• On TechRepublic: Why VISTA HATERS will love Windows 7
December 7, 2008 9:47 AM PST

Energy efficiency high on Obama stimulus plan

by Martin LaMonica

President-elect Barack Obama on Saturday said that building energy efficiency is central to his administration's economic recovery plan and outlined the conditions he intends to impose on ailing U.S. automakers.

In his weekly radio address, which is broadcast on YouTube, Obama laid out the planks a government-led spending program meant to revitalize the U.S. economy and create jobs.

"First, we will launch a massive effort to make public buildings more energy-efficient. Our government now pays the highest energy bill in the world. We need to change that. We need to upgrade our federal buildings by replacing old heating systems and installing efficient light bulbs," he said in his radio address.

He also pledged to make federal money available to rebuild roads, upgrade schools to be energy efficient, and expand broadband access to schoolchildren.

The energy plan is expected to include a commitment to upgrade the electricity distribution infrastructure. By equipping the grid with communications network--the essence of smart grid technology--utilities can run the power grid more efficiently and consumers can get information to help lower energy usage.

An aide told the The New York Times that the green collar portion of the stimulus plan could be $100 billion over two years.

Following his radio address, Obama taped an interview which aired on Sunday's edition of Meet the Press.

In response to questions about the plight of U.S. automakers, Obama said that he does not want to allow the financially strapped corporations to collapse because they are the backbone of the manufacturing industry.

However, he said that any federal assistance will come at the price of "significant adjustments from all their stakeholders." He said his advisers are devising ways to keep automakers "feet to the fire," as a bankruptcy court does, to reflect the urgency of change.

"You have seen some progress made incrementally in many of these companies...They are making some investments in the kind of green technologies and new batteries that will let them make plug-in hybrids," Obama said. "What we haven't seen is the sense of urgency and willingness to make tough decisions."

Martin LaMonica is a senior writer for CNET's Green Tech blog. He started at CNET News in 2002, covering IT and Web development. Before that, he was executive editor at IT publication InfoWorld. E-mail Martin.

Recent posts from Green Tech
Fisker's good Karma
Cleantech Group: Green investing sees uptick
Greenpeace guide frowns on HP, still loves Nokia
U.S. government maps solar energy future
Yahoo redesigns data center, ditches carbon offsets
New solar airplane unveiled in Switzerland
How green are you? Ecobot knows...
The greening of tech packaging
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (16 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by kacirooroo December 7, 2008 12:42 PM PST
Our country is in deep economical trouble and it just amazes me how little credit has been given to the high cost of fuel this past year. That one single factor alone has been solely responsible for putting more businesses out of business and more homeowners out of their home than any other factor. The historically high cost of gas affects every single aspect of our economy and society. Most family's went broke filling up at the pump alone. Then added to the burden was the higher cost of every consumer product because the increased production and shipping cost due to the higher fuel was passed on to the consumer. Let me ask you this, have you seen the price of groceries come down since the price of gas came back down. NOOO! Freddie and Fannie are taking most of the blame for homes being lost. Of all the homes I have seen lost in my area of the country S FL and I have seen many and many more in the process, not one was due to an adjustable rate mortgage. It was due to lack of work. When we pay more for gas and products we naturally cut back spending, that is a domino effect, less consumer spending = more jobs lost. We seriously need to get on about the business of becoming energy independent. Jeff Wilson just released a book called The Manhattan Project of 2009 Energy Independence NOW. He outlines all our uses of oil, things I never even considered. Our depletion, which is even scarier, this is a finite source of energy. It will run totally out and not in the too distant future. We have so much available to us, wind and solar which are free, we just need to harness them. And plug in car technology. It would cost the equivalent of 60 cents a gallon to charge an electric car with the average home electric rates. That is insanely cheap. That electricity to charge the car could be generated from wind or solar. A company called Better Place in Palo Alto CA is in the beginning stages of setting up the infrastructures needed to support electric car use in the bay area in CA and now in Hawaii. WE need to take some of these billions and get ourselves out from under our dependence on foreign countries supplying our main source of energy. I encourage you to read this book www.themanhattanprojectof2009.com. I also have quickly become a "Better Place" junkie and applauded their work as they move our country forward and away from our dependence on foreign oil. Check out their web site as well. http://www.betterplace.com/ click on their get involved button on the top right side of the main page. You can sign a petition there. WE have to move this country forward. Use some of that stimulus money to bail us out of our dependence on foreign oil. Create badly needed new green collar jobs and at the same time provide clean , cheap energy. There is no one single factor that effects our economy more than the cost of our main source of energy. This past year is a testimony to that!
Reply to this comment
by William Crow December 7, 2008 8:52 PM PST
Our electrical power generation is 50% coal. At this point Obama looks to cut back on the total number of coal plants. This will reduce the available supply of electricity to charge car batteries. We are in the same situation with nuclear because "environmentalists" for decades have been against it. It takes about a decade, perhaps more, to get a nuclear power plant online. Some say less but do you really want to rush the building of a nuclear power plant?
The basic opposition to coal and decades of foot dragging on nuclear may put us nationally into a situation such as suffered by California about 7 years ago when, after refusing to build power plants for a quarter century, ran into trouble when those supplying power from of state needed it for themselves.
Power requirements peak. Suddenly we'll have brownouts. And the American population doesn't have the fortitude required to get through something in time of need.
Those that have blocked the power companies from expanding base power supplies will be the first to blame the "corporations" for the predicament. Its standard practice.
I'm all for more wind and solar and other means but I find most "alternative power activists" to be the most fickle among us. They were against nuclear for decades then reversed their thinking, now with Obama tepid on nuclear they are not so sure. Which way are the political winds blowing today? - it'll change the stance of the majority in that groups point of view. Other examples available.
True demand for energy grows at a somewhat steady rate with peaks occurring, such as in California. If we can't meet the base demand plus peak at any point you can look for unrest from those most fickle, quite a lerge % of which consider themselves environmental advocates (read - "whiners") who live in the comfort of their homes with energy wasting computers and flat screen TVs and needless electronic devices.
I find them to be a spoiled lot. If you question my point of view...wait and watch.
by Holly Klug December 7, 2008 9:06 PM PST
I think we will see more fuel efficient internal combustion vehicles before electrics. Remember that Lithium batteries cannot be recycled. They are burned today. The supply of lithium stock is not infinite. Nickel mining is not environmentally friendly. Neither is lead, but both nickel and lead can be recycled.

Our best bet would be to electrify the pavement, and use internal combustion engines to move the last mile if we had to go electric. Why use roads at all? Maybe robotic vehicles on rails, but I don't know how we get there from here.
by 42istheanswer December 7, 2008 4:18 PM PST
I can appreciate your comments. Logically you are right on the money. Mark your calendar by these words. 5 years from now, we will still be driving oil based vehicles. Not hybrid. all gas. Same as today. Try to find the source of this my friends and then come back and let's talk about the future.
Reply to this comment
by Joe Real December 7, 2008 7:37 PM PST
I'll make a wager with you. You are claiming all gas vehicles, 5 years from now. I'll wager $5 with you that it will not be all gas, and I've already won, where do I collect the money?
by OStrolphant December 8, 2008 3:31 PM PST
he's right. people do drive hybrids. not all gas. pay up.
by billmosby December 7, 2008 5:12 PM PST
I haven't read what Obama said. To make any progress, I think a hefty fuel tax would be in order, though. Otherwise we'll get all complacent again. Even now, those Hummers are starting to reappear where I live.
Reply to this comment
by Manhattan2 December 7, 2008 7:06 PM PST
The Manhattan 2 Project has been underway for years. We seek real solutions to today and tomorrows problems. Clean Energy or Green energy is not cheap. In many cases we have found only those looking to pay extra money can live green. We are not talking about checking out and living up in the mountains. Although that may be fine for many we are talking about conserving energy and using renewable energy without grossly changing our lifestyle. We have some unique solutions the Manhattan 2 Project will be releasing shortly. We are also not afraid to shine a light on some ill-advised programs that Al Gore, Bill Clinton and others have been pushing and now Barack Obama will likely be talking about. Solar power as it is currently laid out by the solar industry is not working and will never work. We will reveal why shortly. There are answer. We know because in the Manhattan 2 Project we have been asking questions for years.
Reply to this comment
by rakker91 December 7, 2008 8:35 PM PST
Why aren't we building nuclear power plants outside of every major city? Cheap energy is the answer, not stupid energy efficient light bulbs that are a mercury clean up disaster waiting to happen. If you have an energy source that is cheap, plentiful, efficient, and non-environment altering, like nuclear, energy efficiency becomes irrelevant. Plug in cars become feasible, hydrogen power becomes feasible, and our dependence on foreign oil disappears, which stops the funding of terrorists.

There are plenty of resources for power generation that aren't dependent upon others. This isn't a plan, this is stupidity, just like the bailout. You can't get out of debt by borrowing money.

Finally, this will fix the economy??? RIGHT!! Tax cuts will fix the economy. Getting the government OUT of our lives will fix the economy. The people of the world will fix the economy, not the flaming, stupid, inefficient, political governments of the world..
Reply to this comment
by OStrolphant December 8, 2008 3:34 PM PST
I am not as against Nuclear as I am Coal. Nuclear obviously has its benefits but it is by no means "non-environment altering". It consumes huge amounts of water, tainting wildlife in a whole lake or for miles down river of cooling pipes.

Not to mention all the water vapor (an large green house gas) it puts into the atmosphere.
by rakker91 December 7, 2008 8:41 PM PST
Here's another stupid idea--Want to make the government more energy efficient? REDUCE THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT AND CLOSE DOWN THE BUILDINGS! I could do it with a lot less that 100 billion. "You're fired, You're fired, and oh yeah, so's everyone else in the building. Last one out turn off the heat and lights, and water!" Shoot, I could do that for less than a mil and I'd save a whole lot of energy in the process.
Reply to this comment
by William Crow December 7, 2008 9:08 PM PST
And think of the power, maybe 3 times as much, that would be saved by those in the private sector not having to respond and react to needless governmental regulation and requirements. Its win win!
by matthewbulat December 8, 2008 5:48 AM PST
Consider using solar thermal power as a power source. The Liddel coal power thermal plant in NSW Australia also has a solar thermal section. This is an example of how coal and solar thermal can use the same infrastructure. Perhaps a migration process away from coal and use of solar thermal at least during the day peak could be a workable alternative.

Electric cars have about 1/10 the running costs compared to petrol. Electric cars can be charged using off peak power.
I have created a calculator to work out the cost comparison for your situation.
http://www.matthewb.id.au/media/Electric_Vehicle_Calculator.html

As for other energy efficiency measures. Regular houses can save $100s every year if efficiency is put in place. Businesses can save $1000s every year if efficiency is put in place.

I have made calculators for lighting
http://www.matthewb.id.au/media/Light_Energy_Calculator.html

Computing
http://www.matthewb.id.au/media/Computer_Energy_Calculator.html
Some changes can be applied for free.

This information is can be used to work out how much you can save before investing.

Regards
Matthew Bulat
http://www.matthewb.id.au/
Reply to this comment
by Joe Real December 8, 2008 10:16 AM PST
Proposal to President Obama:
Increase the taxes on gasoline so that it will be sold on the average at $4/gallon. We were used to it last summer, and so we should be able to survive that price.

The increased gas prices will keep all of our start-up alternative energy companies alive. The increased tax revenues:
1) Should be used to fund US automakers retool or increased production for the manufacture of Range Extended Plug-in Electric Vehicles or Plug-in electric Vehicles
2) Should be used in a rebate program to current drivers to give up their internal combustion engines in exchange for the electric vehicles, depending on income, so that the electric cars capable of freeway speed and have excellent electric mile range will become affordable to everybody. For example, people living below the poverty line should only pay 25% when buying these electric vehilces and 75% from the rebate program. Those in the median income and below should be subsidized 50%, and so on. This should put more than 1 million electric cars (plug-in, range extended included) in the market.]
3) Continue to fund the alternative energy research R&D
4) Continue to fund research that increases efficiency
5) fund any other sane projects to minimize use of fossil fuels of all kinds.
6) fund any other worthwhile project, such as those proposed by Amory Lovins and others.

This would have dramatic impacts on our importation of oil very quickly and have energy security for future generations. As a side effect, we will have more jobs, be in the leading edge, a better economy, cleaner air, to name a few.
Reply to this comment
by December 10, 2008 7:40 AM PST
JOE REAL....PLEASE GET REAL. THAT IS THE MOST INSANE IDEA EVER. WHAT KIND OF COMMIE, NAZI, DICTATORSHIP NIGHTMARE GOVERNMENT WOULD HAVE TO BE IN PLACE TO DICTATE ALL THAT NONSENSE. GROW UP. BE RESPONSIBLE. THERE ARE HALF A DOZEN BETTER IDEAS JUST IN THIS THREAD. PICK ONE.
by jennluby December 8, 2008 7:27 PM PST
check out the most energy efficient air conditioner in the world:
http://www.coolerado.com
Reply to this comment
(16 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next

Making sense of Windows 7 upgrades

faq The basics and the fine print on Microsoft's options for those eyeing the next operating system from Redmond.
• Full Windows 7 coverage

Road Trip 2009: Big Sky Country

CNET News reporter Daniel Terdiman takes his car full of gadgets to the Rockies and the Great Plains in search of tech, science, nature, and more.
• America's Fortress: Cheyenne Mountain

About Green Tech

Innovation in energy and environmental technologies is long overdue, in business and at home. Green-tech guru Martin LaMonica and other CNET writers serve up fresh clean-tech news and commentary.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Green Tech topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right