I got this email this morning direct to my private email, and not part of an email list. I suppose the White House thinks the reach and impact we have at WUWT have is important enough to merit a direct email to me of this press release. So, I’ll play the game, publish this PR, and we’ll watch with disdain as our energy infrastructure is dismantled over an overblown climate threat that has become little more than a political tool. As Willis Eschenbach noted in a recent guest post, “Obama May Finally Succeed!”
FACT SHEET: PRESIDENT OBAMA TO ANNOUNCE HISTORIC CARBON POLLUTION STANDARDS FOR POWER PLANTS
PRESIDENT OBAMA TO ANNOUNCE HISTORIC
CARBON POLLUTION STANDARDS FOR POWER PLANTS
The Clean Power Plan is a Landmark Action to Protect Public Health, Reduce Energy Bills for Households and Businesses, Create American Jobs, and Bring
Clean Power to Communities across the Country
Today at the White House, President Obama and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy will release the final Clean Power Plan, a historic step in the Obama Administration’s fight against climate change.
We have a moral obligation to leave our children a planet that’s not polluted or damaged. The effects of climate change are already being felt across the nation. In the past three decades, the percentage of Americans with asthma has more than doubled, and climate change is putting those Americans at greater risk of landing in the hospital. Extreme weather events – from more severe droughts and wildfires in the West to record heat waves – and sea level rise are hitting communities across the country. In fact, 14 of the 15 warmest years on record have all occurred in the first 15 years of this century and last year was the warmest year ever. The most vulnerable among us – including children, older adults, people with heart or lung disease, and people living in poverty – are most at risk from the impacts of climate change. Taking action now is critical.
The Clean Power Plan establishes the first-ever national standards to limit carbon pollution from power plants. We already set limits that protect public health by reducing soot and other toxic emissions, but until now, existing power plants, the largest source of carbon emissions in the United States, could release as much carbon pollution as they wanted.
The final Clean Power Plan sets flexible and achievable standards to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030, 9 percent more ambitious than the proposal. By setting carbon pollution reduction goals for power plants and enabling states to develop tailored implementation plans to meet those goals, the Clean Power Plan is a strong, flexible framework that will:
– Provide significant public health benefits – The Clean Power Plan, and other policies put in place to drive a cleaner energy sector, will reduce premature deaths from power plant emissions by nearly 90 percent in 2030 compared to 2005 and decrease the pollutants that contribute to the soot and smog and can lead to more asthma attacks in kids by more than 70 percent. The Clean Power Plan will also avoid up to 3,600 premature deaths, lead to 90,000 fewer asthma attacks in children, and prevent 300,000 missed work and school days.
– Create tens of thousands of jobs while ensuring grid reliability;
– Drive more aggressive investment in clean energy technologies than the proposed rule, resulting in 30 percent more renewable energy generation in 2030 and continuing to lower the costs of renewable energy.
– Save the average American family nearly $85 on their annual energy bill in 2030, reducing enough energy to power 30 million homes, and save consumers a total of $155 billion from 2020-2030;
– Give a head start to wind and solar deployment and prioritize the deployment of energy efficiency improvements in low-income communities that need it most early in the program through a Clean Energy Incentive Program; and
– Continue American leadership on climate change by keeping us on track to meet the economy-wide emissions targets we have set, including the goal of reducing emissions to 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and to 26-28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.
KEY FEATURES OF THE CLEAN POWER PLAN
The final Clean Power Plan takes into account the unprecedented input EPA received through extensive outreach, including the 4 million comments that were submitted to the agency during the public comment period. The result is a fair, flexible program that will strengthen the fast-growing trend toward cleaner and lower-polluting American energy. The Clean Power Plan significantly reduces carbon pollution from the electric power sector while advancing clean energy innovation, development, and deployment. It ensures the U.S. will stay on a path of long-term clean energy investments that will maintain the reliability of our electric grid, promote affordable and clean energy for all Americans, and continue United States leadership on climate action. The Clean Power Plan:
– Provides Flexibility to States to Choose How to Meet Carbon Standards: EPA’s Clean Power Plan establishes carbon pollution standards for power plants, called carbon dioxide (CO2) emission performance rates. States develop and implement tailored plans to ensure that the power plants in their state meet these standards– either individually, together, or in combination with other measures like improvements in renewable energy and energy efficiency. The final rule provides more flexibility in how state plans can be designed and implemented, including: streamlined opportunities for states to include proven strategies like trading and demand-side energy efficiency in their plans, and allows states to develop “trading ready” plans to participate in “opt in” to an emission credit trading market with other states taking parallel approaches without the need for interstate agreements. All low-carbon electricity generation technologies, including renewables, energy efficiency, natural gas, nuclear and carbon capture and storage, can play a role in state plans.
– More Time for States Paired With Strong Incentives for Early Deployment of Clean Energy: State plans are due in September of 2016, but states that need more time can make an initial submission and request extensions of up to two years for final plan submission. The compliance averaging period begins in 2022 instead of 2020, and emission reductions are phased in on a gradual “glide path” to 2030. These provisions to give states and companies more time to prepare for compliance are paired with a new Clean Energy Incentive Program to drive deployment of renewable energy and low-income energy efficiency before 2022.
– Creates Jobs and Saves Money for Families and Businesses: The Clean Power Plan builds on the progress states, cities, and businesses and have been making for years. Since the beginning of 2010, the average cost of a solar electric system has dropped by half and wind is increasingly competitive nationwide. The Clean Power Plan will drive significant new investment in cleaner, more modern and more efficient technologies, creating tens of thousands of jobs. Under the Clean Power Plan, by 2030, renewables will account for 28 percent of our capacity, up from 22 percent in the proposed rule. Due to these improvements, the Clean Power Plan will save the average American nearly $85 on their energy bill in 2030, and save consumers a total of $155 billion through 2020-2030, reducing enough energy to power 30 million homes.
– Rewards States for Early Investment in Clean Energy, Focusing on Low-Income Communities: The Clean Power Plan establishes a Clean Energy Incentive Program that will drive additional early deployment of renewable energy and low-income energy efficiency. Under the program, credits for electricity generated from renewables in 2020 and 2021 will be awarded to projects that begin construction after participating states submit their final implementation plans. The program also prioritizes early investment in energy efficiency projects in low-income communities by the Federal government awarding these projects double the number of credits in 2020 and 2021. Taken together, these incentives will drive faster renewable energy deployment, further reduce technology costs, and lay the foundation for deep long-term cuts in carbon pollution. In addition, the Clean Energy Incentive Plan provides additional flexibility for states, and will increase the overall net benefits of the Clean Power Plan.
– Ensures Grid Reliability: The Clean Power Plan contains several important features to ensure grid reliability as we move to cleaner sources of power. In addition to giving states more time to develop implementation plans, starting compliance in 2022, and phasing in the targets over the decade, the rule requires states to address reliability in their state plans. The final rule also provides a “reliability safety valve” to address any reliability challenges that arise on a case-by-case basis. These measures are built on a framework that is inherently flexible in that it does not impose plant-specific requirements and provides states flexibility to smooth out their emission reductions over the period of the plan and across sources.
– Continues U.S. Leadership on Climate Change: The Clean Power Plan continues United States leadership on climate change. By driving emission reductions from power plants, the largest source of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, the Clean Power Plan builds on prior Administration steps to reduce emissions, including historic investments to deploy clean energy technologies, standards to double the fuel economy of our cars and light trucks, and steps to reduce methane pollution. Taken together these measures put the United States on track to achieve the President’s near-term target to reduce emissions in the range of 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, and lay a strong foundation to deliver against our long-term target to reduce emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. The release of the Clean Power Plan continues momentum towards international climate talks in Paris in December, building on announcements to-date of post-2020 targets by countries representing 70 percent of global energy based carbon emissions.
– Sets State Targets in a Way That Is Fair and Is Directly Responsive to Input from States, Utilities, and Stakeholders: In response to input from stakeholders, the final Clean Power Plan modifies the way that state targets are set by using an approach that better reflects the way the electricity grid operates, using updated information about the cost and availability of clean generation technologies, and establishing separate emission performance rates for all coal plants and all gas plants. .
– Maintains Energy Efficiency as Key Compliance Tool: In addition to on-site efficiency and greater are reliance on low and zero carbon generation, the Clean Power Plan provides states with broad flexibility to design carbon reduction plans that include energy efficiency and other emission reduction strategies. EPA’s analysis shows that energy efficiency is expected to play a major role in meeting the state targets as a cost-effective and widely-available carbon reduction tool, saving enough energy to power 30 million homes and putting money back in ratepayers’ pockets.
– Requires States to Engage with Vulnerable Populations:The Clean Power Plan includes provisions that require states to meaningfully engage with low-income, minority, and tribal communities, as the states develop their plans. EPA also encourages states to engage with workers and their representatives in the utility and related sectors in developing their state plans.
– Includes a Proposed Federal Implementation Plan: EPA is also releasing a proposed federal plan today. This proposed plan will provide a model states can use in designing their plans, and when finalized, will be a backstop to ensure that the Clean Power Plan standards are met in every state.
Since the Clean Air Act became law more than 45 years ago with bipartisan support, the EPA has continued to protect the health of communities, in particular those vulnerable to the impacts of harmful air pollution, while the economy has continued to grow. In fact, since 1970, air pollution has decreased by nearly 70 percent while the economy has tripled in size. The Clean Power Plan builds on this progress, while providing states the flexibility and tools to transition to clean, reliable, and affordable electricity.
BUILDING ON PROGRESS
The Clean Power Plan builds on steps taken by the Administration, states, cities, and companies to move to cleaner sources of energy. Solar electricity generation has increased more than 20-fold since 2008, and electricity from wind has more than tripled. Efforts such as the following give us a strong head start in meeting the Clean Power Plan’s goals:
– 50 states with demand-side energy efficiency programs
– 37 states with renewable portfolio standards or goals
– 10 states with market-based greenhouse gas reduction programs
– 25 states with energy efficiency standards or goals
Today’s actions also build on a series of actions the Administration is taking through the President’s Climate Action Plan to reduce the dangerous levels of carbon pollution that are contributing to climate change, including:
– Standards for Light and Heavy-Duty Vehicles: Earlier this summer, the EPA and the Department of Transportation proposed the second phase of fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, which if finalized as proposed will reduce 1 billion tons of carbon pollution. The proposed standards build on the first phase of heavy-duty vehicle requirements and standards for light-duty vehicles issued during the President’s first term that will save Americans $1.7 trillion, reduce oil consumption by 2.2 million barrels per day by 2025, and slash greenhouse gas emissions by 6 billion metric tons through the lifetime of the program.
– Low Income Solar: Last month, the White House announced a new initiative to increase access to solar energy for all Americans, in particular low-and moderate income communities, and build a more inclusive workforce. The initiative will help families and businesses cut their energy bills through launching a National Community Solar Partnership to unlock access to solar for the nearly 50 percent of households and business that are renters or do not have adequate roof space to install solar systems and sets a goal to install 300 megawatts (MW) of renewable energy in federally subsidized housing by 2020. Through this initiative housing authorities, rural electric co-ops, power companies, and organizations in more than 20 states across the country committed to put in place more than 260 solar energy projects and philanthropic and impact investors, states, and cities are committed to invest $520 million to advance community solar and scale up solar and energy efficiency for low- and moderate- income households. The initiative also includes AmeriCorps funding to deploy solar and create jobs in underserved communities and a commitment from the solar industry to become the most diverse sector of the U.S. energy industry.
– Economy-Wide Measures to Reduce other Greenhouse Gases: EPA and other agencies are taking actions to cut methane emissions from oil and gas systems, landfills, coal mining, and agriculture through cost-effective voluntary actions and common-sense standards. At the same time, the U.S. Department of State is working to slash global emissions of potent industrial greenhouse gases, called hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), through an amendment to the Montreal Protocol; EPA is cutting domestic HFC emissions through its Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program; and, the private sector has stepped up with commitments to cut global HFC emissions equivalent to 700 million metric tons of carbon pollution through 2025.
– Investing in Coal Communities, Workers, and Communities: In February, as part of the President’s FY 2016 budget, the Administration released the POWER+ Plan to invest in workers and jobs, address important legacy costs in coal country, and drive the development of coal technology. The Plan provides dedicated new resources for economic diversification, job creation, job training, and other employment services for workers and communities impacted by layoffs at coal mines and coal-fired power plants; includes unprecedented investments in the health and retirement security of mineworkers and their families and the accelerated clean-up of hazardous coal abandoned mine lands; and provides new tax incentives to support continued technology development and deployment of carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration technologies.
– Energy Efficiency Standards: DOE set a goal of reducing carbon pollution by 3 billion metric tons cumulatively by 2030 through energy conservation standards issued during this Administration. DOE has already finalized energy conservation standards for 29 categories of appliances and equipment, as well as a building code determination for commercial buildings. These measures will also cut consumers’ annual electricity bills by billions of dollars.
– Investing in Clean Energy: In June the White House announced more than $4 billion in private-sector commitments and executive actions to scale up investment in clean energy innovation, including launching a new Clean Energy Impact Investment Center at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to make information about energy and climate programs at DOE and other government agencies accessible and more understandable to the public, including to mission-driven investors.
Bovine scat.
+10001
Myself, I call it P.S. Political Suicide. One could hardly adopt a more anti-science, anti-intellectual position than one which dismisses an entire science-based viewpoint out-of-hand through the rationale that expert critics are “paid industry shills” and other critics are “deniers”.
+17?
The next guy I meet in person who uses carbon (dioxide) and pollution in the same sentence is going to get a sharp left to the ‘Marie Carelli”
So biff, you really think it is that good eh ?? Well dung beatles just love bovine scat.
Why does this editor not know what beatles are ??
“””””….. a historic step in the Obama Administration’s fight against climate change. …..”””””
So king Obama, is going to sit in his oval office chair with his boots up on the special oval office desk, in his formal salute, and do a king Canute number on the climate, and command it to cease changing.
Biggest unknown at this point is whether he or Gina McCarthy is the smarter of the two.
This white house occupant has so many feathers already in his ” legacy “cap, that nobody is ever going to remember just what exactly it was that he did, while in office.
And with the Clintons the most likely next tenants, there isn’t going to be anything left, that really needs to get done; so they are going to get bored to tears.
He said he would stop the rising of the seas in his inaugural address. He thinks he is a god.
Maybe next week he can stake out a leadership position on Bigfoot and spend billions eliminating that nasty vegetation he hides in. The vegetation must be bad since it DEMANDS that CO2 pollutant to thrive.
The Ministry of Truth is alive and well.
Why would you bother to give this rubbish oxygen?
Because ignoring it won’t make it go away. Discussion and analysis is relevant, or you can choose to stick your fingers in your ears and go “lalalalalala!”
Mr Watts,
You are correct in saying it will not go away. The question I would submit is:
What action can folks take that would yield positive results?
I suggest a campaign of emails to representatives.
Starting now, it’s time to graph the cost of power to the”average consumer”, with the endline $85 less in 2030, the POTUS line! Let’s see how the actual trend goes. But are the savings monthly or annual? Are they $2015 or $2030? So many questions….
Paul,
The house of representatives in the US are powerless because they … oh, never mind,
Obomber is implimenting this through executive fiat, via his bureaucratic and ideological minions.
Which is exactly what the govt. will do, discussion, your’e avin a larf…
The Obama people may want to float this plan as a trial balloon with us so that they can formulate rebuttals to combat all of us skeptical nay-sayers after the plan is rolled out!
This was prominently featured on the BBC news last night.
It is very kind of you Americans to take over the mantle of climate leadership from us Brits and to willingly agree to paying far more for your energy costs and your gasoline. The competitive advantage you currently enjoy due to fracking and low energy costs will now disappear and you can all see what the rest of us in the developed world have been squealing about for years.
The higher energy costs will come directly out of your pockets.
tonyb
Robert of Ottawaw.
Representatives in the House and Senate could vote to defund the EPA rendering the EPA useless and/or ineffective.
In America we can do anything we want to!
@Robert
Yes, those hoof beats you hear aren’t zebras, they are RINO’s in full charge, er retreat.
Anthony, I applaud the open approach that you take on climate, airing all views and not shutting down dissenting voices. Of course it was the right thing to do, to publish Obama’s statement.
It is a nice irony that the previous post was Willis’s excellent article on the diabolically high cost of renewable energy.
Brian (August 3, 2015 at 10:06 am) asks “What can we do about this? Seriously, so many people are outraged about the lies, we need to get organised while we still have time, what can we do?“.
I think that is a very valid question. WUWT has been and is fantastic, but I doubt that it reaches as far as it needs to in order to combat the madness. I agree with Paul that we need to start generating emails to representatives. Can you, and we, produce some short and to the point statements and articles specifically for WUWT readers to send to their political representatives and local media? It is time for truth to get its boots on.
Maybe we could start by using Obama’s “Under my plan the electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket.”. In conjunction with Willis’s graph it would be deadly – if only people knew how to read a graph. (And that tells you how hard it is to get sensible information through to people in the age of holistic education and social media).
https://imgur.com/133LEza
the only thing that isn’t gum flapping is stop paying.
but some girls just can’t say no.
“Representatives in the House and Senate could vote to defund the EPA rendering the EPA useless and/or ineffective.”
If they had the balls to do that, they’d have done so years ago.
Jack, the House and Senate aren’t powerless, because they could refuse to pass bills that contain any spending for the EPA and any other rogue agency.
What they lack is the desire to actually do anything that might get the NYT and Wash Post mad at them and heaven forbid, cause them to be disinvited from any of the A-list parties.
Mike, I believe Anthony and this site are most valuable doing what they do now. Publishing science that won’t see the light of day anywhere else and trying to stay out of the politics of the issue. Which isn’t to say that we the poloi are forbidden from commenting on the politics.
That someone needs to take up the mantle of trying to do something to resist the growing tyranny from Washington is beyond argument. Personally, I’m more of a Patrick Henry than a John Adams.
Defunding the EPA sounds great until you realize that our Undocumented Worker-in-Chief uses the Fed Reserve as his personal money source and will fund it around Congress. He can write any check he wants off the Fed. Res. or even just have the money sent over secretly. How else would he fund his shadow government of czars?
It’s a matter for rejoicing. The USA has reached peak stupid, and it’s all downhill from now.
I’ve learned one thing about progressives, it can always get stupider.
But which way is downhill? The B.S. is so ubiquitous and destabilizing that far too many people don’t know up from down, and they will continue to be led by the loudest voice.
Stupidity has no limits. It can, and will, continue to get worse for as long as we elect idiots to public office. Unfortunately, the idiots are on both sides so I don’t see it getting better anytime soon.
I think we are now so flooded with stupidity, it has spread out to a sheet flow across the land.
I wonder…is the asthma getting worse in the parts if the US where it is warmer than normal, or cooler than normal, over the past several years?
Or is changing climate responsible for all asthma now, regardless of actual temps?
I am very curious to know where sea level rise is having all the awful affects?
Is it at our seashore communities, which are still beong rebuilt as fast as possible, using federal emergency funding, after storms damage these areas?
As far as sea level rise, the sea level rise “Authorities” have done something similar to what NASA and the temperature “Authorities” have done to the temperature record recently. The sea level rise “Authorities” have begun using wave height averages as the new standard. The measurements are no longer taken at sea level, but at how high the waves splash on the measuring indicators.
Remember when socialists and progressives and Democrats cheered the “little” guys, the agrarian poor who would sneak onto the slow moving coal trains as they crept up the long grade, fill bags with coal and toss them onto the sides of the tracks, to be used at home for heating and cooking? This was celebrated as a form of democratic fairness, spreading the wealth, sticking it to the man, and so forth. NOW they’re the ones smacking down the little guy, hammering him on his utility bill, hammering him with higher costs for everything that must be transported (which is virtually everything), not to mention brainwashing his children to be climate shaming tools and propagandizing all of us to believe that higher energy costs will be good for job creation. How long will these people continue to accept this bullsh… er, malarkey?
My asthma actually did get worse for a while. That was back in the days when the oil companies figured out how to sell us their MTBE effluent, that they wondered what to do with, to help reduce the gas mileage for our cars.
But in California, we had our ” Can you hear us now Rallies ” on the steps of the Sacramento Capitol, and finally got rid of that air pollutant.
But they replaced it with ethanol, so as to keep our gas mileage (MPG) from going up.
The oil companies said they could make California reformulated gas standards, without having to add water to the fuel molecule (H2O) ; which is all that an alcohol or ether is anyway. But the corn lobby has more horsepower than the voters.
But the ethanolgas doesn’t give me asthma like the MTBE did (in spades).
g
I believe it was Einstein who said that there are only two infinite things. The universe, and human stupidity. And he wasn’t sure about the universe.
I love the smell of methyl tert-butyl ether in the morning!
I wonder if Romulus Augustulus thought the same thing.
Because the government aims to expand its power almost without limit based on an obvious and ridiculous set of lies, and if they are not stopped it will be very, very bad.
One of the things that makes WUWT good is that it presents information from the CO2 alarmist side of the fence. Even when qualifying articles with “People send me stuff” or “Claim: global warming causes XYZ” this site is more balanced the most others, in my opinion….
Given that asthma diagnoses have gone up as pollution levels have gone down, the PR linkage is less than impressively robust.
In the UK, it is now realised ultra-clean homes in your first couple of years in life is coincident with rising asthma levels. Solution: get a dog and/or let your kids play in the mud, as these both help set up their immune systems the way nature intended.
Also, on what planet is renewable energy cheaper than fossil fuelled energy, unless hugely subsidised.
This is bad science from beginning to end, a modern day prohibition act.
Try planet Obama. It’s out there somewhere I’m sure. It certainly isn’t where I exist.
Oh, it is way, way out there alright!
All conventional energy is solar and renewable. You just have to be more patient for stuff like coal, that is all.
Ernest Bush wrote: “Try Planet Obama.”
Careful, don’t give those megalomaniacs in the White House any ideas.
This rise is US asthma rates over the last 30 years or so, despite contiuing improvement in air quality levels, has been attributed by many physicians to the big push for “weatherization” and sealing up all leaks in residences in order to combat energy “waste”. The government has spent billlions promoting and subsidizing such work. Doctors note that interior air quality levels, even when no smokers are present, have deteriorated significantly. Stale air and accumlated dust can no longer escape from homes the way it used to.
Of course it is cheaper the government pays the subsidies (with our money) and the renewable companies pocket the profit and then charge extra for the energy.
The money that the government pays comes out of tax money that should be used for health and education, or it comes out of the economy resulting in your country going down the plughole. check to see who is investing ion renewable energy, here in Australia the union pension funds are deep into that investment stream so guess who supports the industry (and even then the chinese are the ones who get the manufacturing jobs) but the unions dont care about their members jobs just the funds that they control.
Welcome to the real world USof A Obama has suceeded in selling you out and you are patting him on the back for doing so.
Is that the same planet with 57 states?
Unfortunately, we are unlikely to ever see another episode of large scale coal formation on the Earth. One of the main reasons that so much coal was formed during the carboniferous period is that plants and trees had developed lignin and various forms of cellulose, and it took many tens of millions of years for any organisms to develop the enzymes needed to break these down…so it all just sat where it fell. Lignin took the longest for any substantial ability to degrade it was “invented”, and during those tens of millions of years, trees had far more bark than has been the case since…five or six times more…and bark is/was mostly lignin.
That plus large areas of inland seas allowed a period of coal bed formation which exceeded by far anything before or since.
The plan will “…reduce premature deaths from power plant emissions by nearly 90 percent in 2030 compared to 2005…” Now how was this 90% derived?
” Now how was this 90% derived?”, Very easy, 86.276% of all statistics are made up on the spot!
It’s main point is that when a power plant is shut down, it’s emissions are reduced by 100%. The second trick is that it talks about deaths from power plant emissions, not by other sources such as vehicles or forest fires. And, of course, they don’t require themselves to give you the net reduction in premature deaths. Thus they can ignore increased deaths from cold or hot weather when people can’t afford to use electricity.
They have no real way of determining how many deaths are caused by power plant emissions, which is the point. They can make any assumptions they want in this matter and have no qualms about making up numbers to suit the agenda. The agenda being, of course, a socialist takeover of the United States by an out-of-control government.
Simple; in 2030, people will be 25 years older than they were in 2005, so their deaths will no longer be counted as ” premature “.
Simple combination of mathematics and PR – if two statements are identical, use only the statement that sounds better. Since only coal fired power plants have any real possibility of causing significant actual air pollution, and even if only one person has ever died prematurely from it, shutting all coal plants down will eliminate that specific source of pollution. Choosing between, “The plan will totally shut down 90% of all coal powered power plants in the US, making the national grid far less reliable and electricity far more expensive, since those coal fired plants presently produce as much as 40% of the power used in the US.” and “The plan will reduce premature deaths from power plants by 90%.” the White House propagandists picked the second one.
Since the number of premature deaths from power plant emissions is the US is close enough to zero that the difference is difficult to measure, how exactly does the administration plan on reducing it further?
Ken S – shouldn’t that be 86.277% (” ..86.276% of all statistics are made up on the spot!)? Or am I too pessimistic?
– Save the average American family nearly $85 on their annual energy bill in 2030, reducing enough energy to power 30 million homes, and save consumers a total of $155 billion from 2020-2030;
So at least by 2030, the American people will have a metric by which they can measure this plan and say ‘O’Bama was talking bollocks’.
Translation: “It won’t be as bad as the worst case might be.”
As Willis pointed out (and Obama admitted*) the price of electricity could quadruple. In the face of that fact, it is risible that Obama would claim that consumers are going to save money. I take it that we should not believe anything else he says.
How do you know if a politician is lying? …
*“Under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/74892.html
Well you know – “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.”
Same way as a lawyer…their lips are moving.
No matter how high electricity prices go up, they will claim that it would be worse if they hadn’t acted. The same thing applies to job losses. No matter how many jobs are lost because of this plan, they will say that unemployment would be worse without their intervention. They made the same claim when their stimulus plan failed to create jobs. And when Obamacare failed to reduce the cost of healthcare, they also claimed healthcare costs would be worse without it. When it comes to lies, the only limit is your imagination and the gullibility of your audience.
“– Save the average American family nearly $85 on their annual energy bill in 2030”
Sure, just like the “affordable care act” saves me the $2400 per year they promised.
Bloke down the pub
How Socialists think.
The $85 savings comes from subtracting the actual cost pf energy to the average American family from what the government will claim the average cost to an American family WOULD HAVE BEEN if these rules were not enacted.
So the cost of energy by 2030 could be four times higher than it is now but the claim will be that is still $85 dollars lower than it would have been without these rules.
That is socialist thinking.
Under Socialism people will be starving in the streets and Socialists will be claiming that even more people would be starving if it were not for their brilliant policies.
We are letting hate filled lunatics run the country. “The phrase “hate filled lunatics” describes them accurately.
They have an irrational hatred of personal freedom and democracy and an irrational love of peonage and dictatorship.
These people are like criminals who act in the NOW utterly unable to even think about the future consequences of their actions.
Eugene WR Gallun
No, socialist thinking doesn’t care what the cost of energy will be now or in the future. It’s a cost we all have to bear, equitably, because how it got there, will always be in the public interest. Obama’s plan means it will be $85 cheaper, in dollars of the day, or about 18 cents, in today’s currency. But nobody will get the 18 cents, because somebody will always be having to do without, and your 18 cents will go to ease their need before yours, because that’s what socialists believe.
In 2030, $85 will be worth even less than it is now, and right now it is less than a quarter a day…or enough to buy a cup of coffee every few weeks.
When they say “carbon pollution” do they mean CO2 or is that intended to cover particulates as well as carbon compounds? I am probably being thick but it isn’t clear to me.
I am not sure how the engine manufacturers feel about the feasibility of doubling fuel efficiencies but the curves I have seen indicate that it will be very difficult so perhaps the intention is to have vehicles powered by something other than IC engines. If that’s the case we are drifting into unicorn territory.
Presumably the easiest way to meet the power plant emissions required would be to just go nuclear.
All of that notwithstanding this plan reads more like a fuzzy wish list than anything even vaguely enforceable.
Remember when a diamond was a girl’s best friend? Now it is merely pollution. Wait, we’re carbon-based life forms, so we’re pollution too. I guess we need be eliminated. /50%sarc
You’re right, Skeohane, chemically speaking, there ain’t much difference between us and a lump of coal.
No it’s really CO2 not Carbon. It’s only our breathing out that needs to be eliminated.
Jay, what about intellectually (“chemically speaking, there ain’t much difference between us and a lump of coal”)?
They use “carbon pollution” as a propaganda wheeze, making people think of soot. Of course it is CO2, a colorless, odorless, trace gas that is essential for life.
The term “carbon pollution” is purposely vague to confuse the public. In reality, they are talking about a reduction of CO2 because of their religious beliefs. Particulate matter was reduced to near zero decades ago. What you see see coming out of smoke stacks of power plants is CO2 and water vapor. Any photo or video showing otherwise is caused by manipulation of the image.
I think they say ‘carbon pollution’ because they know that many people will think it’s carbon monoxide that they’re referring to.
While contemplating the 57 varieties of yuppie designer milk, in my local green supermarket; and wondering where they hid the ordinarymilk milk, I casually remarked to a middle aged nearby woman shopper, that all of those ” organic ” milks, had carbon in them, and that the SCOTUS had declared that to be poisonous.
She replied: ” Wow, that’s good to know ! ”
You see that is what we are up against. And no, I don’t fault the lady. She has been fed on this garbage by the pols, and the MSM, and people just assume it must be right; just like they think Wikipediunformation must be real.
g
Total ignorant rubbish. I really pity the American people to have such an idiot as president, but they did vote him in!
And they will vote in his successor. 100% certain.
Nothing is 100%. If the vote were today, the polls say Hillary would win. A year is an eternity in politics, plenty of time for strange things to happen.
I repeat, Obomber is not an idiot. He knows full well what he is doing, following a strong left ideology.
You are correct, he is an elitist socialist effectively setting the ground work for a new era of communism.
Nah, you give him too much credit. He’s just a vengeful narcissistic child who’s figured out how to gold plate his future at whitey’s expense. He doesn’t give a rat’s patootie about socialism, communism or catechism. The DNC said “Hey, bud, how’d you like to be the first black president?”, and Obama simply said,”Sure, beats hustlin’ in Chicago for the rest of my short life. Do I get to wear a tie?”. The rest was just, “business”.
Some people admit to voting for him twice.
More than a few are proud of it.
If he were to run for a third term, the odds are he would win again.
Seems like a continuation of BOs plan to waste as many resources as possible to create a crisis to bury more resources and gain more political power.
Bamster: ” creating tens of thousands of jobs.”
ME — Now tell us who is going to pay for all those new jobs?
(ans:) Us through higher energy bills.
And somehow they do not count the jobs lost at the coal power plants and mines. A coal power plant has 3-4 times as many workers as a gas-fired plant.
My rule of thumb is that if you want to know the actual results of a government legislative act or program, it is usually the exact opposite of the title of the act or claimed desired goal of the act.
So, the above becomes, “It will do nothing for public health or maybe create healthcare poverty, it will increase energy bills for consumers and businesses, it will destroy some jobs, and it will probably wind up crashing the grid and cutting off power to communities.”
Unless Congress miraculously grows a spine, I guess we’ll see how well my rule of thumb holds up.
Congress will do nothing. Both sides are for this kind of boondoggle, with a few exceptions.
I’m not really expecting the miracle I mentioned, SMC. You’re pretty much spot on.
I think you have a beautiful rule there. Along the lines of never believe unless officially denied. Congress will be no help. Supreme court is probably already torturing a thesaurus to twist into constitutional authorization.
This reminds me of the questions at a Miss world competition…
what would you like?
world peace and love for all
When do you want it?
Some time far off in the future
What these regulations will do is further heighten governments at all levels treating Big Business as their ‘partners’ in the economy. It is a Corporatist fantasy that plays right into the Sector Strategies being pushed by the feds under WIOA, signed about a year ago, and the National Governors Association.
It continues our hurtling towards what the Germans termed Vampire Capitalism in the 30s.
When it comes to the cases of asthma and other increases in diseases that they say are caused by emissions, they don’t mention the increase in population as result of those numbers. Not giving all of the facts. There is no increase in the % of the population with those disorders, just more of them. How dishonest of them. http://geography.about.com/od/obtainpopulationdata/a/worldpopulation.htm
Many people have been pointing out since the late 80s that this “carbon scare” or “CO2 will drown/fry us” scare has been supported and paid for by the western governments and especially government of the USA. Obama is not necessarily ignorant of the real facts, he is following the aggressive policies of the US that aims to control every aspect of the lives of the mundane citizens (you and me).
A man once said, “war is the health of the state”. A full scale international war against nuclear armed opponents would be a tad risky even for the US Empire, so a nice little war on CO2 to “save the world” is being prosecuted instead. This new affront is just the latest advance in the war on CO2 which just happens to have horrendous collateral damage — damage to whole economies. And as always, the poor suffer the most.
Consider the poor in this country. Would a doubling (or more) of the cost of utilities and heating hurt the poor? Do animals go potty in the woods?
The sad fact is that even with the change in president coming up, who will back down from all the hundreds of thousands of EPA regulations? Who would demand that we disband the EPA? Who would tell the public that a return to the laissez faire free markets of the Classical Liberals who built this country would be a good thing? Heck, not even many Americans know what the Classical Liberals believed.
https://www.mises.org/library/what-classical-liberalism
I have a name for fear of CO2: Cardiophobia.
Good one Greg. How about Cardiopathy for the mental status of Alarmists?
Are asthma and related issues computer modeled like flu ?
I heard this garbage on the BBC news (where else?) this morning. My first thought was – why does Obama hate plants so much?
Stupid is as stupid does.
My first thought is “why does Obama hate America so much?”
Because he is the worst kind of cultural Marxist perhaps?
Well just read up on his grandfather, and the Mau mau terrorism in Africa, to find out who he hates and why.
“why does Obama hate plants so much?” Quite so UK Sceptic; this shows what happens when you force kids to eat their greens!
That’s one angle I never considered.
😀
“…opportunities for states to include proven strategies like trading…”
The only ‘proven’ aspect is that fraud becomes rampant.
The – Ensures Grid Reliability statement offers no ideas at all , apart from wishful thinking , how this can be achieved while pursuing the goal of basing energy production on the ‘unreliable’ renewable energy approach remains a mystery. Toward the end of their term all presidents start to think about ‘legacy’ and what quick wins they can get on which this can be built . A bit like the rulers of old who wanted to leave their mark on history.
In this case it would seem Obama has identified CAGW has one of his ‘legacy’ ideas, ill advised or just lacking in knowledge it does not matter . And it worth bearing in mind that although its easy to mock the CAGW ‘believers’ for their poor science in reality where it matters they still have a very good hand in the game.
Bloody hell Anthony, your country is up the perverbial without a paddle. This gibberish nonsense will send your country broke with China laughing their asses off watching the moronic Obama administration do flappys with their hands and achieving nothing but global derision from every quarter.
God, the stupid hurts!
Just wait until his third term…
Cables Show Hillary Clinton’s State Department Deeply Involved in Trans-Pacific Partnership
http://www.ibtimes.com/cables-show-hillary-clintons-state-department-deeply-involved-trans-pacific-2032948
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Thursday attempted to distance herself from the controversial 12-nation trade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership. During her tenure as U.S. secretary of state, Clinton publicly promoted the pact 45 separate times — but with her Democratic presidential rivals making opposition to the deal a centerpiece of their campaigns, Clinton now asserts she was never involved in the initiative.
“I did not work on TPP,” she said after a meeting with leaders of labor unions who oppose the pact. “I advocated for a multinational trade agreement that would ‘be the gold standard.’ But that was the responsibility of the United States Trade Representative.”
http://www.ibtimes.com/hillary-clinton-backs-obamas-climate-change-plan-environmentalists-frustrated-2035194
Here is the Gina McCarthy fireside chat
I have used WUWT as a valuable source of facts and science but leftists plug their ears on purpose. The conversation is not about the right or wrong of climate change it is about the fundamental transformation of the USA.
I think WUWT needs to refocus its overall view for what is really happening.
1 Obama and the left wing do not care if WUWT is right on climate change.
2 Any climate change falsehood can and will be used to increase government control.
If “we the people” can finally accept the left wings objective reality of retooling the countries rules and regulations to favor a socialist country we will stop spinning our wheels and maybe reclaim sanity in government.
I debated for several years with a small group of leftists. Their idea of compromise was to see how much I was willing to bend on a position without them giving anything.
I would suggestion the WUWT group organizing and petitioning representatives in government. PAC’s have more power than individuals.
Speaking for myself I emailed all my representatives this morning on 2 issues of importance to me using one issue per email.
Now I see a 3rd issue, climate change, that is going to require more emails today. I keep my emails respectful, short and to the point with a clear yes/no
All the best to Mr Watts and all of you folks here at WUWT!
As a follow up I live in florida. My representatives are:
David Jolly
Marco Rubio
Bill Nelson
In addition I also email Mitch McConnell and John Boehner.
That is a total 5 emails from me and then I rinse/repeat on behalf of my wife who approves of my actions for a total of 10 emails.
If the WUWT gang would start emailing representatives world wide simply do the math and the influence multiplies quickly. If governments world wide would disagree with the USA’s climate change policy it would bring pressure to bear on the current climate change policy being proposed.
Dear Mr ,
Pres Obama is submitting his Clean Power Plan. The plans inaccuracies are to numerous to list and would unfairly burden poor people.
I do not support this plan and I would encourage you to vote no.
All the best!
Paul
“I debated for several years with a small group of leftists. Their idea of compromise was to see how much I was willing to bend on a position without them giving anything.”
“I agree with you completely, those are excellent points. Now let’s do it my way.”
It amazes me that they do not check the mess that is present in Germany and Spain where they are at least a decade ahead of the US with windmills and solar. Those countries have proven that intermittent power generation does not work in so many ways including environmental destruction.
He knows about the mess,
Maybe that is part of his plan
Many people take that view and leave out the “maybe”.
A friend said that “Obama was the true Manchurian candidate, but out in the open for everyone to see.”
Obama’s grandparents were Communists, his parents were Communists, his principal mentor was a radical Communist, the people that brought him to power in Chicago politics were radical and historically violent Communists.
It is human nature that if reality doesn’t agree with our beliefs, we act on our beliefs. Wisdom arises from the pain of confrontations between reality and belief.
Capitalism must be destroyed before Socialism can be implemented.
Those who work to destroy Capitalism are Heroes!
That is how hate filled lunatics think.
Eugene WR GAllun
Of course the US administration knows of those messes in Europe and Ontario, except for the administration, they are great successes showing how to “fundamentally transform” the USA into some ideological utopia, where only government cronies are well-to-do.
Asthma can be cured by not eating wheat. I tell everyone I know with asthma to stop eating wheat. One friends daughter lived in the ER for 8 years. Did so many steroids her bones where breaking in her feet. No wheat no asthma attack in 2 years. Several other people I know have had similar results.
Would be interesting to know if there was perhaps a difference between organic wheat products and the other stuff treated with all the weed killers.
No difference what so ever except in price. “Organic” is a label that means “higher priced”. Truly, you don/t get what you pay for. That is the basis of all cons.
Eugene WR Gallun
Eugene WR Gallun
http://coolinginflammation.blogspot.com/2014/10/celiac-gluten-and-trypsin-inhibitor.html
This might interest you.
“More than fifty years ago, plant breeders began to screen wheat varieties for resistance to pests. Breeding ultimately resulted in enhanced pest resistance that resulted from increased production of ATI in wheat kernels.”
“No difference what so ever except in price. “Organic” is a label that means “higher priced”. Truly, you don/t get what you pay for. That is the basis of all cons.”
Well except for maybe this one where it is applied just prior to wheat harvest for “weed control” (Monsanto) or as a desiccant to increase yield. How often this occurs also depends on who you believe, the wheat industry or other interested parties. But perhaps you consider glyphosate of actual nutritional value, or at least harmless (according of course by Monsanto). then you needn’t worry.
http://www.realfoodhouston.com/2014/11/14/is-glyphosate-monsantos-roundup-used-on-wheat/
http://weedcontrolfreaks.com/2015/03/glyphosate-and-cancer-what-does-the-data-say/
The first three things stated in this this press release are flat-out lies – asthma, extreme weather and sea level rise.
That tells you what you need to know.
“The Clean Power Plan is a Landmark Action to Protect Public Health, Reduce Energy Bills for Households and Businesses, Create American Jobs..”
All LIES – back to the propaganda rule, whoever gets the Lie out first…