GreenerPolitics

by Jaymi Heimbuch, ecogeek.org

Two fair-sized tidal energy projects are on their way to the east coast. First up is (ready for this mouthful?) the Edgartown-Nantucket Tidal Energy Plant Water Power Project. The project proposes 50 underwater turbines turned by the ebb and flow of the tide. A 3 mile-long transmission line would carry the electricity generated to land, where it would be sold to local utilities. Edgartown and Nantucket would be the beneficiaries of the 2 MW of peak output.

The second project is planned for Vineyard Sound and it has a slightly more manageable title: The Cape and Islands Tidal Energy Project. This project is looking at clusters of underwater turbines – each with the ability to put out between 1 and 3 MW during peak tide – with up to 150 of these energy generators installed. The proposed turbines are on the scale of what was recently installed off Ireland, which is a 1.2 MW turbine and touted as the world’s largest.

Read the rest of the article

by Roland Piquepaille, ZD NET

Giant rubber snakes to capture wave power?

UK researchers have developed a prototype of a future giant rubber tube which could catch energy from sea waves. The device, dubbed Anaconda, uses ‘long sea waves to excite bulge waves which travel along the wall of a submersed rubber tube. These are then converted into flows of water passing through a turbine to generate electricity.’ So far, the experiments have been done with tubes with diameters of 0.25 and 0.5 meters. But if the experiments are successful, future full-scale Anaconda devices would be 200 meters long and 7 meters in diameter, and deployed in water depths of between 40 and 100 meters. An Anaconda would deliver an output power of 1MW (enough to power 2,000 houses). These devices would be deployed in groups of 20 or even more providing cheap electricity without harming our environment.

read the rest of the article

Today Now!: How To Pretend You Give A Shit About The Election

Supreme Court Rules Death Penalty Is ‘Totally Badass’

By Justin Wolfers, New York Times

There’s no doubt that Americans are currently frustrated by high gas prices. And certainly many voters believe that “something oughta be done about it.” But why? Here’s a simple taxonomy of concerns:

1. Relative prices: Are people frustrated that a gallon of gas now requires more foregone “stuff.” Or alternatively phrased, are they concerned about the low relative price of “stuff”? Stated this way, it sounds a bit odd that we are so upset that the benefit of giving up one more gallon of gas is now a heckuva lot more stuff. (Indeed, environmentalists should be thrilled.)

2. Absolute prices: Are people concerned about the change in the absolute average price level? The consumer price index is currently 216.632; is this too high? If so, what is the right average price level?

Read the rest of the article

I attended a fashionable cocktail party in Calgary last night and used the time to gauge people’s initial response to the carbon tax brought forward by Stephane Dion.  It’s valuable in these kinds of debates to spend the first week or so observing and empathizing with the people you wish to convince and not to offer any arguments.  Understand and empathize where people are coming from and take them into account when you attempt to persuade them.

Facts and statistics and science are good, but people will not care how much you know until they know how much you care.  Understand, empathize and pattern your argument to your audiences.

The response was universally negative and the arguments against were not against the idea of carbon tax, but rather against the credibility of the government to honestly implement it.

Argument 1.1: The money collected by the carbon tax will be going into government general revenues instead of being specifically targetted to a specific program.  If it is going to a specific program, the government will need to expand its bureaucracy to collect, track and spend the money.

More taxes = bigger government.
Bigger government = bad

Argument 1.2: The Liberals cannot be trusted with the money.  In the wake of the sponsorship scandals, the gun registry and its long-remembered reversal on the promise to scrap the GST, the Liberals cannot be trusted to honestly implement this program.  This inherent distrust of Liberals and of government in general is a very strong argument against the implementation of a carbon tax shift program.

Kudos to the Alberta Progressive Conservative MLA Iris Evans who used her media time to equate Dion’s carbon tax to the National Energy Program.  If there are any three letters in the alphabet that get Albertans backs up on an issue in a way that forstalls rational thought, it’s N.E.P.

Well played, Ms Evans.  Well played.

Kudos also to Prime Minister Stephen Harper who labelled the Liberal’s program as ‘crazy’, a sentiment that was repeated almost verbatim by the rum drinkers in the crowd.