Offering frequent news and analysis from the majestic Evergreen State and beyond, The Cascadia Advocate is the Northwest Progressive Institute's unconventional perspective on world, national, and local politics.

Thursday, January 04, 2007

Bush's Extraordinary Alternative Energy Source - Hot Air

What ever became of switch grass?

As we approach the latest installment of the Bush's State of the Union address this month, a common thread is found in each since 2001 - Bush has reserved a respectable portion of his commentary touting his energy policy:
  • State of the Union 2006: a 22% increase in clean energy research, development of better batteries for hybrid and electric cars, and in pollution-free cars that run on hydrogen, "switch grass" as a biofuel.
  • State of the Union 2005: "Clear Skies"(non) regulation, "strong funding" for hydrogen-fueled cars to clean coal.
  • State of the Union 2004: modernize our electricity system, promote conservation, and make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy (by invading Iraq, no doubt).
  • State of the Union 2003: $1.2 billion in research funding so that America can lead the world in developing clean, hydrogen-powered automobiles.
  • State of the Union 2002: encourage conservation, promote technology, build infrastructure, and act to increase energy production at home so America is less dependent on foreign oil (again, no doubt by invading Iraq).
  • State of the Union 2001: Here's a direct quote - "We can produce more energy at home while protecting our environment, and we must. We can produce more electricity to meet demand, and we must."
In 2000, approximately 52-58% of US oil consumption was from foreign reserves, and today that figure is 68%-73%. While figures are illusory, (some say by design) it's clear that the rate of US dependence on foreign oil has been rising precipitously over the last seven years.

Some of Bush's energy plans were never funded, other announced energy plans were actually cut, and there's ample evidence that some years' energy initiatives were little more than entitlements to big oil.

Consider the $1.2 billion in research funding for hydrogen-powered automobiles from Bush's speech in 2003. Enough time has passed, and the investment was sizable enough that you would think visible, real-life, everyday results should be readily apparent to every one of us today.

Thirty years ago, when Jimmy Carter announced his energy policy, the proliferation of solar panels on the roofs of homes and businesses was immediate, exciting, and impossible to ignore. Yet, an internet search for current developments in hydrogen-based transportation yields little or nothing.

These lost opportunities have a direct impact on us in the Pacific Northwest, as we are both a hungry market for alternative energy products, as well as innovative developers of such technologies, especially if you include our Canadian neighbors to the north (Ballard Power comes to mind).

There is virtually no evidence of any positive results of any of these energy initiatives, and largely much the opposite, but there has been a decided resonance inculcated by the redundant pronouncement of these grand plans each year.

I commonly speak to intelligent, informed citizens who speak of Bush's persistent call for an energy revolution, and even see the conventional press often do much the same, ostensibly as a result of Bush's consistent pattern of rhetoric about the topic. It's an easy prediction that similar meaningless energy commentary will find it's customary place of honor in the 2007 State of the Union as well.

Whatever one might think of John Kerry as successful candidate, many of his pronouncements from the 2004 presidential campaign ring ominously true today.

"No young American solider should fight and die because of our dependence on foreign oil." Kerry also told us Bush "isn't being straight with the American people" and, "just because he (Bush) says it, doesn't mean it's true". There's often little satisfaction in being dead right.

<< Home