Solar San Diego

Green is Gaining Ground

The Denver Post and the USA Today had  pieces  addressing the nation's move toward cleaner, alternative/renewable energy.  In the Post, columnist Susan Thorton writes that "Colorado, nation tilt to green politics."  Thornton points to toward the success of initiatives and candidates espousing alternative energy, specifically a ballot initiative approved by voters in Washington State that mandates that large utility companies derive 15 percent of their energy supplies from rewewable energy by 2020.  Crediting his re-election to the global warming bill and the Million Solar Roofs bill, Thornton lists California Governor Schwartzenegger as among many governors or gubernatorial candidates who won their races while championing green causes.    Among these candidates were Colorado Governor-elect Bill Ritter who had a "...policy emphasis on wind and solar energy, and biofuels."  Congressional and state and local candidates also ran and won on green platforms.  Thornton expresses gratitude for this change in direction for our nation.

In the USA Today, Tom Kenworthy writes about the "Growing number of states requiring alternative energy."  The Washington State initiative, Schwartzenegger and the governors of several other states are cited as politicians who are championing alternative energy through various benchmarks.  Kenworthy writes that a director of US PIRG predicts that Congressional action to set renewable energy levels may soon follow.

This nationwide movement toward renewables is encouraging and those of us who support renewable energy must keep the pressure on our public servants. 

Once Again, Yes on Proposition 87, Do Not Believe Oil Company Lies

On Tuesday, November 7, 2006, California voters will have the opportunity to vote for a step toward energy independence and a cleaner environment for all Californians.   Proposition 87 will impose a tax of  1.5 to 6%, on the extraction of oil in California, depending on the price of oil.   Similar taxes are imposed by other states including Alaska, Louisiana, Okalahoma and even Texas.  Other states ask oil companies to pay their fair share, like all citizens do, why shouldn't California be the same.  The Proposition will  fund  a California Energy Independence Fund with the fund of up to $4 billion used for programs to be administered by new California Energy Alternatives Program Authority.  The Authority will be composed of nine members from the environmental, business, health and energy fields.  The Authority will be tasked with (from the legislative analysis of the Proposition [PDF]):   

• Gasoline and Diesel Use Reduction Account (57.50  Percent)—for incentives (for example, consumer loans,  grants, and subsidies) for the purchase of alternative fuel  vehicles, incentives for producers to supply alternative  fuels, incentives for the production of alternative fuel  infrastructure (for example, fueling stations), and grants  and loans for private research into alternative fuels and  alternative fuel vehicles.

• Research and Innovation Acceleration Account  (26.75 Percent)—for grants to California universities  to improve the economic viability and accelerate the  commercialization of renewable energy technologies and  energy effi ciency technologies.

• Commercialization  Acceleration  Account  (9.75  Percent)—for incentives to fund the start-up costs and  accelerate the production and distribution of petroleum  reduction, renewable energy, energy efficiency,  and  alternative fuel technologies and products.

• Public Education and Administration Account (3.50  Percent)—for public education campaigns, oil market  monitoring, and general administration. Of the 3.5 percent,  at least 28.5 percent must be spent for public education,  leaving a maximum of 71.5 percent of the 3.5 percent (or  roughly 2.5 percent of total revenues) for the Authority’s  administrative costs.

• Vocational Training Account (2.50 Percent)—for job  training at community colleges to train students to work  with new alternative energy technologies.   

The cost of the oil tax, will not be able to be passed onto consumers by the oil companies who have fleeced the people of California with some of the highest prices in the nation and taken home record profits.  Through the Proposition, incentives would  lower the  amount of fossil fuel use helping our atmosphere, reducing global warming and impacting public health.  California has an opportunity once again in November to be a leader and a shining example in care for the environment, reducing global warming, and clean renewable energy for the nation and for the planet.  I am sure that by now you have heard and seen many advertisements in opposition to Proposition 87.   Do not believe the lies that are being spread by the oil companies, their energy allies and special interests.  They have sunk to new lows with their deceptive advertising bombarding the airwaves with deception as thick as the oil they pump freely.  Take a stand for energy independence and a cleaner environment and vote yes on Propostion 87. 

Yes on Propostion 87

10News in San Diego aired a "Guest Perspective" editorial recently.  The speaker is Elizabeth Studebaker of the Apollo Alliance, the text of her speech (courtesy of 10News.com) follows:

Californians need to harness the same American spirit that responded to John F. Kennedy’s call to our nation, the spirit that put a man on the moon in just 8 years.

Today, the call to our nation is a different one, but equally important and challenging; to find a solution to our oil dependence which has resulted in increasing economic, environmental and national security concerns.

Prop 87 is an opportunity for California to start moving in a new direction.

If we continue our dependence on foreign oil, we’ll be stuck with the nation’s highest fuel costs and dirtiest air, which contributes to asthma, lung disease and cancer.

Prop 87 will help California replace oil with alternatives like wind, solar and biofuels which are cleaner, cheaper and made right here.

In fact, big oil companies are bankrolling the "No" on 87 campaign to protect their bank accounts, not yours.

Let’s move forward, vote yes on Prop 87 and give our kids clean air to breathe, sustainable energy sources and a safer nation.

More in support of 87:

UCLA Bruin: Tax state oil production

San Jose Mercury News: Vote Yes: It will end dependence on foreign oil

Vote Solar Supports Prop. 87

The Vote Solar Initative

The Vote Solar Initiative, "a non-profit organization with the mission of stopping global warming and increasing energy independence by bringing solar energy into the mainstream," in the face of millions of dollars of misleading ads that the oil companies are throwing in opposition, are promoting passage of Proposition 87, a proposition supported by SolarSanDiego.net.  Vote Solar is, according to communicaton sent out to activists,  will be buying airplaine banner ads for viewing by gridlocked rush hour commuters as well as other citizens in the San Francisco Bay Area. Vote Solar will be buying carbon offsets to counter their consumption of oil.  SolarSanDiego.net applauds Vote Solar's efforts to get Prop. 87 passed. 

Yes on Proposition 87

This November, California voters will have the opportunity to vote on important Proposition 87.   Propsition 87 will impose a tax of  1.5 to 6%, on the extraction of oil in California, depending on the price of oil.   Similar taxes are imposed by other states including Alaska, Louisiana, Okalahoma and even Texas.  The Proposition will  fund  a California Energy Independence Fund with the fund of up to $4 billion used for programs to be administered by new California Energy Alternatives Program Authority.  The Authority will be composed of nine members from the environmental, business, health and energy fields.  The Authority will be tasked with (from the legislative analysis of the Proposition [PDF]):   

• Gasoline and Diesel Use Reduction Account (57.50  Percent)—for incentives (for example, consumer loans,  grants, and subsidies) for the purchase of alternative fuel  vehicles, incentives for producers to supply alternative  fuels, incentives for the production of alternative fuel  infrastructure (for example, fueling stations), and grants  and loans for private research into alternative fuels and  alternative fuel vehicles.

• Research and Innovation Acceleration Account  (26.75 Percent)—for grants to California universities  to improve the economic viability and accelerate the  commercialization of renewable energy technologies and  energy effi ciency technologies.

• Commercialization  Acceleration  Account  (9.75  Percent)—for incentives to fund the start-up costs and  accelerate the production and distribution of petroleum  reduction, renewable energy, energy efficiency,  and  alternative fuel technologies and products.

• Public Education and Administration Account (3.50  Percent)—for public education campaigns, oil market  monitoring, and general administration. Of the 3.5 percent,  at least 28.5 percent must be spent for public education,  leaving a maximum of 71.5 percent of the 3.5 percent (or  roughly 2.5 percent of total revenues) for the Authority’s  administrative costs.

• Vocational Training Account (2.50 Percent)—for job  training at community colleges to train students to work  with new alternative energy technologies.   

The cost of the oil tax, will not be able to be passed onto consumers by the oil companies who have fleeced the people of California with some of the highest prices in the nation and taken home record profits.  Through the Proposition, incentives would  lower the  amount of fossil fuel use helping our atmosphere, reducing global warming and impacting public health.  California has an opportunity once again in November to be a leader and a shining example in care for the environment, reducing global warming, and clean renewable energy for the nation and for the planet.