We The People USA

Citizens Dedicated To Preserving Our Constitutional Republic

EPA WILL COST YOU AND YOUR JOBS AND MONEY

The EPA’s potentially lethal assault on your quality of life, while the EU vastly increases coal importation

New Rules and Old Plants May Strain Summer Energy Supplies
By MATTHEW L. WALD


WASHINGTON — As 58 million people across 13 states sweated through the third day of a heat wave last month, power demand in North America’s largest regional grid jurisdiction hit a record high. And yet there was no shortage, no rolling blackout and no brownout in an area that stretches from Maryland to Chicago.


But that may not be the case in the future as stricter air quality rules are put in place. Eastern utilities satisfied demand that day — July 21 — with hefty output from dozens of 1950s and 1960s coal-burning power plants that dump prodigious amounts of acid gases, soot, mercury and arsenic into the air. Because of new Environmental Protection Agency rules, and some yet to be written, many of those plants are expected to close in coming years.


 No one is sure yet how many or which ones will be shuttered or what the total lost output would be. And there is little agreement over how peak demand will be met in future summers.


The E.P.A. estimates that a rule on air toxins and mercury that it expects to complete in November will result in a loss of 10,000 megawatts — or almost 1 percent of the generating capacity in the United States. Electricity experts, however, say that rule, combined with forthcoming ones on coal ash and cooling water, will have a much greater effect — from 48,000 megawatts to 80,000 megawatts, or 3.5 to 7 percent. (NYT)


Obama’s War on Coal
Killing jobs, causing blackouts
By William Yeatman
Originally published in The New York Post


President Obama claims to see the need to create jobs at this time of endless 9-plus percent unemployment — yet his administration continues to relentlessly destroy jobs for ideological reasons. The best example may be the Obama Environmental Protection Agency’s “war on coal.”


The EPA’s regulatory crusade directly threatens hundreds of thousands of jobs — and “rolling blackouts” that threaten even more.


Start with a proposed regulation under the Clean Air Act that’s set to be finalized in November. The Utility MACT (“Maximum Achievable Control Technology”) rule seeks to cut US power plants’ emissions of mercury from 29 tons a year to just five. Yet EPA itself estimates that cutting even as much as 41 tons out of total emissions of 105 tons “is unlikely to substantially affect total risk.”


For zero benefit, the Utility MACT is one of the most expensive federal regulations ever. In comments submitted to the EPA, Unions for Jobs and the Environment, an alliance of unions representing more than 3.2 million workers, estimated that this needless regulation would jeopardize 251,000 jobs.


Then there’s EPA’s out-of-the-blue ruling last month, ordering Texas to cut emissions of sulfur dioxide by 47 percent. This, when the draft version of the Cross State Air Pollution Rule had exempted the state entirely. The excuse for the change? A supposed need to slightly reduce emissions as monitored 500 miles away in Madison County, Ill. — a locale that meets the EPA air-quality standards in question. (CEI)


U.S. Coal Exports To Europe Treble
Saturday, 13 August 2011 15:45 Ying Diao and Mathew Carr, Bloomberg


U.S. coal exports to the Netherlands jumped to 1.1 million tons from 334,628 tons. Shipments to Germany went to 899,009 tons from 166,314 tons. Trade to the U.K. rose to 852,159 tons from 159,280 tons.


The U.S. may increase coal exports, further boosting supply of the commodity in Europe, Macquarie Group Ltd. (MQG) said.


“A big push” to encourage natural-gas burning in the U.S. may drive up coal exports to Europe, China and India, said Hayden Atkins, an analyst in London at Macquarie’s commodities unit. The closing of Germany’s nuclear plants will increase demand in that nation, Atkins said.


U.S. steam-coal exports to Europe in the first quarter more than tripled from a year earlier to 4.9 million metric tons from 1.5 million tons, according to a report on the website of the U.S. Energy Information Administration. U.S. coal exports are at their highest level since 1992, it said.


Exports to the Netherlands jumped to 1.1 million tons from 334,628 tons. Shipments to Germany went to 899,009 tons from 166,314 tons. Trade to the U.K. rose to 852,159 tons from 159,280 tons. (GWPF)


Tags: COSTENERGYEPAUNCONSTITUTIONAL

Views: 2167

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

And this along with the BLM and Obama's government has led to Oregon.  And of course, Harry Reid and the Bundy lands next to his.

Decades of individuals fighting alone to preserve their use of lands - and even keeping lands that were theirs by deed and inheritance.  It's time to put a stop to this take over of our country. 

If people actually act on the environmentalism that they assert in Global Warming , mass death and misery would result.  Yet the believers in such ideas would simply assert that the failure was the result of it not being implemented correctly, or that the idea is “good in theory, or that the theory was not carried out far enough”  Likewise we are led to believe that if only the right people were to implement socialism, communism, environmentalism, or any of number of other isms, or if man could just be  “better” then these ideas when implemented would not lead to suffering and mass death. Yet, it always does. It is never questioned whether the idea really is “good in theory” nor is the “good” ever defined. What these people fail to realize is that what is good in theory must be sound in science and lead to a greater good for everyone. Carbon base Energy gives people the power to overcome poverty starvation and ignorance.  Take that away and what are we left with? Starvation and death.

Blizzards, extreme cold, & heavy snow hammer many parts of the world – Moscow Sees Snowfall DOUBLED – 90% of China ‘gripped by extreme cold’


By: Marc Morano - Climate DepotJanuary 22, 2016 12:16 PM

Climate and atmospheric scientists are not only convinced that the present warming trend is happening, but that it is catastrophic and unprecedented. That belief causes some bemusement to historians and archaeologists, who are very well used to quite dramatic climate changes through history, notably the Medieval Warm Period and the succeeding Little Ice Age. That latter era, which prevailed from the 14th century through the 19th, is a well-studied and universally acknowledged fact, and its traumatic effects are often cited. The opening years of that era, in the early-mid 14th century, included some of the worst social disasters and famines in post-Roman Europe, which were in turn followed by the massacre and persecution of dissidents and minorities—Jews in Europe, Christians in the Middle East, heretics and witches in many parts of the world. A cold and hungry world needed scapegoats.

Contemporary scientists tend to dismiss or underplay these past climate cycles, suggesting for instance that the medieval warm period was confined to Europe. Historians, in their turn, are deeply suspicious, and the evidence they cite is hard to dismiss. Do note also that the very substantial Little Ice Age literature certainly does not stem from cranky “climate deniers,” but is absolutely mainstream among historians. Are we seeing a situation where some “qualified and credentialed scientific experts” stand head to head with the “qualified and credentialed social scientific experts” known as historians?

If in fact the medieval world experienced a warming trend comparable to what we are seeing today, albeit without human intervention, that fact does challenge contemporary assumptions. Ditto for the Little Ice Age, which really and genuinely was a global phenomenon. Incidentally, that era involved a drop in temperature of some 2 degrees Celsius, roughly the same as the rise that is projected for coming decades.

The 2015 Paris Conference declared a target of restricting “the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.” It’s very important to set a baseline for such efforts, certainly, but what on earth is intended here? Which pre-industrial levels are we talking about? The levels of AD 900, of 1150, of 1350, of 1680, of 1740? All those eras were assuredly pre-industrial, but the levels were significantly different in each of those years. Do they want us to return to the temperatures of the Little Ice Age, and even of the depths of cold in the 1680s? The Winter of 1684, for instance, still remains the worst recorded in England, ever. Or are the bureaucrats aiming to get us back to the warmer medieval period, around 1150?

Seriously, does any serious climate scientist claim that “pre-industrial” temperature levels had been broadly constant globally for millennia, in fact since the end of the last true Ice Age some 12,000 years ago, and that they only moved seriously upwards at the start of industrialization? Really? And they would try to defend that? In that case, we should just junk the past few decades of writing on the impact of climate on history, undertaken by first rate scholars.

If pre-industrial temperature levels really varied as much as they actually did, why did the Paris conference so blithely incorporate this meaningless phrase into their final agreement? Did the participants intend “pre-industrial levels” to be roughly equivalent to “the good old days”?

I offer one speculation. Maybe the “Little Ice Age” was the planet’s “new normal,” a natural trend towards a colder world, and we should in theory be living in those conditions today. All that saved us was the post-1800 rise in temperatures caused by massive carbon emissions from an industrializing West. If that’s correct—and I say it without any degree of assurance—then I for one have no wish whatever to return to pre-industrial conditions. Climate scientists, please advise me on that?

Historical approaches are also useful in pointing to the causes of these changes, and therefore of much climate change that originates quite independently of human action. One critical factor is solar activity, and historians usually cite the Maunder Minimum. Between 1645 and 1715, sunspot activity virtually ceased altogether, and that cosmic phenomenon coincided neatly with a major cooling on Earth, which now reached the depths of the Little Ice Age. In fact, we can see this era as an acute ice age within the larger ice age. If you point out that correlation does not of itself indicate causation, you would be quite right. But the correlation is worth investigating.

So do I challenge the global warming consensus? Absolutely not. But that does not mean that all critical questions have been satisfactorily answered, and many of them depend on historical research and analysis. Pace the New York Times and large sections of the media, there is no such thing as “established science,” which is immune to criticism. If it is “established” beyond criticism and questioning, it’s not science.

Scientific claims must not be taken on faith.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/history-and-the-lim...

Government is the problem, then you should put more faith in Mr. Massingale, and his fast growing team, and I do mean they have doubled in members, and they are in every site and in every states in America. Your choice. And by the way, they just got 37 more members from Texas.

Belgium Fears Nuclear Plants Are Vulnerable
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/26/world/europe/belgium-fears-nuclea...
What's more surprising?
Belgium has a long industrial history in the nuclear sector. With Biraco in Olen, which regularly hosted Marie and Pierre Curie, it was at the start of the industrial production of radium in 1922.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_energy_in_Belgium
Just sayin!

Next obvious question ? Why not wind & solar?

All passive or renewable electric sources are not reliable and require 100% gas,coal,nuclear base load grid back up which more than doubles the cost of electric. Kills the economy and kills jobs.

Nope only nuclear can provide cheap abundant electric at the present. 24/7/365 base load is needed.

Exactly!

  Here's how green activists affect poverty & the real reason for it!

Desperately poor people focus on feeding their families and have no spare energy to support secondary concerns such as the environment.
Destitute societies also see large families as free labor and old-age insurance. Thus, poverty inevitably produces growing populations and environmental degradation.

The industrial revolution, powered by abundant reliable energy from coal, oil, and gas, provided rural laborers with better-paying jobs in industry and government. With kerosene tractors, iron ploughs, and no draft horses to feed, farmers had more food to sell. Food prices fell, cities grew, and society supported more culture, conservation, and welfare.

With increasing prosperity, Western families became smaller, reducing birth rates below replacement levels, thus moderating population pressure on the environment.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/03/heres_how_green_activis...
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
I never thought the day would comes that I’d be reposting something from David Appell. Yet, here I am, in agreement with him. I keep looking over my shoulder for…
WATTSUPWITHTHAT.COM

RSS

Badge

Loading…

Online Magazines

Accuracy In Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
American Conservative
Amer Conservative Daily
The American Prospect
Atlanta Const Journal
The Atlantic Monthly
Boston Review
Blacklisted News
The Bulletin
Canada Free Press
Capitalism Magazine
Chronicles Magazine
City Journal
CNS News
CNIN Truth
Conservative Economist
Consortium News
Commentary Magazine
The Conservative Edge
Conservative Outpost
Corruption Chronicals (JW)
The Corzine Times
CounterPunch
The Daily Caller
Daily Mail UK
Deep Journal
Digital Journal
Dissent Magazine
The Economist
Examiner
Florida Pundit
Foreign Affairs
Foreign Policy
The Freemen Institute
The Gouverneur Times NY
The Guardian UK
The Foundry (Heritage)
Free Market News
FrontPage Magazine
Gateway Pundit
The Guardian UK
The Globalist
Harper's Magazine
Harvard Inter Review
The Hill
Human Events
In These Times
The Land of the Free
Liberty Unbound
Mission America
Mother Jones
Monthly Review
The Nation
National Interest
National Ledger
National Review
New Internationalist
The New American
The New Ledger
New Left Review
New Media Journal
News Hounds
Newstin
The New Republic
News Busters
News Fifty
NewsMax
Newsweek
News Daily
News With Views
Online Journal
Oohja.com
The Palestine Chronicle
Planet Daily
Policy Review
Poligazette
Politics Daily
The Post Chronicle
Pravda
The Progressive
Reality Check
The Real News Network
Reason
Real Clear Markets
Real Clear Politics
Red Pepper
Roll Call
Russia Today
Salon
Slate
Spectator Magazine
Spiked
Telegraph UK
Time
Toward Freedom
Townhall
U.S. News & World Report
Utne Reader
Wall Street Journal Magazine
Washington Examiner
The Washington Independent
Washington Monthly
The Weekly Standard
World Net Daily
World Magazine
World Press Review
World Reports
World Tribune
Vanity Fair

© 2024   Created by WTPUSA.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service