The timing couldn't be more auspicious. As Devilstower has already
diaried, Democratic majorities in Congress provide an opportunity to establish a comprehensive plan for energy security, job growth and national action to address global climate change. The dailyKos community has the chance to use its clout, knowledge and energy to help lead the country towards this promising future, using Energize America as its platform.
Below are some general thoughts and questions on the plan, as well as specifics for some of the 20 acts proposed within.
First, I wanted to frame these comments and questions within my understanding of what the writers feel are the next steps for bringing Energize America to life. In no particular order, those are to:
*Further improve the plan, through a new public reading.
*Prepare a better financial model of the costs and benefits of the plan. Bits and pieces have been done already, but no comprehensive model has been done.
*Get the plan into public-friendly and media-friendly formats (bumper stickers, the "elevator pitch', the one page PR version, etc...). Some of these exist already, but can probably be improved, especially on the looks side.
*Get the plan to media and pundits.
*Get the plan to politicians, and show them that there is a real force behind it.
*Get in touch with other organizations on the same front to share efforts.
These comments and questions are really only an attempt to address the first bullet point. Engaging more actively in the other aspects of furthering Energize America is high on our list of potential strategies for Climate Changers, but not something we've determined as of yet.
Two things I'd like to stress before jumping in:
1. I am a complete and total layman in this regard, so take my comments with a grain of salt.
2. I was not involved in the process of developing the Energize America plan and, frankly, don't have the time to read through all of the diaries and associated comments associated with its development. Therefore, a lot of my questions may have already been answered. For that, I apologize.
So now, without further adieu:
General/Meta Questions
*What other energy/climate change plans have been developed that are currently being pitched to lawmakers? Which plans/proposals have the best shot of winning Democratic favor? What differentiates Energize America from those?
*What connections have been formed with other groups promoting policy? What opportunities exist for working together with other groups on specific proposals or general, comprehensive plans?
*What consideration has been given to the strategy of pushing each of the 20 proposed Acts individually or in smaller packages, rather than as a whole? I wonder if this would be particularly worth considering with regard to forming alliances with other groups and/or ensuring that time-sensitive measures or low-hanging fruit are fast-tracked.
*What existing framework(s) does Energize America adopt in its attempt to reduce greenhouse gas levels? For example, Gore appears to have adopted the Princeton Carbon Mitigation Initiative's 15 Stabilization Wedges. It appears that the Rocky Mountain Institute has been a source of data and ideas for Energize America. Has anyone involved with Energize America contacted either of these institutions to get their support/feedback?
*What reduction targets does Energize America aspire to achieve? Pacala and Socolow set a target of 50-70% reduction by 2050. The Stern Review appears to set a higher target for the developed world of 80%.
*What is Energize America's position on instituting a carbon tax? Specifically, what is the take on Gore's proposal to eliminate payroll taxes and institute a carbon tax instead?
*It appears that Energize America does not directly address GHG emissions caused by waste, agriculture or land use. Is this only because Energize America has limited itself to energy policy or are there other reasons?
*Energize America expresses concern over the use of ethanol as the prime biofuel agent. How does the plan specifically address the promotion of alternatives to ethanol?
*What is Energize America's position on investing in hydrogen technology, specifically that of stationary hydrogen cells in buildings?
*There appear to be a few different ways that low-interest loans have been proposed (specifically, transportation and homes). Has there been thought put to creating a umbrella program that provides consumers with low-interest loans for a variety of energy-efficient activities?
*Suggestion: Set up some sort of governance and reporting structure for Energize America. Appoint dKos specialists/champions to flesh out/further specific areas of focus or Acts. Add additional positions for online campaign, marketing, partnership, and advocacy specialists. Form a steering committee. Establish regular communication processes, including quarterly/monthly steering committee meetings. I think this would go a long way to bringing Energize America to life, with or without having any dedicated staff time.
Questions/Comments Regarding Specific Acts
Act I, Passenger Vehicle Fuel Efficiency Act
*What is Energize America's position on the Vehicle and Fuel Choices for American Security Act? How does this act complement/differ?
*How would the low-interest loan program work to foster fuel efficient car ownership amongst lower-income populations? Would this be privatized? Also see comment above about tying this program to other loans.
*Random idea: Extend the feebate system to used cars, as well. The window for completely cycling out existing -30mpg cars would be wider, however, it may engage more lower-income Americans while still retiring the oldest and most polluting automobiles.
Act II, Transportation Industry Efficiency Act
*I love the idea of engaging NASA to develop technologies for air transportation.
*What about incorporating a provision for mandating that all new and existing trucks be retrofitted with an auxiliary power unit, as Wal-Mart is doing with the help of RMI?
Act III, Fleets Conversion Act
*I'm concerned about the energy and waste produced by generating a whole new fleet of buses. Is there any possibility of retrofitting existing vehicles to improve fuel efficiency and/or lower GHG emissions?
*Why would Act III only cost $150m/yr?
Act IV, Community-Based Energy Investment Act
*With regard to the provision that the federal government would establish a program within the Department of Energy to help local/state governments establish bond programs: Is there a precedent for this, in terms of the federal government's role? What about a granting program instead to NGOs to work locally and/or regionally to establish bond programs?
*I think the matching funds are key to making this work.
Act V, Passenger Rail Restoration Act
*Why would the new rail lines be entirely privatized?
*Why is there no government funding attached to this project?
*How would required eminent domain and necessary retrofitting take place if it was entirely a private venture?
Act VI, Clean Coal Generation Act
*Without stirring up a previous debate, is there consensus that investing in clean coal is the best approach?
*What about CCS (Carbon Capture and Sequestration) requirements?
*Why set 2020 as the deadline for compliance. Since coal is such a huge source of GHG emissions/pollution, why not be more aggressive in terms of a timeline for compliance?
*What about calling for an immediate halt to planned production of new pre-clean coal technology plants?
*Personally, I hate the term "clean coal." I think it's a dangerous misnomer.
Act VII, Wind Energy Production Tax Credit Act
*Have you considered placing immediate focus on extending the PTC (as well as other time-sensitive actions), rather than including it in the broader Energize America plan? Perhaps going after immediate, low-hanging fruit like this would allow Energize America and the dKos community an opportunity to get a success under their belts and form successful partnerships with other groups and/or lawmakers.
Act VIII, 20 Million Solar Roofs Act
*See my question above, related to wind energy production, with regard to extending the current solar energy tax credit, which is set to expire in 2007. I think the same question about strategy applies to this, as well.
Act IX, Renewable Portfolio Standards Act
*My immediate impression is that the requirement for utilities to generate 15% of their electricity from renewables by 2020 seems very low. Is there a reason why this requirement is not more ambitious?
Act X, Federal net Metering Act Act
*I think this is a fantastic idea.
Act XI, State-Based Renewable Energy Demonstration Act
*How does this Act fit with other Acts proposed in Energize America? Perhaps this Act could be paired somehow with Act IV.
*The matching funds provision is great, however, I wonder if the $100M cap is too low.
Act XII, New Energy Technology Demonstration Act
*With regard to nuclear: Like "clean coal," is there consensus about investing in nuclear technology? This seems like a huge political hurdle and I wonder if it wouldn't be more strategic to separate it from some of the other Acts in order to avoid the whole plan sinking.
*Because of the political hurdles, I have a hard time seeing a groundbreaking taking place by 1/1/2009.
*How long would the demonstration project take?
*Could enough new nuclear plants be put into play soon enough to make a dent in our urgent need for GHG emission reductions? The Scientific American article in the September 2006 edition, "The Nuclear Option," states that "A capital investment of $2 trillion over several decades is called for" in order for nuclear to make a significant contribution.
*With regard to coal liquefaction: Please see comments above about a freeze on construction of new, non CCS plants.
Act XIII, Sustainable Energy Economic Prosperity Act
*First off, I like this idea.
*I'm not clear on how the Sustainable Development Agency (SDA) would work on policy areas like education, health and housing under the auspices of the Department of Energy. Is there a deeper concept of what this agency would do and how it would be effective?
Act XIV, Carbon Reduction Act
*30% reductions by 2020 and 50% by 2040 seems low if we're to reach 70-80% reductions by 2050.
*What is the total cap on tradable certificates?
*What about instituting an across-the-board carbon tax?
Act XVI, National Energy Efficiency & Conservation Act
*Idea: Tie educational programs related to conservation, energy-efficiency and climate change to standards and federal funding
*Would the federal government run the proposed "Energy SMART" centers or contract them out to NGOs?
*I would consider separating out the provision that all new federal/state/local buildings constructed with federal assistance meet LEED standards and perhaps create a separate Act which incorporated all provisions related to government energy consumption. This Act would detail provisions for buildings as well as transportation (see Act III, Fleets) and set a target of 70% reductions by 2050. I would also consider placing specific provisions for members of Congress.
*Also, see my previous comments about packaging Acts together around specific areas (conservation; energy-efficiency; power generation; transportation, etc.)
*Idea for Energy SMART centers: Provide federal funding for the development of Energy SMART centers in partnership with NGOs like Enterprise Fund to invest in developing entrepreneurs. A possible path is a franchise model that provides vocational training to individuals to start their own consulting businesses, along with low-interests loans and the ability to collectively negotiate discounted purchase of energy-efficient products (the savings from which could be passed along to the consumer).
Act XVII, Home Efficiency Act
*I think there is an opportunity to be more ambitious than simply providing two CFLs to each household.
*See Gore's proposed a Carbon Neutral Mortgage Association.
Act XVIII, Demand Side Management Act
*Quick suggestion: have audits be conducted by Energy SMART centers.
*I would propose to incorporate a requirement that all utilities provide customers with detailed, real-time information about their energy/gas use, the portfolio of energy sources to which they individually have subscribed, and the GHG emissions caused by their energy use. Some thought could be put into the most effective way of communicating this information to get consumers to conserve.
Act XIX, Telecommuter Assistance Act
*Promoting telecommuting is great but I think this would be an enforcement nightmare.
Whew... that's it so far. I hope I didn't just babble incoherently and hope this helps further the Energize America plan.
Permalink | 13 comments