As our society recovers from the triple threats of Coronavirus, economic collapse and social unrest, the longer term threat of global warming continues to hang over our heads. Earlier this year — just as the Coronavirus hit and our economy went into a recession — the Trillion Trees Act was introduced.
Representative Bruce Westerman, a pro-logging advocate from Arkansas introduced this act, along with several Republican colleagues. Representative Steve Stivers of Ohio hailed the act as offering a powerful solution to combat our changing climate. And President Trump declared the US will join this initiative. A fundamental claim of this initiative is that a trillion trees is an important part of solving the global climate crisis. In itself, this claim is an acknowledgment by Republicans that there is indeed a global warming problem that humans can effectively address.
Both political parties to some degree acknowledge that global warming is a man-made problem. With abundant apologies to Joyce Kilmer: “I think that I shall never see, a Global Warming Solution as lovely as a tree. So the real question becomes: “how effectively can a trillion trees solve global warming?”
Please listen to this week’s Energy Show as we delve into a few of the scientific and economic issues related to the Trillion Trees Act, including: how trees sequester carbon, how much CO2 will a trillion trees remove, how much land is required, how much will it cost to plant a trillion trees, how long will it take for these trees to capture atmospheric CO2, and to cap it all off — can Congress pass such a bill.
The global warming crisis is a slow-motion train wreck that requires an all hands on deck response. Individuals, businesses and government all need to pull in the same direction to minimize the effect of this crisis. Unfortunately, our federal government continues to focus more on supporting the incumbent fossil fuel industry instead of the clean energy technologies encouraged by the rest of the world.
The good news is that leadership in many state and local governments are stepping up with practical, effective and affordable climate change solutions — and the City of San Jose is clearly a leader when it comes to implementing these solutions. A key component of the City’s efforts is the award-winning Climate Smart San Jose program. This community-wide initiative focuses on reducing pollution and improving the quality of life for San Jose residents. Basically, it’s the city’s plan to align with the targets of the Paris Climate Agreement.
Our guest on this week’s Energy Show is Ken Davies, Director of Climate Smart San Jose. For over ten years Ken has been at the forefront of Silicon Valley’s environmental efforts. There is no doubt in my mind that the work he and his team are doing in San Jose will exceed our local goals for the Paris Climate Agreement.
Please listen up to this week’s Energy Show as Ken discusses some of the key components of Climate Smart San Jose, including electrification rebates, the Climate Smart Challenge, zero net carbon buildings, vehicle electrification, San Jose’s Reach Code, and 100% green electricity.
The Green New Deal is getting a lot more attention as we get into the 2020 Presidential election. The Green New Deal is a set of proposed economic stimulus programs in the United States with a goal of addressing climate change and economic inequality. The green part refers to renewable energy, energy efficiency, agriculture and related strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The new deal part refers to social and economic reforms and public works projects, similar to what was undertaken by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in response to the Great Depression (Civilian Conservation Corp, Civil Works Administration, Social Security Administration, etc.).
Author Thomas Freedman coined the Green New Deal term back in 2007. Taking up where he left off, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Ed Markey released a 14-page resolution for their version of the Green New Deal in February of 2019. Not surprisingly, there are strong political party line differences about the GND. There are even stronger generational differences about the GND. Without mincing words, Millenials see an existential threat to climate change — whereas most Boomers will be dead by then.
OK Boomer, so what should we do? For a youthful perspective, my guest on this week’s show is Kylie Tseng. Kylie is a graduate of NYU and is an activist for the Bay Area Sunrise Movement. Please listen to this week’s Energy Show as Kylie shares a Millennial’s perspective on the Green New Deal, and how everyone can encourage changes that will benefit both our climate and society.
In today’s accelerated and politicized news cycle it is easy to confuse White House pronouncements with the policies that government employees are actually implementing. The U.S. has about two million hard working government employees (disparagingly referred to as the “deep state”) who are dedicated to their jobs and following well-established laws and policies.
There is perhaps no better example of this dedication and progress than the 100,000 people at the Department of Energy (DOE). Although based on recent events I would say EPA employees are in the running for the hardest working and politically least recognized branch of our government. But I digress.
As a result of long established policies and investments, the U.S. is continuing its worldwide leadership in energy and efficiency technology. Although we could obviously be doing a lot more on many dimensions, it is not complete gloom and doom. Once new energy technologies prove they are better and cheaper, no amount of political backsliding can bring back the old ways of doing things. We are no more likely to resort to heating our homes and offices with wood than we are to replace LED bulbs with short-lived, hot and energy-wasting incandescent light bulbs (regardless of the affects they may have on our complexion).
For 2019 Congress authorized $35 billion in funding to the DOE – more than the $30 billion the President recommended. This $35 billion will be spent as follows:
$15b for the National Nuclear Security Administration — basically for weapons and cleanup from past nuclear programs (almost half of the DOE’s budget)
$7.2b for environmental management
$6.6b for pure science
$5b for energy programs – of which $2.5b is for energy efficiency and renewable energy, $1.3b for nuclear energy research, $1b for fossil fuel research and the rest for miscellaneous programs.
The good news is that the DOE is continuing great research into a broad range of renewable energy technologies. The even better news is that there are almost a hundred thousand people hard at work at the DOE striving to make solar, storage and newer technologies better and cheaper – regardless of temporary political headwinds. To learn more about the work being done by the committed people at the DOE, please tune in to this week’s Energy Show.
The 2020 presidential election has been in full swing for months, even though it’s still only 2019. Are things going faster as I get older, or are we in a constant stage of electioneering? Hmm, don’t answer that.
With one notable exception, all of the presidential candidates have positions on climate change – AKA Global Warming. President Trump’s position is basically to deny climate change, mock renewable energy, pull out of the Paris climate accords (signed by every other country in the world except the U.S. … perhaps they know something that we do not), brag about the U.S.’s oil production, and futilely try to resuscitate the coal industry. Sometimes I feel as if I’m watching the Twilight Zone on my parent’s Magnavox black and white TV.
The Green New Deal has been proposed by a number of Democratic members of Congress. This plan is aspirational – the Green part is what we really need to address climate change, but the New Deal part is painfully lacking in specifics and realistic funding mechanisms. Jay Inslee’s “Evergreen Economy for America” is a well thought out plan that has a chance to meet our global warming targets. Joe Biden’s “Plan for a Clean Energy Revolution and Environmental Justice” is a little more political than practical, and may not provide enough funding fast enough.
Listen Up to The Energy Show as we cover the politics of energy and the environment, ranging from the Trump administration’s environmental agenda (some would characterize this as oxymoronic), the Green New Deal, Jay Inslee’s Climate Plan, and what it will take for our next president to get us on the path of limiting global warming to 1.5 C.
This week’s Energy Show is about the Green New Deal. Candidly, I’m all for the “green” parts, and not so enthusiastic about some of the “new deal” parts. The Green New Deal, formally called House Resolution 109 — 14 pages in all — is definitely a conversation starter. I sincerely hope that it gets our country re-focused on clean energy and good paying jobs for the 21st century.
Basically, the Green New Deal is a set of proposed economic stimulus programs in the United States with a goal of addressing climate change and economic inequality. The “Green” part refers to proposals to reduce the impact of climate change. It deals primarily with renewable energy, energy efficiency, and technologies that reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. I’ve been working in the solar and the energy efficiency industries since 1977, so I believe that an “all of the above” approach gives us the best chance to avert the most negative effects of global warming.
For those of us who coasted through U.S. history in high school, the “new deal” part refers to a set of social policies, economic reforms and public works projects. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt pushed through the New Deal in response to the Great Depression. The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), the Civil Works Administration and the Social Security Administration are all legacies of the New Deal — and these policies created jobs for people who needed work. If you go camping in national parks, you may still see log cabins bearing the CCC logo.
Fast forward to 2007 when journalist and author Thomas Friedman coined the term “The Green New Deal.” The concept bounced around and evolved for a dozen years until Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Ed Markey released the Green New Deal resolution on February 7, 2019. Please Listen Up to this week’s Energy Show as we discuss both the energy and socioeconomic objectives of the Green New Deal.
Barry Cinnamon has been blogging about the Solar Industry since 2007.
Barry hosts The Energy Show, a weekly 30 minute talk show that runs every Saturday at 1:30 PM on KDOW Radio AM in San Jose California.
Every week Barry provides practical money-saving tips on ways to reduce your home and business energy consumption.
Barry Cinnamon heads up Cinnamon Energy Systems (a San Jose residential and commercial solar and energy storage contractor) and Spice Solar (suppliers of built-in solar racking technology). After 10,000+ installations at Akeena Solar and Westinghouse Solar, he’s developed a pretty good perspective on the real-world economics of rooftop solar — as well as the best products and services for homeowners, manufacturers and installers. His rooftop tinkering led to the development of integrated racking (released in 2007), AC solar modules (released in 2009), and Spice Solar (the fastest way to install rooftop solar modules).
Subscribe to The Energy Show
Complete the info below to receive The Energy Show in your inbox. (We will never sell your email or share it with 3rd parties.)