Suggestions for Action
What do you think is the most effective way to turn this idea into real policy?
Add your suggestions here for how you think we should run an advocacy campaign to
advance the idea – including the overall strategy, messaging, targets, and tactics.
Approach this from the standpoint that people reading this forum already agree
with you on the importance of the issue, and are asking "What can we do to help
make this a reality?"
You can also comment on and rank the suggestions submitted by others.
Write a Suggestion
If you would like to leave a suggestion please sign in, or create an account
Endorsements for this Idea
Nonprofits and bloggers can formally endorse an idea they support. 12 current endorsements:
- The Unknown Candidate
- Backstage w/ Supak
- EcoLabs
- Focus the Nation
- Amoration
- Green Dads
- From the Sole
- Sustainable Food
- WebEcoist - Offbeat Environmentalism
- Why Not?
- 1Sky
- evoasis
The key to a green grid is putting the whole nation on Solar, Wind, and Nuclear Power. Nuclear energy is the one of the most powerful sources of energy, and contrary to popular belief, is very safe, and completely clean. Nuclear energy emits just as much greenhouse gases a wind and solar: none. Although wind and solar are completely renewable, and totally all-natural, the amount of space required to power the nation is does not exist. Also, it's not always windy, and it's not always sunny. We need a back up. That's where nuclear comes in. Not only is nuclear green, it's super powerful. The amount of energy from a penny-sized amount of uranium is equivalent to the amount created by 1 ton of coal. If we can all get electric cars, or at least hybrids, and have the grid running on solar, wind, and nuclear combined, we will be 100% green, and have no shortages of energy.
Suggested by Frederick Newton on 01/24/2009 @ 08:26PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Maximize traffic flow.
A simple, inexpensive way to save gas and time.
Most city traffic departments have a way of timing traffic signals. Setting them so traffic can move without unnecessary stops, timing side access streets to remain red when no traffic is seeking ingress or crossing the main thoroughfare would save unnecessary stops for the through traffic.
Changing red right turn signals to flashing yellow, with a sign “YEILD TO ONCOMING TRAFFIC” would allow traffic to move more efficiently. When a car starts from a dead stop the fuel consumption is equivalent to driving 60 miles an hour for five minutes.
Suggested by Donald Hubbard on 01/24/2009 @ 06:42PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Speaking admiringly of America's inventive powers, a WW II vet in our town recalls that when the Japanese captured America's most important source of rubber, American manufacturers invented synthetic rubber almost instantaneously. If only necessity motivated today's energy companies to invent cheaper solar power.
Instead, big energy seeks huge programs over long time constants to develop clean coal, nuclear power plants and fuel crops - everything except the free, clean light of the sun. My suggestion to elected officials is to spend less in deficit-building dollars by empowering solar development from the grass roots up.
First, incent states to provide real estate tax deductions to individual home owners for installing limited solar power systems that support an affordable energy load such as heating hot water. Condition federal funding for states based on their tax break to the homeowner for solar power, and start with the individual homeowner -- not the commercial, corporate and investor-developer-landlord property owners whose projects are already subsidized by individual homeowner taxes as well as state and federal programs.
Targeting a small but useful goal such as hot water heating, indivual property owners will respond more quickly than corporations. They have no vested interest in stifling solar in favor of more expensive technologies -- just the opposite. Fueled by their desire and economic imperative to become independent of greedy oil and utility companies, their individual initiatives are sure to create a groundswell.
Incent local governments to provide free workshops and information on self-installation of solar solutions and product sourcing and to organize neighborhood 'house warmings' -- neighbors helping neighbors to install basic solar techbology. With every program, tie government funding to measurable inclusiveness from the $60,000/year income level and below.
Roll programs out first in states like Florida where sunlight is abundant and environmental resources overwhelmed. Do it for a year in low and middle-income communities first, and the energy and efficiency will gust upward, rather than trickling down like water torture over years.
Suggested by patricia borns on 01/24/2009 @ 09:55AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Thomas Friedman's "Hot,Flat,and Crowded" ,has a well thought out outline for what a system of clean power, energy efficiency, and conservation would look like.Bruce Grover
Suggested by bruce Grover on 01/22/2009 @ 10:36PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
In our view, renewable energy's greatest potential and competitive advantage is its ability to evolve rapidly and offer technologies that produce electricity at lower and lower prices with no carbon emissions, subsequently decreasing our dependence on foreign fossil fuels.
Here is one effective, low-cost approach to encourage innovation: Create a set of national Standard Offers or Feed-in Rates for new, significantly better renewable technologies. This policy would offer predictable compensation to any renewable energy generator in the form of long-term power purchase contracts, creating a streamlined administrative national framework that makes developing renewable energy projects and manufacturing new technologies highly investable for entrepreneurs and private capital alike.
The great virtue of offering a national price for renewable energy is that it would be immediately transparent and open to any technology company/developer. Currently, developing utility-scale renewable energy projects requires dealing with hundreds of private and public utilities all operating under strikingly different state regulatory requirements, and often requiring substantial upfront investments just to respond to requests for proposal.
The feed-in rate we are proposing would be set below what current renewable technologies deliver in order to focus support on breakthroughs that will drive the price of renewable electricity down in order to replace more and more traditional, fossil fuel based electricity generation. The national feed-in price could be adjusted periodically by the policy's governing board in order to move renewable electricity through the price points that would deliver greater market share to renewable generation while avoiding excess or windfall profits at the expense of the taxpayer. For example, the set of feed-in rate price points could be set by (1) on-peak natural gas fired generation to (2) combined cycle natural gas –fired generation to (3) base load coal generation with an adjustment to reflect the cost of CO2 emissions.
Setting an initial feed-in rate at $.15 per kWh for 20 years for solar projects, for example, would draw out multiple breakthrough technologies and greatly advance their market penetration.
Suggested by Donald Hubbard on 01/22/2009 @ 11:35AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
one word. nuclear. why are we so afraid of nuclear power plants. they are one of the cleanest safest power producers in the world. i live in arizona by the palo verde power plant, the united state's biggest nuclear power plant, and I am completely safe. stop the misconception that it's easy to have a nuclear plant go into meltdown, it's not. so if you want electric cars and electric everything you better start concidering nuclear power is the main alternative resource.
Suggested by J. - on 01/21/2009 @ 12:49AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
1) Hire unemployed people to plant trees all around the country. A single Redwood tree removes tons (not just an expression, but an actual realistic measurement) of carbon dioxide from the air. That is an example of one of the largest trees, but all trees do the same thing more or less depending upon their size. This would solve two problems at once, cleaning air and putting unemployed people to work.
2) Rather than ruining the one remaining state in our union that still contains vast areas of nature not yet turned into pavement, skyscrapers, and suburbs, why don't we leave Alaska alone and get serious about powering our cars by other sources such as electricity or hydrogen rather than oil. So many people still try to say that hydrogen vehicles are not realistic because it takes as much energy for a vehicle to separate hydrogen from water as it takes to run the vehicle in the first place, but people are really overlooking something in that. Do you expect your gasoline powered car that you drive now to produce gasoline for you as you drive it? No. You go fill it up with gasoline at the gas station. You can do the same thing with hydrogen. Just because it is scientifically impossible to make a vehicle create the very power that moves it, does not mean that hydrogen is in any way a less than realistic idea. It is a very realistic idea. It causes no pollution. There does not have to be a dependence on hydrogen stations like there is on gas stations either, because although the idea of your car producing hydrogen is proven not to work well, any idiot with even the most basic mechanical skills can make their own hydrogen at home from tap water and electricity. Electric cars are a neat idea, but what if you have to drive across the country. The days of road trips would be over. You can only go 250 miles on the average electric car that is being proposed. Nobody wants to only be limited to driving 250 miles before they have to stop and recharge their car for who knows how long. Nobody has time for that. Hydrogen stations could be everywhere just like gas stations are now. You could make it for free at home and drive your car for free when you are around town, and buy it at a hydrogen station on longer trips in which you are not able to take your supply at home with you. This technology already exists. There were already cars that had been converted to run off of hydrogen in the 1970s. Nothing new needs to be discovered. Public buses in Iceland already run off of hydrogen. We just need to make a law in which Detroit auto makers are no longer allowed to sell gas powered vehicles, and then they will do what they need to do on their own to stay in business; problem solved. Cheaper transporation, and greener environment; kills two birds with one stone.
Suggested by J A on 01/20/2009 @ 07:46PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
ok so i have a great idea that will help out with global warming, bringing general motors out of debt, and help with poverty all at once. why not give everyone (depending on income) the oppertunity to have government credit twards the new line of eco friendly cars from general motors that use little gas? say someone makes eight to ten thousand a year, that is barely enough to survive on. give them all the cars next to nothing. people that make anywhere from 15-20 thousand, pay 3/4. 21-30 half and so on. but they would have to trade in their gas hoging cars for that credit if they have one. this would really help out with the economy and global warming. general motors could prophit off of it because they could take the trade in cars to a recycling place or somewhere they get money from. it would take many gas guzzleing vehicles off of the street, it would lower our gas prices, it would give many familys transportation so that they could get a good job that they couldnt because of no transportation. the people would have to be working, not living off of social security or welfare(because alot of those people usually life life doing nothing) but this could really be an awsome idea.
Suggested by Sunny Ball on 01/20/2009 @ 03:07PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
http://globalwarming.change.org/actions/view/out_grow_the_opposition_save_mother_earth_
Suggested by rev baker aka rev420 on 01/20/2009 @ 02:26PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Best Policy for renewable electricity development The best policy for accelerating renewable electricity development would be a feed in tariff based on the instantaneous cost of electricity in the local market, the local market being what one pays for electricity at the location of feeding in. Renewable energy producer receive %150 of instantaneous local net price1. If the electricity from the national net is produced using more than 5% renewable energy sources, the feed in tariff is equal to 1.5*(net price)*(100-%Renewable Energy) 2. Large producers of renewable energy are permitted to build transmission lines to gain access to high price electricity areas. These transmission lines are privately owned and used only by the owning company and the companies to whom it leases3. The capital to pay the renewable electricity producers is financed through a distributed country wide rate increase4. All renewable energy technologies are treated equal5. Regional incentive may be set up for a particular technology by local government6. Instantaneous price is used to encourage produces to store renewable energy when prices are low, and to use this stored electricity to match high cost peaking loads7. Having access to instantaneous electricity costs, will also allow customers to choose when to shut down non-crucial appliances for a short time, such as refrigerators, electric hot water heaters, and air conditioners. These appliances can be safely turned off for a short period of time without a customer recognizing their absence. The customer chooses at what electric cost they want to shut appliances down and for how long they will allow them to be down8. This will allow even consumers who do not produce renewable electricity to decide when to take electricity from the net and when to store the electricity from the net. Of course, if they are not producing renewable electricity they will not be allowed to feed their electricity into the net9. The smart meters that can organize the feed in and storage of the consumers electricity already exist, however, only as a small market. A market the size of the U.S. will cause new companies to enter the market and for dramatic improvements in smart metering to take place. Notes: 1 Renewable sources of electricity should naturally be given a higher price because they produce electricity without as many bad side effects as fossil electricity generation. The 150% value can be changed. A 50% increase is the least added value of renewable energy generation. However, to meet other target this value may be increased. 2 This prevents a runaway cost scenario in which so many renewable energy generators increase the cost of electricity nationally and continue growth because the increase cost of electricity gives them a higher feed in tariff. This formula also creates a natural end to the program. One day, all the electricity will be renewable, and the feed in tariff will simply be the price of electricity on the grid. This policy may not still be in effect at that time. The policy should stipulate a minimum amount of time it will be in effect, for example 20 years, so that people can count on it. 3 This will allow large renewable energy power plant built in specific ideal locations to produce renewable energy at a low price, then to build distribution lines to high priced electricity markets. An example of this would be a collection solar thermal power plant in a desert that connect to distant high priced city networks. 4 This gives a constant non-tax based source to pay for the feed in tariffs. This will prevent periodic debates about where to get funding, like the Wind Industries Production Tax Credits. 5 Some renewable energy sources today are cheaper than others. Let the cheaper ones have an advantage. This will allow these technologies to progress even further. In the end the most cost effective (but still renewable) technologies will have a larger market share. This will simplify the labeling of current and future renewable energy technologies. Whether the power producer is using geothermal, solar, wind, hydro, ect., or a combination of sources, the feed in tariff is the same. 6 If locally a state wants to boost a particular industry, let them. This will allow technologies that are locally more popular to develop quicker. 7 One of the disadvantages of renewable feed in tariffs in Germany is that the net must take in the renewable energy even if the renewable energy source is producing more than the local net requires. This will be a critical problem in the U.S. because we have so many coal fired power plants. Coal fired power plants cannot quickly lower there electricity output when the wind picks up. But this disadvantage is an advantage during peaking loads. At these times the cost of electricity goes up sometimes by a factor of 5 because coal fired power plants or even gas fired power plants cannot efficiently increase output to meet demand. If renewable electricity produces are allowed to store their electricity when prices are low, coal fire power plants can maintain their constant output. Furthermore, if renewable electricity generators can sell their stored electricity for a premium when demand is high, they will stabilize the net, and prevent fossil fuel power plants from increasing output quickly and inefficiently. 8 This smart metering concept is the start of a whole new industry. When customers have access to in instantaneous cost of electricity they can make more choices and become more aware of the cost of electricity. Small devices could show customers every day how much electricity has cost them. The smart metering devices could communicate over the power lines or an internet connection to a third party company which will chose when to feed in the customers electricity into the grid and when to store it. These companies will develop software to maximize the customers profits. This will be the equivalent to predicting when the net will require electricity (peaking loads) and when the net will have sufficient electricity. This will stabilize the electricity network allowing conventional power plants to run a constant and efficient power output, dramatically reducing pollution. This new industry of smart metering and choosing when to feed in electricity and when to store it will take a portion the consumers profits. But, with this revenue they can create sophisticated software programs to organize such a system, and generate the advertizing to get more consumers to enter the system. 9 Electricity can be stored in several ways, but one of the most obvious is batteries. This policy will create a larger market for batteries. Batteries which are cost efficient and have a low lose between charge and recharge will have an advantage. The size and weight of the batteries will be less crucial because the batteries will be stationary. However, if a consumer has an electric or hybrid car, this battery capacity could also be used. This will allow electric car owners to use their cars to produce a profit as they are sitting in their drive way.
Suggested by Paul Wassink on 01/20/2009 @ 11:06AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.