**Impacts **
I/L – Energy K/ Agenda
Energy reform key to obama’s agenda- fulfilling campaign promises
Norris June 16th (Teryn, Director Americans for Energy Leadership, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/teryn-norris/obama-signals-need-for-ne_b_613835.html, The Huffington Post, 6-16-10) ET
Cap and trade has long dominated the debate, but a large number of think tanks, business leaders, and academics are rallying behind such an "energy innovation consensus," which places these federal investments at the front and center of the energy and climate agenda. President Obama cited these experts in his speech, noting that "Others wonder why the energy industry only spends a fraction of what the high-tech industry does on research and development -- and want to rapidly boost our investments in such research and development." The energy innovation consensus currently includes dozens of Nobel Laureates, Breakthrough Institute, Brookings Institution, National Commission on Energy Policy, Third Way, Association of American Universities, Clean Air Task Force, Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, Google, and Americans for Energy Leadership, among others. The latest group to join is the American Energy Innovation Council (AEIC), made up of several of the nation's top business leaders: Bill Gates, Jeff Immelt, John Doerr, Chad Holliday, Norm Augustine, Ursula Burns, and Tim Solso. Last week, these leaders released a new report, "A Business Plan for America's Energy Future," calling for major new federal investment in clean energy technology RD&D -- at least $16 billion annually, more than triple the current level (see our news roundup).nIn fact, such an energy innovation strategy was originally at the center of the Obama administration's energy and climate agenda. Throughout his campaign and the beginning of his presidency, Obama consistently promised he would increase federal investment in clean energy R&D by $15 billion per year. As one of the administrations "Guiding Principles" on energy and environment, the White House website still states that it will "Invest $150 billion over ten years in energy research and development to transition to a clean energy economy." Time Magazine's Bryan Walsh wrote in response to the speech, "if Obama is really serious about changing some of the insane parts of our energy policy--like the fact that we spend less than $5 billion on energy R&D a year, a number that Bill Gates wants to triple--he could be truly revolutionary."
Competitiveness Impacts
Energy Reform key to competitiveness- China, Germany, India, energy dependence pose a threat
Weiss and Lyon 1/28 [Daniel J, Senior Fellow and the Director of Climate Strategy at American Progress Susan, Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change Policy Carol Browner, 2010, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/01/sotu_energy.html] KLS
Obama also urged the Senate to pass strong bipartisan energy and climate legislation to increase national security and bolster U.S. competitiveness overseas, saying, “Washington has been telling us to wait for decades, even as the problems have grown worse. Meanwhile, China’s not waiting to revamp its economy. Germany’s not waiting. India’s not waiting. These nations aren’t standing still. These nations aren’t playing for second place.” China, Germany, and other nations are, indeed, racing ahead of us to develop and produce the clean-energy technologies of the future. China is now a world leader in solar, wind, electric cars, and high-speed rail technologies. And China is the leading producer of solar photovoltaic cells even though the technology was invented and perfected in the United States. The U.S. market share of PV cell production dropped from 45 percent to under 10 percent between 1995 and 2005. But the investments sparked by ARRA, combined with legislation to reduce carbon pollution, will help the United States keep up this race. America’s dependence on foreign oil hurts our economy, helps our enemies, and puts our security at risk. A recent CAP analysis found that one in five barrels of oil consumed in the United States come from nations that are “dangerous or unstable,” according to the U.S. State Department. It is essential that we invest in clean-energy technologies and reduce global warming pollution to lower American consumption of foreign oil. As conservative Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) recently noted, “The idea of not pricing carbon, in my view, means you’re not serious about energy independence. The odd thing is you’ll never have energy independence until you clean up the air, and you’ll never clean up the air until you price carbon.”
Energy Reform Impacts- Climate Change Laundry List
Climate Change will cause anarchy, food and water shortages, and national security threats
Simpson 6/25 [Walter, Environmental Consultant, 2010, http://www.energyreallymatters.com/] KLS
There is a natural tendency to deny the inconvenient truth about fossil fuels but it is based on overwhelming scientific evidence. We ignore this problem at our own peril because as climate change gets worse our species will find itself living in a much less hospitable world with rising sea levels and more intense storms, heat waves, droughts, and floods. Even now in parts of the world many people are just barely surviving. Imagine the difficulties the world’s poor will have as natural environments fail. Changing climates will cause millions of “eco-refugees” to illegally cross national boundaries, seeking land, food, and water resources to survive. Water wars may rival oil wars as deserts expand and the glaciers and winter snowpack that feed rivers decline. The U.S. military understands the science and takes the threat of climate change seriously. As early as 2004, the Pentagon released a study which found that climate change could lead to anarchy in many parts of the world, making international conflict endemic. The report, which was quickly suppressed by the Bush Administration, described global warming as a greater threat to national security than terrorism. These findings were repeated in the recently released 2010 Pentagon Quadrennial Defense Review which described climate change as “an accelerant of instability” that “may spark future conflicts.” While we spent 5 trillion dollars on national defense and war during the last decade, we have yet to address climate change and our addiction to fossil fuels in any meaningful way.
Share with your friends: |
