Something to Think About: Your Own State Energy Plans

Keeping with the theme of Michigan's Proposal 3 from the week, the something to think about will be on a similar topic.

Currently Michigan does already have an energy plan in place, 10% coming from alternative energies by 2015. The proposal would have simply increased the percentage and the year goal date.

What about your state or country?

Do you know what sort of energy goals your geographical area has right now?

Think about it this weekend. Maybe even do some research.

Let me know what you find out!

Current Topic Thursday: Proposal 3 Final Results

They say whoever spends more and raises the most money will win whatever position they are vying for.

This proves true with Michigan's proposal 3. The article linked here through the Huffington Post explains the highest funded companies that supported either the 'yes' or 'no' for proposal 3.

Surprise surprise,

"According to the Michigan Campaign Finance Network, Prop 3 supporters like the League of Conservation Voters, the American Wind Energy Association and the Green Tech Action Fund contributed over $10 million to the group Michigan Energy, Michigan Jobs to get the amendment passed. The Clean Affordable Renewable Energy (CARE) committee raised more than $23 million from DTE Energy, Consumers Energy and Wolverine Electric to oppose it."

Prop 3 Turnout

Prop 3 failed.

Miserably.

And it makes me sad.

Presidential Election Night

In support of more awareness (as if it needed it) for the USA presidential election I have linked a website to a current time assumption and counting system.

Keep watch on the changing events instead of reading here!

http://news.yahoo.com/control-room/
http://www.google.com/elections/ed/us/results

Proposal 3

So far I have yet to bring in anything political at all, and this was done on purpose. However, with the day before election day I have now had people ask me what way to vote on Prop 3 here in Michigan.

In Michigan we have 6 proposals total, number 3 being about requiring renewable energy to be used 25% (of total energy produced) by the time by 2025.

My suggestion? Make up your own mind about this. I am not very knowledgeable about political things, and the political style of writing (adding in little clauses, tidbits, and confusing terminology and loop holes) makes my head hurt.

I would vote yes, since on the surface it's a good thing to require our energy to come from renewable sources. The interesting part will be seeing where the renewable comes from, how they are built, how workers are treated, what land needs to be cleared, and more.

Nothing is perfect, but at least it is a step in the right direction.

Something to Think About: Devil's Advocate

Throughout the months I've been putting up thoughts, opinions, articles, and facts I have always put sustainability and sustainable business in the 'light'. To me, it is the most obvious choice to make - turning towards sustainability.

But I am not naive to believe everyone feels this way. Already I have had interviews, networking, and speaking opportunities and have had people laugh. In one instance this past week, the man I was speaking with laughed openly the whole time while I was explaining what my major was and how it could greatly help his company.

So, I'm playing devil's advocate this weekend.

Why wouldn't someone want to move towards sustainability?

Think about it this weekend, and let me know your thoughts.

Current Topic Thursday: Make Way for Superstorm Sandy!

"From the climate hawk’s perspective, there is an intense, crazy-making urgency involved in all this. A humanitarian tragedy is heading our way and we are neither preparing for it nor working to reduce its severity. A catastrophe is unfolding, right in front of us, in slow motion. Somehow — no one knows how, but somehow — the American public must be made to appreciate that urgency and demand action. It is rare that an opportunity to highlight the climate crisis emerges out of the daily news scrum. When such an opportunity does emerge, climate hawks view it as a moral and political imperative to make the most of it."

That quote is taken from the article, Hawks vs. scolds: How 'reverse tribalism' affects climate communication. With the big Superstorm Sandy that just hit the East Coast of the United States I knew there would be articles like the above popping up.

Was the storm influenced by climate change or not?

Obviously there is some influence, the climate is different so our storms and weather are different, but to how high of a different degree?

This article puts an interesting approach on that very question, the climate hawks vs scolders vs people who agree one way or another, but don't want labels.

Give the article a read and let me know what you think!