Here are just a few quotes from him that I think are cool:

• I am a Christian, Liberitarian, Environmentalist, Capitalist, lunatic.
• The industrial food system is cracking.
• May your pork be rose colored and your rain barrels be full.
• The measure of an open and free society is how it treats its non-conformists.
• Innovation has to be birthed at a prototype size.

This guy is as Randy Jackson would say – The Bomb.

You should google him – Joel Salatin – and check out many of the things he has done and that he promotes.  You will not be disappointed.

Dealerships are making deals on new cars when you bring your clunker in. Photo from mlive.com and by Katy Batdorff of The Grand Rapids Press

If you haven’t heard of the new government program CARS, then you must really be out of the loop. No worries though, because I am here to give you a little more insight. The Car Allowance Rebate System or CARS is a government funded and dealership operated program where people can take their cars into certain dealerships and get a $3,500 to $4,500 rebate if they trade in their gas guzzlers for a more fuel efficient vehicle.

It is one of the many steps that the government is taking in trying to support a more eco-friendly culture, but they never thought it would be as popular as it has proven. The government put $1 billion into the budget for this program expecting that amount to last for at least a month. What really happened is far more shocking. The money was gone is just seven days. This occurred just this month and now the government is rushing to put $2 billion into the budget so as to keep the program going. Many dealerships had to cancel transactions because they were afraid there would be no more money for customers and the government would cut the program.

The junk yard will be filled with many junkers that dealerships will have to despose of themselves. Photo from japanesenostalgiccar.com.

It hasn’t been all grins and giggles though. This program has caused a lot of hassle for the dealerships. They have more paperwork that they have to fill out and they are responsible for the disposal of all the clunkers. The only aid that the government is giving is the rebates to the people who trade in their cars.

Dealerships have, though, seen a major boost in sales since the program started, which is the whole goal in the first place. This was supposed to be a program that would help to stimulate the transportation market as well as help stimulate people’s involvement in going green. It seems that this has been accomplished.

I am still undecided on whether this program is a benefit or a not. I don’t think this is the best way to make people more energy efficient. Just by giving them money to buy a more fuel efficient car doesn’t mean we are going to help the earth. There are still those junk cars that will need to be dealt with. I only hope that the majority of the parts can be scrapped and recycled. Those are large items that don’t need to be occupying the landfills. I also think that giving more money in the promotion of public transportation and no-fuel methods of transit would be a better way to help the environment. Put some money into the development of better sidewalks and bike paths. Give people free bus passes if they only use public transportation as their means of travel. These are the types of things that will help the environment more than more fuel efficient cars on the roads. What do you think? Tell us your thoughts.

The two biggest debates were over money and the environment. Waxman and Markey let a lot of changes occur to their bill. It could be said that they were more worried about getting the bill passed than they were about keeping the plan that was originally drawn up. There were cold welcomes for the bill from many representatives from the Mid West and surrounding areas where coal and farming are the major industries. There were some amendments made to make these industries happy, like giving farmers a carbon offset credit by not tilling the ground which releases carbon into the atmosphere. If industries want more allowance for their carbon emissions they can just invest in some carbon offsetting project, like planting trees. This is a nice gesture, but there is no way of knowing how much carbon is offsetting from these projects. It should be the same amount that the company is getting in extra allowances, but it doesn’t seem the bill is taking that measure.

Money is a big problem among the Republicans. They see the bill as being something that will hurt the economy rather than build it up. Some feel there is not any concern for the public in this bill. They believe care is only for the environment and the large industries. It is estimated that each household will incur about $175 a year by 2020 because of this bill. Also, the allowances will cost $13 to start with and each year will get higher over time. Some believe that $175 maybe the amount that this bill will cost in taxes, but if industries will have to start paying for allowances it will mean that the cost of consumer goods will go up as well. We may have to pay more in taxes, but we will be paying for these companies allowances as well. The price of goods may not go up very much, but they will, most likely go up. Many Republicans tried to make amendments that would cancel the bill if the amount for electricity went up by certain amounts. All of these amendments were rejected. It seems like this bill has forgotten about the people who pay to keep the government going and will be helping to pay for this bill if it passes Senate.

On the complete other spectrum some environmental groups feel the bill is not doing enough to stop pollution and reduce the effect of climate change. There are some who feel that there were too many amendments that weakened the bill to suite those who started opposed to the bill. The bill is a grand step to reducing pollution and the effects of climate change, but many who have seen this bill feel that India and China are going to need to take up similar standards if we are ever to see major impacts on aiding the environment.

Because of these two very shaky reasons there is speculation as to whether this bill will pass the Senate because of how close the vote was in the House. There is no way to know exactly how this bill is going to cost the public. There also is no way to tell how it will affect the economy. One thing is certain though; if the bill does pass the Senate there is still much work to be done to figure out how to implement the laws. This will not happen overnight. The economy could be better by the time the bill is actually put into effect. Who knows? What are your thoughts on this? What input can you give about this bill? Are there other controversies that you know of and could brief us on? This bill could have a major impact on all of our lives.

There are four titles (or sections) to the bill. I will address each one individually. I will only be able to give you a brief summary because the bill is a thousand page document that I could go into great depth about. That will probably bore most readers, so I’m going to give you what you need to know and leave out all the rest.

Title 1 – Clean Energy

Renewable energy is the key here. The main focus of this title is to ensure that by 2012 six percent of the nation’s electricity is coming from renewable sources (like solar, wind or geothermal) and will rise to twenty five percent in 2025. There is an understanding that fossil fuels will still need to be used to produce some electricity, which leads to promotion of technologies that can capture carbon emissions and funnel them into the ground instead of into the air. This will help keep the coal industry alive. Along with these measures, the title also calls for the mass production of clean fuel vehicles and the government’s aid to any group who plans to implement this sort of production. This title calls for the development and use of smart grids (electricity will be supplied through digital technology which is supposed to be cheaper and cleaner). Finally, it provides federal refunds in order to expand clean energy.

Title 2 – Energy Efficiency

This title covers building, transportation, and industrial efficiency. It calls for all three of these areas to set new standards for their divisions. New buildings will have to meet qualifications set by green standards. I’m assuming it would be something like all new buildings would have to be LEED certified. There is also an option for anyone who lives in a mid seventies or older manufactured home to get a rebate for a new energy-star qualified manufactured home. The transportation sector must develop ways to make vehicles more efficient and make emission requirements stricter. Finally, industries have to find ways to become more energy efficient as well.

Title 3 – Reducing Climate Change Pollution

This is probably the most confusing section of this bill. This section calls for a market-based program that will curb the amount of pollution industries and companies produce. Each company that produces over 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide gas (or any other greenhouse gas) will be required to obtain permits for each ton of gas produced a year. These permits can be looked at almost like money. The companies will be able to borrow against and/or save these allowances for later years. The idea is that each year the government will allow fewer and fewer permits to be distributed to companies. The hope is that this will help curb greenhouse gas emissions.

Title 4 – Transitioning to a Clean Energy Economy

This is the section to ensure everyone we will be able to pull out of the recession with the implementation of this bill (whether or not we actually will is a different matter). It outlines the jobs that this bill will create and the ways the government will “rebate” US companies who are competing against overseas industries who make the same product with non-renewable energy and offer it at a smaller price.
This is just an overview of the draft that was taken to the House of Representatives. I want to know your thoughts on this. Is this going to be good for the environment? What about the economy? What is this going to mean for individuals? Is this a good or bad thing? I would love to hear your thoughts. Next week I will give both sides of the main parties in government.

If you would like to get more information on the Energy Bill follow the links below.

General Summary

Title Summaries (more detailed)

The whole draft

I guess it could be argued we have been in this revolution since the late 60’s early 70’s when hippies were all for saving the environment, but I believe the greatest turning point would be the amount of influence the government is now having on the environment. The House just passed a bill on June 26th called the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES) that is the first of its kind. It is the first lawful step that has ever been taken to stop greenhouse emissions.

The bill will put a price on greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide. This means that many sectors of American industry will have to develop alternative ways of producing their energy. This will include solar and wind power. It also calls to have 15 percent of the nation’s electricity be produced by alternative sources by 2020. This bill will affect just about everyone in the United States. It will force many to rethink technology and force some industries to design and implement completely new ideas. This would include the car industry needing to make more energy efficient vehicles and the housing industry to design LEED certified homes. These are just two examples as to what this bill will bring to America.

What are your thoughts on the bill? Do you see it as a good thing for our economy during the recession, or is this going to be a suppressor? In my next post I will detail the bill more and discuss what it means for Americans more specifically.

My last post discusses this issue and I promised to address the law today. Well, to my surprise, the law has now changed. I read in my local newspaper that effective July 1st, rainwater and snowmelt collection will be permissible. I found the news a little ironic due to the post I had written the day before, but it couldn’t have come at a better time because of the blog I had promised the readers. Sadly, the law is too good to be true.

I did some more research into the topic and found that the law is not as open as it may sound. It only applies to residential buildings and to those people who have a well or a well permit. This means that mostly only rural people are able to collect rain water. It goes on to state that you can only use the water that you have collected for purposes that your permit state. For some this means for only household uses. If that is your case, than you wouldn’t be able to use the water for gardening and possibly even lawn work. Above that, you would not be able to use it for filling any sort of landscape pond or hot tub. It could be used inside the house for drinking and cleaning.

The problem that I see with this law is that not many people have a well and/or well permit. The people who would benefit most from rain water collection live in the suburbs or city and use city water. These are the ones who have to pay for their water and would benefit from using less of it. The other problem with the law is that you can’t use the water for gardening. This is not the safest water for drinking and would need plenty of filtration before being consumed. That could be costly. I believe that the water falls on an individual’s property and they should be able to do with it as they like. I will admit though that is a good step in the right direction. Hopefully, people will try to fight this more; make the government see that water collection is beneficial to people and the environment. One day, everyone in Colorado will be able to collect their water and do as they please with it.

Now, if you are a builder in Colorado, you can make this more capable for individuals. If you are planning on making a subdivision that shares a water source, you can implement a mass collection system in your development that can be shared with the individuals of the subdivision. There is a completely different law for that, but it is a great idea for a good green building. These are just the small steps that we can take to making this a more ecolonomic world.

If you know of any laws in your area that are prohibiting you from doing something ecolonomic please let me know. I would love to research it more and shed light on the topic for other readers.