Apparently you have forgotten: Way back then, I agreed that you had a valid point.
Yes, Kunect... I DO remember.
BeRight, I don't recall saying this scheme was good OR bad, and I certainly didn't "OK" the concept.
His legacy is that he cant stand Americans.
BobDahler - Apparently you must have missed all my ranting, on former threads here, about Jeff Immelt serving as both the present, floundering CEO of General Electric AND Barack Obama's (former) head of his Jobs Creation Council.
That incestuous relationship represented a conflict of interest with me because of Obama's drive for abandonment of fossil fuels, in favor of green technologies, and Jeff "I haven't moved the GE stock value" Immelt needing new markets for GE's involvement.
ObamaCare? Medical digitized data transfer technologies in abundance need there. Who's ALSO into manufacturing such capable devices? Good ole GE.
So private funding is OK for bringing electricity to Africa but it is not possible to use private funding to re-start White House Tours?
luvthesouth: I stand corrected on the source of the funding for this enterprise. Happy Fourth to you too!
OK, I guess the White House tours for elementary students are still off. But the DCSC folks will be still furloughed since the Gov’t can’t manage its own budget. Which reminds me of the Air traffic controller’s fiasco: When it was decided to furlough controllers and keeping with the Obama mandate to make it as painful on the public as possible, the controllers were all furloughed on the same day at the busiest airports causing massive backups.
A more rational person would have furlough controllers at the smallest and less busy airports and spread the furloughs over a seven day period. What a bunch of hooey.
good morning and happy 4th of july to you bob. from cnn, it was reported that the 7 billion was being promised as part of an initiative that will be funded as follows.."The program includes $1.5 billion from the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation and $5 billion from the Export-Import Bank, the White House said." further research finds that the usopic and the e-i bank, which is part of the executive branch of government, operate outside of congressional approval. the latter entity being criticized for it's "politically motivated" lending habits. both lay claim to not costing taxpayers a dime, which should please everyone.
He didn't "find" seven billion... He "called" for seven billion (over the next five years). The rest is up to Congress, that is controlled by Republican interests.
And thus begs the question: How far off is he from what you actually desire?
Seeing that General Electric will be the main benefactor of the largesse proposed by this administration, with the exploitation of the coal and oil reserves of South Africa... It is difficult for me to understand your characterization of Obama as a Green Weenie kind of guy. Quite the opposite it would seem to be.
Today Obama’s administration found 7 Billion dollars to set up windmills and green power in Africa but can't find a dime to have White House tours for elementary students. What a bunch of hooey. This coming month DCSC in Columbus and Dayton will be laying off workers because this administration won’t allow them to manage their budgets in a way to avoid layoffs. Obama wants maximum pain inflicted on the citizens in an effort to put the blame on someone else. More Hooey.
Legacy? Have at it.
Yes I can, (not go there). Have a good 4th everyone.
BobDahler - Please excuse the double-negative BUT - You CAN'T "not dive into the political aspect of this". It is our national energy policy and it is surrounded by politics.
Take the proposed Keystone Pipeline project for instance. IF it's construction across the continental US is squashed by the ballyhooing of Leftist environmental groups (until this point, some of DEMOCRAT Obama's staunchest supporters) it will instead be built to the Canadian Pacific coast. There, it will be loaded onto tankers for shipment to, and BURNING IN, China. Release of CO2, from the burning of that oil from our backyard will benefit the Chinese economy and leave us just as dependent upon our friends, the Islamic Jihadists, for our economic survival.
I see a lot of "politics" at work there.
Perhaps someone can explain how to burn fossil fuel without emitting CO2.
Lowering the emission limit on CO2 kills coal in this country.
Exports of coal are at an all time high since others continue to burn coal for power.
Maybe it is like punishing ourselves for other’s sins.
I'll not dive into the political aspect of this, but simply ask: If not now, when should we act? You made the point about our inaction over the past four decades...
The mis-characterized "new" regulations that energy producers are now required to comply with, have been on the table for over 20 years and were finalized more than 10 years ago. During all that time, they were granted carte blanche deferrals of compliance. With ample time to prepare, these regulations came as no surprise to anyone in the industry.
Perhaps some of your wrath should be redirected toward the energy conglomerates.
NO! Not MY "much hated "green" sources"! In fact - The too long maligned green sources. We should have been working toward the development of those technologies since the 1970's, when Saudi Arabia showed us how vulnerable we were.
We could have modulated our commitments to green energy through the various highs and lows of our fluctuating economic statuses over that last four decades.
Now, with our present economy, is no time to be yanking the rug (cheaper energy) out from under our consumers and manufacturers but Obama always has this "WE CAN'T WAIT" mentality to get HIS dreams to fruition.
At the present time, increasing energy costs (and the job cuts that will surely follow) would be another nail in our nation's coffin. Mr. Obama behaves as if he doesn't understand that or maybe...he understands it all too well.
If I recall correctly, the article I'm referring to mentioned a couple of new large coal fired units and many smaller, natural gas facilities scheduled to come on line. Included in their forecast were a few of your much hated "green" sources, such as solar, hydro, etc., starting up. I think nukes were described as pretty much remaining unchanged.
Are those projections based upon the unencumbered, present production of electricity from conventional sources (coal, gas, nuclear)?
If so, under Obama, the 9% overproduction would not hold. If you exclude the carbon-based fuels to any percentage, it leaves nuclear as the only DEPENDABLE source. How many nuke plants are we bringing on-line in the coming years, while China or India add one new coal-fired power plant PER WEEK?
Don't I remember JFK saying something about our universal commonality as global citizens with, "...and we all breathe the same air"? There are no 'walls' in place in the atmosphere to prevent China's/India's air from becoming our air.
Remember: The very industry we are concerned about here, projects their own ability to produce an excess (9%) over demand in the next decade.
Very dramatic. Fortunately, there is no factual basis supporting such dire predictions.
700 Channel Lane , Marietta, OH 45750 | 740-373-2121