrong thread.
No, seriously - this sounds like a good idea on paper. I just hope he does what he says he'll do if elected.
Oh - and how high does the cost of a barrel of oil have to go before it's cheaper to use chicken carcass?
Oops - wrong thread.
No, seriously - this sounds like a good idea on paper. I just hope he does what he says he'll do if elected.
Oh - and how high does the cost of a barrel of oil have to go before it's cheaper to use chicken carcass?
08-06-04, 02:45 PM
#5
Administrator
Finally something to talk about.
I have a hard time believing that government can do much about the cost of energy and experience has shown me that when the government gets involved in promoting particular actions it usually has huge negative unintended consequences.
For instance, it's regulations and fines on coal-fired plants that helped get us into an energy shortage in the first place and had the consequence of not allowing them to expand into becoming clean-burning facilities.
I prefer that oil and gas just stay at high prices and let private enterprise work on alternatives while getting government out of the way.
I have a hard time believing that government can do much about the cost of energy and experience has shown me that when the government gets involved in promoting particular actions it usually has huge negative unintended consequences.
For instance, it's regulations and fines on coal-fired plants that helped get us into an energy shortage in the first place and had the consequence of not allowing them to expand into becoming clean-burning facilities.
I prefer that oil and gas just stay at high prices and let private enterprise work on alternatives while getting government out of the way.
08-06-04, 02:46 PM
#6
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Kerry Offers 10-Year Plan for U.S. Energy Independence
Originally posted by JasonF
I thought maybe we could have an election thread that isn't about the Viet Nam war.
I thought maybe we could have an election thread that isn't about the Viet Nam war.
Shudder to think. How dare we talk about it?
Versus how many "Bush AWOL threads" in this forum this year?
Hmm...
08-06-04, 02:48 PM
#7
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 4,661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: Kerry Offers 10-Year Plan for U.S. Energy Independence
It would also earmark $5 billion for a research partnership between government and industry into fuels made from agricultural waste, and $10 billion to transform the current generation of coal-fired utility plants into cleaner and more efficient facilities.
08-06-04, 02:49 PM
#8
Originally posted by X
Finally something to talk about.
I have a hard time believing that government can do much about the cost of energy and experience has shown me that when the government gets involved in promoting particular actions it usually has huge negative unintended consequences.
For instance, it's regulations and fines on coal-fired plants that helped get us into an energy shortage in the first place and had the consequence of not allowing them to expand into becoming clean-burning facilities.
I prefer that oil and gas just stay at high prices and let private enterprise work on alternatives while getting government out of the way.
Finally something to talk about.
I have a hard time believing that government can do much about the cost of energy and experience has shown me that when the government gets involved in promoting particular actions it usually has huge negative unintended consequences.
For instance, it's regulations and fines on coal-fired plants that helped get us into an energy shortage in the first place and had the consequence of not allowing them to expand into becoming clean-burning facilities.
I prefer that oil and gas just stay at high prices and let private enterprise work on alternatives while getting government out of the way.
08-06-04, 02:49 PM
#9
Administrator
Originally posted by icondude
The biggest problem with his plan is that there is nothing in it for nuclear.
The biggest problem with his plan is that there is nothing in it for nuclear.
Maybe he'll learn about that energy source after the French become our friends.
08-06-04, 03:02 PM
#11
DVD Talk God
Originally posted by CRM114
And just think, we could fund this 4x over with the money we wasted in Iraq.
And just think, we could fund this 4x over with the money we wasted in Iraq.
I like that he has a plan, and darn near any plan is better than us not having one. But I have serious doubts as to any plan from either Bush or Kerry getting accepted. If Bush can't do it with control of the Senate and House, I see Kerry as having no chance. I don't think either can, frankly. Not until Congress decides it wants to, and they don't seem to.
But it is very nice to see him actually have a plan. I also want nukes. Put them in my backyard if necessary. Just like Hanford
08-06-04, 03:02 PM
#12
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
Re: Re: Kerry Offers 10-Year Plan for U.S. Energy Independence
Originally posted by JasonF
I thought maybe we could have an election thread that isn't about the Viet Nam war.
I thought maybe we could have an election thread that isn't about the Viet Nam war.
Yes, two whole threads on the issue Kerry himself has made central to his campaign, with major allegations from over 250 veterans challenging that major campaign position.
Shudder to think. How dare we talk about it?
Versus how many "Bush AWOL threads" in this forum this year?
Hmm...
08-06-04, 03:07 PM
#13
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
Originally posted by X
Finally something to talk about.
I have a hard time believing that government can do much about the cost of energy and experience has shown me that when the government gets involved in promoting particular actions it usually has huge negative unintended consequences.
For instance, it's regulations and fines on coal-fired plants that helped get us into an energy shortage in the first place and had the consequence of not allowing them to expand into becoming clean-burning facilities.
I prefer that oil and gas just stay at high prices and let private enterprise work on alternatives while getting government out of the way.
Finally something to talk about.
I have a hard time believing that government can do much about the cost of energy and experience has shown me that when the government gets involved in promoting particular actions it usually has huge negative unintended consequences.
For instance, it's regulations and fines on coal-fired plants that helped get us into an energy shortage in the first place and had the consequence of not allowing them to expand into becoming clean-burning facilities.
I prefer that oil and gas just stay at high prices and let private enterprise work on alternatives while getting government out of the way.
I agree that nuclear has to be part of our energy plan. Of course, my Dad has worked for the NRC my whole life, so I know some actual facts about nuclear energy instead of the Three-Mile-Island-Chernobyl-Booga-Booga shit most Americans associate with nuclear energy.
08-06-04, 03:07 PM
#14
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: Re: Kerry Offers 10-Year Plan for U.S. Energy Independence
Originally posted by JasonF
[B]Originally posted by natesfortune
Yes, two whole threads on the issue Kerry himself has made central to his campaign, with major allegations from over 250 veterans challenging that major campaign position.
Shudder to think. How dare we talk about it?
Versus how many "Bush AWOL threads" in this forum this year?
Hmm...
[B]Originally posted by natesfortune
Yes, two whole threads on the issue Kerry himself has made central to his campaign, with major allegations from over 250 veterans challenging that major campaign position.
Shudder to think. How dare we talk about it?
Versus how many "Bush AWOL threads" in this forum this year?
Hmm...
I hate to break it to you, but the Bush AWOL threads are about Viet Nam, too. It's not just a Kerry thing. Right now, there are 3 threads on the first page about Viet Nam -- Bush AWOL, Vets Against Kerry, and Christmas in Cambodia. I thought it might be nice to have a thread about policy. Silly me.
And also, I don't think the Vietnam threads are irrelevant to the campaign - they would be - but John Kerry has decided to make that his main selling point for his campaign.
So if he gets to make it an issue, we get to treat it like one.
As for the energy policy, I don't think Government is the answer. Private enterprise got us oil. Private enterprise has a profit motive, and know that oil will run out soon. Private enterprise knows there's growing resentment over oil and a potential huge market for other sources, and thus private enterprise will find that solution.
Government would best serve that effort by relaxing regulations that stop that kind of innovation.
08-06-04, 03:10 PM
#15
Administrator
Originally posted by JasonF
Counter-example -- our government's got its hands all over the pharmaceutical research industry through the NIH, and our firms are churning out new drugs at an absolutely astonishing rate.
Counter-example -- our government's got its hands all over the pharmaceutical research industry through the NIH, and our firms are churning out new drugs at an absolutely astonishing rate.
If you want to see the impact of the government on drug/medical research you don't have to go further than stem-cell research.
08-06-04, 03:10 PM
#16
Originally posted by JasonF
so I know some actual facts about nuclear energy instead of the Three-Mile-Island-Chernobyl-Booga-Booga shit most Americans associate with nuclear energy.
so I know some actual facts about nuclear energy instead of the Three-Mile-Island-Chernobyl-Booga-Booga shit most Americans associate with nuclear energy.
That being said, I don't completely rule out nukes either. I can be convinced.
08-06-04, 03:11 PM
#17
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
Originally posted by X
I don't think that's a real good example as there are so many drugs that aren't being developed or put on the market solely because of the testing required. Of course there need to be safeguards but getting the government out of the picture would increase new drugs.
If you want to see the impact of the government on drug/medical research you don't have to go further than stem-cell research.
I don't think that's a real good example as there are so many drugs that aren't being developed or put on the market solely because of the testing required. Of course there need to be safeguards but getting the government out of the picture would increase new drugs.
If you want to see the impact of the government on drug/medical research you don't have to go further than stem-cell research.
08-06-04, 03:13 PM
#18
Administrator
Originally posted by JasonF
I was more referring to the fact that a lot of drug research by the Pfizers and Abbott Labs of the world is underwritten, directly or indirectly, through research paid for by NIH.
I was more referring to the fact that a lot of drug research by the Pfizers and Abbott Labs of the world is underwritten, directly or indirectly, through research paid for by NIH.
But when they allocate the money to the areas they think will be fruitful, as Kerry is advocating, they distort the market and the science.
08-06-04, 03:13 PM
#19
DVD Talk God
Originally posted by CRM114
I don't know about booga-booga but you live, what, 1500 miles from TMI. I live 90 miles from TMI and much closer to Limerick. I don't like the idea of my town looking like that Chernobyl website around here a few months ago.
That being said, I don't completely rule out nukes either. I can be convinced.
I don't know about booga-booga but you live, what, 1500 miles from TMI. I live 90 miles from TMI and much closer to Limerick. I don't like the idea of my town looking like that Chernobyl website around here a few months ago.
That being said, I don't completely rule out nukes either. I can be convinced.
08-06-04, 03:20 PM
#20
Originally posted by kvrdave
If TMI taught us anything, it is that people are dumber than we give them credit for. Had the people done absolutely nothing, the system would have shut down by itself. I think we can do it better now.
If TMI taught us anything, it is that people are dumber than we give them credit for. Had the people done absolutely nothing, the system would have shut down by itself. I think we can do it better now.
08-06-04, 03:22 PM
#21
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
Originally posted by CRM114
I don't know about booga-booga but you live, what, 1500 miles from TMI. I live 90 miles from TMI and much closer to Limerick. I don't like the idea of my town looking like that Chernobyl website around here a few months ago.
That being said, I don't completely rule out nukes either. I can be convinced.
I don't know about booga-booga but you live, what, 1500 miles from TMI. I live 90 miles from TMI and much closer to Limerick. I don't like the idea of my town looking like that Chernobyl website around here a few months ago.
That being said, I don't completely rule out nukes either. I can be convinced.
TMI was a partial meltdown. A lot of things went wrong. And we still managed to contain the meltdown. So little radioactivity was released into the environment. that the conclusion was that there would be one additional fatal case of cancer due to TMI. Moreover, we completely revamped the way we manage safety at nuclear plants after TMI.
Chernobyl was a graphite-moderated reactor -- a type we don't use in the U.S. precisely because they are so unsafe.
Am I saying that nuclear power is 100% safe? Of course not. But the public has a skewed perception of the danger that nuclear power plants pose. As a result, we under-utilize nuclear power. It's sort of like airplanes -- everyone thinks they are the most dangerous form of transportation, but the statistics show they are actually one of the safest.
Between oil spills and air and groundwater pollution, fossil fuels have killed far more Americans than nuclear power.
08-06-04, 03:24 PM
#23
DVD Talk God
Originally posted by JasonF
Am I saying that nuclear power is 100% safe? Of course not. But the public has a skewed perception of the danger that nuclear power plants pose. As a result, we under-utilize nuclear power. It's sort of like airplanes -- everyone thinks they are the most dangerous form of transportation, but the statistics show they are actually one of the safest.
Am I saying that nuclear power is 100% safe? Of course not. But the public has a skewed perception of the danger that nuclear power plants pose. As a result, we under-utilize nuclear power. It's sort of like airplanes -- everyone thinks they are the most dangerous form of transportation, but the statistics show they are actually one of the safest.
I agree and I lived 75 miles from TMI at the time.
08-06-04, 03:28 PM
#25
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
Originally posted by X
I wouldn't have a big problem with the government saying "here's a big pot of money - take it and see what you come up with."
But when they allocate the money to the areas they think will be fruitful, as Kerry is advocating, they distort the market and the science.
I wouldn't have a big problem with the government saying "here's a big pot of money - take it and see what you come up with."
But when they allocate the money to the areas they think will be fruitful, as Kerry is advocating, they distort the market and the science.
