Van testified, “If we are smart, we will make the invention, manufacturing and deploying of clean energy technology a cornerstone of the next American economy – and create green pathways out of poverty, while we do it.”
With the support included in this package, we will do just that. The massive investments in weatherization, state energy efficiency grants, and federal building efficiency are some of the safest and smartest investments our country can make right now. They put money into the
pockets of American workers and pay for themselves in the form of energy savings and lower energy prices. This energy efficiency “double dividend” is a proven, reliable phenomenon that our current weak economy must exploit.
The Select Committee recently released a Green Economic Recovery information sheet detailing how the stimulus package will re-power America, doubling our renewable energy production and investing $69 billion in jobs that put shovels in the ground and windmills in the sky. It will jump start waste-cutting efficiency projects and invest in desperately needed advanced battery technologies to ensure the clean cars of tomorrow are built here at home. Read the report here:
http://globalwarming.house.gov…
The recovery package provides tax relief for 95% of Americans and targets investments in key areas to turn around the economy. We are facing enormous challenges in Massachusetts, but we also have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to create new jobs, invest in vital priorities and position our economy for future growth. This package is a major down payment on the clean, renewable energy future Massachusetts and this country have been waiting for and desperately need. I strongly urge you to join me in supporting the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
You can send me your comments via my site: http://markey.house.gov/email
Speaker Pelosi’s site has more information on the different provisions in the package: http://www.speaker.gov/newsroo…
Rep Markey:
<
p>The Boston metro area is suffering greatly because there’s poor linkage for pedestrians and bicyclists. Boston’s got a handful of 2+ mile separated paths (Esplanade, Emerald Necklace, Southeast Corridor, Harbor Trail), but they don’t connect to each other, severely limiting their usefulness for exercise or transportation. The bridges connecting Cambridge to Boston (BU, Mass Ave, Longfellow) are key for non-motorized traffic too, but are in desperate need for some amenities like bike lanes and sufficiently wide sidewalks. There was supposed to be a footbridge near Science Park connecting foot and bike traffic in that neighborhood as part of the Big Dig… never happened.
<
p>Relative to most projects, pedestrian and bicycle projects are cheap. A few projects, chosen wisely, could connect already existing and currently funded parts of the network, resulting in Boston metro becoming a far better place for walkers, joggers, cyclists, and the disabled. Remember, as a flat, dense area which pre-dates cars by a few hundred years, Boston is the perfect place for non-motorized traffic. It’s good for health. It’s good for the environment. It’s good for businesses. It’s good for the other drivers. It’s a winner for all — but it takes real money and a vision that once projects get connected the number of users will shoot up.
<
p>I know there are some non-auto transit projects in the list, but frankly, there aren’t enough. Please keep working on getting money to connect and strengthen the multiple non-auto networks in the Boston area, and Massachusetts as a whole.
And $11B to Massachusetts will help immensely.
<
p>To some degree counter-cyclical spending will be OK, but investment spending should be much more beneficial. Is there an analysis for each major component of spending that estimates the long term payoff of the investment?
<
p>For example, if we invest $X in computerizing health care records, how much annual savings in health care costs are estimated to be realized?
<
p>Or, if we invest in infrastructure to transform our Cities, how much private investment in the area will it spur? Will it help create a smart growth zone that is environmentally friendly both from the point of view of energy generation/consumption and transportation efficiency? We may want to consider the most effective road is the one that does not have to be built.
<
p>A counter argument to the current bill is that the government would spend $275K for each job created. But if those jobs were to last 10, 20 or more years, that may well be a good investment.
<
p>What I think is missing from the public view is an analysis of each investment that estimates the return on the investment. And even if some proposed investments cannot be justified from the “ROI” point-of-view, it may stand on the merits of counter-cyclical spending to ease the economic pain. However, for that type of spending, it should not be considered a means to propogate ineffective spending through the economic malaise to better times. That would be a grave error.
the budget deficit would be great, but I do applaud this first effort in what it should deliver for the state of Massachusetts. But, seriously, we need some federal help for our structural deficit.
Some capital expenditures result in larger operational deficits. In general, a new road falls into this category.
<
p>Other capital expenditures result in a reduction in operations costs, for example replacing/upgrading MBTA tracks and signals.
<
p>I hope that the emphasis on the stimulus bill is to build projects which maintain or reduce operations costs (or result in increased revenue to match the expenses), instead of those which will cost future generations money year after year.
Dear Congressman Markey –
<
p>Your support of the economic stimulus package is much appreciated. But there is a shovel ready clean energy project poised to create thousands of jobs for Massachusetts citizens that has earned your support.
<
p>On January 16 of this year, the US Department of Interior, Minerals Management Service released the Final Environmental Impact Statement on Cape Wind finding significant public interest benefits while identifying no major environmental impacts.
<
p>You are fortunate enough to hold the influential Chairmanship that will help shape clean energy initiatives across this country, while at the same time developing policies that invests in projects that will get our economy moving, mitigate climate change and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. No project encompasses these principles than Cape Wind.
<
p>Supporting Cape Wind will demonstrate your commitment to ending global warming and creating a vibrant clean energy industry in Massachusetts.
<
p>The time is now because we need the jobs.
<
p>Barbara Hill
Clean Power Now
http://www.cleanpowernow.org
Not only for energy, but for the jobs that would be needed to create the project. Let’s hope those jobs are local, and not in some far off land.
Agreed.
<
p>My top two “why the hell haven’t they started working on these yet, they should’ve been done years ago!” frustrations in Massachusetts are Cape Wind and the Green Line extension.
<
p>Why haven’t we started them already?
Those two great projects are delayed because NIMBY plaintiffs can tie them up for years in administrative proceedings and then litigation. It’s really not the fault of “government” per se. Well intentioned environmental laws have become a cudgel for parochial anti-development interests.
<
p>It can happen to even something as simple and obviously beneficial as adding bicycle lanes and racks in San Francisco — http://www.sfbg.com/blogs/poli…
<
p>These laws mandating study after study, hearing after hearing, etc., need to be reevaluated.
That seems to cover just about everything these days đŸ˜‰
I bet John Yoo could write a great memo justifying that!
<
p>Or how about a new Czar. But instead of just the nomenclature, we actually give him dictatorial powers đŸ™‚
Miss Hill,
<
p> I believe that Cape Cod is a unique natural resource that should not be destroyed by placing windfarms in Natucket sound. I live in Maine but spend much time on Cape Cod with my family in Centerville, Mass. Here in Maine
another 59 Megawatts of windpower just went online making a
total of 165Megawatts of Maine windpower going into the ISO
New England power grid. There are many undeveloped areas in
New England where wind farms can be located an abundance of wind power produced. I am for wind power, however I
find your Cape Wind project objectionable. While, many have
characterized the units as specks on the horizon, I believe that to be misleading. And that the true nature of the project if realized will be a net negative to your cause. Perhaps you should consider locating your project
in the berkshires. Another concern is the location of the
power along the migratory bird route. While there have been some improvements in design the high tip speed of the
blades do present a threat to our feathered friends.
<
p>Regards,
<
p>Bob Henry
<
p>Copy to Rep. Markey
Bob Henry:
<
p>We need wind power in the Berkshires and the Cape. Cape Wind is something like 468 MW of installation. 59 is cool, and a total of 165 is good stuff. 468 dwarfs it in terms of capacity. Furthermore, the quality of wind on the Horseshoe Shoal exceeds the quality at the Maine wind farms or the Berkshires, meaning that if you put identical turbines at all three places, the turbine at Cape Wind would generate more MWh per year than the others.
<
p>Now, put your arm out in front of you, fully extended. Make a thumbs up sign. The wind turbine will appear smaller on the horizon than your thumb nail. On a day which isn’t clear, you likely won’t see them at all.
<
p>As for our feathered friends — Cape Wind has passed it’s environmental studies. Bird kill simply isn’t a legitimate fear at this site.
Dear Mr. Henry –
<
p>My home is in Centerville where I live with my family and feel very fortunate to be in such a beautiful place. I believe this project is just the right one for where I live.
<
p>Nantucket Sound which is a mile from my home is where is swim as early in June and as late in October as I can. Also Nantucket Sound is over 500 square miles. The area in which Cape Wind will be built is approximately 25 square miles. Clearly Cape Wind will not destroy Nantucket Sound.
<
p>The turbines will be placed 2 – 3 football fields apart from one another so recreational boating will be possible. I was fortunate to visit Denmark and sailed around the Nysted Wind Farm so I know first hand this is real.
<
p>The winds offshore are more powerful and steadier than on land. When Cape Wind is on line it will supply on average 3/4 of the electrical needs of Cape Cod, Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard.
<
p>In terms of the birds, MA Audubon over the past 6 years have been conducting survery’s and analyzing potential impacts. In June 2006 MA Audubon came to the conclusion there was more harm to the avian population from fossil fuels emissions than Cape Wind and they gave their conditional approval to the project.
<
p>There is no energy source without impacts but I feel the Cape Wind project serves us on many levels not the least is jobs.
<
p>After 8 years of regulatory review (more than any nuclear, oil or gas project in NE) and 5 major state and federal reports the conclusion is that the Cape Wind project has significant public interest benefits with minor environmental and socio-economic impacts.
<
p>And finally, I feel we have a moral responsibility to tap into an indigeneous renewable source of energy right off our coast to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and mitigate the effects of climate change. We can’t keep saying put it someplace else. It is time to take charge of our energy future and we can do it here on Cape Cod and be a symbol of the renewable energy revolution right here off our coast in Nantucket Sound. Just because some people don’t want to see them is not important enough in light of what the stakes are.
<
p>Sincerely,
<
p>Barbara Hill