Tag Archives: commerce

U.S. Chamber of Commerce joins anti-solar crusade

Throwing shade

U.S. Chamber of Commerce joins anti-solar crusade

By on Jun 15, 2016Share

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the latest conservative group to start spreading anti-solar messages. In an email sent to supporters on Wednesday, the chamber attacks net metering, a policy in place in many states that pays people with solar panels on their roofs for the electricity they feed into the grid. The group also posted a video on YouTube last week making its anti-net metering case. This is fairly new territory for the chamber, according to energy regulation experts.

In its email, the group warns: “While your neighbor is receiving a credit (in the form of a reduced electricity bill) for putting excess energy back on the electricity grid, these outdated net metering policies overlook the costs to use, maintain, and update the grid. So, who is actually paying those costs? You — and everyone else!”

There is actually some truth to this. But the problem with the chamber’s analysis is that it ignores the positive effects of rooftop solar — most importantly, that it reduces the need for dirty, fossil fuel-based energy that causes air pollution and worsens climate change.

Here’s a more fair way to paint the situation: Electric utilities are using outdated technologies that poison our air and destabilize our climate. Who is actually paying for those costs? You — and everyone else!

We reported on Tuesday about the utilities’ trade association, the Edison Electric Institute, feigning concern for consumers who could be ripped off by unscrupulous solar companies. The Chamber of Commerce’s new campaign takes a different approach by heaping blame on solar consumers. But it’s all part of the same big effort by conservative groups and dirty energy companies to kneecap the solar industry, any way they can.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

See original article: 

U.S. Chamber of Commerce joins anti-solar crusade

Posted in alo, Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on U.S. Chamber of Commerce joins anti-solar crusade

Saudi Arabia’s US-Backed Air War in Yemen May Have Committed War Crimes—Again

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Saudi Arabia is yet again adding to its trail of destruction in its war in Yemen, and its tactics are drawing condemnation from the United Nations. The Saudi’s latest actions include firing missiles on civilian buildings in the capital, Sanaa—striking a wedding hall, the Chamber of Commerce, and a center for the blind—as well as dropping US-made cluster bombs on at least two of Sanaa’s residential neighborhoods.

This morning, a spokesman for United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon condemned the latest strikes, and stated that the use of cluster munitions in civilian areas “may amount to a war crime.”

This is by no means the only time the US-backed, Saudi-led coalition has been called out for potentially violating the laws of war in Yemen and using US-made cluster munitions in civilian areas. (See our previous reporting on that here, here, here, and here.) Now, nine months into the conflict against Houthi rebels who ousted the Saudi-backed government of President Abdu Rabu Mansour Hadi last January, nearly 3,000 noncombatants have been killed, the majority of them from Saudi-led airstrikes. Despite increasing concern over civilian deaths, the United States continues to ink arms deals and provide intelligence and logistics support to the Saudi coalition.

Excerpt from: 

Saudi Arabia’s US-Backed Air War in Yemen May Have Committed War Crimes—Again

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Saudi Arabia’s US-Backed Air War in Yemen May Have Committed War Crimes—Again

Obama’s power plant rules could cut your electricity bill

Obama’s power plant rules could cut your electricity bill

By on 24 Jul 2015commentsShare

What will happen to your electric bill after the Obama administration starts limiting CO2 emissions from power plants? It could come down quite a bit, a new report finds — if your state leaders are smart.

Republican lawmakers have claimed that residential electricity bills will rise by up to $200 annually under Obama’s Clean Power Plan, based on a study put out in May 2014 by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. While the study has been widely discredited, opponents of Obama’s plan continue to cite it.

Now, a report by consulting firm Synapse Energy Economics suggests that state compliance with the plan — paired with investment in renewables and energy efficiency initiatives — could actually lead to big reductions in what Americans pay for power. The key? Early action.

Two of the report’s authors lay out the logic in EcoWatch:

By investing in high levels of clean energy and energy efficiency, every state can see significant savings with a total of $40 billion saved nationwide in 2030 … However, consumers will typically see the largest savings in states that build renewable resources early. Under the Clean Power Plan, these first movers will profit by becoming net exporters of electricity to states that are slower to respond. States that keep operating coal plants well into the future will tend to become importers after those plants retire, and energy consumers in those states will miss out on substantial benefits of clean energy and energy efficiency.

According to the report, if two-thirds of consumers participate in energy efficiency programs, electricity bills could be $35 cheaper per month than a “business-as-usual” scenario would predict for 2030. In fact, bills would be cheaper than they were in 2012, write the authors. The firm projects that the $35 savings would leave household electric bills at an average of $91 per month in 2030. (The EPA also expects household electric bills to drop under the plan, but the agency estimates they would be $8 lower per month.)

Keep in mind, though, that Synapse’s $35 figure is averaged across the U.S. as a whole. Since electricity prices already vary widely around the country, and the Clean Power Plan will be implemented differently by different states, the projected savings are subject to some massive variance. North Dakota residents, for example, could save $94 per month if their leaders are aggressive with renewable energy and efficiency.

But so far six governors have said they won’t draw up strategies for implementing the Clean Power Plan — so don’t expect early action from their states. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) wrote an op-ed in March calling for states to defy the Obama administration over the power plant rules.

While the Synapse report wasn’t funded by a group with an obvious financial interest in the outcome (like, say, the corporate-backed Chamber of Commerce), it was supported by a group with a viewpoint: the Energy Foundation, “a partnership of major foundations with a mission to promote the transition to a sustainable energy future.” Which is something we can get behind.

Source:
A Clean Energy Future: Why It Pays to Get There First

, EcoWatch.

Climate rule to bring lower energy bills, report says

, The Hill.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work. A Grist Special Series

Meat: What’s smart, what’s right, what’s next

Get Grist in your inbox

View original:  

Obama’s power plant rules could cut your electricity bill

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, sustainable energy, Uncategorized, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obama’s power plant rules could cut your electricity bill

GOP Obstruction Is Making It Harder To Catch Rapists—Mitch McConnell Would Rather Not Talk About It

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) will not say if he will stop blocking a major spending bill in the Senate that contains funding to help identify and prosecute rapists—or whether he would support a separate bill to break the log jam.

As I reported last week, since June, Senate Republicans have held up a $180 billion appropriations bill that would fund several federal agencies, including the Department of Commerce, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Justice. Part of the funding allotted for the DoJ is supposed to go toward a $41 million grant to help states and localities go after rapists by funding jurisdictions to process backlogs of rape kits, the samples of DNA evidence that are taken after a sexual assault and used to identify assailants. There are over 100,000 untested kits waiting to be processed at crime labs and police departments around the country, partly because states and localities don’t have enough money to test them. The kits can go untested for decades, allowing countless rapists off the hook.

The sweeping spending bill has hit a wall in the Senate because McConnell and other Senate Republicans want Dems to let them add several unrelated amendments to the legislation. The amendment McConnell introduced would make it harder for the EPA to enact new rules on coal-fired power plants. Democrats have complained that GOPers are abusing the amendments process to hold up a bill they don’t like. “Regardless of the outcome of the amendment votes…Republicans have indicated that they are not willing to support the underlying bill,” a Senate staffer told me last week.

On Tuesday, the Louisville, Ky. Courier-Journal asked McConnell if he would withdraw his amendment, which would indicate that he and fellow Republicans would be willing to vote for the underlying bill, including the $41 million in funding to process rape kit backlogs. McConnell dodged the question. His office did not respond when Mother Jones asked the same question this week.

Lawmakers may be able to add the rape kit funding into an temporary spending measure in October. However, neither McConnell’s office nor Republicans on the House and Senate appropriations committees will say whether they would support doing so.

Continue at source – 

GOP Obstruction Is Making It Harder To Catch Rapists—Mitch McConnell Would Rather Not Talk About It

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Safer, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on GOP Obstruction Is Making It Harder To Catch Rapists—Mitch McConnell Would Rather Not Talk About It

Bill Clinton in 1996: GOP Opposed Commerce Department Because It Was Run By “A Black Democrat”

Mother Jones

During a January 1996 staff session, while then-President Bill Clinton and his staff were working on his upcoming State of the Union speech, Clinton let loose in a long rant about a Republican proposal to gut the Commerce Department. One reason for the GOP opposition to the government agency was race, he noted. Republicans in Congress, Clinton said, only began to dislike the Commerce Department after he appointed an African-American to head the department.

“The reason they want to get rid of the Department of Commerce,” Clinton said, “is they are foaming at the mouth that Ron Brown is better than all of those Republican corporate executives who got those cheeky jobs because they gave big money to Republican presidential candidates. And here is this black guy who is a better Secretary of Commerce than anybody since Herbert Hoover, which he was a success at.”

Notes from this meeting were released by the Clinton Library as part of a larger document dump on Friday. Throughout the spring, the library has released batches of internal documents from the Clinton White House.

Clinton’s diatribe immediately followed a discussion of how he should pitch the successful outcomes of the administration’s crime policy, which dovetailed into a larger discussion of Republican opposition to Clinton’s administration. “I mean, they’ve taken a laundry list, and everything we did, if it’s really working, they really want to get rid of it,” Clinton said. That’s when the president began griping about the Republicans targeting the Commerce Department for possible elimination, indicating that race was a factor. “They will get rid of the Department of Commerce so they’ll never have to remember that Ron Brown, a black Democrat, was better than all their big, corporate muckety-mucks that make American jobs. I mean, it’s crazy. It’s unbelievable.”

An unnamed aide asked Clinton if that sentence should go into the State of the Union address. There was laughter in the room. “No,” Clinton responded, “but I mean, they need a rabies shot.”

Clinton appointed Brown, the first African-American to lead the Commerce Department, in 1993. But in April 1996, while Brown was on an official trip in Croatia, Brown’s plane crashed, killing the commerce secretary and 34 others.

Bill Clinton on Republican Opposition to Ron Brown Clinton Library

Credit: 

Bill Clinton in 1996: GOP Opposed Commerce Department Because It Was Run By “A Black Democrat”

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Bill Clinton in 1996: GOP Opposed Commerce Department Because It Was Run By “A Black Democrat”

Watch Bill Nye Explain Climate Change to GOP Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Bill Nye is getting good at this.

Fresh off a mega-debate that embarrassed Young Earth creationists and led to none other than Pat Robertson denouncing their views, Nye appeared on Meet the Press today to debate Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), a global warming “skeptic.”

On the air, Blackburn, who is vice-chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, denied that there is a scientific consensus on climate change and argued that “you don’t make good laws, sustainable laws, when you’re making them on hypotheses, or theories, or unproven sciences.” (There is indeed such a scientific consensus; at one moment, host David Gregory had to correct Blackburn on this point.)

But Nye rebutted her with some simple science lessons that made a lot of sense—noting that going from 320 to 400 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, something Blackburn called “very slight,” is actually a very big change in percentage terms (Nye said 30 percent; it is actually a 25 percent increase). At the same time, Nye also hammered home a compelling message centered on patriotism. “As a guy who grew up in the US,” he said, “I want the US to lead the world in this….The more we mess around with this denial, the less we’re going to get done.”

The key gotcha moment in the debate came when Nye called out Blackburn for failing to lead on the climate issue. “You are our leader,” he said to Blackburn. “We need you to change things, not deny what’s happening.”

“Neither he nor I are a climate scientist,” Blackburn noted during the debate. But as Nye observed, only one of them is a politician, whose job is to use the best information that we have at our disposal to make the world work better.

Originally posted here: 

Watch Bill Nye Explain Climate Change to GOP Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, oven, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Watch Bill Nye Explain Climate Change to GOP Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn

The Media Once Again Refuses to Answer Questions From the Media

Mother Jones

Personally, I’ve never really understood the appeal of Mike Allen’s “Playbook”—or any of the other morning briefing newsletters. Why would reporters deliberately read something whose explicit goal is to make sure that everyone is saying and chasing the same stories? This has never made any sense to me.

That’s not really the topic of this post, though. I just wanted to get it off my chest as a prelude to the latest example of the press going into full stonewall mode whenever they’re the ones a story is about. Today, Erik Wemple reported the results of a deep dive into the contents of Playbook, and it wasn’t pretty: organizations that advertise with Allen, such as the Chamber of Commerce, get an awful lot of friendly mentions that are presented as straight news. Does Allen do this as part of his deal with his advertisers without telling his readers, or is there a more innocent explanation? We’ll never know:

Politico’s leaders didn’t cooperate for this piece. In rejecting a sit-down discussion, Editor-in-Chief John Harris said the premise “is without merit in any shape or form.” Without an interview, it’s impossible to judge Allen’s motivations. For example, does he write nice things about the chamber because he wants more advertisers or because he feels their agenda doesn’t get fair play in other outlets? Did he publish those BP plugs because he thought they were newsworthy or because he’s got a friend at the company?

Of course Harris refused to say anything. It’s standard journalistic practice. It’s only other people who have to answer questions. It’s outrageous to expect news organizations themselves to do the same.

Visit site: 

The Media Once Again Refuses to Answer Questions From the Media

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Media Once Again Refuses to Answer Questions From the Media

Read our response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee

Read our response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee | Fuels America
Close
About Us
Media
rss twitter facebook youtube
The Issue
Why Renewable Fuel Matters
Standing up to the Oil Industry

The Facts
Take Action
Blog

back

Read our response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee

Posted 27 July 2013 in

National

Fuels America News & Stories

Home
The Issue
The Facts
Take Action
Blog
About Us
Media
rss twitter facebook youtube
© 2013 Fuels America
Privacy Policy
Terms of Use

Fuels
View original – 

Read our response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Read our response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee

Response to House E&amp;C Committee White Paper on Energy Policy

back

Response to House E&C Committee White Paper on Energy Policy

Posted 24 June 2013 in

National

The bottom line:

Our nation’s continued reliance on oil ensures that American families and our economy will continue to be burdened by the high and volatile prices of the global oil market and the national security challenges that come with oil dependence, as well as a greenhouse gas intensive transportation fuel supply. The Renewable Fuel Standard is the single-most important policy driving our nation toward oil alternatives.

Read the full letter to Reps. Upton and Waxman of the House Energy & Commerce Committee on the energy policy implications of the Renewable Fuel Standard.

 

Fuels America News & Stories

Fuels
Visit link: 

Response to House E&amp;C Committee White Paper on Energy Policy

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Response to House E&amp;C Committee White Paper on Energy Policy

Yes Men prank the Chamber of Commerce — and get away with it

Yes Men prank the Chamber of Commerce — and get away with it

Youtube

A Chamber of Commerce official interrupts a fake news conference by the Yes Men in 2009.

If you’re going to prank the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, you’d better brace yourself for a long legal battle.

It’s been almost four years since the Yes Men conned reporters into thinking the chamber was finally warming up to the dangers of climate change. The tricksters put up a fake website and sent out a fake press release under the chamber’s name, fooling a number of mainstream news outlets into believing that the business group had reversed course and decided to support climate legislation. The Yes Men also held a fake news conference, which went on for a number of minutes before an actual chamber spokesman barged in and busted it up (video is below).

Laughs were had, feelings were hurt, confusion reigned for the better part of five minutes, and then, of course, the stodgy old men in ties talked to their lawyers and filed the inevitable lawsuit.

On Friday, with court proceedings in the stalled case finally set to get underway, the stodgy old men in ties backed down. From The Wall Street Journal:

The Chamber’s … lawsuit alleged the Yes Men infringed its trademarks, engaged in false advertising and committed cyberpiracy that confused the public about the organization’s policy positions. “The acts are nothing less than commercial identity theft masquerading as social activism,” the lawsuit alleged.

In response, the Yes Men argued the hoax was protected First Amendment speech that criticized the Chamber on a matter of public concern. “The Yes Men deliberately used the Chamber’s logo and service marks to poke fun at it,” the group said in court papers. “Without using the Chamber’s marks, the parody would have lost virtually all of its force and purpose.” …

An updated version of the Chamber’s lawsuit would have been due in court Monday. In dropping the lawsuit, the Chamber cited “the age of the case,” and the fact that it had taken control of the domain name the Yes Men previously used for their fake web site.

Here is a video of the prank that caused all those wasted lawyer hours. Enjoy:

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Read More:

Yes Men prank the Chamber of Commerce — and get away with it

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, organic, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Yes Men prank the Chamber of Commerce — and get away with it