The Oil Drum: Local

Unfortunately, there are many issues where the federal government has trumped things that states might do. Several states had allowed electric utilities to include investment in conservation in their rate base alongside investment in new generating capacity -- but FERC's "deregulation" of generation did away with those state rules. NYC or Boston might like to encourage very small all-electric cars that are well-suited to their dense urban settings -- but their ability to do so will be limited by federal safety and other standards. Since the 1950s, the Commerce Clause in the US Constitution has been stretched so far by the Supreme Court that states are, effectively, allowed to regulate only if Congress has chosen not to preempt them -- for example, California can have more stringent emission requirements than the EPA's only because Congress has passed specific legislation allowing that.

It's even harder at the local level. In the election last week, Boulder, Colorado passed a "carbon tax" on electricity and exempted customers who use the local utility's wind-power option. I expect this to be successfully challenged in the courts. The wind-power option is an accounting gimmick: even on a day when wind-power is adding nothing to the grid, so that customers are using coal-based electricity, they will not pay the carbon tax. If not in state court over that, they'll lose in federal court because they cannot show that they are accurately taxing power generated in other states and "imported" to Boulder. Any carbon tax associated with electricity and levied on consumers will probably fail in court for the same reasons.

Under the 'localize' mantra, how does one go back to the bad old days of 'states rights' and stop sending lottsa money to the feds?

That way State efforts will have funding?

This time of change in political control of Congress is perhaps a time of very great opportunity. New people in positions of power are potentially open to new ideas, much more so than the incumbents were. Now is the time to try and influence them to embark on the necessary changes.

I am particularly encouraged by the victory of McNerney over Pombo in a California district. I understand that McNerney is a wind energy developer, and I am reasonably sure that he must be aware of peak oil. Perhaps he will be able to impress his colleagues with the importance of this issue.

Perhaps not much can be done legislatively in the next two years, given that Bush still has veto power. But like you, I'll settle for anything that begins to overcome inertia. Maybe these next two years will be best used to get a strategy in place to really push by the time a new administration takes office.

I am concerned that measures that are really needed will be avoided because of a fear of voter retribution. How can better CAFE standards and reduced speed limits be legislated without paying a heavy political price? I'm sure that I don't know, but I'm also sure that we don't improve things very much without them.

And how do you increase the tax on gasoline to European levels without committing political suicide? Oil profits have already increased, and will certainly increase even more when demand gets way ahead of supply. Perhaps a windfall profits tax on oil companies is the only way to get the job done?

Tony Verbalis

As an aside, we should recognize that congress people and/or staffers may be reading this board. Just another reason to keep our comments focused and somewhat on topic.

 Either it is ignorance, or incompetence, or both.

 And as I read on, my suspicions only rise.
for instance:
*Support the development of a hydrogen economy

   Any idea how much oil or equivalent energy is needed to produce, pressurize, transport and store a gallon of hydrogen?
Any idea how little energy is in a gallon of hydroven compared to gallon of about anything else?

*Promote deployment of advanced clean coal technology with carbon capture and storage

    This is a total politically pleasing nonsence. What energy is left in coal if you take out the Carbon?! How much energy capture and storage costs? Is the leftover enought for mining and transportation?

   Is is that they do not care as long as they get the votes or they relly have no clue?

Absolutely correct.  However, that type of action goes against every instinct of the typical politician.

We desperately need localization and community solutions to be a major focus.  We also need funding for education to go beyond technical solutions and include disease prevention, experts on small scale farming and other types of independent work arrangements, and establishing protocols for community problem solving.

Unfortunately, the federal govt, has moved in the opposite direction by working to centralize power and supporting private industry to do the same.

Some empirical observations on the further centralization of law enforcement functions is a good illustration:

>Local law enforcement is increasingly dependent on federal funds (esp. the post 9/11 DHS slush funding);

>Patriot Act blurs lines between federal and state/local law enforcement;

>2008 ushers in the era of the Real ID and moves American closer to a national ID system;

>Coinciding with the approx timing of Real ID, the military has announced that uniforms will change color from green to blue;

>The military is now working with the Border Patrol.  Is this the first step for a blending of U.S. military and law enforcement?

As an aside, I recently read about a trend towards elimination of the jury system.  This would streamline continuing centralization of authority for the feds.