Presidential debate is no wind job

By John McGory

Last night’s presidential debate made me proud to be an American.  President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney went toe-to-toe on the issues that are critical to America.  We love that these men running for the most powerful elected office in the world must defend their policy positions on live television.

The debate showed clear differences between the two candidates’ energy policies.  

President Obama pushed more fuel-efficient automobiles, clean oil, natural gas and coal technology and the expansion of renewable energy.

Governor Romney's plans include more permitting and licensing for oil and gas on federal lands and waters, the opening of the Canadian oil pipeline, a strong support of the use of coal and the reduction of environmental regulations.

Our country's energy future cannot be based solely on carbon-based fuels.  As President Obama said last night, an “all of the above” energy plan must include strong support for wind, solar and biofuels.  

President Obama pointed out Governor Romney’s opposition to extending wind energy tax credits that could cost America thousands of jobs in Ohio, Iowa and Colorado.  He quoted the governor as saying those jobs were “imaginary.”

Romney responded to this criticism of his energy plan by saying, “I appreciate wind jobs in Iowa.”

Appreciating renewable energy jobs and supporting them through tax credits are two different approaches to our energy future.  The government must support renewable technology and not simply give it lip service while providing billions in tax breaks to the oil industry.

The second point of contention came over the price of gasoline.  Four-dollar-a-gallon prices have hurt American pocketbooks.  Governor Romney indicated that if he became president that his policies would lower gas prices.

Pulitizer Prize-winning columnist, Robert B. Semple, Jr., in a March 17, 2012 column in the New York Times, “Obama sets oil prices?  Just another GOP myth” correctly points out that the president has no control over oil prices.  World markets set prices as supply and demand fluctuates depending on issues ranging from “a worldwide recession, an embargo or conflict in the Middle East.”

Prices will come down when oil use is reduced through its more efficient use and as other energy alternatives become available.  Governor Romney’s plan of drilling our way to energy independence will not succeed without increasingly efficient cars that may or may not use oil as a fuel.

Our energy future will determine many of the others issues facing our country including jobs and the deficit.  An “all-of-the-above” approach is what we need to truly become energy independent.  This will improve our economy and create jobs. 

The spirited give and take between two qualified candidates made for great political theater.  They both laid out their energy plans and it is our belief that President Obama’s plan makes more sense for our energy future. 

John McGory is an Ohio Energy Soldier.  Follow our daily posts on Facebook.

Ohio and the presidential election

By John McGory

 

American will make a critical decision for president of the United States in 2012.  Barack Obama and Mitt Romney’s paths for solutions to our country’s problem are divergent and divisive.  Let’s take a look at their energy policy proposals and what they mean for Ohio.

The general policy difference between the two candidates is simple. President Obama wants to encourage renewable energy while continuing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel energy sources.  The challenger Romney wants to release the coal and oil industries from the requirements of the 1970 Clean Air Act in an effort to increase national energy production.

This difference will determine how energy jobs are created.  Obama’s focus on renewable energy has created 3.1 million new green jobs, including 126,000 in Ohio.   CNN reported that the top three clean-tech states employ more people in green jobs than the coal industry does nationwide.  The wind industry now has 75,000 workers in the U.S. compared to 81,000 in the coal industry.

Romney says four million new jobs in oil, gas and coal industries will be created by opening up coastal Virginia and the Carolinas for oil exploration and cutting back on environment regulations.

The regulations Romney wants to gut are from the 1970 Clean Air Act.  President Richard Nixon signed into law the act which is the foundation for many of today’s environmental regulations.  Many of Romney’s proposals would require major reductions in America’s environmental standards.

Another major difference between the candidates is in energy tax credits.  Romney favors a proposal to eliminate the wind energy tax credit while refusing to end the tax credits for fossil fuel energy. This would have a devastating impact on Ohio which ranked as the fastest growing state for new wind-power installations last year. 

Obama supports the wind tax credit and a reduction in the $4 billion a year the oil industry receives in tax credits. 

The car mileage standards negotiated between the auto industry and the federal government is also up for debate.  An agreement between the federal government and the auto industry sets the standard of 54.5 miles per gallon for autos by 2025.  It will save Americans an average of $8000 over the life of the car while reducing greenhouse emissions.  The auto industry does not want to renegotiate the standards.  Romney wants to reduce it anyway.

Polls show approximately eighty percent of Americans support the increased production and use of renewable energy.  The explosion of renewable energy into the consciousness of the world is stunning.  Going back in time now and solely embracing fossil fuel energy to the detriment of renewable energy makes no sense.

Two great Ohioans, Orville and Wilbur Wright, were the first to build and fly an airplane.  Sixty-six years later another great Ohioan, Neil Armstrong, walked on the moon.  The stunning advancement of aviation technology is only one example of how quickly innovation can come once you start focusing the country’s intentions on it.    

The energy policy difference between the two candidates is stark.  We cannot go back to the 1960s and power our world solely on fossil fuels.  We must look to the future and trust technology will continue to lead our country to greater heights.  The energy policy differences between the candidates makes Ohio Energy Soldiers’ support for the reelection of Barack Obama for president of the United States an easy one.

John McGory is an Ohio Energy Soldier.  Become a fan of our Facebook page by going to this link.  We support a strong Ohio economy linked to renewable energy.

Obama or Romney? Nah, electricity

By John McGory

This year’s presidential election will determine who our country’s leader will be.  Regardless of who wins, the real power in our world is electricity.

Electricity is the one leader we cannot do without.  We can change presidents and prime ministers but could you imagine the state of world affairs if we lost power for a substantial period of time? It would be very ugly.

The recent storms that ripped through the Midwest and Middle Atlantic states left millions without electricity for up to a week.  Ask any business or individual who didn’t have power for a week how important electricity is to them today.  They would kneel to the all powerful king.

The world’s economic and environmental future hinges on how we continue to provide a steady, reliable stream of electricity for a growing world.  The world-wide consumption of electricity doubled since 1980 and is expected to double again by 2030. 

China doubled its electric power system between 2006 and 2010.  India electric consumption will increase fivefold from 2010 to 2030. 

The United States electric needs sound modest in comparison to developing countries.  The U.S. electricity consumption will increase by 1.4 percent a year for the next two decades, according to Daniel Yergin in his book, “The Quest.”  But don’t be fooled, it will not be easy to produce.   Yergin says the U.S. will need to build about 300 new standard-sized coal-fired plants or 150 nuclear reactors to meet that increased consumption.

So how does the world get from here to there to meet it insatiable hunger for electricity?  Here are two questions that need to be answered:

1.   What types of fuel will countries use to produce their electricity needs? 
2.    How will the world pay for the estimated $14 trillion it will cost to accommodate this growth?        

Electricity’s great strength is its flexibility.  It is not a primary energy resource but one that is made from other resources.    Coal, natural gas and uranium are today’s big three with coal supplying 45 percent of the power for electricity, followed by natural gas at 23 percent and rising, and nuclear at 20 percent.  Hydropower supplies seven percent, wind approximately two percent and oil one percent. 

These primary resources are competing for a piece of the worldwide $14 trillion electric pie.  They all have their pluses and minuses.  Coal, natural gas and nuclear are the big boys who are elbowing their way into position.

They are trying to elbow out renewable energies.  The big three continue to say that renewable energies are decades away from having a significant impact on the world’s electricity needs.

This year’s presidential election will put Barack Obama and Mitt Romney in a tight spot.  Huge contributions are coming in from the big energy producers.  But 85 percent of the public wants renewable energies to play a bigger role in meeting our energy needs. 

The candidates are going to walk a tightrope in appeasing big energy contributors while assuring the public that renewables will play a part in our energy future.  Listen closely to the candidates and you should be able to tell who is paying for the words that are coming out of their mouths. 

Electricity is our sovereign ruler.  We need it to live in our modern world.  The need for more power is great so the stakes are high.  Our economic and environmental future hinges on how we produce and pay for electricity.  The king must be served.

John McGory is an Ohio Energy Soldier and a partner in Webface, an original content marketing company.              

Ohio: A picture of renewable mediocrity

By John McGory

The U.S. Department of Energy's website ranks state's in terms of their renewable energy production.  Ohio is truly mediocre when it comes to its ranking.  We are 38th.

It is easy to see why states like Texas and Iowa are big wind power states, California a solar state and Idaho a hydro power generator.  These states have the natural resources to create power that Ohio does not.

It is sort of like rooting for Ohio professional sports teams.  We cheer mightly for our teams but know that we have a hard time running with the big dogs.

"We always do our best" is the phrase uttered by countless Ohio pro atheletes.  They tell their fans that as long as the team is giving its all, then good things will eventually happen.

When it comes to renewable energy production one wonders if Ohio is doing its best? The Ohio Legislature passed a 2008 mandate requiring Ohio to produce 12.5 percent of its power by renewable energy by 2025 and another 12.5 percent by alternative energy.  Renewables are solar, wind and hydro and alternatives include clean coal technology and reduced energy consumption.

Is that a good enough goal for Ohio?  The U.S. Department of Energy says Ohio produces 9.15 percent of its energy from renewable sources.  That means we only have to increase our renewable energy production by 3.35 percent in the next 13 years to meet our goal.  Seems like we can do a lot better.

Michigan voters will decide this November if their state shall require a 25 percent standard for renewable energy by 2025.  The big corporate types are coming out against it.  It is an election Ohioans should keep their eyes on. 

Let's not accept mediocrity when it comes to renewable energy.  Maybe we won't produce 100 percent of our state's energy needs like Idaho, but setting the bar a little higher could get us out of the rut known as 38th place.

John McGory is a partner in the original content marketing company, Webface, and a licensed Realtor.

Join the Ohio Energy Soldiers

By John McGory

Energy is the key to the future.  Developing renewable, clean sources of energy will improve our economy, our national security and the well-being of all of our family and friends.

Support for renewable energy is a non-partisan issue.  Polls show 85 percent of the people support it.  But changing from fossil-based energy to clean, renewable energy will take many years and the dedication of everyone to achieve it. 

The issue is simple.  The world won’t change unless we change it one person at a time.  This organization plans to do just that and would like you to join us.

Our goal is to gain supporters for energy independence and a “renewable security” for our state and nation.

You can join by liking us on Facebook.  Go here to do that http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ohio-Energy-Soldiers/398221510229537    

Please join us if you want to make a difference.  Post on our Facebook page how you or others are changing the world one bit at a time.  If you agree, then pass along this link and encourage your friends and family to join.

Take the Ohio Energy Soldier oath: 

“As an Ohio Energy Soldier I will strengthen our state by supporting energy independence by reducing my personal carbon footprint.  I support a non-partisan approach, research and development and the use of less Ohio water for clean energy development.  I will defend our “renewable security” and support a stronger Ohio economy through a clean energy future.”

Let us honor the thousands of soldiers who have died in wars protecting sources of oil.  Let us honor them by becoming a stronger, more secure Ohio and America by producing our own energy needs through renewable clean energy.

John McGory is a partner at Webface, an original content marketing company.