Contact
Subscribe
Chu calls for ‘a new industrial revolution’
Energy Secretary Steven Chu at this evening’s event. (Photo by Heath Haussamen)
Energy secretary praises Teague for leadership on climate change, attends campaign fundraiser for the congressman
Global warming necessitates the development of improved energy sources and technological leaps in energy efficiency, and New Mexico can play an important role in making that happen, U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu said this evening.
Speaking at a conference at New Mexico State University, Chu said it has become “overwhelmingly clear” in recent years that global warming is directly tied to the burning of fossil fuels by humans. That means carbon emissions must be regulated, he said.
Between that and the rising cost of oil, the United States must work toward energy efficiency and independence, he said.
“We need a new industrial revolution,” Chu said.
President Barack Obama’s energy secretary said the New Mexico Renewable Transmission Authority, university system and two national laboratories can be instrumental in moving the United States toward a new energy future. Tax credits and other incentives that exist in New Mexico also encourage the development of new technologies here, he said.
Chu was speaking to a couple hundred people at the Re-Energize Conference, sponsored by NMSU and chaired by U.S. Rep. Harry Teague, D-N.M. The congressman introduced Chu before the energy secretary spoke at NMSU’s Corbett Center, telling him to remember the importance of the oil and gas industry in New Mexico but also endorsing a shift toward other energy sources.
“We have to end our disastrous economic policy,” Teague said. “… I want my country to be strong and energy independent.”
Chu was visiting a congressional district that’s heavily dependent on the oil and gas industry. After voting for controversial cap-and-trade legislation that was approved earlier this year, Teague faced angry constituents at town-hall meetings, and some expressed beliefs that global warming isn’t real or at least isn’t caused by man.
Chu spent a great deal of time during his speech countering such beliefs by showing charts that indicated rising temperatures and the correlation to the burning of fossil fuels. Americans should embrace the reality that global warming is caused by humans, Chu said, and help push their nation toward energy independence and efficiency.
‘Doing the right thing’ and saving money
Chu said a “new industrial revolution” must involve several components, including learning to make the burning of coal less environmentally harmful, expanding use of natural gas and nuclear energy, improving battery technology and researching improvements in wind, solar, geothermal, biomass and other alternative technologies.
It also includes dramatically reducing energy usage. Chu said simple things like replacing refrigerators and using lighter-colored materials on roofs can help, and so can high-tech improvements like regulating energy use in buildings with computers.
Overall, Chu estimated that it’s possible to reduce energy use in commercial buildings by 80 percent, and said the money saved through energy efficiency more than makes up for the cost of developing and implementing the technology.
He cited California as evidence. Regulation there forced energy efficiency in the 1970s that led to increased utility rates but decreased energy usage so much that Californians pay significantly less for energy than other Americans.
“Doing the right thing will actually save you money,” he said.
The political battle
U.S. Rep. Harry Teague at the NMSU conference. (Photo by Heath Haussamen)
Chu wasn’t only in Las Cruces to speak at the conference. After his speech, he was to attend a fundraiser for Teague, who is in a tough re-election battle against former U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce, R-N.M.
Teague was one of the critical votes in passing the cap-and-trade bill earlier this year. During Chu’s speech at NMSU, he thanked Teague “for his leadership” on the legislation.
Republicans were quick to hammer Teague. The state GOP put out a news release earlier today accusing him, in hosting the conference, of pandering to liberal voters in his district after alienating conservatives with his cap-and-trade vote.
“Teague’s actions continue to erode confidence that he is in Washington fighting on behalf of the concerns and values of his district,” state GOP chairman Harvey Yates Jr. said in the release. “While many congressmen are at home facing tough questions from their constituents on health care and out-of-control spending, Teague has selected to participate in events tailored to his most liberal supporters.”
In addition, the National Republican Congressional Committee is currently hammering Teague with radio ads running in his district.
|
Share
Tweet
|
Advertisements
|
7 comments so far. Scroll down to submit your own comment.
Leave a response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
“We need a new industrial revolution,” Chu said.
…we all loved to see the plan
What the devil does Venus’s atmosphere have to do with proving human CO2 is causing global warming? Perhaps you should research further than Wikipedia and accepting what Chu, Gore, and Harry say about it. They are not experts by any wild stretch of even their imaginations, and their educational qualifications in that regard are sorely lacking.
“Venus has an extremely dense atmosphere, which consists mainly of carbon dioxide and a small amount of nitrogen. The atmospheric mass is 93 times that of Earth’s atmosphere while the pressure at the planet’s surface is about 92 times that at Earth’s surface—a pressure equivalent to that at a depth of nearly 1 kilometer under Earth’s oceans. The density at the surface is 65 kg/m³ (6.5% that of water). The CO2-rich atmosphere, along with thick clouds of sulfur dioxide, generates the strongest greenhouse effect in the Solar System, creating surface temperatures of over 460 °C (860 °F).”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus
Again, CO2, human or otherwise, has NEVER caused climate change in the highly researched and documented 4.5 billion years of earth’s history. It is always a follower and minor feedback source, NOT the cause. This fact is alwyas conveniently left out of Chu, Gore or any other political science talk. Chu, Teague, Gore, Pelosi, etc. are using fear and misleading science half-truths to push a left wing political agenda of regulation, taxation, and increased government control over our lives, freedoms, and choices. And Teague using an energy conferemce to operate a partisan fundraiser? Shame on you Harry, universities are supposed to be non-partisan enclaves of higher education and learning, not political fundraising.
Here is the last paragraph of the GOP news release
Teague will chair his two-day “Re-energize America” conference at the New Mexico State University campus today and tomorrow. Keynote speaker Chu created controversy when he proclaimed earlier this year that global warming could wipe out California agriculture by the end of the century. Jones, an environmental activist and author of a book endorsed by Nancy Pelosi and Al Gore, chronicled his journey toward communism in a 2005 interview.
Ergo, all dems and climate change scientists are commies.
>>>Secretary Chu was very impressive.”
I’m sorry I missed seeing his presentation.
>>> He showed the graph I have seen before of eath temperatures from the 1850’s to present,
>>>plus one I have not seen before, showing carbon atmospheric concentration (from Artic ice core
>>> samples) from 800,000 years ago to present and correlating the peaks with the ice ages.
Did he also mention that Temperature changed first, both at the peaks and the troughs of
this correlating graph? If not, he was being misleading. CO2 variation did NOT play a part
in ice age onset or retreat. CO2 may influence temperature but the glacial cycle record
has nothing to do with it.
>>>The concentration of carbon on the graph rose spectacularly in the last century, looked like at least
>>> 10x the previous cyclic rises.
>>>He also said the Ice Age average earth temperatures were only six degrees centigrade (that’s
>>>around 10 degrees Fahrenheit) lower than normal, and that the predicted average INCREASE in the
>>>next 100 or so years would be 4.5 to 5 degrees centigrade, and asked, do we want this kind of
>>>increase?
Did he explain why the rate of warming has been so much less over the last thirty years when
global warming is reputed to have occurred? The IPCC claims the best estimate for the
-low- scenario should be 1.8 degrees C per century. And guess what? NONE of the global
measures of temperature indicate a warming rate of even this low scenario, much less than
these numbers you cite.
(Wiki the IPCC fourth assessment report to see this)
>>> I recorded the speech, will try to pull together a more detailed summary later this week.
>>> Really sad that the Republicans call an intelligent assessment of the facts “activism.”
We can say global warming is real – the last thirty years have warmed.
We can say global warming is exaggerated – the warming has been below even the low end, -AND-
We can say gloabl warming is decreasing – the 15 year trend is lower than the 30 year trend.
and the 10 year trend is lower still than the 15 year trend.
These are facts, not activism.
My take on ‘activism’ is summed up in this quotation:
“the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.” – HL Mencken
Secretary Chu was very impressive. He candidly laid out the arguments for global warming and for its being human-caused. He showed the graph I have seen before of eath temperatures from the 1850′s to present, plus one I have not seen before, showing carbon atmospheric concentration (from Artic ice core samples) from 800,000 years ago to present and correlating the peaks with the ice ages. The concentration of carbon on the graph rose spectacularly in the last century, looked like at least 10x the previous cyclic rises.
He also said the Ice Age average earth temperatures were only six degrees centigrade (that’s around 10 degrees Fahrenheit) lower than normal, and that the predicted average INCREASE in the next 100 or so years would be 4.5 to 5 degrees centigrade, and asked, do we want this kind of increase?
I recorded the speech, will try to pull together a more detailed summary later this week.
Really sad that the Republicans call an intelligent assessment of the facts “activism.”