Skip to comments.Billionaire has unique role in official Washington: climate change radical
Posted on 02/23/2013 8:16:49 AM PST by Lorianne
When Thomas Steyer a San Francisco billionaire and major Democratic donor discusses climate change, he feels as if one of two things is true: What hes saying is blindingly obvious, or insane.
Its a somewhat shocking statement for someone whos in the running to succeed the cerebral Steven Chu as energy secretary. Granted, hes a long shot the leading contender is MIT professor Ernest Moniz, who served as the departments undersecretary during the Clinton administration but his backers say his strength lies in combining business savvy with an activists passion.
But its not as if Steyer, 55, needs an official government perch to make an impact. Armed with his wealth and his political connections, Steyer has played a critical behind-the-scenes role in helping shape the countrys national energy policy. He has helped bankroll two successful ballot initiative campaigns in California since 2010, including one last fall that closes a corporate tax loophole and steers $500 million toward energy-efficiency projects for each of the next five years. He has funded initiatives at the Brookings Institution and the Center for American Progress, along with major research centers at Yale and Stanford. And he has spoken with President Obama about how to pursue climate and energy policy in a second term.
But Steyer is taking on a more prominent public role..Im not the first person youd expect to be here today. Im not a college professor and I dont run an environmental organization, he said. For the last 30 years Ive been a professional investor and Ive been looking at billion-dollar investments for decades and Im here to tell you one thing: The Keystone pipeline is not a good investment.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
“Im not a college professor and I dont run an environmental organization...”
And he sure as hell didn’t sleep at a Holiday Inn last night.
How do you knows the Keystone is ponzi? The others are money laundering not poinzi.
It is always amazing that someone so anti human can get so rich. The demagoguery of the left is without parallel and the amount of money they control is corrupting science along with everything else.
Increasingly we are spending a higher percentage of the energy we get in the extraction of that energy. That’s not sustainable in the long run and it’s certainly not a good economic strategy.
The only way the ‘tar sands’ extraction can make money right now is by suckering in investors who think there is going to be a big payday down the road. But most of the money being made is in luring in investors.
What would you suggest? I am not being funny.
You are talking about windmills? High EROEI for wind is BS. Forget EROEI and look at price per kWh with and without subsidies and gas, oil and coal all win hands down.
I agree gas coal and oil win (with and without subsidies, which by the way there should be no subsidies).
However, the EROEI is constantly getting smaller and particularly with tar sands, it’s ridiculously small, even with lots of subsidies.
Thus Keystone is not economically viable because what it will be carrying is not economically viable