Page added on January 4, 2013
The September 2011 bankruptcy of solar manufacturer and stimulus-loan recipient, Solyndra, sparked a national media firestorm and political debate over the role of government in funding emerging clean energy technologies. The issue soon rose to prominence in the presidential campaign with Mitt Romney attacking Barack Obama on the stump and in televised debates over the president’s handling of stimulus funds for clean energy. Yet in the end, Obama won re-election handily and Democrats expanded their numbers in the Senate and House, seemingly giving Democrats the upper hand.
With the new Congress sworn in yesterday, what is in store for energy policy and politics in the 113th Congress?
That rich question will be the topic of a free webinar hosted by TheEnergyCollective.com on Wednesday, January 9th I’ll be moderating the discussion on behalf of TEC and will be joined by Josh Freed, Director the Clean Energy Program at the Democratically-aligned think tank Third Way, Jerry Taylor, a Senior Fellow and energy and environmental policy expert at the conservative Cato Institute, and Bruce Oppenheimer, a Professor of Public Policy and Education and Congressional expert at Vanderbilt University.
We’ll dive into a number of key questions to explore what’s ahead for energy policy in 2013:
Audience participants can join the discussion as well, submitting questions directly via the webinar software or online via a live tweet-chat using the hashtag #TECLive.
5 Comments on "A Look Ahead at Energy Policy and Politics in the 113th Congress"
BillT on Sat, 5th Jan 2013 1:49 am
This will be another years of BAU. Nothing new. Nothing progressive. Nothing important. Nothing has changed, only a few names in some of the seats.
Clean energy? Where? What? That is a fabrication of Wall Street. “Clean energy” is only that energy produced without the help of hydrocarbon fuels in any part of their production, use or disposal. None of the above qualify.
Growing food with sunlight, naturally, and using muscle power, qualify as “clean”. All else requires mining, refining, machining, and trucking on many levels. The total hydrocarbons used are more than you might think. That is why you never see a useful life-study on that area of ‘renewable’ energy. It would disprove the dream that they are clean, and renewable.
LT on Sat, 5th Jan 2013 2:20 am
quote: “Growing food with sunlight, naturally, and using muscle power, qualify as “clean”. ”
>> You’re correct on the first one “sun light”, but incorrect on the second one “muscle power”!
– If men can eat fresh grass like water buffalo or cow, or fresh leaves like elephant, then their muscle power is truly clean.
Men’s muscle power come from food, and very often come from cooked food, not fresh food like fruits. And to cook, men burn fire-wood or hay, or coal or petro oil. Of these fuels, perhaps, fire-wood or hay is less toxic than others.
Bottom line: Only sunlight can qualify as “clean” energy.
Kenjamkov on Sat, 5th Jan 2013 8:10 am
Solar ovens are really easy to build LT.
Beery on Sat, 5th Jan 2013 12:44 pm
Solar ovens cannot be built using clean energy.
BillT on Sun, 6th Jan 2013 2:29 am
Beery, at least you see reality. Even the reflectors in a solar oven came from oil produced energy somewhere in their live cycle. Everything not sun or muscle comes from hydrocarbons.