The country is still reeling from President Bush's admission during the state of the union address that America was "addicted to oil." Now, three weeks later, the president is touring the country, touting his administration’s commitment to renewable sources of energy. But the president is not putting his money where his mouth is. In fact, he has gutted funding for renewable energy like wind and solar. And while he is busy with his PR blitz, the future of offshore wind hangs in the balance as members of his party in Congress are trying to kill attempts to build America’s first offshore wind farm.

As fast as the words came out of the president’s mouth, administration officials began to backtrack. The day after the president said he would reduce imports of Middle Eastern oil by 75 percent by 2025, his energy secretary explained he was merely speaking "metaphorically," - he didn’t actually mean it.

We're calling on President Bush to stop paying lip service to a clean and independent energy future, and actually take steps toward achieving one. If he wants an energy policy that scientists, environmentalists and public citizens can rally around, he must incorporate the following:

The doubling of current fuel economy standards by 2025, with a 50 percent increase for new vehicles by 2015.
No less than 25 percent of the nation’s liquid transportation fuels and electricity should be provided, or displaced by renewable sources, including renewably-generated hydrogen, and should be increased by at least one percent per year thereafter.
State and federal standards should mandate the energy efficiency of appliances, motors and lighting be improved by no less than 20 percent by 2025.
Energy use in the electricity sector reduced by at least 10 percent by 2025, through improved energy storage and transmission technologies.
The expansion of renewable energy, efficiency and generator technologies should be encouraged through tax incentives, government procurement and planning programs.
Increased funding for research, development and deployment of renewable energy and efficiency technologies; doubled over the next five years, and be expanded to five times the current levels by 2025. This funding should come from gradually increased dedicated taxes on carbon-based fuels, energy imports, and fossil-fuel leases on federal lands.
Licenses for new nuclear power plants should not be extended or renewed, and nuclear funds should be directed toward plant decommissioning, waste clean-up, storage and disposal.
In other words, our nation must cut down our energy consumption and start investing in renewable energy sources like wind and solar. Representative Don Young (R-AK) obviously disagrees.

In a stunning move, Rep. Young is leading the effort to put an end to the Cape Wind project, which would be America’s first offshore wind farm. He is seeking to attach an amendment that would strip authority away from the Coast Guard to review any offshore wind project closer than 1.5 nautical miles, including the one proposed in Massachusetts.

Take Action!

If President Bush is going to make energy promises, it's up to us to hold his party to them.

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/energy-future#
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tell Representative Young and other members of Congress that America wants wind farms, and Massachusetts is the perfect place to start. http://members.greenpeace.org/action...p?action_id=76
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll be happy to take action.

Thanks for the post.

Don't know if this applies everywhere, but within 50 miles of where I live, there have been HUNDREDS of wind generators erected within the last 10 years. There may be more than 1,000.

Every one of them has Federal money behind it.

And though this is not Bush, personally, in this case the Feds HAVE BEEN putting their money where their mouth is.

Not really. Our government spends about a hundred times more for oil companies than it does for alternative energy.

I'm not talking about percentages. I'm talking about the FACT that these hundreds upon hudreds of wind generators have FEDERAL FUNDING behind them. So there's no reason to try to sidetrack it with inane comparisons.

It SHOULD be more. But at least it's a start.

It's not inane, it's true, and it's hypocritical. How can you claim that the government is for phasing out polluting measures in favor of alternative fuels, when we're still giving money to big oil? Not only that, but big oil has HUGE profit margins, whereas alternative fuel does not. It's simple economics. In order for alternative fuels and energy sources to catch on, they have to be more desireable than the old ones. Being more environmentally friendly isn't the biggest concern of the average American. I think the high rate of SUV sales indicates that. It's dropped off recently, but not because Americans care about the environment. It's because gas prices are too high. I think that's actually a good thing. It's doing what the government isn't.

If gas was 12 dollars a gallon, and our government wasn't giving oil companies so much money, we'd have fully alternative, more environmentally friendly cars in less than a year.

You CANNOT have viable wind-generated power UNTIL the technology has been perfected - or at least improved to the point of being efficient. The same is true for other alternative fuels.

Those improvements are being made AS WE SPEAK. However, there is still a ways to go. And for the most part, the Federal Government is making this progress possible through grants and/or tax incentives. This government money may not be up to the level you or I would like, but it IS THERE.

In the meantime, whether you like to admit it or not, we are petro-energy dependent.

Also, in the meantime, if YOU want to actualy DO something that will bring along the alternative-energy industry, BUY AND BURN E85 IN YOUR CAR. There is NOTHING that will spur development like consumer demand.