Hayward, CA to get new power plant with greenhouse gas controls

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget!



On YouTube.com

With BART's deadline to reach a new union contract or face a worker strike extended to July 9th but still coming up on us fast, I took to the streets to learn what the public thinks about this possible event.

What I found was that many claimed they didn't even know of the possibility, but of those who did they all believed it would "severely cripple" transportation service in the Bay Area. I didn't tell those I talked to that the average BART union worker's salary was $115,000, or that the public ridership took in an average of $55,000, as that would be leading the witness. I wanted to learn what was on their minds and you can see that in the video.

But people not being informed about this? That's crazy. But I encountered a frightening number of people who were not informed. It's not that they don't care, but I think they see themselves as powerless to do anything one way or the other, and so stay out of the debate. Many didn't know that BART workers wanted a three percent raise or that BART police couldn't strike for that matter.

This sets the stage for a massive public outrage when a group of people (us) that has been asleep at the wheel finds it can't catch it's BART Train in the morning. Then there will be hell to pay.

Cap & trade or cap & tax? Lobbyists behind scare tactics?

While most Americans support a cap on carbon pollution there’s now a flood of “talking points” and sound-bites circulating about the supposed short-comings and dangers of any new plan. The real threat of cap-and-trade is that it doesn’t favor the ultra-rich energy barons and corporations such as ExxonMobil. Changing to new and cleaner energy sources changes where the money goes - more of it stays in the U.S., in smaller, newer companies; it creates jobs that we desperately need to recover from the fiasco of letting the financial giants “self-regulate.”

Meanwhile, without incentives to change, we'll continue our reckless dependence on energy coming from overseas, from countries that seem to want to dominate us. Even if you ignore environmental impacts, our national security and our leadership role in the world depend on changing to more reliable energy supplies - the system of campaign donations controlling congressional decisions has to change.

It looks like green jobs are real. Recently, two solar energy companies — Hemlock Semiconductor Corp. and Wacker Chemie AG — announced billion-dollar investment plans to build plants near Clarksville and Chattanooga.”

U.S. Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN)

Follow the money:
don't let D.C. insiders off the hook!

In fact, a cap and trade system simply uses pure capitalism to reward efficient, innovative businesses while it effectively penalizes out-moded industries. Used world-wide it plays to American strengths, conveying tremendous economic advantage to industries and countries ready to innovate, and results in domestic job growth. Only somebody making lots of money off the existing rules could possibly deny the benefits of a global cap and trade system.

Many members of Congress benefit from huge campaign donations from energy companies. They’d be happy if we’d all stop paying such close attention to how energy policy intertwines with national security. They smile and want you to “trust” them. No matter if the business is banking or big oil, well-funded special interests don’t want to give up the loopholes they’ve lobbied for over the years.

Sound-bites and talking points don't insure anything but the status quo.

Obama hasn't fixed the lobbying system yet. Urge the President to push for reform of lobbying tactics. Don't let the fact that he's got high personal standards and goals to reform ethics inside the beltway blind you to what still happens in and around the Capitol building (and at the golf course...) Trusting is fine, my friends, but don't forget to verify.

read more | digg story

Ross Mirikarimi - SF Supervisor - "Yes On H"; San Francisco

At a party fundraiser for San Francisco "Yes On H", I sat down with San Francisco Supervisor Ross Mirikarimi to talk about SF Proposition H and how it will benefit San Francisco.

Aaron Peskin - SF Supervisor Says "Yes On H"; Explains Why

"YES ON H" - San Francisco's Quest For Clean Energy November 4th

On November 4th a very important vote is coming to San Francisco. It's called "Yes on H" and if it passes, this is what it will do:

Specifically, the Act directs the City to analyze, identify and pursue strategies that:

Maximize greenhouse reductions from the electricity sector at the minimum cost including the following clean energy mandates: by 2012 ensure at least 107 megawatts; by 2017 ensure 51%; and by 2030 ensure 75%. The SFPUC shall ensure that 100% or the greatest amount technologically feasible or practicable are met through clean energy by 2040. Nuclear is prohibited from being included in the definition of clean energy.

Investigate ways to improve electric service and reduce costs to customers, including through measures such as Community Choice Aggregation.

Establish an Independent Ratepayer Advocate to represent the interests of ratepayers and ensure affordable and reliable service.

Develop a Green Jobs plan providing workforce development for clean energy, construction and operations in PUC jurisdiction. Any PG&E employees who become City employees as a result of this Act will not suffer any reduction of compensation or seniority.

Evaluate the financial and environmental benefits of locally controlled electricity services, including renewable energy and energy efficiency. This includes a cost-benefit analysis of municipalizing the electric system, as well as shorter-term measures such as Community Choice Aggregation.

Seems like a no-brainer, and it is. One problem is that SF Mayor Gavin Newsom's not behind it, and no one seems to have a good reason why, including Mayor Newsom. Not a good idea for someone running for Governor of California.