Canada's Tar Sands Oil vs. Clean Energy

A solar energy company from California is to be hiring 600 people for 600 jobs in Kansas City.

Sungevity shines on with office build, hiring spree

600 jobs.

Meanwhile, a Canadian tar sands oil company---TransCanada---would be bringing between 35 to 50 total permanent jobs TO THE ENTIRE NATION, if only we'll let them build a pipeline THAT WILL INEVITABLY LEAK AND SPILL THEIR TOXIC TAR SANDS OIL just so they can get this stuff to the Gulf coast so they can get it out to world markets.

And with the solar, "green", sustainable energy, there will never be any inevitable oil spill and environmental nightmare like we can count on with the Keystone XL pipeline.

So tell me how tar sands oil from Canada, for a foreign oil company, crossing our nation and our farmlands and aquifers and lakes and creeks and rivers and streams, threatening all those, so it can go out to world markets from the Gulf, is somehow a good idea and a jobs maker.

How does that make sense?

To anyone?

Three quarters of one trillion dollars, at least, for weapons and killing and attacking other nations--far beyond what any other nation spends, in fact, far beyond what virtually all other nations spend--but we don't take care of the people.

How does anyone think this is sustainable for the nation?

Kansas representative is no. 2 on "most money received from 'Big Oil'"

None other than Kansas' own Representative Mike Pompeo (Republican, Wichita, Ks) is the number two recipient/beneficiary of the most money from "Big Oil." Mr. Pompeo took home $333,156 in the last two years from the oil and gas lobby--more than anyone else but one person. That honor goes to Representative Steven Pearce of New Mexico, also, of course, a Republican. In fact, of the top then beneficiaries on the list, 9 out of the 10 are Republicans. No surprise, that. Nearly needless to say, Mr. Pompeo won't be supporting any "clean" or "green", sustainable fuel sources or technology any time soon, no doubt, not even if it can help the nation get cleaner air, more jobs and free of independence from Middle East oil, nosirree. Links: http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/01/11/402533/oil-dollars-members-of-congress-pushing-keystone-xl-decision/?mobile=nc; http://maplight.org/content/72909

Another economic race between states

There is an article out today about a "Ballot Initiative Would More Than Double Michigan’s Renewable Portfolio Standard" To an extent, I can see how a bit of a race will be taking place among states--if it hasn't already begun--to get more and more renewable energy and for a few reasons. First, it would be to have technology in the forefront of the state's economy. No state can afford to fall behind on cutting-edge technology. Second, it would be to lower energy costs for each state. Third, it likely add the jobs these projects and breakthroughs bring and finally, to have cleaner air. It's already true among nations--at least it is for those who care to take it on. The US needs to do a far better job of this. Link: http://cleantechnica.com/2012/01/15/ballot-initiative-would-more-than-double-michigan’s-renewable-portfolio-standard/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+IM-cleantechnica+%28CleanTechnica%29

That pipeline from Canada to Texas is all but done

When the question of a Keystone XL company's oil pipeline being brought up in the last few months, I thought it was a "suggestion" or request put on the country. And maybe it was. But first, I learned later (recently) that parts of the pipeline have already been built, however far North that is and that, second, the route it was going to take would be examined but that yes, it was going through. Now, today, there is this news: Sinopec, Total pour $4.5 billion into U.S. shale

(Reuters) - China's Sinopec (600028.SS) and France's Total SA (TOTF.PA) made major purchases into the U.S. energy sector on Tuesday, pouring $4.5 billion into deals to buy into booming production from shale rock formations. (link below). So not only is it going through but 2 foreign companies--and one of them our supposed "arch-enemy"--is going to own and run it. If it has an oil spill on it somewhere here in the States, they'll be the ones seeing to its cleanup. This seems like bad news that just keeps getting worse. Links: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/03/us-shale-us-idUSTRE80215S20120103; http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/03/us-athabasca-idUSTRE8020OW20120103

Quote of the day

"In today's deeply interdependent world, war is outdated and illogical. All regions, and all peoples, are interconnected environmentally, economically, and politically. War, oppression or civil strife in one area inevitably affects people in other parts of the world." --The Dalai Lama

Isn't this right?

I mean, seriously, doesn't this describe our situation? The scientists and scientific community have declared that "global warming" or "climate change" or whatever you choose to call it, is real and that it is very likely being inflicted on us by our own actions of pumping so much carbon dioxide into our atmosphere. Some, however, want to deny it--whole political parties, at minimum. So what if the scientists are wrong? Doesn't it make sense to use less and conserve? Of course it does. What part of how we live across this planet seems sustainable? It surely is not.

Learning and unlearning, again and again

PBS showed an archive film clip of the late, famous and renowned economist John Kenneth Galbraith from some time ago, on economies, of course, and on housing bubbles and bursts. What he had to say was interesting.

Mr. Galbraith pointed out that there were virtually always about 20 years apart, to paraphrase him, because we never seem to learn our lessons, permanently, anyway, on housing and costs and prices and markets.

Naturally, the obvious thing to point out is that this is so unfortunate, first, and that you would think we would learn.

Sure it’s true but that’s not where I’m going with this.

Where I want to go is to say that I hope that, with the environment and our air, land and waters, as to polluting and not polluting, hopefully we will know better and permanently learn this stuff, as a people, all over the planet.

With our environment, we can’t keep “learning and unlearning” this stuff.

We have to have clean air and clean soil and clean water all the time, naturally (no pun intended), as a matter of course.

We don’t get “do-overs” on clean air or water or soil.

In order to live, we have to have these things all the time.

And we know this.

Just ask the people in China who are trying to live with filthy air or waterways.

These things are not luxuries. To repeat, we must have them.

So, as a country and as a world, we can’t be going through cycles of caring for our world and then not, for a period of time. Even our own generations, let alone future ones, are far too dependent on all that is around us to make those mistakes.

We have to be good stewards, so to speak, at all times.

It’s as the old saying goes, we don’t inherit our world from our ancestors—we borrow it from our children.