Right Time To Push Climate Change, Obama calls for action

For those of you who thought Climate Change was a dead issue in the US, the BP spill has created an opportunity to push for climate change.  NYTimes reports on president Obama's latest call to action.

Obama Tells Congress to 'Seize the Moment' on Climate Legislation

Published: June 16, 2010

President Obama challenged the country last night to unify behind a "national mission" to reduce its reliance on oil and coal, using his first Oval Office address to pressure Congress into acting quickly on clean energy legislation.

Can you imagine being a oil industry lobbyists, trying to tell Congress why climate change is bad for the economy?

Obama promised to make the oil giant place billions into a holding account that would be used to compensate people who've lost wages, before pivoting into a sweeping promotion of a renewable power economy that would prevent future disasters like the spill while creating jobs.

"Time and again, the path forward has been blocked -- not only by oil industry lobbyists, but also by a lack of political courage and candor," Obama said. "The consequences of our inaction are now in plain sight."

"We cannot consign our children to this future," he added. "The tragedy unfolding on our coast is the most painful and powerful reminder yet that the time to embrace a clean energy future is now. Now is the moment for this generation to embark on a national mission to unleash America's innovation and seize control of our own destiny."

The push is on for climate change.

"I think it's the right push at the right time," said David Hunter, director of U.S. policy with the International Emissions Trading Association and a former climate aide to Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), a key swing vote on climate legislation. "It gives an opportunity to get legislation done this summer. It's a narrow window, but it is there."

Are you ready to report your data center carbon emissions?

Read more

Who will be next for Government Regulation? Google, Facebook or Apple

One side affect of the Microsoft anti-trust action is the governments of world feel good about taking on technology companies with regulation.  You go throughout history and technologies at first were not regulated - auto mfg, power generation, oil & gas, and healthcare.  And, there is still people arguing there needs to be more legislation in these areas.

Microsoft fought the battle with the DOJ and EU and besides paying lots of money, is government regulated.  SEC has a degree on financial regulation, but doesn't touch on the latest issues with Google, Apple, and Facebook.

You look in the news at Google's Wifi.

Privacy group to go to police over Google Wi-Fi data collection

Privacy International likens mistake to tapping phone without consent

By Carrie-ann Skinner, PC Advisor UK
June 10, 2010 11:26 AM ET

Privacy International has revealed it will approach the Police regarding Google's recent admission it had mistakenly collected data from unsecured Wi-Fi networks for the past three years.

The search enginer's error came to light after the German data protection authority audited the Wi-Fi data collected by Street View cars for use in location-based products such as Google Maps for mobile.

Apple's ad policy.

Earlier today we reported that Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) had amended itsiPhone Developer Agreement, specifically clause 3.3.9 related to advertising networks. The amendment was written in such a way that it allowed Steve Jobs to make good on a promise he made at D8 to open up the SDK for third parties to collect data for services such as advertising. But at the same time it was worded very carefully so as to exclude Google’s AdMob mobile advertising network from the iPhone eco-system.

This was met yesterday with lots of grumbling from Google, and gnashing of teeth from Admob’s CEO. Whilst the wording of the clause excludes any rival smart phone maker, Google is the only real threat on the horizon that Apple probably cares about right now.

And bloggers like danah boyd make the point on Facebook being a utility, and utilities get regulated as they are monopolies.  Being a Microsoft employee she knows what is like to be a monopoly.

Facebook is a utility; utilities get regulated

From day one, Mark Zuckerberg wanted Facebook to become a social utility. He succeeded. Facebook is now a utility for many. The problem with utilities is that they get regulated.

Yesterday, I ranted about Facebook and “radical transparency.” Lots of people wrote to thank me for saying what I said. And so I looked many of them up. Most were on Facebook. I wrote back to some, asking why they were still on Facebook if they disagreed with where the company was going. The narrative was consistent: they felt as though the needed to be there. For work, for personal reasons, because they got to connect with someone there that they couldn’t connect with elsewhere. Nancy Baym did a phenomenal job of explaining this dynamic in her post on Thursday: “Why, despite myself, I am not leaving Facebook. Yet.”

danah goes on, and makes points about society, utilities and choice.

I hate all of the utilities in my life. Venomous hatred. And because they’re monopolies, they feel no need to make me appreciate them. Cuz they know that I’m not going to give up water, power, sewage, or the Internet out of spite. Nor will most people give up Facebook, regardless of how much they grow to hate them.

Your gut reaction might be to tell me that Facebook is not a utility. You’re wrong. People’s language reflects that people are depending on Facebook just like they depended on the Internet a decade ago. Facebook may not be at the scale of the Internet (or the Internet at the scale of electricity), but that doesn’t mean that it’s not angling to be a utility or quickly becoming one. Don’t forget: we spent how many years being told that the Internet wasn’t a utility, wasn’t a necessity… now we’re spending what kind of money trying to get universal broadband out there without pissing off the monopolistic beasts because we like to pretend that choice and utility can sit easily together. And because we’re afraid to regulate.

And here’s where we get to the meat of why Facebook being a utility matters. Utilities get regulated. Less in the United States than in any other part of the world. Here, we like to pretend that capitalism works with utilities. We like to “de-regulate” utilities to create “choice” while continuing to threaten regulation when the companies appear too monopolistic. It’s the American Nightmare. But generally speaking, it works, and we survive without our choices and without that much regulation. We can argue about whether or not regulation makes things cheaper or more expensive, but we can’t argue about whether or not regulators are involved with utilities: they are always watching them because they matter to the people.

The political win to regulate Google, Apple, or Facebook is huge.  You can argue whether it is right or not, but the fact is a group of  politicians see regulating one of the companies as a career milestone that will set them for life, and allow them to break into private industry making more money or guaranteeing them more influence.

Read more

EPA vs. Carbon motivated Congress Members debating who sets Energy Policy

Alaska (Oil) and West Virginia (Coal) Senators are making statements that congress should set energy policy and not the EPA, and are attacking the EPA's scientific findings.

EPA Stripped of Authority Would Be Threat to Climate Change Bill

Posted by Bridgette Outten in The District23 hours ago

President Barack Obama is planning to veto a bill that — if it passes Congress — would strip the Environmental Protection Agency of the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and derail efforts for a climate change bill.

Alaska Senator says.

GOP Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski will ask senators to approve the measure Thursday, which willreportedly signal the Senate’s official disagreement with the EPA’s finding that carbon is a danger and needs to be regulated. The proposal uses a technique that can’t be filibustered and is an official mechanism to disagree with the rulings of executive branch agencies, according to reports.

Support for the Murkowski is coming from both sides of the aisle as lawmakers dispute the EPA’s right to set energy policy.

West Virginia says.

“I have long maintained that the Congress — not the unelected EPA — must decide major economic and energy policy,” said Democratic Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia in a press release. “EPA regulation will have an enormous impact on the economic security of West Virginia and our energy future.”

The White House says.

The White House said this week that Murkowski’s proposal would “undermine the administration’s efforts to reduce the negative impacts of pollution and the risks associated with environmental catastrophes, like the ongoing BP oil spill.”

The EPA says.

The Miami Herald reported that EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson “had even harsher words:”

“She called the oil spill a ‘tragic reminder of the hazards of our oil addiction’ and accused Murkowski of undermining the agency’s efforts to zero in on large emitters, not small ones.

‘It would take away EPA’s ability to take action on climate change,” Jackson said. “And it would ignore and override scientific findings, allowing big oil companies, big refineries and others to continue to pollute without any oversight or consequence. Finally, it will result in exactly zero protections for small businesses.’”

As the NYTtimes reports the battle is for jobs in States with a high carbon impact.

Republicans voted in unison, with some arguing that the emission program would suffocate millions of jobs and others asserting that EPA's plan is an unparalleled power shift toward "unelected bureaucrats," weakening Congress. Altogether 47 lawmakers, including six Democrats, supported moving forward with a vote to reverse the agency rules.

This is an interesting consequence of 2 Senators from each State vs. the House of representatives for the population.  The States get to argue for their own livelihood vs. the population at large.

Some think the Climate Bill is too hard this year, but next it could be done.

One Dem: Climate bill next year

But there's evidence for less optimism: 47 senators signaled discomfort with a federal policy reducing greenhouse gases. Six of them are Democrats, a margin of mutiny that, if transferred to a vote on climate legislation, would likely spell disaster.

They include: Sens. Evan Bayh of Indiana; Mary Landrieu of Louisiana; Ben Nelson of Nebraska; Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia; and Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor, both of Arkansas. All come from states that lean heavily on fossil fuels.

The final tally, combined with heightening campaign partisanship, seems to have convinced some cap and trade supporters that the climb is too steep this year.

"I think it's difficult to pass a big bill a few months before a big election," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said after the vote. "But I think it can get done next year."

Where should you build your next data center?  What colocation facilities will be in high demand.

If you aren't thinking of a carbon impact and a green data center strategy you better get started soon.

Read more

Bill Gates other execs recommend $16 billion/yr investment in clean energy

CNET news covers Bill Gates and other execs recommendations for clean energy investment.

Gates, other execs call for more energy spending

by Lance Whitney

Bill Gates and other corporate figures say America's current energy strategy is hurting the economy, the environment, and national security and is asking the government to devote more money to fuel alternative energy.

The group, dubbed the American Energy Innovation Council (AEIC), released a detailed report on Thursday highlighting the problem and offering its own recommendations (PDF). Members of the group were due to meet with President Obama in the White House to discuss their concerns and possible remedies.

The site with Bill Gates and others is here.

OUR COMMITMENT TO CLEAN ENERGY

We have had the great privilege, as business leaders, of building companies that have become leaders in their respective fields, and employ hundreds of thousands of American workers. Our experience in building these companies has given us a common and unshakable belief in the power of innovation.

And, a PDF. With 5 recommendations.

OUR RECOMMENDATIONS


Create an independent national energy strategy board.


Invest $16 billion per year in clean energy innovation.


Create Centers of Excellence with strong domain expertise.


Fund ARPA-E at $1 billion per year.


Establish and fund a New Energy Challenge Program to build large-scale pilot projects.

Read more

Thanks to Gulf Spill, Clean Energy Bill gets a second chance

Mike Manos points out the Presidential address on carbon legislation.

C02K Doubter? Watch the Presidential address today

June 2, 2010 by mmanos

Are you a Data Center professional who doubts that Carbon legislation is going to happen or that this initiative will never get off the ground?   This afternoon President Obama plans to outline his intention to assess a cost for Carbon consumption at a conference highlighting his economic accomplishments to date.   The backdrop of this of course is the massive oil rig disaster in the Gulf.

As my talk at the Uptime Institute Symposium highlighted this type of legislation will have a big impact on data center and mission critical professionals.  Whether you know it or not, you will be front and center in assisting with the response, collection and reporting required to react to this kind of potential legislation.  In my talk where I questioned the audience in attendance it was quite clear that most of those in the room were vastly ill-prepared and ill-equipped to this kind of effort.

If passed this type of legislation is going to cause a severe reaction inside organizations to ensure that they are in compliance and likely lead to a huge increase of spending in an effort to collect energy information along with reporting.  For many organizations this will result in significant spending.

NYTimes discusses President Obama's speech.

Obama Says He’ll Push for Clean Energy Bill

By HELENE COOPER

PITTSBURGH — President Obama said Wednesday that it was time for the United States “to aggressively accelerate” its transition from oil to alternative sources of energy and vowed to push for quick action on climate change legislation despite almost unanimous opposition from Republicans and continued skepticism from some Democrats.

Seeking to harness the deepening anger over the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico to the advantage of his legislative agenda, Mr. Obama promised to find the lagging votes in the Senate to get the climate change and energy bill passed this year. Last year, the House passed a version of the bill, which tries to address global warming by putting a price on greenhouse gas pollution and provides incentives for alternative clean energy sources.

Mike makes a call to action, but I wonder if the data center managers will be even 10% as passionate as Mike on this topic.

This should be a clarion call for data center managers to step up and raise awareness within their organizations about this pending legislation and take a proactive role in establishing a plan for a corporate response.   Take an inventory of your infrastructure and assess what will you need to begin collecting this information?  It might even be wise to get a few quotes to get an idea or ballpark cost of what it might take to bring your organization up to the task.  Its probably better to start doing this now, than to be told by the business to get it done.

Read more