CleanTechnica is the #1 cleantech-focused
website
 in the world. Subscribe today!


Policy & Politics burning_man_future

Published on December 31st, 2009 | by Susan Kraemer

51

Foreign Windpower Giant Iberdrola Taps Saudi Arabia of Wind Because We Can't

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

December 31st, 2009 by
 

Today, a European company put the finishing touches on a wind project in North Dakota which Americans have known for decades is “the Saudi Arabia of Wind.”

[social_buttons]

Spain’s Iberdrola Renovables, the parent company of Iberdrola Renewables Inc that built the project became a giant global wind company in the wake of the Kyoto Accord. The European renewable energy sector grew from the resulting renewable energy legislation in Europe.

The result is that it is European wind companies such as Vestas and Iberdrola, that are now building the wind energy that we need.

Iberdrola Renovables is the largest provider of wind power in the world. It now has over 10 Gigawatts of wind power in operation in 23 countries and 56 GW of projects in the pipeline. It began in 2001 from an initial renewables capacity of little more than 1,000 MW.

That tremendous growth is indicative of what legislation like the Kyoto Accord and the resulting EU carbon markets will do to grow renewable energy companies.

But renewable energy legislation has been filibustered by the Republican Party each time it was brought up, since 1993. Because of these 16 years of Republican refusal to allow movement on renewable energy policies (through the use of the filibuster), America is now falling steadily behind in renewable energy market dominance that might protect us in the much more dangerous future that climate change will create.

The Democratic Senator for North Dakota; Byron Dorgan still supports renewable energy legislation that virtually all the Democrats have supported and tried to pass many times, that would would create a nationwide Renewable Electricity Standard (RES). It would have the same  effect as European renewable energy legislation like Kyoto; building a renewable energy sector in this country, like the Kyoto Accord has done in Europe.

A nationwide renewable energy Standard or Portfolio Standard forces utilities to buy more renewable energy. China just passed a similar measure over the weekend; one with a bit more force; which if it works as well as their One Child policy did – will propel China into the renewable energy power of the 21st century world.

An RES (or a Renewable Portfolio Standard: RPS) would transfer our energy production to renewable energy such as wind and solar, lowering the greenhouse gases that increasingly cause climate catastrophe from California to Australia, dumping heavy precipitation on the Northeast and drying out the Southwest.

“If we want to both protect the environment and protect our country, we can start doing that immediately by passing this energy bill,” Dorgan said in December, in reference to passing it; the sort of sentiment that he has voiced for about a decade. “It contains specific policies that will lower carbon emissions and will provide our country with a more secure energy future.”

Yet in the run-up to finalizing the climate bill on the Senate floor; Republican operatives in outlets such as Politico are selectively quoting Democratic Senators of marginally Democratic states as saying that they don’t think they support the climate bill.

The background they leave out is that, with one or two exceptions; these Senators have voted for renewable energy (and thus: climate) legislation many many times, and are not going to change now. It is the Republican’s routine demand for 60 votes that is stopping all renewable energy legislation, not a few Democrats who want variants on legislative vehicles to achieve the same end.

Because of our lack of that kind of renewable energy-enabling legislation, the US “Saudi Arabia” is being colonized by nations who don’t have to reach an undemocratic 60 votes to overcome a filibuster from an ignorant few. But, we should be grateful. It did bring some jobs to the state. Two hundred and fifty locals were hired to install the turbines and build the 16 mile road and operations building.

One Party is turning this once great and innovative nation into a mere resource to be mined by colonizers. This year, it’s Spain. And soon enough, it will be China.

Image: Flikr user Dave Otsubo

Source: Bismark Tribune

More from Susan Kraemer: Journalists on Twitter

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.

Print Friendly

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


About the Author

writes at CleanTechnica, CSP-Today, PV-Insider , SmartGridUpdate, and GreenProphet. She has also been published at Ecoseed, NRDC OnEarth, MatterNetwork, Celsius, EnergyNow, and Scientific American. As a former serial entrepreneur in product design, Susan brings an innovator's perspective on inventing a carbon-constrained civilization: If necessity is the mother of invention, solving climate change is the mother of all necessities! As a lover of history and sci-fi, she enjoys chronicling the strange future we are creating in these interesting times.    Follow Susan on Twitter @dotcommodity.



  • Andy Olsen

    Your photo is from Burning Man?

  • Andy Olsen

    Your photo is from Burning Man?

  • Andy Olsen

    Your photo is from Burning Man?

  • Dave B

    Noah,

    It doesn’t take a ban to slow the growth of an industry sector when it is as disruptive as renewable energy. Just keep building more coal and gas plants, its easier, right?

    But legislation in Europe made wind energy more attractive to investors, and that caused it to grow faster over there, gradually pushing “we” American companies to the back of the line.

    The same kind of legislation has been opposed in America by one party, so “we” can’t pass it.

  • Dave B

    Noah,

    It doesn’t take a ban to slow the growth of an industry sector when it is as disruptive as renewable energy. Just keep building more coal and gas plants, its easier, right?

    But legislation in Europe made wind energy more attractive to investors, and that caused it to grow faster over there, gradually pushing “we” American companies to the back of the line.

    The same kind of legislation has been opposed in America by one party, so “we” can’t pass it.

  • Dave B

    Noah,

    It doesn’t take a ban to slow the growth of an industry sector when it is as disruptive as renewable energy. Just keep building more coal and gas plants, its easier, right?

    But legislation in Europe made wind energy more attractive to investors, and that caused it to grow faster over there, gradually pushing “we” American companies to the back of the line.

    The same kind of legislation has been opposed in America by one party, so “we” can’t pass it.

  • Dave B

    Noah,

    It doesn’t take a ban to slow the growth of an industry sector when it is as disruptive as renewable energy. Just keep building more coal and gas plants, its easier, right?

    But legislation in Europe made wind energy more attractive to investors, and that caused it to grow faster over there, gradually pushing “we” American companies to the back of the line.

    The same kind of legislation has been opposed in America by one party, so “we” can’t pass it.

  • Noah

    The title says “we” can’t touch it, but in the article there is no mention of why “we” can’t touch it and nothing you linked explains why either. Did they ban US companies from putting wind power there?

  • Noah

    The title says “we” can’t touch it, but in the article there is no mention of why “we” can’t touch it and nothing you linked explains why either. Did they ban US companies from putting wind power there?

  • http://www.PlanetThoughts.org David – green thoughts

    Good article and discussion. I would hope everyone can accept reality, not political positions. But the comments have been fair — I learned that some Republicans have been good (or very good?) about state-level environmental action (and George Bush has a more efficient home than Al Gore).

    That said, I agree fully with Susan, the author, that on the national level and in the media, Republicans have been strongly antagonistic to advancing the benefit of our nation regarding energy. International competition is one aspect the article wisely points out. I will add that the strong media push by pro-fossil forces, including significant distortion of facts or more broadly, ignoring of science, is preventing the American public from speaking with a united voice to help shape our own internal policies.

    Denmark consistently shows as one of the happiest nations in the world. They accepted heavy taxes in 1975 in order to invest in wind and conservation infrastructure, and are now reaping great benefits in international business as well as internal efficiency. It is a shame that this should be seen as a profit issue for a few companies, and as a political issue.

    The economic and environmental analysis adds up to the same thing: we need to move quickly to become experts in developing and implementing renewable energy sources, or the world will leave us behind. Indeed, this should have been done years ago.

  • http://www.PlanetThoughts.org David – green thoughts

    Good article and discussion. I would hope everyone can accept reality, not political positions. But the comments have been fair — I learned that some Republicans have been good (or very good?) about state-level environmental action (and George Bush has a more efficient home than Al Gore).

    That said, I agree fully with Susan, the author, that on the national level and in the media, Republicans have been strongly antagonistic to advancing the benefit of our nation regarding energy. International competition is one aspect the article wisely points out. I will add that the strong media push by pro-fossil forces, including significant distortion of facts or more broadly, ignoring of science, is preventing the American public from speaking with a united voice to help shape our own internal policies.

    Denmark consistently shows as one of the happiest nations in the world. They accepted heavy taxes in 1975 in order to invest in wind and conservation infrastructure, and are now reaping great benefits in international business as well as internal efficiency. It is a shame that this should be seen as a profit issue for a few companies, and as a political issue.

    The economic and environmental analysis adds up to the same thing: we need to move quickly to become experts in developing and implementing renewable energy sources, or the world will leave us behind. Indeed, this should have been done years ago.

  • http://www.PlanetThoughts.org David – green thoughts

    Good article and discussion. I would hope everyone can accept reality, not political positions. But the comments have been fair — I learned that some Republicans have been good (or very good?) about state-level environmental action (and George Bush has a more efficient home than Al Gore).

    That said, I agree fully with Susan, the author, that on the national level and in the media, Republicans have been strongly antagonistic to advancing the benefit of our nation regarding energy. International competition is one aspect the article wisely points out. I will add that the strong media push by pro-fossil forces, including significant distortion of facts or more broadly, ignoring of science, is preventing the American public from speaking with a united voice to help shape our own internal policies.

    Denmark consistently shows as one of the happiest nations in the world. They accepted heavy taxes in 1975 in order to invest in wind and conservation infrastructure, and are now reaping great benefits in international business as well as internal efficiency. It is a shame that this should be seen as a profit issue for a few companies, and as a political issue.

    The economic and environmental analysis adds up to the same thing: we need to move quickly to become experts in developing and implementing renewable energy sources, or the world will leave us behind. Indeed, this should have been done years ago.

  • Susan Kraemer

    Dan, that’s great news to hear of a Republican who wants to encourage renewable energy to impede climate change.

    That is WHY you should get your Senator on board with that, and why I included the reasons we are falling behind.

    Because if you don’t live in Maine, your Republican Senator has voted for continuing and worsening climate change.

    It is upsetting for you to read my account of the Senate Republicans’ history of filibustering to prevent renewable energy bills from passing, but now that you know, you are in a position to do something about changing that so they represent a safe climate future too. I have no doubt that individually Republicans buy life insurance to protect their kids too. There is no rational reason for Senate Republicans to prevent us from doing our best to slow climate change.

    Republicans used to be different – they invented the cap and trade that is working to reduce NOx and SOx emissions through EPA, as I described here:

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cap-and-trade-cut-emissions-50-in-2-2009-12

  • Susan Kraemer

    Dan, that’s great news to hear of a Republican who wants to encourage renewable energy to impede climate change.

    That is WHY you should get your Senator on board with that, and why I included the reasons we are falling behind.

    Because if you don’t live in Maine, your Republican Senator has voted for continuing and worsening climate change.

    It is upsetting for you to read my account of the Senate Republicans’ history of filibustering to prevent renewable energy bills from passing, but now that you know, you are in a position to do something about changing that so they represent a safe climate future too. I have no doubt that individually Republicans buy life insurance to protect their kids too. There is no rational reason for Senate Republicans to prevent us from doing our best to slow climate change.

    Republicans used to be different – they invented the cap and trade that is working to reduce NOx and SOx emissions through EPA, as I described here:

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cap-and-trade-cut-emissions-50-in-2-2009-12

  • Susan Kraemer

    Dan, that’s great news to hear of a Republican who wants to encourage renewable energy to impede climate change.

    That is WHY you should get your Senator on board with that, and why I included the reasons we are falling behind.

    Because if you don’t live in Maine, your Republican Senator has voted for continuing and worsening climate change.

    It is upsetting for you to read my account of the Senate Republicans’ history of filibustering to prevent renewable energy bills from passing, but now that you know, you are in a position to do something about changing that so they represent a safe climate future too. I have no doubt that individually Republicans buy life insurance to protect their kids too. There is no rational reason for Senate Republicans to prevent us from doing our best to slow climate change.

    Republicans used to be different – they invented the cap and trade that is working to reduce NOx and SOx emissions through EPA, as I described here:

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cap-and-trade-cut-emissions-50-in-2-2009-12

  • Susan Kraemer

    Dan, that’s great news to hear of a Republican who wants to encourage renewable energy to impede climate change.

    That is WHY you should get your Senator on board with that, and why I included the reasons we are falling behind.

    Because if you don’t live in Maine, your Republican Senator has voted for continuing and worsening climate change.

    It is upsetting for you to read my account of the Senate Republicans’ history of filibustering to prevent renewable energy bills from passing, but now that you know, you are in a position to do something about changing that so they represent a safe climate future too. I have no doubt that individually Republicans buy life insurance to protect their kids too. There is no rational reason for Senate Republicans to prevent us from doing our best to slow climate change.

    Republicans used to be different – they invented the cap and trade that is working to reduce NOx and SOx emissions through EPA, as I described here:

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cap-and-trade-cut-emissions-50-in-2-2009-12

  • Dan Feldon

    What a disappointment. Rather than unite us together behind the environmental cause, you have forced me to reconsider ever visiting this site again. I am a republican because of their progressive family values and progressive moral stances and progressive views on religion and government rather than the old push by Democrats to socialize for the lazy and the special interests of the minority views and appoint Czars over us (a term that hasn’t been used since USSR days of absolute communism)…. There I created a comment that was just about as stupid as the comments in your story about one party versus the other. The most recent election may have proven that there are many people happy to see a black guy become president, but that there are just as many republicans as there always have been and if we are going to impeded climate change, we are going to NEED ALL OF US, not just a few democrats. I’m a republican, but I am also a dedicated environmentalist.

  • Dan Feldon

    What a disappointment. Rather than unite us together behind the environmental cause, you have forced me to reconsider ever visiting this site again. I am a republican because of their progressive family values and progressive moral stances and progressive views on religion and government rather than the old push by Democrats to socialize for the lazy and the special interests of the minority views and appoint Czars over us (a term that hasn’t been used since USSR days of absolute communism)…. There I created a comment that was just about as stupid as the comments in your story about one party versus the other. The most recent election may have proven that there are many people happy to see a black guy become president, but that there are just as many republicans as there always have been and if we are going to impeded climate change, we are going to NEED ALL OF US, not just a few democrats. I’m a republican, but I am also a dedicated environmentalist.

  • Doug Breden

    i too was disappointed to find a rant rather than a story as i’ve been green for many decades, long before it was cool to be green.

    it’s sad that many envirofanatics don’t realize they’re fanatics.

    i’m sure Ms. Kraemer will do better in the future as she seems reasonable in her responses to several previous posts.

  • Doug Breden

    i too was disappointed to find a rant rather than a story as i’ve been green for many decades, long before it was cool to be green.

    it’s sad that many envirofanatics don’t realize they’re fanatics.

    i’m sure Ms. Kraemer will do better in the future as she seems reasonable in her responses to several previous posts.

  • Chris V

    The Democrats should pull the nuclear option and kill the filibuster. As progressives who supposedly like change, there’s nothing better for providing change.

  • Chris V

    The Democrats should pull the nuclear option and kill the filibuster. As progressives who supposedly like change, there’s nothing better for providing change.

  • Susan Kraemer

    Sam, yes – I agree that at the state level, occasionally Republicans do great work promoting renewable energy,(like they did in Texas) with your great RPS.

    Also, here in CA we could not ask for better action for the “Future Party” than from our Republican Governor Scwarzennegger, who also understands the science.

    But national policy like Texas and CA AB32 is what is needed to compete with other “united states” like the EU, China and Russia. If we devolve into little nation-states of Texas etc, we will be weaker than Europe and China – too weak to make it through the huge transition needed to the new renewable energy – that the rest of the world will make, with us or without us.

  • Susan Kraemer

    Sam, yes – I agree that at the state level, occasionally Republicans do great work promoting renewable energy,(like they did in Texas) with your great RPS.

    Also, here in CA we could not ask for better action for the “Future Party” than from our Republican Governor Scwarzennegger, who also understands the science.

    But national policy like Texas and CA AB32 is what is needed to compete with other “united states” like the EU, China and Russia. If we devolve into little nation-states of Texas etc, we will be weaker than Europe and China – too weak to make it through the huge transition needed to the new renewable energy – that the rest of the world will make, with us or without us.

  • Susan Kraemer

    You are right JJ. That one wind project Cape Wind was blocked by a Democrat. However, Kennedy voted for all 50 renewable energy/climate friendly votes in the Senate since the Al Gore BTU tax on fossil fuels.

    The consistent anti-renewable pro fossil energy stance by Republicans is quite different. It is backed by consistent filibusters and anti-renewable votes that affect the entire nation, not just one project in one state.

    The two exceptions are Republicans Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, which has excellent RPS state legislation that has given Maine 55% renewable energy power. They always vote correctly with the “Future Party” for a future.

  • Susan Kraemer

    You are right JJ. That one wind project Cape Wind was blocked by a Democrat. However, Kennedy voted for all 50 renewable energy/climate friendly votes in the Senate since the Al Gore BTU tax on fossil fuels.

    The consistent anti-renewable pro fossil energy stance by Republicans is quite different. It is backed by consistent filibusters and anti-renewable votes that affect the entire nation, not just one project in one state.

    The two exceptions are Republicans Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, which has excellent RPS state legislation that has given Maine 55% renewable energy power. They always vote correctly with the “Future Party” for a future.

  • Susan Kraemer

    @McDad: I sympathise. I too wish just technology issues need to be solved (because that is easy) and I normally cover the technology side of renewable energy. I wish.

    But, to be honest, technology is not the issue that needs to be addressed in bringing more wind power (or more solar power) to the USA. Increasingly it is clear to me that the issue to overcome is not technology but technology prevention.

    Truly, that prevention HAS BEEN by Republicans. You can always click on the links to what you call the “wild accusations”. It is crucial that we overcome that, and that means writers have to bring it up.

  • Susan Kraemer

    @McDad: I sympathise. I too wish just technology issues need to be solved (because that is easy) and I normally cover the technology side of renewable energy. I wish.

    But, to be honest, technology is not the issue that needs to be addressed in bringing more wind power (or more solar power) to the USA. Increasingly it is clear to me that the issue to overcome is not technology but technology prevention.

    Truly, that prevention HAS BEEN by Republicans. You can always click on the links to what you call the “wild accusations”. It is crucial that we overcome that, and that means writers have to bring it up.

  • Susan Kraemer

    @McDad: I sympathise. I too wish just technology issues need to be solved (because that is easy) and I normally cover the technology side of renewable energy. I wish.

    But, to be honest, technology is not the issue that needs to be addressed in bringing more wind power (or more solar power) to the USA. Increasingly it is clear to me that the issue to overcome is not technology but technology prevention.

    Truly, that prevention HAS BEEN by Republicans. You can always click on the links to what you call the “wild accusations”. It is crucial that we overcome that, and that means writers have to bring it up.

  • Bruce B

    I agree with the author. The problem is not technology, but technology prevention:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jurriaan-kamp/there-is-plenty-renewable_b_397237.html

  • Bruce B

    I agree with the author. The problem is not technology, but technology prevention:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jurriaan-kamp/there-is-plenty-renewable_b_397237.html

  • Sam

    While it is easy to blame the lack a national renewable energy strategy on Republicans, these same Republicans go back to their home states and support renewable energy on a state level while Democrats like Ted Kennedy do the opposite. Heck right here in Texas Republicans have passed three Renewable Energy Standards and the Texas Public Utilities Commission is spending 5 billion dollars on transmission lines for wind power. Wanting a fiscally responsible and limited federal government is not a crime when action on a local and state level continues to be promoted.

  • Sam

    While it is easy to blame the lack a national renewable energy strategy on Republicans, these same Republicans go back to their home states and support renewable energy on a state level while Democrats like Ted Kennedy do the opposite. Heck right here in Texas Republicans have passed three Renewable Energy Standards and the Texas Public Utilities Commission is spending 5 billion dollars on transmission lines for wind power. Wanting a fiscally responsible and limited federal government is not a crime when action on a local and state level continues to be promoted.

  • Robert

    “Now European wind companies are the only ones capable of building the wind energy that we need.”

    Quite true but equating this fact with the latest “feel-good energy bill” is pure fiction created to push an unrelated agenda.

    China will surely walk all over the US in the coming years as long as the “what’s mine is mine & what’s yours is mine” government attitude towards US business continues to cripple the only entities capable of putting this country back on top.

    A foreign company can realize the project because of an economic incentive to grow (for the benefit of shareholders and employees), & not the punishment for success, (to make up for the 50% of US “workers” who neither pay taxes nor contribute much if anything) foisted on US companies.

    Ireland understands it all too well & Spain is right behind them in figuring out that government is the problem and business is the solution.

    Even the Russians figured out that “… according to his abilities & … according to his needs” (now known as “spread the wealth”) is just a chant of the lazy & ignorant.

  • Robert

    “Now European wind companies are the only ones capable of building the wind energy that we need.”

    Quite true but equating this fact with the latest “feel-good energy bill” is pure fiction created to push an unrelated agenda.

    China will surely walk all over the US in the coming years as long as the “what’s mine is mine & what’s yours is mine” government attitude towards US business continues to cripple the only entities capable of putting this country back on top.

    A foreign company can realize the project because of an economic incentive to grow (for the benefit of shareholders and employees), & not the punishment for success, (to make up for the 50% of US “workers” who neither pay taxes nor contribute much if anything) foisted on US companies.

    Ireland understands it all too well & Spain is right behind them in figuring out that government is the problem and business is the solution.

    Even the Russians figured out that “… according to his abilities & … according to his needs” (now known as “spread the wealth”) is just a chant of the lazy & ignorant.

  • O

    What Obama said:

    “[A]s somebody who served in the Senate, who values the traditions of the Senate, who thinks that institution has been the world’s greatest deliberative body, to see the filibuster rule, which imposes a 60-vote supermajority on legislation – to see that invoked on every single piece of legislation, during the course of this year, is unheard of,” says President Obama in a yet-to-air interview with PBS.

    I mean, if you look historically back in the ’50s, the ’60s, the ’70s, the ’80s – even when there was sharp political disagreements, when the Democrats were in control for example and Ronald Reagan was president – you didn’t see even routine items subject to the 60-vote rule.

  • O

    What Obama said:

    “[A]s somebody who served in the Senate, who values the traditions of the Senate, who thinks that institution has been the world’s greatest deliberative body, to see the filibuster rule, which imposes a 60-vote supermajority on legislation – to see that invoked on every single piece of legislation, during the course of this year, is unheard of,” says President Obama in a yet-to-air interview with PBS.

    I mean, if you look historically back in the ’50s, the ’60s, the ’70s, the ’80s – even when there was sharp political disagreements, when the Democrats were in control for example and Ronald Reagan was president – you didn’t see even routine items subject to the 60-vote rule.

  • O

    What Obama said:

    “[A]s somebody who served in the Senate, who values the traditions of the Senate, who thinks that institution has been the world’s greatest deliberative body, to see the filibuster rule, which imposes a 60-vote supermajority on legislation – to see that invoked on every single piece of legislation, during the course of this year, is unheard of,” says President Obama in a yet-to-air interview with PBS.

    I mean, if you look historically back in the ’50s, the ’60s, the ’70s, the ’80s – even when there was sharp political disagreements, when the Democrats were in control for example and Ronald Reagan was president – you didn’t see even routine items subject to the 60-vote rule.

  • JJ

    Well in my state of Mass we have the cape wind project which was resisted by that king democrat Ted Kennedy till he died. Still don’t know when that goes forward.

    Yes usually we expect republicans to block renewables, but obviously some democrats will too if it blocks their nice view.

  • JJ

    Well in my state of Mass we have the cape wind project which was resisted by that king democrat Ted Kennedy till he died. Still don’t know when that goes forward.

    Yes usually we expect republicans to block renewables, but obviously some democrats will too if it blocks their nice view.

  • Michael Scott

    Please don’t push your religious views on the rest of us.

  • Michael Scott

    Please don’t push your religious views on the rest of us.

  • Michael Scott

    Please don’t push your religious views on the rest of us.

  • Michael Scott

    Please don’t push your religious views on the rest of us.

  • NcDad

    Wow. I thought I was going to get an article about the building of this wind project — possibly issues that they had to address, the technology used, etc.

    Instead, I get an article that would be more appropriate on the DailyKOS (or any other Republican bashing site).

    Next time you decide to bash conservatives, at least include references for your wild accusations.

  • NcDad

    Wow. I thought I was going to get an article about the building of this wind project — possibly issues that they had to address, the technology used, etc.

    Instead, I get an article that would be more appropriate on the DailyKOS (or any other Republican bashing site).

    Next time you decide to bash conservatives, at least include references for your wild accusations.

  • NcDad

    Wow. I thought I was going to get an article about the building of this wind project — possibly issues that they had to address, the technology used, etc.

    Instead, I get an article that would be more appropriate on the DailyKOS (or any other Republican bashing site).

    Next time you decide to bash conservatives, at least include references for your wild accusations.

  • NcDad

    Wow. I thought I was going to get an article about the building of this wind project — possibly issues that they had to address, the technology used, etc.

    Instead, I get an article that would be more appropriate on the DailyKOS (or any other Republican bashing site).

    Next time you decide to bash conservatives, at least include references for your wild accusations.

  • Susan Kraemer

    Sam, yes – I agree that at the state level, occasionally Republicans do great work promoting renewable energy,(like they did in Texas) with your great RPS.

    Also, here in CA we could not ask for better action for the “Future Party” than from our Republican Governor Scwarzennegger, who also understands the science.

    But national policy like Texas and CA AB32 is what is needed to compete with other “united states” like the EU, China and Russia. If we devolve into little nation-states of Texas etc, we will be weaker than Europe and China – too weak to make it through the huge transition needed to the new renewable energy – that the rest of the world will make, with us or without us.

  • Susan Kraemer

    You are right JJ. That one wind project Cape Wind was blocked by a Democrat. However, Kennedy voted for all 50 renewable energy/climate friendly votes in the Senate since the Al Gore BTU tax on fossil fuels.

    The consistent anti-renewable pro fossil energy stance by Republicans is quite different. It is backed by consistent filibusters and anti-renewable votes that affect the entire nation, not just one project in one state.

    The two exceptions are Republicans Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, which has excellent RPS state legislation that has given Maine 55% renewable energy power. They always vote correctly with the “Future Party” for a future.

  • Susan Kraemer

    @McDad: I sympathise. I too wish just technology issues need to be solved (because that is easy) and I normally cover the technology side of renewable energy. I wish.

    But, to be honest, technology is not the issue that needs to be addressed in bringing more wind power (or more solar power) to the USA. Increasingly it is clear to me that the issue to overcome is not technology but technology prevention.

    Truly, that prevention HAS BEEN by Republicans. You can always click on the links to what you call the “wild accusations”. It is crucial that we overcome that, and that means writers have to bring it up.

Back to Top ↑