U.S. Presidents agree on the importance of energy to create jobs

9/4/2011

Whether your conserving energy or just using it, Former President Bill Clinton suggest that it might be the way to creating millions of jobs in the U.S.

(EMAILWIRE.COM, June 28, 2011 ) President Obama, Former President Bill Clinton, and 2016 Presidential hopeful, Chris Greenman, all show signs of being complimentary on the significance of energy in one form or another.
Former President Bill Clinton laid out a tactful and pertinent plan that puts America back to work. His ideas were laid out a couple weeks back and not only acknowledges the importance of the useenergy to create jobs, he also list thirteen other ways to create jobs in the U.S. as well. Clinton specifically makes use of the Empire State building in New York City, and showed how it created thousands of jobs. This example showed how the state building cut electricity usage by almost 40%, thus saving millions in energy costs. If this example is used country-wide, it could create millions of jobs.
Clinton pointed out the need to enforce trade jobs. We are a country rich in natural resources such as coal, innovation such as computers, and a skilled and educated workforce. We can no longer accept labor costs as our only excuse to trade deficits, Clinton showed a study how the average U.S. acceptable minimum wage is .25 cents per hour, a number that was far less than many other countries.
According to MSNBC President Barack Obama does not fare well in popularity from the coal and gas industry because of his apparent obsession with eliminating numerous tax breaks and job elimination in the coal industry. Obama has been targeted by MSNBC of having his own war on energy, thus dictating its political importance.
Obama seems to take a hard-line stance on environmental concerns, favoring alternative energy and renewable energy without looking at the whole picture. Obama has gone back and forth in regards to his position with all three fossil fuels but has been reported as making bad judgments without knowing all the facts in the energy community. He takes this stance even though he continues to repeatedly endorse just the oil industry, keeping in mind it was the last source of the biggest man-made environmental disaster this world has seen possibly ever.
The Huffington Post and NY Times have repeatedly reported on a continued hole that Obama continues to dig himself in with regards to two-thirds of the fossil fuel industry, that being coal and now, natural gas as well. These are the three primary fossil fuels of the world, regardless of how bad we want to be able to rely on other sources.
Obama was an early proponent of natural gas until Cornell Professor Robert Howarth questioned the gas-for-coal solution by showing certain methane usages. Now natural gas is seen as being twice as greenhouse gas intensive as coal, and Obama has already showed signs of slamming natural gas in addition to coal use as much as possible or until cleaner energy could be proved.
Reduced energy use and coal-to-gas substitution could provide a bridge to a low carbon future, enabling us to move forward on climate change mitigation while we continue critical research on other more advanced technologies. Energy alternatives require close scrutiny for their range of impacts on the environment, the environmental effects of shale gas are no exception.
People can talk until they are blue in the face about offshore drilling, wind power, natural gas, and energy conservation. The short-term drift of history still dictates a heavy reliance on coal, in fact coal generates 45 percent of all electricity produced in this country. This fact alone creates a serious conflict of interest as the core of the President’s energy vision calls for switching our transportation system from oil to plug-in electricity. In other words, the world will run the real risk of merely replacing one polluting and increasingly scarce fuel, petroleum, with an abundant and environmentally troublesome one, coal.
Presidential hopeful, Chris Greenman seems to concur with the Bill Clinton suggestions and appears to be a pro energy advocate. Via his website,www.GreenmanForPresident.com, he repeatedly shows support for the fossil fuel industry and wants to continue with the tax incentives currently adhered to by the tax code. In fact, he offered this industry of one of his top five ways to fix America.
Energy is and will continue to be a human necessity for years to come. Can it be used to create the millions of jobs as Clinton and Greenman seem to believe? Or are environmental concerns more important than certain basic human needs? IJR supports the quest for renewable energy and alternative environmental friendly energy, however, the opinions of IJR also understand the current human demands and resources available to fill those growing demands. The world should exercise caution in the speed they mandate new energy requirements and do proper research and testing before endorsing any new energy source.

Michael Gingino, Editor in Chief, International Journalism Review
InternationalJournalismReview@gmail.com www.IJRnews.com
(949) 533 – 8353 / (805) 764-1830

references
<||>rnhttp://www.newsweek.com/2011/06/19/it-s-still-the-economy-stupid.html
<||>rnhttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36132029/ns/politics-howard_fineman/t/obamas-energy-challenge-coal-not-oil/<||>rnhttp://finance.bnet.com/bnet/news/read?GUID=18822375
<||>rnhttp://www.xplosivestocks.com/Investment-Picks/a-very-controversial-chris-greenman-vows-to-secure-the-us-and-run-for-us-president.php
<||>rnhttp://emailwire.com/release/66809-A-very-controversial-Chris-Greenman-vows-to-secure-the-US-and-run-for-US-President.html

Company: International Journalism Review
Contact: Machael Gingino
Phone: 8058077201
Email: InternationaljournalismReview[@]gmail.com