« Home | John Kerry Reporting For Duty Once Again » | "Studio 60" And the New Attack on Christianity » | My Thoughts on Election 2006 » | Christians and the Welfare State » | Are You a Red or Black Letter Christian? » | Guns and The Amish School Shooting » | One Book Tag » | Friday Funnies: Terry Tate - Office Linebacker » | Alcohol and the SBC: A Call for Peace » | Friday Funnies: Ask A Ninja » 

Tuesday, January 30, 2007 

Obama Not as "Green" as He Would Like You to Think

Future Presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama might not be as "green" as he appears. And I don't mean "inexperienced." Last year Obama came under fire from conservatives for giving a series of speeches on the need to reduce carbon emissions by breaking America's addiction to SUVs, while arriving and departing in a GMC Envoy. When the story broke, Obama's press secretary, Tommy Vietor, issued a statement saying that Obama liked to roll in a Flex-Fuel SUV, which suggested that he was indeed practicing what he preached. Unfortunately for Obama, many clever conservatives did their research and found out that the GMC Envoy does not come equipped with Flex-Fuel technology.

But now, Obama's committment to being Green is being challenged by environmentalists on both sides of the aisles (Washington Post article here). In a Grist article entitled, "Even Stevens?" reporter Amanda Griscom Little descibes the problems environmentalists have with the "Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Promotion Act of 2007" co-sponsored by Obama and Kentucky Senator Jim Bunning. According to the article, "Coal-to-liquid (CTL) technology uses a highly energy-intensive process to convert coal into diesel fuel for cars or jet fuel for airplanes -- an appealing prospect to the coal industry in Obama's home state of Illinois, but not to [environmentalists] and others concerned about global warming." Little goes on to explain the problems with CTL technology:
David Doniger, policy director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's Climate Center, has supported coal gasification as a viable alternative to coal-burning power plants, but explains that CTL is not as promising an alternative to conventional gasoline or biofuels. "Coal-to-liquid is, in the best-case scenario, no worse for the climate than oil-derived gasoline -- and no better," he says. The best-case scenario assumes that CTL producers find a way to capture their carbon emissions. Problem is, none of the current CTL projects actually involve carbon capture. Without that step, the climate impacts of CTL fuel are far worse than those of gasoline. According to an NRDC analysis, a 35-mpg car powered by the CTL fuel that's currently available would generate as much carbon dioxide pollution as a far less efficient 19-mpg car that runs on conventional gasoline.
The Bunning-Obama bill "which would expand tax incentives for CTL and help jumpstart the industry with public-private partnerships, was first introduced by the senators in spring of last year." It appears that for Obama, regional politics trump environmentalism. It will be interesting to see how many of his Democratic collegues will support the bill and undermine the Dems climate control promises. One thing is for sure: Obama's "100 percent approval rating from the League of Conservation Voters for his environmental voting record in the Senate last year" is certain to decrease this time around.

Labels: , , ,

Last year Obama came under fire from conservatives for giving a series of speeches on the need to reduce carbon emissions by breaking America's addiction to SUVs, while arriving and departing in a GMC Envoy.>

I read that some of Obama's relatives have a different story to tell about his family background than appears in his book that he has written also, which sort of reminds me of another president we had that seemed to have difficulty with his stories. That troubles me.

A bill co-sponsored by Jim Bunning should smell like a bad idea to any liberal or conservative who cares about the environment.

Not that it matters to Christians in Kentucky. Bunning will promptly remind us during his next reelection that he opposes abortion and homosexual marriage. He may allow the earth to be stripped bare, but he is still "pro-life."

Sorry, was this supposed to be about Obama or Bunning?

Sean,

You should run against Bunning. I would vote for you, even though you oppose all new forms of progress and put liberal signs in your front yard. Oh, and you put up with infant baptizers. And you have a dog named Shamus that hates me. Still, though, I would vote for you, even though I can't vote in Kentucky.

His name is SEAMUS!


And it must be personal because he loves Kevin.

Let's not talk about that okay? I just finished paying the psychiatrist, and am now putting my trust in Biblical counselors to help me cope with the mental scarring.

D.R. - Seamus' hate is easier to handle than his love. TRUST ME.

Daniel, I can't find your email any more so I wanted to be sure you saw the invitation to go to Michael's blog to discuss the gay issue.

I apparently was unable to make my case effectively to you and you to me, in part because you speak the language of seminary and I don't.

Michael is someone who is fluent in that language and therefore, I'm genuinely interested in what you would make of his arguments. And he, yours.

Would you email me at jmhswbts@gmail.com ?

Thanks,

JMH

Hi,

Nice blog.

http://www.autumnishereatlast.blogspot.com

just fyi since we had words over at big daddy weave, I have addressed your arguments on the just war ideal at my blog.

d.r., I would have emailed this to you, but I couldn't find an address. I disagree with most of what you wrote over at big daddy weave's blog, but you were absolutely correct that I attacked you personally and disparaged your intentions. That was wrong, and I apologize.

Streak

Post a Comment

Links to this post

Create a Link

About me

Paul was not interested merely in the ethical principles of religion or of ethics. On the contrary, he was interested in the redeeming work of Christ and its effect upon us. His primary interest was in Christian doctrine, and Christian doctrine not merely in its presuppositions but at its centre. -- J. Greshem Machen.

Powered by Blogger
and Blogger Templates