Rate:
Share
Views: 2943
Text Size:
Comments (14)

Obama's Energy Policy

Environmentalism... It's the New War

By Nick Hodge
Wednesday, December 10th, 2008

It is a major national security issue.

That reasoning seemed to work the past eight years as countless, often unnecessary, rules and policies were rammed down American citizens' throats.

Secret wiretapping? National security issue.

Spying on peaceful protesters? National security issue.

Millions of missing White House e-mails just as investigations began into the politically motivated firings of U.S. Attorneys? Obviously a national security issue.

Just like those WMDs, right?

Of course, BILLIONS were made on those "national security issues." (OK, maybe not on the e-mails.)

Private security firms, military and spying software, and defense contractors have raked in billions as a result of our national security issues.

Thing is, you had to be willing to profit from lies, deceit, and destruction to go along for that ride. I certainly wasn't. And I know a few more like me.

Now, a new President is going usher in a new line of national security issues. The profit potential from these new issues will be equally as great as the old ones, only they're backed by truth, science, and goodwill—not greed and a get-rich-at-all-costs mentality.

New National Security Issues

To be clear, I'm not in favor of applying the "National Security" label to any pet project that needs public approval. But, that's the world we live in. Somebody has to herd the sheep.

The moral high ground has many loose stones. And the new administration will certainly use tools sharpened by their predecessors. Hopefully, they have a different end-game in mind.

So far, it looks promising.

Instead of wielding the national security tag to gain access to your e-mail, Mr. Obama has set his targets on less dubious threats: energy security and climate change.

The incoming president has appointed General James Jones as his national security advisor. Jones is also the CEO of the Institute of the 21st Century, a group developed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to promote energy development and conservation.

That group, headed by the soon-to-be national security advisor, sent Mr. Obama a report after his election asking him to usher in a new age of energy policy.

Advertisement

Here's What Every Wealthy Energy Investor Already Knows...

  • The U.S. Department of Energy has indicated that enough electric power for the entire country can be generated by covering about 9% of Nevada with solar power systems. This is a plot of land roughly 92 miles by 92 miles.

  • According to M.I.T., there are over 100 million quads of accessible geothermal energy worldwide. The world only consumes about 400 quads.

  • The Institute for the Analysis of Global Security has stated that if all cars on the road were hybrids, and half were Plug-In Hybrids by 2025 -- U.S. imports would be reduced by 8 million barrels per day. That's about 80% of our daily consumption!

Want a million more reasons that renewable energy investors have become some of the wealthiest in 2009?

Click here for all the proof you'll ever need!


Here's an excerpt from that report:

"For over 40 years, the United States has had an inadequate, contradictory and shortsighted approach with our regard to our energy future. Energy is a national security issue and an international security issue of the highest order. Global demand will increase by more than 50 percent between now and 2030 - and perhaps by as much as 30 percent here in the United States. We must develop new, affordable, diverse and clean sources of energy that will underpin our nation's economy and keep us strong both and home and abroad."

Did you see the buzzwords in there: "Energy is a national security issue."

This is must be a top priority. Sound the alarms. Get your checkbooks ready. We have a new national security issue.

Surely someone, somewhere, is getting rich of this deal. Shouldn't it be you?

For a list of what Mr. Jone's report recommends, click here. I just scanned them, but from what I saw, the price tag comes out at well over a billion dollars.

Basically, we're substituting First Solar (NASDAQ: FSLR) and EnerNOC (NASDAQ: ENOC), and a litany of other cleantech companies for Enron and Lockheed Martin (NSYE: LMT) here. It may not be exactly straight arrow, but it's certainly not war profiteering.

And energy security isn't the only new national security issue. We're also going to war against climate change.

Here's a recent quote from the next leader of the Free World on the subject:

"This is a matter of urgency and of national security and it has to be dealt with in a serious way. That's what I intend my administration to do."

For rhetorical good measure he added that attacking global climate is a "matter of urgency."

Can you see the stocks rising yet?

Profiting from National Security Issues: A Quick Case Study

Take a look at this chart of four major defense contractors over the past five years:

defense contractors

Each of them had substantial runs, earning well over 100%, as they gobbled up government contracts to deal with our national security issues, namely the occupation of Iraq.

It's no surprise or coincidence that their rise in stock price correlates concretely to our invasion of, and prolonged stay in, Iraq.

Now, you could argue that these stocks began to decline along with the broader markets. But I'd argue they held up comparably well, and only started to decline upon the realization that a new president would be elected with drastically different national security issues.

With new national priorities, a new group of stocks is about to embark on a similar run.

Instead of defense contractors, it'll be cleantech companies that are receiving government meal tickets for the next few years.

It'll be the same profit opportunity, only with new players and a more positive end-game.

But you'll need to get your ducks in a row now in order to take advantage.

To get you started, I've compiled a full report on investing in wind energy—one of the first sectors that will receive the Obama-bump.

Be sure to check it out.

And, for continued coverage on this emerging trend, along with complete investment advice and analysis, be sure to join the thousands of other readers already in the know at the Alternative Energy Speculator.

Call it like you see it,

nick hodge

Nick






Rate this article:
 
     Current Rating:  
Article RatingArticle RatingArticle RatingArticle RatingArticle Rating (16 votes)

Comment on this Article


Comments:

Comment by Steve on 2008-12-10
Amazing that simply by electing Obama, the aurhor thinks the greedy will simply turn the other cheek and make their profits "backed by truth, science, and goodwill—not greed and a get-rich-at-all-costs mentality." I believe Nick Hodge is putting his head in the sand when it comes to the next administration
Comment by Jack on 2008-12-10
Since it's okay with you to profit from a fraud - anthropogenic climate change - why is it not okay with you to profit from the national defense of this country? Have you paid attention to the global mean temperature since '98? It's falling. The ferver in the new "messiah" you drip with is telling. What flavor is the kool-aid?
I don't mind receiving advice about the potential investment sectors based on a new administration but please check your facts and be honest. I can do without the ad hominines.
Comment by Chuck S on 2008-12-10
Barack has said that he'll impose a carbon tax that will bankrupt any coal plant, DESTROYING energy security. Al Quida doesn't have to blow up our power plnats - Barack is planning on doing a much more thourough job. I think wind generators take much mmore resource - maybe even more fossil fuel - than conventional plants. It takes fossil fuel to dig out copper and iron ore, ship them to refineries, and build the generators, towers, transmission lines, and the necessary natural gas back-up plants. We're paying for this, even if through subsidies/taxes and higher prices of goods due to the taxes.

We should continue with conventional power until alternatives are ready to do the job. We need to drill here, drill yesterday or sooner.

Instead of war profiteering, we have alternative energy profiteering. I suspect that General Electric, etc, knows what a waste wind generators and other wasteful alternative energies are. Some probably make sense, but a lot is waste. I think geothermal in the right locations may make sense, but do the analysis, including all subsidies and laws hurting competitive energy.
Comment by Raymond L. Grier on 2008-12-10
YIour lead in is pure BS. Why have we not been attacked following 9-11???
How many attempted attackeds have been prevented because of the actions that you object to???
As for the warming trend that we are in--the world is getting warmer-yes-how much of this is due to man's causes? Answer, not much.
The rest of your article is, I believe, correct.
Comment by Terry on 2008-12-10
I stopped reading the article as soon as you interjected your political bias. You bash Bush's character and praise Obama when this has nothing to do with the merits of your investment ideas. I don't think your political views should permeate your articles as they often do. I want investment advice, not political propaganda and I bet I'm not the only one who feels this way.
Comment by John C Walgamott on 2008-12-10
Cut the political pontificating. Obama comes out of the dirtiest political machine in the country and all you see is rainbows. Stick to evaluating investment ideas.
Comment by Chuck S on 2008-12-10
You could just tell us that we can make a fortune from the government's misguided mega-funding of inefficient alternative energy, instead of making it seem like that's the best thing to do. Maybe like investing in casinos, which we should know aren't the best thing, but may be profitable.

The attacks on Mubai, India and Bangkok, Tailand indicate that somebody needs MORE survelience. Maybe the attacks on our survelience by Barack and the Democrats kep us from monitoring the bad guys' blackberries in India. You, by attacking the survelience we have, may have contributed to the attacks.
Comment by Larry Green on 2008-12-10
Mr. Hodge's political views in this article have caused me to no longer want advice of any kind from Wealth Daily. I will unsubscribe immediately.
Comment by Marian Kann on 2008-12-10
Unfortunately our country has enemies and without our defense strategies we are just hiding our heads in the sand. The author is naive on this subject.
Comment by Chuck S on 2008-12-10
You could just tell us that we can make a fortune from the government's misguided mega-funding of inefficient alternative energy, instead of making it seem like that's the best thing to do. Maybe like investing in casinos, which we should know aren't the best thing, but may be profitable.

The attacks on Mubai, India and Bangkok, Tailand indicate that somebody needs MORE survelience. Maybe the attacks on our survelience by Barack and the Democrats kep us from monitoring the bad guys' blackberries in India. You, by attacking the survelience we have, may have contributed to the attacks.
Comment by Wallace D. Henderson on 2008-12-10
Anyone who believes that the security policy of the new administration will be better than current policy is either nieve or blind to reality. Check to current arrest of the Democrat Governor of Illinois, the state and party in which Obama received his political education.
Comment by vethost on 2008-12-10
Awesome article! So many so called investment writers tell you what you already know and with a bias that makes it look like GW Bush was a messiah. Ha! Finally, someone who makes sense of it all. Nick Hodge is a light in the darkness. Let it shine, Nick! You rock!
Comment by sherry on 2008-12-11
It would cost the equivalent of 60 cents a gallon to charge and drive an electric car. The electricity to charge the car could come from solar or wind generated electricity. If all gasoline cars, trucks, and suv’s instead had plug-in electric drive trains, the amount of electricity needed to replace gasoline is about equal to the estimated wind energy potential of the state of North Dakota. Why don't we use some of the billions in bail out money to bail us out of our dependence on foreign oil? This past year the high cost of fuel so seriously damaged our economy and society that the ripple effects will be felt for years to come. Why not invest in setting up some alternative energy projects on a national basis, create clean cheap electricity, create millions of badly needed new green collar jobs, and get out from under our dependence on foreign oil. What a win -win situation that would be. There is a great new book out called The Manhattan Project of 2009 Energy Independence NOW by Jeff Wilson. I highly recommend this book for anyone interested in alternative energy. www.themanhattanprojectof2009.com



Comment by JC on 2009-03-12
Great article! I enjoyed it very much and totally agree. :)