(No) climate change in the usa

During the US, the signs of change in climate policy multi – the Bush government continues the head into the sand

After the rough success of the apprenticeship film "to Inconvenient Truth" by Al Gore and the outstanding victory of the Democrats in the parliamentary elections besides the Atlantic a lively debate besides. Climate protection is in the air. Only US Prassident George W. Bush once again proves to be a man of Big Oils.

Much new was for his state-of-the-Union speech, which he held on Tuesday evening (local time). But the subject of climate change was stripped only on the edge, and on the youngest discussion, which had not least been fueled by the weather phapriols, Bush did not take over at all. The international negotiating process in terms of climate protection remained completely unhappy.

However, a certain role in the Bush speech played the energy supply into which the climate theme was brought. On the other hand, nothing is obvious, because climate protection is above all a question of energy policy. The most important greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, is mainly due to the burning of fossil fuels. Climate served Bush in this context, however, only as rhetorical bumps. He wants to demand a new generation of nuclear power plants to drive "clean coal" and generate a coarse market, especially renewable raw materials.

While wind energy and photovoltaics are briefly mentioned in his speech, but the explanation of the various energy programs on the website of the woman’s house, which was put into the network with the speech, is completely silent on these two sectors. In doing so, investors are left in the unclear again, because the currently valid urban programs are attributable. In recent years, they have taken care of in the United States for a considerable boom of wind energy, but the sector is experiencing a stable up and down in Europe because of the discontinuous event policy.

Energy policy, which makes the planned measures clear, is especially a matter of national security for the US prasident:

FOR TOO LONG, OUR NATION HAS BEEN DEPENDENT ON OIL. America’s Dependence Leaves US More Vulnerable to Hostile Regimes, And to Terrorists – Who Could Cause Huge Disruptions of Oil Shipments, Raise The Price of Oil, And do Great Harm to our Economy.

Accordingly, the national Olreserve is to be increased and the domestic demand is being promoted. "Environmentally sensitive" sees itself. What to keep from it shows not least the aspirations to open Alaska’s national parks for exploration.

Otherwise, alternative fuel is the Joker for Bush. Hydrogen is briefly mentioned in this context, but the contested measures focus on land and forestry, which is called for renewable raw materials. In the next ten years, Sun Bush, fuel consumption is to be reduced by 20 percent. However, this is meant only the fuel from oil. 15 percentage points should be achieved by the claim of alternative fuels, which the corn farmers and probably the GENTECH industry is certainly happy. So far, there is a legally fixed target, according to the supplier of gasoline and diesel by 2012 at least 7.5 billion gallons (28.4 billion liters) biosprit must add. This goal is now to be increased according to the ideas of the US prasident to 35 billion gallons (132.5 billion liters) by 2017.

Only funf percentage points of the single-saving target should be achieved through more efficient motors. In view of the striking praise for American technology, which runs through the Bush speech, this is a very modest goal. In view of the active development of economical engines and hybrid cars in Japan and the strict standards in China, which the car manufacturers there are under considerable modernization prere, is more likely to be expected that the already weakening US auto industry is the risk of being returned to the competition, if she rests on the tabs specifications of the Washington Government.

Bush goods not bush if he was not enriched his message with a significant portion of arrogance and subliminal threats against the rest of the world. In the caught conscious and explosion of the individual energy policy goals, it is called:

The President’s Plan Enables America To Lead The World to Energy Security. By Establishing Search a Visible and Ambitious Fuel Standard, America’s Global Leadership wants Help Encourage Our Friends and Allies to Consider Similar Policies. Actions by America’s Friends and Allies to Increase Their Production of Oil and Oil Alternative, DiversiFy Their Supplies, Reduce Their Consumption, And Increase Their Oil Reserves Will Enhance The Energy Security of America And The Rest of the World. Conversely, Foreign Actions That Undermine Free, Open, and Competitive Markets for Trade and Investment in Energy Supplies Diminish The Energy Security of America and the World. This is Why America Opposes The Political Manipulation of Oil and Gas Exports.

The others must therefore reduce their consumption and should be excited to this excluded from the US example (for comparison: in Germany, the per capita greenhouse gas emissions in 2004 amounted to about 12 tons, in the US around 23 tons and in China about 2.5 tonnes.) In addition, they are expected to rely on the rules of the market alone and indeed non-legal restrictions that contradict US interests.

Like this post? Please share to your friends:
Leave a Reply

;-) :| :x :twisted: :smile: :shock: :sad: :roll: :razz: :oops: :o :mrgreen: :lol: :idea: :grin: :evil: :cry: :cool: :arrow: :???: :?: :!: