Yes!  This is exactly right, and it's worth looking at a the "Principles for a Green & Equitable Stimulus and Recovery" memo submitted to the Obama Transition Team from a diverse range of 70 organizations, including Green For All, Apollo Alliance, Energy Action Coalition, 1Sky, MoveOn and many others: http://www.greenforall.org/blog/memo-on-a-green-and-equitable-stimulus-sent-to-obama-team

Thanks, Billy. Would highly recommend all take a look at the memo as well.

True change means no war, the biggest carbon footprint on the planet.

We need a major focus on a new national rail system powered by clean renewables including wind, solar, geothermal, and ocean/tidal energy.

We can create millions of green jobs with this, but also solve our climate change problem, peak oil, energy security, safe fast mobility, and it can pay for itself by reducing our $700 billion per year oil purchase trade deficit.

We can save companies by retooling auto manufacturers into producing the trains, retool road builders into building the train infrastructure, retool defense contractors into building the solar panels and computer control systems.  Its a win-win for everyone!

Here is the plan outlined:
http://www.urbandesign.org/newdeal2009.html

I think President-elect Obama can help our country's energy by trying to achieve that goal by cutting 50-80% of the emissions by the year 2050. I think he'll be on the road for a green recovery so that he wants all the green jobs that we need in this country. This is no time to waste if we want to save our planet's future from being at risk. I think his green recovery plan can get this country on the right track once again so that we have all the renewable sources that will have for generations to come.

Investing in green jobs will help us in the wright direction. Changing into organic foods, soaps, recycling, and environmental friendly packaging. We need to go back to some of our old ways to create new jobs, that have been replaced by technology. Educating our children on future technologies. They have a school incentive program here that pays their children money for their hard work at school. It seems to be working. If people were aware of what was in their soaps and food they would not be using it.Coal energy is bad and electric magnetic waves are not good for us either. Even formaldehyde and other chemicals are in our clothes, carpet, and building materials. In our water, food, materials and other. Its not a wonder that we our all sick from cancer and other illnesses. I have to much information on this and people need to be aware. Thanks to everyone on this effort to work together. If you need any help, I can do it.

Yes, we have to change the way it works now-getting in debt by purchasing oil and help making money for terrorists. We need to create more alternative energy by using solar, hydrogen, wind sources and make cars to use electricity. That will create more jobs and less dependence on oil

It's really important that any direction we move towards in the future contributes to the right change rather than stays the course. The right change, in this case is to fuse economic revival with the green industry. It's just mutually beneficial and obvious. To not do what's obvious is to choose pain!

I completely agree with Margery. No one seems to mention the environmental damage caused by war, yet it is absolutely devastating. This issue just gets put in the 'too hard basket'.

I think there needs to be some kind of 'kick in the pants' incentive for people and business to start moving to more green habits.  Force all Govt buildings to buy their power from Green sources.  Make it manadatory to purchase recycled paper and other products. 

Obviously there are tons of the obvious ones, investing in mass transit and renewable forms of power will be huge too.

I would like to see an incentive (tax break?) for companies to offer telecommuting to employees. This would reduce carbon emissions (in several ways), reduce independence on foreign oil, reduce wear-and-tear on infrastructure, encourage better tech infrastructure, etc. 

Don't know why companies have such an aversion to this concept. It works. But, perhaps an incentive would help push it along.

I am very much in favor of all the above.  We definitely need to act for Green Power!  Thank you,
Jean Ann Campana

Reactivate The Civilian Conservation Corps.

http://www.wecantakeit.org/index.html

I am all for Rebuilding and Repairing America with a Green Stimulus Package. I am urging all congressmembers to please act now.

A Green Stimulus Package is what America needs to create jobs and ensure a clean energy future for the United States and for the world.

Save the planet by reversing global warming.  Green jobs can be put into operation by training programs in building cob homes for the homeless, land to grow crops for the hungry, alternative fuel and automotive power to save our forrests, cease ocean radar and fishing in preserves, and print money within the USA to pay workers, new businesses, and rebuilding projects.  Then restore the use of gold or silver backed money to be used outside of the USA. 

I agree with the Green Stimulus but it does not go far enough.

We need to start taxing finite, non-manmade natural resources and stop taxing income on capital and wages. 

For example, tax, heavily, the use of land to drill natural gas, as well as the raw natural gas itself, and any pollution caused by it, but allow companies to make whatever profit they can from the production and sale of it.  This would encourage them to reduce pollution, and get the most mileage out of a given portion of gas.  At the same time, companies would have a strong incentive to develop products since they could keep 100$ of their profits.  We ALL own the NG in the ground; after all, it was created from leftover dinosaurs, not by anything the companies did, so the tax should return to all of us from this limited natural resource.  On the other hand, it is fair and just to reward companies and workers for their labor in getting the gas out of the ground; in fact, we want to encourage that activity, so we should not discourage it by taxing it. 

If we apply the "single tax" to wind or solar, you'll see immediately the cost structure begins to favor these alternatives much more, since they use fewer resources - just some land, usually in remote, less desirable and therefore less-taxed ares - and some steel etc. which should be taxed at the source level too, from the companies that mine it, or smelt it and pollute the air.

This idea is not new - it dates back to economist Henry George in the 19th century and everywhere it has been tried, the result has been a burst of economic activity and a reduction in poverty and "land" speculation like the kind that has given us our latest economic meltdown.

We need to set aggressive goals, not easy ones that don't take any effort to meet.  I agree with the Earth Policy Institute, led by Lester Brown, that we need to reduce carbon emissions 80% by 2020.  Their entire plan is outlined here: http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/PB3/80by2020.htm.  I strongly encourage all of you to read it.

Ok, people, specifics.. we need actionable ideas! We're fed up & we're not gonna take it anymore, but WHAT are we gonna do about it, to make a positive change..??
Here's an idea: Speaker Pelosi is commuting to "home" in California from DC.. uh, that's a few miles, its done on taxpayer $'s. That needs to stop.. she's not a Senator representing her district, her permanent job is in DC, she needs to "move" there (guarantee she's got a residence there) and if she wants to visit her home state, let her pay for that priviledge. So write Speaker Pelosi & cc the Obama team and let 'em know that as our leaders, they need to set an example that shows commitment to their jobs by moving closer to said jobs.
Here's another idea: get a worm farm! You will 1) cut down by 1/2 the trash you throw out 2) raise worms, which are great for the earth 3) create both compost & worm "juice" (solid & liquid castings) that are going to increase your home garden's output, you'll spend less at the grocery, you'll get exercise by working in the garden, you'll get fresh, organic produce in your system!
Here's another idea: raise honey bees! They're facing many problems, CCD, mites, insecticide poisoning, they need your help. Many areas offer free or very inexpensive bee 'schools'. You can have bees almost anywhere. There are hives on high rises in NYC. You will get 1) free organic honey 2) the exercise from working the bees 3) help the bees, which pollinate 1/3 of every bite you put in your mouth!
Change starts at home.. and man, when you can affect a big change at home, you'll be more impowered to affect a change (by example, no less!) on your neighborhood, your community, your country..

This idea is key, and it should be at the top of list, along with new transportation approaches.

  Think train....High Speed Trains through the North East Corridor and over to Chicago...Denver......Los Angeles and San Francisco.
With one engine you can haul 100 cars!!!Think about that.

This is exactly what we need.

I must agree with war having the biggest carbon footprint known to man.  As a participant in the Gulf War and the run up to it I've seen it first hand.  First and foremost an army (and air force and navy) does move on it's stomach, but even before that, it moves on petroleum, without oil derived products, not just as fuel, our cutting edge technology, second to none armed services would grind to a halt.  That fact in and of itself should tell even the most casual observer that war is responsible for the single largest carbon footprint on the planet.  This also should tell the same observer that our dependence on foreign oil from people who would love nothing more than to see not just America, but the whole of Western Culture and civilization utterly wiped from the face of the earth, severely compromises our national security.
In addition to that, in the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein also engaged in eco-terrorism, an expression and concept that up until that point didn't exist, not until he set ablaze every single Kuwaiti oil well and oil production facility.  This single act probably increased exponentially the already largest carbon footprint mankind has ever created.

Oh dear, what a terrible idea.

The Federal government simply has no business in energy policy. It's not an area of responsibility listed in the Constitution, and they have shown themselves inept at such things.

Incentives such as this are better left to the states to implement, tailoring each to the particlar needs of their industries and resources. Local control means local voting, and that is what a *true* representative republic is all about.  (As most politicians do, Obama got the democracy part wrong.)

There are many good ideas in this thread but most of them are silly, warm and fuzzy, and really don't have anything to do with the subject (raise bees?  what does that have to do with renewable energy?).

If we truly believe in change, we must consider new avenues for energy production that will protect the planet.

What I would really like to see is a change in the EPA-OBD II Annual Vehicle Emissions Inspection Law.This Law mandates that all Gasoline Powered Vehicles in the USA from 1996 to the Present, must operate at 14.7 parts of Air to 1 part of Fuel.Any change whatsoever, even if Emissions are lowered, and Fuel Economy is improved, will result in a failed Emissions Inspection.The point is that it is entirely possible to safely Vaporize Gasoline into 100 parts of Air to 1 part of Fuel.Even the largest SUV could easily get 50 + MPG, and emit a Fraction of the Emissions of a 14.7 / 1 Fuel System, with an actual increase in Power, as well as much longer Engine Life.I'm not the first to know this.Far from it ! Just do a Search on [the late] Tom Ogle.He was offered $25 Million to keep his Fuel Vaporizer off the Market, refused it, and died of "A Mysterious Death" , and was totally discredited, as was Charles Nelson Pogue.Also, go to http://energy21.freeservers.com/bookrep.html.Even if it is not to be believed that any of these Vapor Fuel Systems work, the Fact remains that it's illegal to even attempt to Vaporize Fuel on any Vehicle 13 Years Old, or newer ! When a Vehicle is connected to an OBD II Emissions Analyzer for it's Annual Inspection, it's On Board Oxygen [O2] Exhaust Sensors must detect a level of Polluting Exhaust Emissions that would indicate 14.7 / 1.If a Vehicle is running too rich, and is emitting too much Pollution, it will fail it's Emissions Inspection, as well it should.But, with Vaporized 100 / 1 Fuel, O2 Sensors will detect nothing, and an O2 Sensor Failure Code will be generated.O2 Sensor Exemptions are granted for Vehicles that have been Legally converted to operate on Natural Gas, Propane, or Hydrogen.But not for Vaporized Gasoline.Thus, it is entirely possible to fail an Emissions Inspection for not Emitting enough Polluting Exhaust Emissions ! And not one Big Oil Executive, Vehicle Manufacturer, or Politician will answer the Question, " Why is it illegal for any Gasoline Powered Vehicle 13 Years Old, or Newer, to Emit too little Polluting Exhaust Emissions ? " Can anyone that's read this Honestly Answer this Question ? Or forward it to that rare Politician, or Environmentalist that really cares, and dares to attempt to make a positive change, for the better ? Good Luck with that ! I know I've tried, many, many times !

Legalizing Marijuana could solve this issue and thousands of other issues! Hemp Ethanol, Hemp Plastic, Hemp Rubber, Hemp Paints, Hemp Clothes, Hemp Inks........ Hemp Farming alone could make our country Green and would produce millions of jobs! Biodegradable Everything!!! 0% bad for the Earth and People!!!!!! Shut down the Oil companies, Reduce our emissions and carbon footprint by enormous perportions!!!!!! Shut down the black markets on drugs and get criminals off the streets! Keep innocent americans out of jail! Stop the wasteful spending on the failed war on marijuana! Marijuana is SAFER than Alcohol, Aspirin, Tobacco.......... stop believing the lies/ propaganda about Marijuana! It is the Most versatile Plant on our Planet!!

If the United States government gets out of the energy business altogether Renewables stand a much better chance of becoming a mainstream source of power. The United States fights wars for control of oil reserves, provides oil companies with tax breaks, and built a national highway system. How many more favors does the oil business need? 

1. Address sustainability comprehensively - economic, mobility, land/development, energy, solid waste, water, food production, and health - but with a recognition that building the green economy will help leverage the other elements.
2. Address sustainability at the scale of the individual, family, neighborhood, community, and region (as well as state and national), creating "plugs" to best attract and retain interest, action, and commitment.
3. Address sustainability by deploying "high leverage" strategies, especially the time-tested, most efficacious strategies and actions.

We can drought proof up to 50m American homes.
There has been much talk about climate change, but not much about where we will see its first impact.

Flooding, Drought, water is the vector of climate change, we already have seen in recent times in many areas America/Worldwide areas where there is intense competition for water; Windesal® can sustain many areas America/Worldwide that will be impacted by this issue that may suffer physically or economically from this lack of fresh water shortage.

Begin the greening of America starting with a White House Victory Garden. During the gas shortage, food providers saw the need to get local growers as a source that doesn't waste fuel. Vote yes for a resurgence of Victory Garderns starting with the White House!

The Food Industry Challenges That Obama Needs to Address
President-elect Obama’s choice for Secretary of Agriculture could be perhaps the most important clue as to whether Obama really intends to bring change to Washington. It will determine whether or not he plans to take on one of the most powerful lobbies in the country, the businessmen who turned agriculture into agribusiness.

Current farm policy was called by Time magazine, "a welfare program for the megafarms that use the most fuel, water and pesticides; emit the most greenhouse gases; grow the most fattening crops; hire the most illegals; and depopulate rural America." An online movement has sprung up calling on President-elect Obama to name anti-agribusiness crusader Michael Pollan Secretary of Agriculture. Pollan's popular books include The Omnivore's Dilemma and In Defense of Food.

In this fascinating interview, Bill Moyers asked Michael Pollan what would happen if he was named Secretary of Agriculture instead of yet one more advocate of industrial farming. Sources: Bill Moyer’s Journal (Part II) November 28, 2008Bill Moyer’s Journal (Part I) November 28, 2008PBS.org Interview TranscriptOrganic Consumers Association Petition to Stop Vilsack's Confirmation as Secretary of Agriculture

A clean energy stimulus package could be one of our best ways out of our current economic and environmental situations.  Making clean energy a top priority would provide significant benefits ranging from local job creation to reducing the exportation of US currency to scaling back pollution from excessive energy use to improving national security. Such an approach needs to be comprehensive and must include efficiency as a mainstay, buildings and transportation, and renewable sources that don't compete with food.

More than half the polution in the world comes not from cars, factories or industry, but from our homes. Once we realize that each and every one of us can stop to polution of our homes by reducing our homes energy use and producing our own electric power with solar, wind, bio, and other forms of "clean" energy, then we will be on the right track to begin to think about saving this planet. Support RESNET initiatives and get an energy audit performed on your own home today, so you can learn how to reduce your own carbon foot print on our planet.

We need efficiency standards brought into this or else the money will simply be wasted supporting technology which isn't cost effective.   Right now solar is available at $1 per watt via companies like nanosolar, which is less than the cost of coal.   We need to:

1: Create a revolving loan fund with a lookup database online to find the most effective form of alternative energy and then links to federally certified partners who provide technology which would be effective for that area of the country.  Someone in Arizona might be a link going to nanosolar panels, someone on the north end of the big island of Hawaii might get a link going to wind mills.   Either way it should have a target cost of $1 per watt of electricity for the alternative energy, it's available now and is far more efficient than older, less cost efficient technology.

2.  Then have a online training knowledgebase with links going to local sweat equity groups where you volunteer to help someone build their panels, or windmills, and then qualify for them to help you.   This will reduce the costs of installation and spread knowledge and standards on how to install it safely and effectively.

3.  Free federal land for green energy plants coupled with low interest loans.   As it stands these plants produce their panels for solar farms for utility companies.  We need to bring incentives that will focus on individual homes and lower their costs of production, ultimately lowering the end cost of the product.   This will finally decrease the cost of living for the middle class and would be the ultimate goal for any energy project.  

Going Green isn't even a revolution, it is a technical upgrade, a system overhaul.  Lighting streets with gas was a revolution.  Lighting them with electricity was just an upgrade.  Going Green is merely logical.

Lots of good ideas here. Add this one: restore our soils! We need local, organic (no-petroleum) food located close to where it is eaten, not 1500 miles away. Soils trap carbon, growing trees trap carbon, this will help slow or stop global warming. Fringe benefits - better health, saner communities.

Also: take subsidies away from air travel and put them into trains - make trains cheaper and get them to run on time. Take subsidies away from petroleum and put them into alternative energy. Take subsidies away from Monsanto and agribusiness and put them into organic farming and/or research.

Grow plants (food or sustainable ethanol plants) on freeway median strips instead of chemical lawns. Grow food plants everywhere on public property. Create a program to help people who want to grow their own food, create an edible forest, make their house sustainable through insulation and solar or wind. Put the money into what we need instead of into what big business thinks it needs. (By the way, those subsidies include regulations, tax advantages, and wars as well as direct corporate welfare.)

The sad fact of matter is that federal stimulus packages don't go toward new and improved product lines...they go toward padding the bank accounts of a select few on the inside of a industrial sector. Now, legally, does funding "green" energy fall within the role of government as defined by our Constitution? Of course not.

The fact is that whoever does ultimately invent economically viable "renewable" energy stands to make trillions of dollars in revenue...revenue that would dwarf the U.S. government's paltry efforts at stimulus. It is sort of ridiculous - not to mention unfair - that the government should force taxpayers to pony up more dough to fund every dead-end technology and fly-by-night operation that fills out an application. After all, this is money coming out of your weekly paycheck (plus interest owed under our financial system) that would be funding this proverbial "butter".

As an example, we saw far more explosive, innovative growth with the IT industry in the 90s with Dell, Google, and Microsoft than in the 50s with ARPA net. Government is not a miracle worker, and the energy problem is no exception. More often than not government is a retardant to progress.

The development of a national railway system to connect our country is a long overdue initiative that should also be implemented as part of a large-scale 'green industry stimulus'.

We are miles behind the rest of the world in this regard.

Also, this is an excellent proposal that ought be aggressively pursued.

Unfortunately, something we have to realize is that it's not just the U.S. that needs green energy. It's africa, it's the middle east, it's everywhere. 
We live in a world of competition, scarcity, and corruption for the sake of profits. Profits, profits, profits...
So do you really think Obama is going to do ANYTHING to help the Green cause, when that will take away from the profits of corporations that have more economic powere than most countries? No...
Fight for the right movement, the end of the monetary system.Help us move into a new, "Resource-Based Economy".
Check out the Venus Project.

Expanding local mass transit in urban and suburban areas should be a priority. Most people travel very similar routes to fulfill daily errands, commute to work, visit with friends, etc. We must get people out of their individual cars and into local group/mass transit options. Many developed cities have excellent transit options via surface and underground. These routes need to be expanded back into the suburban areas which were efficiently served by trains, trolleys and other options in earlier years (when there weren't two+ cars in every family garage!). The inconvenience in terms of timing, availability and privacy in mass transit must be countered by the greatly diminished costs and energy resource savings of joint transit solutions.

I wholeheartedly agree a green stimulus package is the way to go Foster those new jobs in the right direction.

There are so many ways that we can improve things if we work from within the system to redefine the "BOX" within which the system thinks. 

So many great comments and suggestions!  Let's keep focused and determined to manifest these ideas.  We can't expect our new President or Congress to do the work unless we, ourselves, remain vigilant for the duration.

I would also like to add that it's important to think retrofit, and not just new development.  Currently existing homes and buildings need to be made greener, as well.  It isn't as easy or as glamorous as designing new structures, but there are millions of jobs that could be created insulating/weatherproofing, and "greening" the buildings we already have.  Plus, this will use far less of our dwindling, unsustainable resources and generate much less waste than tearing down buildings and carting the debris to landfills.   There is much room for improvement, and so many hours of labor and natural resources have previously been invested in the buildings that are already standing.  With nationally supported programs we can have a nation of buildings that use less energy, conserve more resources, cause less pollution, and are healthier for everyone.  Innovations like full-scale weatherization; organic, local gardens; locally sited, alternative energy technologies; gray water filtration systems, and small, local “green” businesses, when implemented on a national scale, will put millions of people back to work, and create a more sustainable and equitable economy.

Increase C.A.F.E standards!

Released after this was written is Architecture 2030's concept for $170 billion for mortgage/refinancing buy-downs based on energy efficiency. This would be a very sensible and high-leverage part of greening the stimulus package. 

Yes, Yes, & Yes again. Let's stop talking about going green & start doing it on a natioal level.

The New Deal II will involve the government creating jobs for the unemployed which should involve
1) rebuilding our infrastructure with green materials
2) recycling plants which should operate at a much higher level than currently
3) plants that build only vehicles that do not depend on fossil fuels and/or provide the smallest possible carbon footprint
These are only a few ideas--there are hundreds of other ideas to put America to work in an environmentally responsible way.
We have the scientific know-how to do this.  We need only the political will to accomplish it.

Chris Smith, I agree with you.  Hemp would be great but I'd not be in favor of burning it for fuel.

We need to do more than increase CAFE standards, we need to get cars off gas and oil completely.  No more fossil fuels.  We need electricity supplied by solar and wind and we need to stop f-ing around and do this.  There isn't much time.  People are acting like this is optional, it's NOT.

"So do you really think Obama is going to do ANYTHING to help the Green cause, when that will take away from the profits of corporations that have more economic powere than most countries? No..."

I think he will, because he has John Holdren and Steven Chu on board.  They get it.

To be green that means NO NUCLEAR ANYTHING!  That stuff is deadly poison to get out of the ground and nobody knows what to do with the deadly poisonous waste.  NUCLEAR IS THE OPPOSITE OF GREEN AND IS WORSE THAN COAL OR OIL!