<html>
<body>
All-<br><br>
If you have not seen this, it looks like something Greens (and greens)
can support. Our party platform calls for many of the demands listed
below, including an end to use of petroleum and nuclear in our energy
policy, ending tax breaks for oil and nuclear, market support for
advanced technologies, and stronger standards for appliances and new
buildings and an end to coal fired power. He also opposes
underground carbon sequestration, which is in line with the Green energy
groups I am aware of, though not yet part of the platform.<br><br>
This call gives a time table- 2050, for complete withdrawal- which I
consider a pretty quick time line- possibly within the lifetime of some
of us who have worked so hard to get it done. Based on analysis by
Arjun Makhijani, a long-time ally in promoting sane energy policies, some
specifics are put forth that can suggest various political strategies for
accomplishing them.<br><br>
Among the book's recommendations:
<ul>
<li>Enact a physical limit on carbon dioxide emissions (a "hard
cap") for large users of fossil fuels that steadily declines to
zero;
<li>Eliminate all subsidies and tax breaks for fossil fuels, nuclear
power and biofuels from food crops;
<li>Build demonstration energy supply plants including solar thermal,
solar photovoltaic, and carbon dioxide capture in microalgae for liquid
fuel production;
<li>Leverage government purchasing power to create markets for advanced
technologies such as plug-in hybrid vehicles
<li>Ban new coal-fired plants unless they include reliable carbon capture
and storage
<li>Create and enforce stringent efficiency standards for appliances,
transportation and buildings
</ul>I am especially interested to know more about "CO2 capture in
microalgae for liquid fuel production", and am happy to see he
included biofuels from food crops with nuclear and fossil fuels in ending
subsidies to them.<br><br>
I need to research this more, but feel on first blush, it might be worthy
of support at the local and state level to help build enabling
legislation and supportive candidates to get this done.<br><br>
What do people think?<br><br>
Don<br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Subject: Sign the Carbon-Free,
Nuclear-Free statement<br>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:54:43 -0500<br>
From: "Michael Mariotte" <nirsnet@nirs.org><br>
To: <done7777@sbcglobal.net><br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times">January 24, 2008<br>
<br>
Dear Friends:<br>
<br>
Below is a statement of principles to achieve a Carbon Free and Nuclear
Free energy future for the United States, based on Dr. Arjun Makhijani’s
groundbreaking new book </font><i>Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free: A Roadmap
for U.S. Energy Policy</i> (for more information on the book, visit
<a href="http://www.ieer.org/">www.ieer.org</a>). <br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times"> <br>
We are now seeking organizational signatures to this statement in order
to show a groundswell of support for this concept.<br>
<br>
<b>Organizations:</b></font> please sign this statement by sending your
name, title, organization and city/state to NIRS at
<a href="mailto:nirsnet@nirs.org">nirsnet@nirs.org</a>, or just reply to
this message with this information.<br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times"> <br>
<b>Individuals: </b></font>While we hope you will support this statement
and the Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free concept, we are not collecting
individual signatures at this time. Instead, please sign the NIRS
statement on nuclear power and climate (if you haven’t already done so!)
at
<a href="http://www.nirs.org/petition2/index.php">
http://www.nirs.org/petition2/index.php</a> (organizations that haven’t
yet signed this statement are encouraged to do so as well!). And if you
have already signed the statement, please send it to a few of your
friends and colleagues, as well as other e-mail lists, to encourage more
signatures. More than 6,000 of you have signed so farlet’s get to 10,000
this winter and 100,000 by Inauguration Day!<br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times"> <br>
As always, thank you for your help and activism.<br>
<br>
Michael Mariotte<br>
Executive Director<br>
Nuclear Information and Resource Service<br>
<a href="mailto:nirsnet@nirs.org">nirsnet@nirs.org</a><br>
<br>
<div align="center"><b> <br>
STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES <br>
TO ACHIEVE A <br>
CARBON FREE AND NUCLEAR FREE U.S. ENERGY SYSTEM BY 2050 <br>
</b></div>
<br>
</font><font size=2>We the undersigned believe that the United States can
and should implement energy production, distribution, and use policies
that will phase out the use of fossil fuels and nuclear power by the year
2050. A recent book, <i>Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free: A Roadmap for U.S.
Energy Policy</i>,1 provides a detailed analysis that shows that this
goal is technically and economically feasible. The <i>Roadmap </i>lays
out how we can get from a 94 percent reliance on fossil fuels and nuclear
energy (as of 2005) to none by mid-century.2 Oil imports would be
completely eliminated along the way. <br>
<br>
Action to achieve such an energy system as soon as possible is necessary
given the scale of the climate crisis, global conflicts over oil
resources, and the serious risks of nuclear power. Achieving a near total
elimination of CO<sub>2 </sub>emissions in the United States is also
implied by U.S. commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change (UNFCCC) combined with the latest report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC estimates that
global CO<sub>2 </sub>emissions should be reduced by 50 to 85 percent by
2050 relative to 2000 levels to limit temperature increases to less than
2 to 2.4 degrees Celsius, with the former reduction being given only a
small chance of accomplishing the goal. If global emissions are allocated
on a per capita basis, the U.S. would have to reduce CO<sub>2
</sub>emissions by 92 to 96 percent by 2050 to have reasonable confidence
that the temperature goal will be met. The United States has signed and
ratified the UNFCCC, which went into effect in 1994. <br>
<br>
A U.S. goal of zero-CO<sub>2 </sub>emissions would greatly enhance the
likelihood of serious negotiations with China, India, and other
developing countries towards an agreement to reduce global CO<sub>2
</sub>emissions by 50 to 85 percent. It would be the most practical way
to recognize that the United States has contributed disproportionately to
the build up of CO<sub>2 </sub>in the atmosphere. It would show
developing countries by example that economic well-being can be achieved
using ecologically sound approaches. And it would establish U.S.
leadership in an area where it has been sorely lacking. <br>
<br>
A reliable electricity sector that is more secure than the present one
can be created without nuclear power. The promoters of nuclear energy
have used the threat of global warming to rekindle interest, but nuclear
power entails risks of nuclear proliferation, severe accidents, and
terrorist attacks. It would exacerbate the problem of nuclear waste, for
which no reasonable solution is in sight. Overall, it shifts the burden
of radiation and proliferation risks arising from current energy use to
future generations. <br>
<br>
Greatly increased energy efficiency throughout the country will make
possible a more economical and faster transition to a renewable energy
economy. Solar, wind, biofuels, and other renewable energy sources are
ample and capable of supplying the energy requirements of a zero-CO<sub>2
</sub>U.S. economy. But converting food, such as corn, into biofuel is
not a suitable approach, because it is associated with increases in food
prices, poor net energy output, and large greenhouse gas emissions.
Biofuels must be derived from plants that trap solar energy efficiently
and that can be grown on marginal lands. In addition, certain aquatic
plants, including some types of algae, could simultaneously provide fuels
as well as other environmental benefits. <br>
<br>
Subsidies for problematic energy sources, notably fossil fuels, nuclear
power, and food-based biofuels, should be ended. For example, neither
loan guarantees nor production tax credits should be provided to new
nuclear power plants. <br>
<br>
New coal-fired power plants without carbon capture and storage (also
called “sequestration”) should be banned. While there is some experience
with CO<sub>2 </sub>storage, it is not yet a proven technology for
climate protection, which requires isolation of CO<sub>2 </sub>from the
atmosphere for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Storage technology
should preferably be developed and tested using emissions from existing
rather than new sources of CO<sub>2</sub>. Carbon capture and storage
technology may be needed to remove CO<sub>2 </sub>that has already been
emitted to the atmosphere. <br>
<br>
The U.S. government will need to invest tens of billions of dollars per
year in the transition to a carbon-free, nuclear-free economy. The funds
will directly support renewable energy and efficiency projects, assist
state and local governments, and finance worker and community transition.
The money can be raised in a variety of ways, including taxes and the
sale of emissions allowances; it should be dedicated to help achieve the
transition to a renewable energy economy. <br>
<br>
Whatever set of policies is adopted, there should be no free emission
allowances. Such giveaways are inequitable and regressive. There should
be no international offsets or trade in CO<sub>2 </sub>allowances,
especially with countries that have not set stringent limits on CO<sub>2
</sub>emissions. Further, importing biofuels from developing countries
could create land pressures that could harm the poor and may even
increase greenhouse gas emissions directly or indirectly, for instance,
by increasing destruction of tropical forests and peat bogs. U.S.
policies must ensure that the goal of reliably ending CO<sub>2
</sub>emissions by mid-century is translated into laws, regulations, and
intermediate targets that are verifiable and enforceable all along the
way. <br>
<br>
Scientists, including leaders of the IPCC, have been warning that there
is little time left to begin to shift from increasing to decreasing
greenhouse gas emissions, of which CO<sub>2 </sub>emissions are the most
important. The United States has delayed too long, partly using the
argument that China and India and other major emitters also need to
participate in achieving global reductions. We agree that they do; but we
note that U.S. leadership, in both immediate action and long-term
commitments, is a <i>sine qua non </i>for securing serious commitments
from developing countries, which have until recently contributed little
to the problem. <br>
<br>
Finally, the establishment of a goal of achieving a carbon-free and
nuclear-free U.S. energy sector by mid-century can have a transformative
effect on the global <i>political </i>climate, which is a prerequisite
for protecting the planetary <i>physical </i>climate. The ecological,
health, and security benefits of realizing that goal will be immense. We
are committed to establishing that goal, creating policies designed to
achieve the goal, and dedicating the resources to implement those
policies. <br>
___________________________________<br>
<sup>1 </sup><i>Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy
Policy </i>by Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D., is published jointly by RDR Press
and IEER Press, 2007. It can be downloaded free at
<a href="http://www.ieer.org/carbonfree/CarbonFreeNuclearFree.pdf" eudora="autourl">
<u>http://www.ieer.org/carbonfree/CarbonFreeNuclearFree.pdf</a></u>. The
Roadmap is described in Chapter 8. <br>
<sup>2 </sup>Another recent book, <i>Winning Our Energy Independence: An
Energy Insider Shows How</i>, by S. David Freeman (Layton, Utah: Gibbs
Smith, 2007) also advocates a fully renewable, non-nuclear U.S. energy
system. 2 <br>
<br>
<b>Signatories</b> (organizational sign-ons, unless indicated: * =
organization for identification only) <br>
Brent Blackwelder, President, Friends of the Earth <br>
Helen Caldicott, Founding President, Nuclear Policy Research Institute
<br>
S. David Freeman, former Chairman Tennessee Valley Authority*, and
President, Los Angeles Board of Harbor Commissioners* <br>
Alexander Lee, Executive Director, Project Laundry List <br>
Arjun Makhijani, President, Institute for Energy and Environmental
Research <br>
Michael Mariotte, Executive Director, Nuclear Information and Resource
Service<br>
John Miller, Vice-President, Advanced Transportation Systems, Maxwell
Technologies* <br>
Lenny Siegel, Executive Director, Center for Public Environmental
Oversight <br>
Jenice View, Just Transition Alliance 3 <br>
Daphne Wysham, Fellow, and John Cavanagh, Executive Director, Institute
for Policy Studies <br>
Hisham Zerriffi, Ivan Head South/North Chair at the University of British
Columbia<br>
<br>
<br>
</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=2>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
</font><font size=1>Please consider making a tax-deductible contribution
to NIRS. Your support enables us to do the outreach and mobilization
needed to stop new atomic reactors and build a sustainable, carbon-free,
nuclear-free energy future. You can do so safely on our secure website
at:
<a href="https://secure.campagne-online.com/registrant/donate.aspx?EventID=2927&LangPref=en-CA">
https://secure.campagne-online.com/registrant/donate.aspx?EventID=2927&LangPref=en-CA</a>
<br>
</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times"> <br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
</font><font size=1>This is the NIRS E-Mail Alert list. You are on this
list because you signed up on our website, at a NIRS table at a concert,
on a petition, or directly to NIRS. Your name and address are never sold,
rented, or traded with anyone for any reason.<br>
<br>
For address changes or to unsubscribe, just send an e-mail to
nirsnet@nirs.org. If you have friends or colleagues who would like to be
on this list, have them send a note to
nirsnet@nirs.org</font></blockquote>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<br>
Don Eichelberger<br>
DJ Fix Independent Productions<br><br>
Green Uprising Blog<br>
<a href="http://www.greenuprising.blogspot.com/" eudora="autourl">
www.greenuprising.blogspot.com<br><br>
</a>My You Tube<br><br>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctRp5rGJoUc" eudora="autourl">
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctRp5rGJoUc<br>
</a><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iySwwyZfDgE" eudora="autourl">
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iySwwyZfDgE<br>
</a><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r9rK8nPREA" eudora="autourl">
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r9rK8nPREA<br>
</a><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5UbnJ0kUqo" eudora="autourl">
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5UbnJ0kUqo<br>
</a><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SktIYTyC1U" eudora="autourl">
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SktIYTyC1U<br><br>
</a>Donny Fix del.icio.us book marks<br>
<a href="http://del.icio.us/donnyfix" eudora="autourl">
http://del.icio.us/donnyfix<br><br>
</a>The Hegelian/Marxist goal is emancipation. Marx said it best in
1843:<br><br>
"Human emancipation wll only be complete when the real, individual
man (sic) is absorbed into himself the abstract citizen; when as an
individual man, in his every day life, in his work and in his
relationships, he has become a <i>species-being</i> (<b>politically
accountabe to the whole</b>); and when he recognizes and realizes his own
power as <i>social</i> powers, so that he no longer separates this
<i>socia</i>l power from himself as <i>political </i>power."<br>
</body>
</html>