The Mind of Mike

Solyndra and Southside Solar Innovation

2012-01-27T09:49:00.000-05:00

As the battle over the Solyndra loan guarantees continue I see no one talking about the good things coming out of the NREL's (National Renewable Energy Laboratory) SunShot Incubator Program, and how this program has brought 1.3 billion dollars of private investment into the solar energy sector.

From Smart Planet:

Startup Semprius took the transfer-printing technology it originally developed for flexible electronics and applied it to solar cells. What did they create in return? Tiny solar cells — each a dot the size of a ballpoint pen tip — able to convert 41 percent of solar energy into electricity using low-cost lenses to concentrate the sun more than 1,000 times.

The Energy Department’s National Renewable Energy Lab announced Wednesday it had recently validated the 41 percent efficiency of the company’s solar cells. Semprius was selected by the DOE and NREL as one of its PV Incubator (now called SunShot) companies. The startup, which began at the University of Illinois, has piqued the interest and investment dollars of venture capitalists and power gear giant Siemens. Last June, Siemens took its partnership with Semprius considerably further and bought a 16-percent stake in the company.

From the NREL Newsroom:

Sunshot Incubator Program Spurs Private Investment

Enlarge image NREL's state-of-the-art testing and characterization instruments scrutinize the quality and efficiency of solar cells, such as on this module made by Semprius. Credit: NREL staff Since 2007, DOE has invested $50 million for 35 solar start-ups to participate in the PV Incubator program — now the SunShot Incubator — at NREL. Private investment in those firms now totals more than $1.3 billion, a 25-to-1 multiple.

DOE and NREL selected Semprius to be one of their PV Incubator companies in 2010. Incubator companies get $1 million to $3 million to develop their concepts into actual working prototypes or pilot projects. And they also get the expertise of NREL scientists to help overcome obstacles and test for reliability and validity.

Now I'm not for throwing taxpayer money blindly at every new technology but here is a program that allowed struggling entrepreneurs to come up with the best ideas and compete for funding to finance their startup. A startup working on solar technology that can be cost competitive with other fossil fuel sources of energy.

Same press release:

In 2010, Semprius earned one of four spots in what is now the SunShot Incubator, which is funded by DOE and run out of NREL.

Ghosal laughs when he remembers the frantic moments finishing the application for the PV Incubator.

"We barely met the criteria," Ghosal said. "The rules said that you had to have a module ready to be eligible, but we only had small squares with a couple of cells, not a real module."

So, the Semprius engineers "worked feverishly day and night to make our first module." "Two days before the deadline, we were able to get good results from that first module," Ghosal said. "We applied for the Incubator grant with the results from this module and a scale-up plan."

When Ghosal asked the company's engineers about whether they could meet the hard deadlines and aggressive goals laid down by NREL, "I was met with a lot of apprehension," he recalled. "NREL was asking for a lot of deliverables that had not been done before."

But it all worked out, and Semprius became the latest Incubator company to achieve more than it thought it could via the strict dictates of the NREL contract.

"It looked like a tall order, but we met all our goals,"Ghosal said.

Kaitlyn VanSant, NREL's technical monitor for Semprius, said the company is being too modest.

"They actually met the goals a lot faster than originally anticipated," VanSant said. "The goals were definitely aggressive, but they accomplished them quicker than the timeline."

The modules to be made in the North Carolina plant starting next year will be 24 inches by 18 inches, and about 2 and a half inches deep, have a concentration of more than 1,100 suns and an efficiency of more than 31 percent. These modules would be cost competitive with fossil fuel technology at high volume.

NREL's role was critical, Ghosal said.

"A lot of the early benefits were from the testing NREL could do. NREL has an internationally recognized testing program," Ghosal said. "It's one thing to claim a particular output, but something different to say that it was validated at NREL. It gives that stamp of credibility.

"Also, we learned from NREL how vigorous we had to be in terms of the materials we are using," Ghosal said. "We got an understanding of how it would perform in the field and got some important pointers of what to watch for."

Now this is a great story of entrepreneurs working hard and getting a small amount of help and expertise from the government to get started. Not any long term subsidies but just a little help to get going with their dream.

Semprius has also partnered with the nanotechnology program at Danville Community College to provide workers the skills needed to compete in this new and exciting career field.

Okay, now for the bad part: Why did the jobs go to North Carolina and not Southside Virginia? That's a tough question that needs to be debated. North Carolina has put in place some policies like a Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard and other incentives. So when I see certain bills get killed in committee and not debated, and utilities are allowed to charge fees that could stifle the adoption of new innovations, I get frustrated.

I know I'm a little blind at times but can someone 'splain this stuff to me?

Building an Entrepreneurial Great Society

2012-01-27T04:59:00.000-05:00

Today Senator Mark Warner is urging the president for support with the Startup Act.

From the Augusta Free Press:

In December, Sens. Moran and Warner introduced legislation called The Startup Act (S. 1965) to jumpstart the economy through the creation and growth of new businesses.

“Last night, in your State of the Union address, you called on Congress to pass an agenda that helps startups and small businesses succeed. We have introduced such a bill to harness the job-creating potential of entrepreneurs,” the senators said. “In the Startup Act, we address the need to reduce regulatory burdens, provide tax relief to help startups grow, support research conducted at American universities that will spur innovation, and we create new opportunities for American-educated foreign students to stay in the United States where their high-tech skills will fuel growth in our country.”

You can read the full text of the bill here. I really like this bill because it tears down some barriers while developing an ecosystem of capital, education, innovation and accountability to help future entrepreneurs succeed in the 21st century.

Nice work Senator Warner.

Here is a great segment from the Dylan Ratigan show on startups and cradles of innovation:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Moving Forward with Natural Gas

2012-01-26T15:25:00.000-05:00

Today U.S. Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Richard Burr (R-NC) today applauded the President for endorsing the idea of creating new incentives for running medium and heavy trucks, and public transportation vehicles on natural gas. The Senators are authors of the NAT GAS Act. The President has endorsed new incentives for medium- and heavy-duty trucks that run on natural gas and support programs to convert municipal buses and trucks to run on natural gas. These ideas are both in and fully paid for in the NAT GAS Act.

Press release from Senator Menendez:

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Richard Burr (R-NC) today applauded the President for endorsing the idea of creating new incentives for running medium and heavy trucks, and public transportation vehicles on natural gas. The Senators are authors of the New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions (NAT GAS) Act of 2011, legislation that would boost domestic production of vehicles that run on clean natural gas by extending tax credits for natural gas vehicles and building refueling infrastructure, and be fully paid for by a temporary user fee on natural gas used as a vehicle fuel.

Today President Obama will give two speeches about his clean energy blueprint announced during the State of the Union address. The first talk will occur at a United Parcel Service facility in Las Vegas, the second at Buckley Air Force base in Aurora, Colorado. In both speeches the President is expected to endorse new incentives for medium- and heavy-duty trucks that run on natural gas and support programs to convert municipal buses and trucks to run on natural gas. These ideas are both in and fully paid for in the NAT GAS Act.

“We look forward to working with the President to pass our legislation to use more cheap, domestic natural gas here in America instead of exporting this fuel abroad,” said Menendez. “Our bipartisan bill will create jobs and lower transportation costs and do so without adding one dime to the deficit. This is exactly the kind of bipartisan proposal we should be able to pass, even in an election year.”

“Natural gas represents a way to boost our nation's energy security and help free us from our over-reliance on foreign oil, and I am pleased to hear that the President is committed to working with us on this effort" said Senator Burr. "Energy security is absolutely vital to national security, and our bill would be a step in the right direction towards decreasing our dependence on imported energy sources."

Currently there are nearly 14 million natural gas vehicles in the world, but only about 117,000 in the United States. [EIA, 2011] It is estimated that the NAT GAS Act of 2011 will jumpstart the industry and in ten years add over 700,000 NGVs to our roads. In addition it is estimated that the bill will displace over 20 billion gallons of fuel and create over 1 million direct and indirect jobs.

Natural Gas is Plentiful

North America’s natural gas resources discoveries have increased by more than 1,800 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) over the past three years, bringing the total natural gas resource base to more than 3,000 Tcf. With U.S. natural gas demand at about 23.5 Tcf per year, this resource could supply current consumption for over 100 years. [Fueling North America’s Energy Future, p. ES-4]

Natural Gas Is Cheap

At the pump, on average, CNG sells for $2.33 per gasoline gallon equivalent while gasoline sells for $3.46 [DOE Clean Cities Price Report, p. 3]. LNG, which competes primarily with diesel fuel, currently is selling for $2.25 per diesel gallon equivalent while diesel sells for $3.81 per gallon. [Id., p. 6 n.6]

We Have To Decide: Do We Use It Here Or Export It?

If we do not use our natural gas here in America, it will be exported abroad, for other’s benefit. The price of natural gas internationally is significantly higher than it is here in the United States. As a result one facility recently received a permit to export natural gas and four more U.S. facilities are following suit. [Testimony of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Oil & Natural Gas Mr. Chris Smith, 11/8/11] We can use that natural gas here in the United States to displace oil or we can export it, so other countries can improve their own energy security and clean their air.

This could be great news for the natural gas producing region of Southwest Virginia and the hard working men and women of Volvo Trucks in Dublin. The ball is now in the hands of Congress to act and help to create 1 million direct and indirect jobs while reducing energy prices for the consumer.

Video from President Obama's speech:

video platform video management video solutions video player

New Obama Defense Plan and Martinsville Jobs

2012-01-26T01:11:00.000-05:00

After watching most of the GOP primary debates and trying to analyze the candidate's positions on defense and foreign policy I found myself becoming increasingly frustrated with the lack of knowledge and honesty. The most knowledgeable candidate and the one who articulated the most realistic and fiscally responsible plan was Jon Huntsman. But with Huntsman out, and after watching the State of the Union address, it seems that the Obama Administration is ready to begin the execution of a new defense plan moving forward.

From Wired Magazine's Danger Room Blog:

Obama’s New Defense Plan: Drones, Spec Ops and Cyber War

The President announced his vision for the future of the U.S. military today. Kiss big counterinsurgencies goodbye. Get ready for more shadow wars, drone attacks and online combat, with the military’s eyes on the Pacific, rather than Afghanistan.

In a rare visit to the Pentagon, President Obama declared that the U.S. will be “strengthening our presence in the Asia-Pacific,” while “turning the page on a decade of war.” In practice, that means cutting the Army and Marine Corps and unspecified “outdated Cold War systems,” part of a broad effort to cut what the Pentagon now calculates as $487 billion over 10 years from its budget.

But it also means that the U.S. is going to lean hard on other military specialties between now and 2020. Obama identified those as “intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, counterterrorism, countering weapons of mass destruction, and the ability to operate in environments where adversaries try to deny us access.”

Translated from the defense wonk: lots of spy tools including drones; lethal special operations forces; offensive cyber weapons; jammers; and a presence to deter and confront Iran — and maybe China, which seeks to keep the Navy and Air Force off its shores.

All I can say on this one is thank you Mr. President. This has been long over due and we as a nation definitely need to reevaluate the sacrifice in both blood and treasure during the past decade. There is just no way this nation could possibly continue the Bush doctrine given the fiscal situation this nation currently faces.

But with this new strategy may come many sacrifices in the defense industry here in Virginia. With the loss of over 40% of all manufacturing jobs in Virginia the main driving factor in the state's economy in the past decade has been the defense industry. And the hardest hit area with the most manufacturing job losses is Martinsville, Virginia.

From today's Martinsville Bulletin:

RTI CEO: U.S. deficit plan critical to jobs here

With so much uncertainty in Washington, the company doesn’t know what will happen next with the joint strike fighter, which Leone described as “one of the major programs that would go through that (Martinsville) plant — not the only one, but a major one.”

About 20 people are working at the Patriot Centre plant, Leone said. They recently began producing test pieces for a customer certification process in which the equipment, the facility and its products will be tested to make sure they meet the specifications of Lockheed Martin and other customers, he said.

The good news for workers in Martinsville with the new Obama strategy could be the salvaging of the Joint Strike Fighter program.

From Wired's Danger Room blog:

Trillion-Dollar Stealth Fighter Program Delayed, But Still Tracking

In the short term, The military will purchase only 30-60 JSFs per year from 2013 to 2017, an almost 25-percent reduction that could save $15 billion in the next few years. News of the delay comes at the same time the White House and Pentagon are rolling out a new U.S. military strategy that de-emphasizes grinding land wars in favor of air and sea deterrence in the Pacific.

The military still aims to eventually buy about 1,800 copies of Lockheed Martin’s stealthy, single-engine fighter for the Air Force, and another 700 or so for the Navy and Marines. And all three versions of the $100-million-a-pop fighter will apparently go forward: the Air Force’s and Navy’s conventional-takeoff models and the Marines’ more complex vertical-launching variant, which last year was placed on “probation” owing to weight and reliability issues.

At a trillion dollars over 50 years, JSF is history’s most expensive weapons program. Currently, the Pentagon anticipates the F-35 being combat-ready sometime in 2018.

The fresh commitment to the jet, rather than the long-telegraphed production delay, is the real news in the ongoing Defense Department revamp. It seems the Pentagon’s renewed interest in traditional air power trumps the F-35′s troubled history and the growing pressure for deep cuts in defense spending.

There is no doubt that this program has a troubled history, but I feel the long-term strategy is the right way to go, and America will need the right weapon systems to "fight smart" in the future.

A lot at stake in this next election: for the country, the world, and the workers of Martinsville, Virginia. I always try to call it like I see it, and on this one the president has it right.

Response to the State of the Union 1/25/12

2012-01-25T03:42:00.001-05:00

I missed a little of President Obama's speech tonight but I have to admit that I was impressed with many of the policy proposals and how they could effect the citizens of this part of the state. From simplification and consolidation of job retraining programs, to tax reform, and even a new approach to energy reform, they all sounded pretty good.

I was very interested in the president's promotion of natural gas along with other alternatives to create a new energy economy.

After this speech the president will be heading to Las Vegas to promote his agenda.

From the Las Vegas Sun:

In Nevada, conversations about investing in energy usually revolve around geothermal power or solar panels. But Obama is not coming to Nevada to talk at a power plant in the desert.

Obama arrives in Las Vegas Wednesday evening. On Thursday morning, he is delivering public remarks at the United Parcel Service Las Vegas South facility.

Last year, UPS announced it had contracted with Clean Energy Fuels Corp. to roll out a fleet of 48 liquefied natural gas-fueled transport trucks at a new LNG fueling station. The initial contract, set for seven years, started in 2011.

If the president moves more towards this balanced approach on energy it could have a big impact for the workers of Southwest Virginia. I have written before on some ideas about natural gas, coal and other alternatives that can create jobs and wealth for the citizens of this area. Many of the president's recommendations in the area of smart grid investment (video) and natural gas with other alternatives could have an immediate impact on jobs right here in Southwest Virginia.

From Volvo Trucks North America:

Volvo Trucks Adds Factory-Installed Natural Gas Option for VNM Daycab

The natural gas option is ideal for port drayage, pickup and delivery applications, grocery and beverage haulers, or any private fleet concerned about CO2 emissions.

“Localized or closed-loop operations present a great opportunity for companies to utilize our nation’s abundant domestic supply of natural gas,” said Ron Huibers, senior vice president – sales and marketing. “Volvo is already delivering the cleanest trucks in the world in terms of regulated emissions, and now we’re offering an alternative fuel option to move our nation’s goods while emitting less CO2.”

Powering the VNM daycab is a 9-liter, 320 hp, 1,000 lb.-ft. torque Cummins Westport ISL G engine that uses cost-effective, clean-burning compressed or liquefied natural gas. The heavy-duty engine features maintenance free aftertreatment, requiring only a three-way catalyst to meet EPA 2010 emissions standards.

Volvo Trucks North America’s operations and products are guided by the company’s three core values: Quality, Safety and Environmental Care. The Volvo VN and VHD trucks are assembled in the United States at the New River Valley Plant in Dublin, Virginia, while Volvo engines for North America are assembled in Hagerstown, Maryland. Both plants are certified to ISO14001 environmental and ISO9001 quality standards.

With a little incentive and small investment in infrastructure from the government, Volvo could move out of the localized or closed-loop market and move natural gas and other alternatives into long-haul truck sector. At current natural gas prices a trucker would save about $2.00 a gallon over the petroleum-based diesel equivalent. So why are we not moving on this? Why should the oil companies have a complete monopoly of this market? Why is the House Energy and Commerce committee not moving this forward? Good questions? (video)

Anyway, the most fun I've had on this blog is going back and forth on energy with Progressive blogger, Lowell Feld.

Here is a great video that I hope everyone will watch regardless of your party affiliation.

Winners Don't Punt on First Down

2012-01-23T13:15:00.001-05:00

Okay, I think everyone knows that I have supported the Republican Governor Bob McDonnell in 2009 and Democrat Roscoe Reynolds in 2011. The main reason I supported Bob McDonnell in 2009 was the transportation issue and maybe he would take a different approach to economic development here in Southside Virginia. I thought the governor could leverage some innovative ideas and work towards a sustainable transportation funding solution for the state. I have even gone as far as telling stories of Southside entrepreneurs and civic leaders fighting their way through the briar patch to promote many of the governor's ideas.

Now it's crunch time, the game is on the line, and it seems the governor wants to punt on first down.

From the Washington Post:

The governor’s inability, or unwillingness, to deliver major, ongoing new funding for transportation, despite the extravagant promises he made as a candidate, is a major failure, one that is likely to haunt Virginia for years.

The failure is compounded given that Mr. McDonnell, a Republican, is the first governor in more than a decade to face a General Assembly wholly controlled by his own party. Virginians may conclude that the GOP cannot resolve what the governor himself has identified as a full-blown crisis that threatens Virginia’s long-term economic health.

Until a few days ago, Northern Virginia lawmakers and officials of Mr. McDonnell’s administration hoped for a deal that would allow the state to stop digging itself deeper into a transportation funding hole. The deal might have taken the form of indexing the gas tax, last raised in 1986, to inflation, or some other means of ensuring that Virginians pay for the transportation they use.

Now, Governor McDonnell talked a good game in 2009, but the big question is does he have the skills to play a good game for the citizens of the Commonwealth. I'm not seeing it this year.

Anyway, enough of all these pressing issues for now. What kind of critters is on the mind of the AG these days?

“I’m protecting the borders again, this time from illegal rats,” McDonough said. “I’m very concerned about my friends in Prince George’s and Montgomery counties. They’re on the front lines of this.”

Jesus, God help us all down here in the economic black hole of the state.

As always, just calling it like I see it.

When is Anyone Going to Get Serious?

2012-01-22T10:15:00.000-05:00

I'm not an expert but the other day I tried to lay out what I see as the current Virginia transportation funding situation.

Today I'm reading this from Jim Bacon:

And the hits just keep on coming… Gov. Bob McDonnell has announced an addendum to the 2012 transportation legislation he is seeking this year. My favorite measure is this: Authorizing the Commonwealth Transportation Board to sell naming rights for transportation infrastructure!

According to the governor’s press release, the legislation will allow private entities to place their name on highways, interchanges, bridges and other infrastructure for an annual fee. Proceeds would be applied to road maintenance.

I’m looking forward to hearing some of the creative names people come up with. The Verizon Information Super Highway for Interstate 81… or the Utz Pretzel Interchange for the Springfield Interchange…. or the UVa Heart Center Bypass for the Charlottesville Bypass. (Does anyone else have suggestions? Let me hear them.)

Two words Jim: Wagon Trail. Or at least that's what I see as the future of the dispersed rural transportation network of ROVA (Rest of Virginia) unless a serious solution is put on the table soon. More from the Washington Post here.

Autism Bill Passes, Exchange goes in the Round File

2012-01-21T21:37:00.000-05:00

This week the Virginia House of Delegates passed HB 1106 96-1 to help struggling Virginia families deal with childhood autism.

Va. House approves autism licensing bill

The measure authorizes the state Board of Medicine to develop regulations for the licensure of behavior analysts involved in the treatment of autistic children, a necessary step for the care of those youngsters to be covered by Virginia insurers.

After years of debate, lawmakers in 2011 passed a law requiring insurance companies to cover the diagnosis and treatment of young children with autism spectrum disorder. Its provisions generally apply to autistic children ages 2-6 and caps annual expenses at $35,000.

Instead of taking effect in January, however, it was delayed by an amendment from Gov. Bob McDonnell requiring behavior analysts to be licensed by the state for their treatment to be covered by insurance. Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has opined the state presently lacks that licensing ability.

This is a good piece of legislation and this insurance company mandate will go along way to help Virginia families.

But in other news, I'm very disappointed that a free marketplace health exchange where individuals can shop for the most affordable and best health insurance plan to fit their needs will not be debated this year.

Virginia needs a health exchange

Last fall, members of the state health reform initiative advisory council did precisely that. The report outlined potential frameworks for an exchange and a basis for lawmakers to draft legislation.

As expected, details vary in some of this year's bills. Del. Patrick Hope, D-Arlington, submitted a bill that would create a quasi-governmental agency to operate the state-based exchange, an approach that the advisory council recommended by a vote of 11 to 3 in September. Del. Jennifer McClellan, D-Richmond, offered a similar bill.

Del. Kathy Byron, R-Campbell, proposed an alternative discussed by the council: establishing an exchange under the umbrella of the State Corporation Commission.

Each patron, along with the dozen other lawmakers supporting those bills and similar versions in the Senate, can make compelling points about why they believe their model is best for Virginia consumers and coverage providers.

Instead, the bills seem destined to be quietly dust-binned. It's a dangerous and entirely unnecessary gamble.

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule this summer on the constitutionality of the federal reform law's mandate that individuals purchase health insurance.

The politics associated with that decision - and the upcoming presidential election - have undoubtedly contributed to a new ambivalence toward finishing the work begun by last year's General Assembly.

McDonnell has insisted repeatedly in the past month that lawmakers don't need to focus on this kind of legislation. That's bad advice.

I'm not even going to get into the details of this, but I'm sick of this game.

I wrote this post back in 2009 and think many of the principles still apply today.

Ron Wyden on the Health Care Debate

Conservatism vs. Reactionary Populism

2012-01-18T06:07:00.000-05:00

You know, sometimes I get confused by some of the things the tea party does in the name of conservatism. Last month Mark Lloyd said there would be bill watchers trained by the Heritage Foundation to keep an eye on the General Assembly this year.

From the Washington Post:

Bolling isn’t the only Virginia politician under tea party scrutiny. But tea partyers won’t be too focused on liberal Democrats. (“You know what they’re going to do,” Lloyd said. “They’ll tell you that upfront.”) They’ll really be on the lookout for closet moderates who ran as conservative Republicans.

This week the Virginia Conservative Caucus have a bill put forward by Dels. Patrick Hope (D-Arlington) and Jennifer McClellan (D-Richmond) that would form a state-based health exchange for the commonwealth on its hit list. But here is the problem, the state-based health exchanges were actually proposed by the Heritage Foundation as a market alternative to the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).

From the Heritage Foundation:

Defined-Contribution Model v. Government Model: A conservative, market-based exchange is an administrative mechanism for enabling businesses to offer workers a way to choose and own their health insurance while still benefiting from the current tax breaks for employer-sponsored coverage. In sharp contrast, an Obamacare exchange is intended to be a bureaucratic tool for the federal government to subsidize, standardize, and micromanage health insurance coverage.

From Forbes Magazine:

In reality, doing nothing is probably the worst thing any state can do to prevent federal action. The best way for all states to prevent federal intrusion is to make health system reform a states’ rights issue. Each state should boldly and aggressively stake out their territory in identifying what needs to be done and moving forward in a way that works best for their state.

Before President Obama was even elected, Utah studied this issue and decided to take a market-based, business-friendly approach to health system reform. One piece of that plan was to implement a new defined contribution market that would make it easier for small businesses to offer health insurance to their employees. Under this new type of market, employers give each employee a specific allowance that they apply toward the purchase of the health plan of their choice. The support of this market is one of the key functions of the Utah Health Exchange.

Mr. Graham himself supported this approach as recently as February 16, 2011, when he wrote, “I agree with Governor Herbert on this: Let Utah have its Exchange. Maybe someday it will find its feet and make a serious impact.”

I know I get in trouble with a lot of my Republican friends when I call this stuff out but this is a conservative idea. If you don't think something is right shouldn't you try to fix it? A few things I've learned in the past three years is that it is tough to get substantive reform in the areas of health care and energy in Washington. The special interest groups get involved and the noise machine gets cranked up to "11," and sometimes they make stuff up.

I don't agree with everything in the Affordable Care Act but the exchange is a good idea. It allows individuals and small businesses to pool together to receive volume pricing for health insurance and shop for the best plan to fit their needs. The exchange can help many low-income individuals and workers in more rural areas of the state where not all doctors accept Medicaid. Properly structured it could also help to give individuals choice and control the escalating cost of Medicaid that eats into much-needed revenue for education. This should be an area where conservatives could have a win in the marketplace of ideas and work towards a negotiated solution for the good of the people and the taxpayer.

But in today's political world we have to kill it. Why? Because this conservative idea sounds too much like Obamacare.

Special thanks to Del. Patrick Hope (D-Arlington) with support from co-patrons Del. Betsy Carr (D-Richmond), Del. Jennifer McClellan (D-Richmond), Del. Scott Surovell (D-Fairfax), and Del. Jeion Ward (D-Hampton) for bringing this legislation up for debate.

Christmas Gifts, Compromise and Negotiation

2012-01-15T01:22:00.000-05:00

The image of the bridge to the right was taken in Ridgeway, Va. The bridge was constructed with funds received from an earmark appropriated by former Virginia 5th District Congressman Virgil Goode. Most people in this area would agree that this was a proper use of federal funds to replace the old bridge, but I often ask myself what did Virgil have to do to get the earmark? How many times do our elected officials have to compromise their principles to get vital funding for much-needed projects in their home districts? How many times do our elected officials question a piece of legislation, know it is not right, but need the bill to pass so their district will get that funding? Sometimes things get very murky in the grey area when faced with these decisions and the economic reality.

This week Governor Bob McDonnell may be embarking on a bold move to finally get the Commonwealth's transportation funding on a sustainable path.

From the Washington Post:

Gov. McDonnell may finally have a Virginia roads fix

Sources tell us that piece, currently the subject of intensive negotiations among Republicans, involves indexing the state’s badly inadequate gas tax to inflation, or otherwise ensuring that it keeps pace with rising costs — something that should have been done a quarter-century ago.

With indexing or some similar strategy, Virginia would, over time, have access to hundreds of millions of dollars more annually to pay for transportation upgrades. Without it, the state will continue to fall further into an abyss of its own making.

The question is whether Mr. McDonnell can persuade his fellow Republicans not to regard indexing as a tax increase. By any rational calculation, they shouldn’t.

The gas tax, Virginia’s main source of transportation funds, was last raised in 1987, to 17.5 cents per gallon. Since then, rising prices have decimated the revenue it yields, so that the state will soon have no cash — not a dime — for new roads, rails and bridges.

This is most likely going to be a hard sell for Governor McDonnell with many in the base of the Republican Party of Virginia, but you have to look at the economic reality. This is an area that I have gotten myself in big trouble during the last election cycle. You have to ask what is a user fee and what is a tax? You have to look at inflation and auto efficiency due to high oil prices that is eroding the ability of the gas tax to pay for transportation projects. You also have to look at increased world demand for oil, geopolitical instability, and what OPEC is doing to keep the price of oil high.

From The Oil Drum in December:

OPEC says,"Don't Count on US" for more supply

The results of OPEC’s latest meeting to set oil production quotas were announced this morning. Instead of production targets for individual countries, a group production ceiling of 30 million barrels a day was set. This amount is a bit less than OPEC produced in November 2011 (actual 30.367 mbd), according to its reckoning, and less than it would have produced most of 2011, if Libyan production had stayed on line, based on the amounts shown in its November Oil Market Report.

According to a Platts report of the meeting, Venezuelan Oil Minister Rafael Ramirez told reporters, “We are going to reduce the level of production of each country to make space for Libya.” That is not what people want to hear–Brent oil price is still over $100 barrel, even with what seems to be record production for both the world and OPEC.

Each and everyday Americans are getting squeezed at the pump by the price fixing of OPEC and the revenue from the gas tax is being eroded as more consumers are forced to buy more fuel efficient cars and trucks. This trend will also continue with the geopolitical instability of the Arab spring and the need for the leaders of many OPEC nations to pacify their populations with increased spending on social welfare programs to remain in power.

Here is a hard look at what has happened to the price of oil in the last decade.

You can see from the graph above that the price of oil was low and stable during the '90s and the current gas tax worked well, but oil prices have been extremely volatile in the last decade. It is this price volatility that has reduced the revenue from the gas tax. So how did we make up the difference in the last decade? Earmarks and relying on more and more federal spending. Our failure to address the declining purchasing power of the state's current gas tax forced a situation where many of our elected officials at the federal level could not negotiate for the best deal on many controversial spending bills, but had to compromise to keep the earmarks/funds rolling in. All of this is unsustainable both at the federal and state level. In the end there are only a few short cuts and economic gravity always wins.

Since the 2010 election cycle the Republican Party has voted for a voluntary ban on earmarks. So what do you do? Do you go back to the old ways of the last decade? I say it is time to take a hard look at this problem and say here is the economic situation and here is the way to fix the problem. Indexing the gas tax to inflation and fuel efficiency is a good way to stop the bleeding in the short-term and get Virginia moving again. Then start debating other alternatives to the gas tax as more fuel efficient and electric cars come on the market.

Back to the graybeards one more time:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Update: Here is a short video from the Warner - Gilmore debates of 2008 on earmarks and their role in transportation funding for the Commonwealth.

What do you do? I say "Pay For It," and everyone can avoid these compromising positions on legislation in the future. You can't be against earmarks or bailouts and not address this problem. You decide?

Out of the Ashes: New Possibilities in 2012

2012-01-05T15:38:00.000-05:00

It was a long year with much struggle in Henry County in 2011. There were some victories in gaining new businesses but also the loss of some old industrial friends in the community. One of the more inspiring events occurred at the end of the year with firefighters from around the region fighting hard and fierce in an attempt to save the former Bassett furniture plant No. 2. on Trent Hill Drive in Bassett, Virginia.

The Bassett family along with many other entrepreneurs and civic leaders showed how business and labor could achieve progress for almost a century. It's a little sad watching old friends fall down, but you get back up and you keep fighting. It's just our way in this part of the state.

In the last election cycle six-term state Senator William Wampler retired:

The news shocked many on both sides of the aisle, where he is highly regarded for his institutional memory and broad knowledge of the state budget.

“It would be a big loss to the state,’’ said Senate Majority Leader Richard Saslaw (D-35) before the news was official. “He's extremely bright. He knows the budget forward and backward. I can't see it.”

Wampler has represented the Republican-leaning district that includes the counties of Dickenson, Lee, Scott, and Wise, part of Washington County, and the cities of Bristol and Norton since 1988. Wampler said he “looking forward to resuming more of a private life of living and working here in the Great Southwest.”

This week Wampler was named to lead the New College Institute in Martinsville:

In an NCI news release, McDonnell stated: “Sen. Wampler has spent his 24 years of public service strengthening opportunities in higher education throughout Virginia while being a strong partner in creating jobs. He is uniquely qualified to move NCI to the next level in helping revitalize Martinsville and Henry County. He has my full support and that of my administration. I wish him much success.”

Several board members praised Wampler and welcomed he and his wife, Mary, to NCI and to the Martinsville area, where they will be moving.

Board Vice Chairman Elizabeth Haskell said she was “thrilled” that Wampler is joining the institute, and Wampler noted that when she was secretary of the Department of Natural Resources under then-Gov. Douglas Wilder, Haskell helped implement a common-sense streamlining of the state government and her department’s permitting process.

He also praised outgoing Sen. Roscoe Reynolds, D-Ridgeway, calling him a “solid advocate” and “fierce fighter.” Wampler recalled a budget conferees’ session at 2 a.m. one year when someone suggested eliminating funds for NCI.

“Do you want to tell Roscoe Reynolds that,” someone else asked, and the funds remained in the budget, Wampler said.

Del. Danny Marshall, R-Danville, said he has served with Wampler on the Tobacco Indemnification and Community Revitalization Commission. Marshall called Wampler’s appointment “exciting, a turning point. I would never have thought it would happen.”

Spilman is president and chief executive officer of Bassett Furniture Industries, and Wampler is on its board of directors. Spilman said Wampler is “highly respected” and was involved in keeping NCI afloat in the General Assembly.

Looking forward to this one and it's great to know that someone who understands the challenges of this area will take the lead.

Now it just comes down to the age-old problem in Southside and Southwest Virginia, finding the money?

Recovering Lost Souls and Inventing the Future

2012-01-03T15:25:00.002-05:00

I was in the checkout line at the local Walmart the other day and in the line behind me were four young men and one young lady. Each looked aged beyond their years on this earth and each carrying a small amount of cold medicine.

With the high levels of unemployment in Southside and Southwest Virginia, there has been a commendable effort by state and local officials to recruit new businesses and retain and build a quality workforce. But an idle mind can become the devil's workshop.

This week Governor Bob McDonnell annouced that Virginia is ready to invest in higher education. A plan that I hope will produce the human capital needed to bring new businesses and opportunity to this area of the state. There are three areas - transportation, education, and research and development - where I believe government plays a vital role and a leveling-up mechanism for the less fortunate in society. I believe a proper role of government is to provide an environment where people, goods, services, and ideas can be created and flow freely in society.

At a time when many state governments have reversed support for higher education, it is enormously encouraging to see Virginia moving in a positive and optimistic direction.

The $200 million in new funding for Virginia's higher education system proposed by Gov. Bob McDonnell will have a substantive benefit by helping to make a college education more affordable and accessible for Virginia students.

Just as important — possibly more so, in the long run — this investment sends a huge message to existing Virginia businesses and potential job-creating investors. Namely, that Virginia will not flinch from its commitment to a well-trained, informed and prepared workforce.

I applaud and want to give Governor McDonnell a big thank you for his efforts in this area, but there is another problem in the idle workforce, recovering lost souls.

Today Debbie Hall at the Martinsville Bulletin reported on a growing problem for business owners in the Basset area:

Thefts prompt action

Bassett area merchants are banding together to combat what some say is a spike in the number of break-ins in that community.

Shirley Amos and Paul Kennedy are organizing a meeting at 7 p.m. Jan. 10 at Bassett Funeral Service.

It is intended to be the inaugural meeting of a new community watch group, and all merchants in the Bassett area are invited, said Amos, of Shirley’s Florist, and Kennedy, of Bassett Funeral Service.

So far, “the response from merchants is overwhelming,” Amos said.

Both said there has been a rise in break-ins during the last year. “There’s just too many.

It’s been terrible,” Amos said, adding that Young’s Barber Shop was affected just a week ago.

“Harder’s Drug Store and the Bassett Fire Department recently were hit,” Amos said.

Even churches, such as the Bassett Memorial Methodist Church, are among the victims

Debbie also reported on this back in February of 2011:

Meth production not spiking in area

The increased methamphetamine production that plagued Virginia in 2009 seems largely to have bypassed Martinsville and Henry and Patrick counties.

“We have not had a meth lab” problem, Henry County Sheriff Lane Perry said.

The Associated Press recently reported that figures released by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration show the number of meth labs increased statewide in 2009.

The DEA attributed the increase to higher production by Mexican drug cartels and dealers figuring out how to get around restrictions on sales of pseudoephedrine, an over-the-counter medicine that is a key ingredient in producing the drug, according to the AP

Local law enforcement in the area have done a commendable job in recent years and the problem seemed to be contained, but there is another problem that emerged in the south in 2009. The shake and bake method of producing methamphetamine.

Shake'n Bake Meth:

For me, it seems that tracking the purchase of pseudoephedrine alone will not solve this problem. This is a tough problem - with no quick and easy solutions - that will most likely require a partnership between public, private and faith-based organizations to solve. Somehow we have to find a way to treat the victims on the demand side of this problem and address criminal justice reform so that we may reallocate resources to invent the future. I hope everyone can come together and find a solution in the next session in Richmond.

To invent the future we must also recover the lost souls.

Thoughts on the Keystone XL Pipeline

2011-12-24T19:51:00.000-05:00

As the debate over the Keystone XL Pipeline rolls into 2012 and it appears there will be a fierce lobbying effort now the payroll tax debate has ended.

From The Hill's E2 Wire on December 17th:

Savage two-month lobbying battle over Keystone oil pipeline starts now

The 60-day clock for a federal decision on the Keystone XL pipeline started by the payroll tax deal will touch off a frenzied lobbying and PR battle as environmentalists and the oil industry seek to sway the decision.

The Senate voted overwhelmingly Saturday for legislation that requires the State Department to issue a permit for the pipeline to bring Canadian oil sands to Gulf Coast refineries, unless President Obama determines that it’s not in the national interest.

Here is a video of environmentalists protesting the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline earlier this year:

Now I understand some of the objections of many environmentalists over the use of heavy crude oil (derived from oil sands) and the increased environmental impact of this type of oil. But the problem is we already use products derived from this type of oil everyday from the Venezuelan Orinoco River Basin (oil sands)

From Seeking Alpha back in 2007:

Heavy Crude: Why Venezuela and The U.S. Need Each Other

The plain vanilla fact-of-the-matter is that Venezuela has no other market for the greater part of its oil. Heavy crude is special stuff and is not for the average refinery. The majority of Venezuela's oil can only be processed in the specialist refineries run by Hovensa (a joint venture between US refiners Hess Corp and PdVSA) located in the US Virgin islands, amongst other places. Meanwhile, the USA readily accepts the Venezuelan heavy crude because, without it, the heavy crude refineries would close. There is no other supplier of this special crude available, so the US would lose around 11% of its total domestic oil products supply in one fell swoop.

The result is of the 2.15mbpd (million barrels per day) Venezuela pumps presently, 1.35mbpd has to go to the USA. Simply put, without Venezuela, the US refineries will close and the country will have an oil supply crisis.

The simple fact is with the construction of the Keystone Pipeline we as a nation are simply replacing an unreliable oil source in Venezuela with a reliable trading partner in Canada. The Keystone pipeline is a national security issue as Venezuela led by Hugo Chavez has been actively working with China to cut off his reliance on U.S. refiners of heavy crude.

More analysis from T. Boone Pickens:

In the current geopolitical oil world it would be very risky not to build this pipeline. But also develop an all-the-above strategy to foster the development of unsubsidized domestically produced alternative bio-crude from algae and biomass with significantly less emissions to limit the environmental impact of heavy crude oil as we transition to other fuel sources in the future.

In the current volatile state of the U.S. economy and how any geopolitical oil event and any energy price spike could crash the global economic recovery, this pipeline is needed!

Beautiful Day in Ridgeway, Virginia

2011-11-03T15:27:00.000-04:00

I love the history of this little town in Southside Virginia. And it's great to see some forward progress in this great community.

A Good Starter Bill from Danny Marshall

2011-01-22T20:34:00.004-05:00

Delegate Danny Marshall (R-Danville) has a good starter bill with H.B. 2282.

Centralized fleet; DGS, et al., to establish plan for vehicles to use alternative fuels

Description:

Department of General Services; centralized fleet; alternative fuels. Requires the Director of the Department of General Services, in conjunction with the Secretary of Administration and the Governor's Senior Advisor on Energy, to develop a plan providing for the replacement of vehicles in the centralized fleet that are rotated out of service with vehicles that operate using natural gas, electricity, or other alternative fuels, to the greatest extent practicable. The plan shall be submitted to the Governor for his review and approval. Once the plan is approved by the Governor, the Director is required to implement the plan for the centralized fleet. The bill provides that all state agencies and institutions shall cooperate with the Director in implementing the plan.

It's a start, but I would like Danny and the Commonwealth of Virginia to be more proactive. At this point it looks like oil prices are going nowhere but up, and this is going to put a huge strain on state and local budgets.

I think it would be better for the state to assist the localities with centralized training to begin converting many of the existing fleets to natural gas and other alternative fuels.

Of course, there is no money for anything at this point, but the outlook is pretty ugly if the experts are correct. Hopefully the new Congress could provide some assistance by working towards the passage of a simple piece-meal version of the Natural Gas Act to get something started.

From Bloomberg:

Fatih Birol talks about the outlook for oil prices and demand in 2011

Jan. 18 (Bloomberg) -- International Energy Agency Chief Economist Fatih Birol talks about the outlook for oil prices and demand in 2011. Worldwide oil consumption will rise by 1.4 million barrels a day, or 1.6 percent, to 89.1 million barrels a day, the IEA said in its monthly Oil Market Report. Birol speaks with Maryam Nemazee on Bloomberg Television's "The Pulse." (Source: Bloomberg)

In Other Road News

2011-01-17T21:27:00.005-05:00

While Virginia struggles to find a way to fund and build a transportation system for the 21st century.

Here's this from ISAF Command:

Welcome to Now Zad: New roads to bring better life to Afghans

Road construction doesn’t only help with the importing and exporting of goods, it also shows the progress of the area. Paving the roads makes the connection between Now Zad and the rest of Afghanistan easier for both locals and Afghan National Security Forces.

“These roads don’t just help the local villagers, they improve the quality of life for everyone,” said Lance Cpl. Bowen Yu, a civil affairs team specialist in support of 8th Marine Regiment, Regimental Combat Team 2.

Paving roads here will cut the risk from traveling in and out of Now Zad. By building the roads out of concrete instead of dirt, the placement of improvised explosive devices by the enemy will be difficult.

Although the workers will use little more than picks and shovels to level the roads and fill the holes along the way, they are laying the foundation of the future success of Now Zad.

“I think that the roads will give the locals here a sense of place and sense of purpose,” said Sepulveda. “I think that at the end of the day it really signifies [to others] that you’re in Now Zad.”

Can anyone tell me how this makes any sense anymore?

Newt on Building Roads in Afghanistan:

Something to Think About

2011-01-16T18:13:00.012-05:00

I love this photo. If you look at many of the recommendations coming from the McDonnell Administration and compare it to the Wilder Administration of the 1990s, you can find a lot of similarities.

One of the similarities is the latest transportation plan from the McDonnell Administration.

In the 1990s Governor Wilder leveraged bonds and lobbied for federal money to fund transportation projects in the state:

He also worked to fund Virginia's transportation initiatives, effectively lobbying Congress to reallocate highway monies to those states with the greatest needs. Much residential and office development had taken place in Northern Virginia without the state's receiving sufficient federal money for infrastructure improvements to keep up. He also succeeded in passing state bond issues to support improving transportation.

My objection to this latest plan is the recession in the early 1990s was a blip on the screen compared to what we are going through with the sluggish economy of today.

Governor Wilder and Allen also had the luxury of low stable oil prices during the '90s.

From OilPrice.com:

Rising Oil Prices and Municipal Bond Defaults

“Municipal” bonds include bonds issued by states, as well as bonds issued by cities and by many types of smaller entities, such as hospitals and toll roads. To date, everyone has assumed that there is not much risk of default, and even if there is, someone else will handle it. But if one looks at the long term oil situation, and the problems states and cities are having already, it is pretty clear that the debt default problem is likely to get worse over time, and there is really no one set up to handle the default risk.

There are many ways debt default problems arise from higher oil prices. One path is

Higher oil prices -> less money to spend on discretionary items -> less demand for new homes -> lower home prices -> more debt defaults

Another is

Higher oil prices -> business layoffs -> unemployed unable to make debt payments->defaults on loans.

Some of these debt default problems fall through to cities that try to collect taxes on the value of homes. States find themselves in poorer financial condition, in part because they have to pay more benefits to the unemployed (without an increase in tax revenue), and in part because road repairs cost more.

It looks like all of the area leaders except one are going along with this plan to get the funds for U.S. 58, but I think it's a big gamble. What happens if a new wave of home foreclosures and high oil prices cause the economy to tank?

I still say we should hunker down or find some way to pay for it.

You Just Can't Win with Road Politics

2011-01-09T14:51:00.034-05:00

Here is Chap Petersen on Virginia debt, budget and transportation funding:

I say Chap Petersen is wrong. The Ford Fusion is actually made in Mexico, Chap. Just kidding!

OK. Now for the bad part. Chap is actually correct on the rest.

So where are the grown-ups? We currently have a revenue source (gas tax) for roads that is declining with more vehicles becoming more fuel-efficient. This is a big problem that needs to get fixed. You also have supply-side oil problems that could push the price of gasoline over $4.00 a gallon. This will further accelerate the problem as we slide down the back slope of peak oil.

Southside has always been able to produce leaders - who wore their party ties loosely - to come up with a compromise on transportation. Those farm-to-market roads didn't just build themselves.

We currently have some Republicans who are a little squeamish about alcohol, and others who are really not in favor of public-private roads, while others are willing to start tax trade wars between the states. This is crazy!

Listen, I'm a pro-market supply-side kind of guy. I strongly believe in keeping taxes low and reducing taxes on income, capital investment and business formation - but roads should be paid for by dedicated user fees. A gas tax is a user fee, a mileage tax is a user fee, a toll is a user fee - pick your poison. The free lunch from the federal government may come to an end, and private investors are currently unwilling to make a transportation investment in public-private highways in rural America. It's ugly, but you can't have big league economic growth with a little league transportation system.

At some point, we've got to connect the dots:

This is going to be a long-term endeavor that will eventually need a sustainable revenue source. I'm all for innovative solutions, but what happens when the interest on all this new debt begins to eat into the revenue that is already declining for much-needed future projects? This could get really ugly for the future of Southside Virginia.

Anyway, here's a funny video that some of the old school Southside leaders may like:

You just can't win with road politics, but I hope someone out there is thinking this through!

Unbelievable! Rep. Gabrielle Giffords Shot

2011-01-08T16:12:00.011-05:00

The National Journal reports:

Surgeon 'Optimistic' on Rep. Giffords' Conditio n

Giffords was talking to two constituents at a "Congress on your Corner" event in Tucson when the gunman ran up to her and fired from approximately four feet away, said Peter Michaels, the news director of Arizona Public Media, according to an NPR report. Five others, including members of Giffords staff were also shot.

"Gabrielle Giffords' condition was very optimistic and she was following commands," a surgeon at the hospital told a news conference. "I'm about as optimistic as I can get in this situation."

The suspect, a 22-year old male identified by the Associated Press as Jared Laughner, was firing indiscriminately into the crowd and is in custody, according to the news reports.

The Tucson Citizen newspaper reported that Giffords was shot in the head. She was taken to University Medical Center in Tucson. Rep. Raul Grijalva and his staff have reportedly been put on alert. About three hours after the shooting, the Capitol Police issued a warning to members of Congress.

My thoughts and prayers go out to Gabrielle Giffords, her staff, and the victims of this heinous act.

This should have been a slam dunk for Robert Hurt...

2011-01-06T16:30:00.007-05:00

...or maybe even an interception and run back for a touchdown.

Today, Robert Hurt was posed a question about the repeal of health care reform:

Here's the simple answer Robert: If the Republican plan of Paul Ryan or the Democrat plan of Ron Wyden had passed, all Americans would have got the same deal as a member of Congress.

The plans were actually based in most part on the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program:

The FEHBP has often been proposed as a model for national health insurance and sometimes as a program that could directly enroll the uninsured. These proposals began within its first decade and have continued ever since. Notable economist Alain Enthoven explicitly built a proposal for a system of "managed competition" as a national health reform decades ago, and has continued promoting the idea ever since. A version of this proposal was recently adopted by the Netherlands. In the 2004 presidential campaign, Senator John Kerry proposed opening enrollment in this plan to all Americans. In enacting the Medicare Modernization Act in 2003, the Congress explicitly modeled the reformed Medicare Advantage program and the new Medicare Part D Prescription Drug program after the FEHBP. One of the prominent proposals for health reform in the United States, the proposed bipartisan Wyden-Bennett Act is largely modeled after the FEHBP, as have recent "Republican Alternative" proposals by Representative Paul Ryan.

Patients' Choice Health Care Act Explained - Paul Ryan:

Let's go Robert, it's time to go to work. Make us proud and please stay out of the conspiracy rabbit holes. Good luck :)

Conservatives for Climate and Energy Solutions

2010-12-28T22:06:00.016-05:00

As the climate debate rolls on, I just wanted to express why I support a 100% revenue-neutral carbon tax. In the beginning I was opposed to any form of carbon taxation, but then started thinking about it.

Southside and Southwest Virginia has been in an economic downward spiral for going on 20 years with the loss of manufacturing jobs. There are many factors like the cost of labor in the U.S., but another big cost is the compliance with federal environmental regulation. I for one agree that some of these regulations were needed. You can't look at the Smith River in Martinsville and Henry County today and say it doesn't look a lot better than it did 20 years ago. The problem is that many of these regulations have put many businesses at a disadvantage when competing against foreign manufacturers.

So why am I for a carbon tax? Well, if you make the tax 100% revenue-neutral and border adjusted, the tax will actually become a tariff on foreign produced goods that do not meet the environmental regulatory standards of the U.S. This could be a big step forward to increase the competitiveness of American manufacturers in the world market. And because the tax would be 100% revenue-neutral - meaning the price of energy would go up but taxes on businesses and consumers would go down as an offset - every time a consumer used less energy or a low carbon fuel, they would get a tax cut.

You use better insulation in your home, get a tax cut.
Buy a alternative or fuel efficient car, get a tax cut.
Change your windows, get a tax cut.
Generate your own low-carbon energy, get a big tax cut.

Well, you get the point. There are no complex regulations needed! You just have to put a price on carbon, offset the cost with a tax cut on individual income and productivity and let the market solve the problem.

There are cost-effective ways to solve the climate issue, create a lot of new jobs and do it in a way that does not result in a net tax increase on the consumers of energy.

Here is Reagan conservative, George Shultz, in an interview with climateconservative.org:

You can listen to the podcast here.

White Christmas in Ridgeway

2010-12-26T22:46:00.001-05:00

Here's hoping that everyone had a wonderful Christmas.

Maybe Haley Barbour Should Make a Visit...

2010-12-23T00:02:00.003-05:00

...Here, The International Civil Rights Center & Museum:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

What was he thinking!?!?

Jerry Fuhrman Misleading Voters in Coal Country

2010-12-17T10:32:00.006-05:00

Today, Jerry Fuhrman has decided to mislead voters about the efforts of Jim Webb and Mark Warner to prevent the over-regulation of coal by the EPA. You can read Jerry's post here.

Here are Jim Webb and Mark Warner at a pro-coal rally earlier this year:

It's important for the voters in coal country to understand that clean energy does not have to mean an end to coal.

Here is cleantech venture capitalist, Vinod Khosla, with a entrepreneur's vision of clean energy:

There are ways to turn waste emissions from coal into valuable building materials. There are also cost-effective ways to turn Virginia coal into a cleaner high value fuel while expanding job opportunities for the citizens of Southwest Virginia.

I applaud both Mark Warner and Jim Webb for showing leadership on this complicated issue, and not playing political games with the energy and economic future of our nation.

Jim Webb Takes Aim at Ethanol Subsidies

2010-12-15T13:15:00.011-05:00

This was a good move by Jim Webb to bring out the honest facts about corn ethanol.

From the office of Senator Webb:

“Reducing the ethanol subsidies and trade barriers would reduce the overall cost to taxpayers, while allowing Congress to support the vitally important development of our manufacturing sector through the Advanced Energy Manufacturing Tax Credit,” said Senator Webb.

Currently, the United States has a 54 cent-per-gallon tariff on ethanol imports and a 45 cent-per-gallon subsidy on blending ethanol into gasoline. In addition, the Federal Renewable Fuels Standard mandates an annually increasing usage of corn ethanol. These protections are expensive and redundant. The amendment would lower the tariff and subsidy to 36 cents-per-gallon. The resulting $2 billion in savings would be used to reduce the deficit and to renew the Advanced Energy Manufacturing Tax Credit, which was created under the 2009 economic stimulus law to spur renewable technology advancement. The tax credit would fund the advancement of projects such as smart grid technology, energy storage capabilities, and geothermal energy technologies.

In a 2009 letter, Senator Webb recommended the Environmental Protection Agency examine more closely the negative effects ethanol protections have on other sectors of the economy. Ethanol subsidies have led to steep increases in the price of corn and other sources of feed, which have negatively affected beef cattle, dairy and poultry producers and driven up the cost to consumers of commodities like milk and eggs. He also sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk expressing concerns over the ethanol tariff.

The subsidies for corn-based ethanol were only intended to be a short-term solution and not a long-term national energy strategy. It's good policy to end these subsidies and allow a new generation of biofuels to compete fairly in the market.

Here is a short video from the Reason Foundation on ethanol subsidies. The video was produced in 2008:

But you also have to look at other subsidies to be able to create a market where unsubsidized market competitiveness drives our energy policy.

Here is a great interview on biofuels with cleantech venture capitalist Vinod Khosla:

The development of biofuel technology that reaches unsubsidized market competitiveness with oil is key. There is a lot of underutilized land in Southside Virginia that can be used for biofuel production with the loss of tobacco farming in the area.

But the development of a level market playing field is crucial.

Great job Senator Webb.