Obama administration unveils controversial emissions cap on power plants

Obama (via the EPA) has finally released his master wrecking ball plan for power generation stations.

It's all about CO2 emissions and they want big reductions by 2030 mainly from coal generators.

States will be "handling" much of it because Congress has not passed any major laws apparently.

Big taxes coming.

The dream is coming true

The Obama administration took aim at the coal industry on Monday by mandating a 30 percent cut in carbon emissions at fossil fuel-burning power plants by 2030 -- despite claims the regulation will cost nearly a quarter-million jobs a year and force plants across the country to close.

The controversial regulation is one of the most sweeping efforts to tackle global warming by this or any other administration.

The 645-page rule, expected to be final next year, is a centerpiece of President Obama's climate change agenda, and a step that the administration hopes will get other countries to act when negotiations on a new international treaty resume next year.

Article;
Obama administration unveils controversial emissions cap on power plants


All 645 pages.................
EPA
Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units

Get your wallets and loan applications ready.

Make sure your credit score is up to date and correct !!

And for comparison, here's the top ten Chicken Little predictions that failed....

The Sky Still Isn't Falling --Top Ten Failed Global Warming Predictions (story from Dec 2010)

By now we should have seen something, we were supposed to begin seeing effects from the "man made global warming. The predictions were all there, and they were made long enough ago that we can figure out if the sky is falling and the Manhattan skyline will be under water a week from Tuesday. So how did the global warming nuts do? Well if you excuse the expression, Not too hot. So don't cancel your trip into Manhattan next month (because Chicken Little was more accurate) and read the top ten dud predictions some are from Fox News, the rest have been covered here at the Lid

They also can set up pollution-trading markets as some states already have done to offer more flexibility in how plants cut emissions.

Pollution-trading markets? If that is not a sign that this is complete bollucks, I don't know what is.

Anyway, I'm all for cutting pollution but this is not the way to do it. Instead of regulating the coal industry, we should be investing in renewable-energy research and working towards getting away from coal all together.

But I believe Obama would be bashed for that as well. So no matter what he can't win on this issue.

a reply to: xuenchen




I agree with Sheepslayer in that he will be held accountable remembered for his actions.

He said it, no-one listened.

Oh, YAY!
My electric bill will be going up.... again.

Thank you President Obama!

Oh YAY!
More people will be on food stamps (coal miners, truck drivers , etc....).

Thank you President Obama!

Here in Australia a "carbon tax" was put into place a few years ago and ever since that time our electricity bills have been rising slowly but surely in preparation for when the tax comes into full affect. Compared to just a few years ago, our electricity bills are now considerably higher. I can tell you right now with 100% certainty that it doesn't lower carbon outputs, to do so would require the economy to shrink and for less energy output. What it really achieves is higher energy prices, the utility companies are not going to sell less energy, they simply increase their prices in order to cover the losses caused by the tax. The cost is simply shifted onto the consumers and at the end of the day it achieves nothing except higher energy prices and more tax income for the government (which is of course the real plan).

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Here in Australia a "carbon tax" was put into place a few years ago and ever since that time our electricity bills have been rising slowly but surely in preparation for when the tax comes into full affect.

So they used the slow boiling frog tactic.

originally posted by: xuenchen
So they used the slow boiling frog tactic.

Lol, yes, exactly, that's precisely what they did. But now that I properly read the article I see Obama's plan isn't actually any sort of tax on carbon outputs, it's simply some sort of demand that the coal industry should cut their carbon emissions by 30 percent by 2030. Although obviously they will be fined or taxed in some way if they fail to meet the new regulations, so it's essentially the same thing, just worded in a different way.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder

originally posted by: xuenchen
So they used the slow boiling frog tactic.

Lol, yes, exactly, that's precisely what they did. But now that I properly read the article I see Obama's plan isn't actually any sort of tax on carbon outputs, it's simply some sort of demand that the coal industry should cut their carbon emissions by 30 percent by 2030. Although obviously they will be fined or taxed in some way if they fail to meet the new regulations, so it's essentially the same thing, just worded in a different way.

That and the higher rates passed to users.

I bet they add a new "tax" on power bills like they do on other "utilities".

The reason they are making an end run on this is because they can't get legislation passed at the Federal level.

The EPA, being part of the Executive Branch is by-passing Congress on this one.

I guess now we can put heating our homes in the same category as healthcare...things we can't afford. This is practically an act of war on the middle class. No wonder they have been stock-piling ammunition.

Thanks Obama, for yet another blow to us 99 percenters.

a reply to: sheepslayer247

Pollution-trading markets? If that is not a sign that this is complete bollucks, I don't know what is.

Just keep shuffling the pollution around.

If they will give me some credits that I can sell, I might be in. Hold on, I've just been informed that I am not a big enough player in the game to get in. I am targeted as someone to pay the money into the game so other can profit.

Another brainless move by a brainless government. Come elections time we should clean house. Not a single incumbent should be re-elected.

I think we need to clean up the pollution in the west wing before we tackle coal plants.

I wonder if some of our scientist friends can explain this....

But the EPA adds that the regulations will generate more than $90 billion in climate and health benefits compared to $7.3 billion to $8.8 billion in costs. Under the first year alone, the EPA states the rule will avoid up to 150,000 asthma attacks and 2,100 heart attacks.

but how many heart attacks will happen when people get the bills in the mail?


article from The Hill

a reply to: xuenchen

Hard to say how much of the price increase is inflation, trillions of dollars more currency for the same amount of stuff.

Everything should cost twice as much as it did in 2008.

More people will pay easier if they think they are saving the planet, or getting the only healthcare.

The banker bailout is in that bill somewhere.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Obama (via the EPA) has finally released his master wrecking
-- despite claims the regulation will cost nearly a quarter-million jobs a year and force plants across the country to close.

I see your "claim" of 250,000 jobs and raise you..
13,000 Pre-Mature deaths
10,000 Hospital Admissions
20,000 Heart Attacks
10,000 Cases of Chronic Bronchitis
750,000 Asthma Attacks
And 1,600,000 lost days of work annually
www.rmi.org...

With a monetary cost of over 100 Billion annually...

How about this...The Coal industry pays those real costs and the Gov. doesn't ask them to pollute less?

Because what they are getting right now is a 100 Billion Dollar + annual subsidy...in the form of medical bills and lost work that the average Joe pays for as a result of their unwillingness to move to cleaner technology.

And that is all apart from the fact that it simply sucks to suffer from Bronchitis, Asthma...or simply be slowly poisoned to death.

a reply to: Indigo5
I am sure that the government will put out stats showing how there are fewer cases of all of the listed health maladies after the changes have been made...

Whether the stats are true or not.

a reply to: Indigo5

First, you should get the quotes corrected.

Then, maybe explain better.

You might have some points worth discussing.

This is not a game of thorns.

a reply to: butcherguy

Oh, no, once they get done killing our power. There won't be any bills. They can't charge you for what doesn't exist. After all, everyone knows there is no viable replacement for things that produce pollution that the greens can't stand us having. Once those coal plants go out ... so do the lights.