Guest post by Alec Rawls
The graphics were changed in the last two days, but Conn Carroll at the Washington Examiner took a screenshot of Obama’s “All of the Above” energy policy page on Tuesday. “Notice anything missing?” he asks:
The updated graphics actually retain the same omission. They still omit the source of almost half of all U.S. electricity generation (coal), and only add the non-existent eco-unicorn called “clean coal”:
Of course what the CO2 alarmists call “dirty coal” is perfectly clean. The only difference is that it produces CO2—that most healthful gas, the beginning of the food chain for all life on earth—which remains alarmingly close to the minimum levels needed to sustain life.
To rid coal-burning emissions of this eco-villain the going cost is $761 per ton of sequestered carbon: “staggeringly, wildly, mind-blowingly higher than any other conceivable measure designed to cut greenhouse-gas emissions.” So still no coal in Obama’s plan. Our existing energy infrastructure is to be jettisoned, as Obama promised in 2008:
If somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can — it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.
Obama’s EPA rules already block all new coal plant construction, so his graphics are just looking forward to his true objectives: all-but-coal for now, with oil and nuclear to disappear next.
That slick “clean coal” logo indicates that the coal omission was not a mistake
The Obamatons had the clean-coal stupidity all ready to go, indicating a conscious decision to leave it out. This is reinforced by the absence of the clean-coal logo, not just from their pick-a-topic selector, but also from their header logo. Another of Obama’s eco-pages still has the original header:
That page now includes a clean coal section but the Google cache from May 3rd shows that it was recently added. The people who put these pages together are so anti-coal that they couldn’t even bring themselves to include the utterly phony “clean coal” in their proclaimed “All of the Above” energy strategy. That shows a extraordinary level of zealotry.
Kinda fits with the longstanding “climate denier” smear (recently on display), where people who don’t buy CO2 alarmism are likened to those who deny the holocaust of the Jews during WWII. The alarmists are all projection all the time. Their supposed scientists at the IPCc are omitting virtually all of the evidence for a solar driver of climate from AR5, and here their political leaders are trying to disappear the primary energy source upon which modern society currently relies, yet it is supposedly the rest of us who are conspiring to cover stuff up.
The conniving mind cannot conceive of another mode of being.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
That is so bloody scary. And I don’t even live in the USA.
I guess we can forget the 54.5 MPG fleet average CAFE standard now since FUEL EFFICIENCY is no longer part of the all of the above mix.
Well, heavier cars will save lives …….
The back door destruction of the US energy base will not cut global carbon dioxide levels. Carbon dioxide emissions from China, India and the rest of the world will exceed our reductions.
Your post ignores that Obama, both as a Senator and as President, was a huge supporter of coal and clean coal in particular so the coal in southern IL (his home state) could be exploited.
If POTUS Obama doesn’t want the US to use coal, for sure China will take it of their hands if the price is cheap enough.
As China has planned for the consumption of one gigaton of coal in energy production per annum, any little bit will be a help.
But China has recently discovered a massive new coal field, and with the coal from Mongolia, Russia and Chinese coal mining, the price would have to be competitive with the Chinese labour.
http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page38?oid=142229&sn=Detail
And also Google – Winsway to see the infrastructure for coal handling and transport across the Sino-Russian border.
“yet it is supposedly the rest of us who are conspiring to cover stuff up.”
Yes it is called flipping; they do it all the time. It is just one of the tactics used, another is the consensus meeting and of course: paid to say by big/oil coal, huge amounts of money from big oil/coal and creationist/liar/flat eather, bla, bla, bla. The list goes on. But remember “Flipping”
onlyme-
Ya, that CAFE standard is working out terribly. The 8 speed transmissions, lighter materials and better engines are going to improve fuel efficiency the 2013 Ram trucks and the coming 2014 Chevy’s by at least 20% in efficiency. Great vehicles, I might get one:
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2012/04/2013-ram-1500-powertrain-deep-dive.html
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2012/04/2013-ram-1500-frame-suspension-deep-dive.html
http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/sns-2013-ram-1500-safety-uconnect-deep-dive-20120412,0,4560496.story?page=1
RACookPE1978 says:
May 11, 2012 at 12:23 am
Well, heavier cars will save lives …….
Gezackly. Since Ehrlich’s prediction that most of us would have died of starvation and disease in the ’70s (and when that didn’t happen, the ’90s, and when that didn’t happen, etc.), they have to find other alternatives to help them achieve that result.
I almost wrote “…find another vehicle to help…” but decided it would be trite…
I was listening to a programme on BBC Radio 4 (Costing the Earth) on Wednesday night. It raises the spectre of Climate Change/Global Warming/Climate Whatever whenever possible. This week it concentrated on Coal/Carbon Capture.
One expert was quite blase about carbon capture adding £150-£200/ $300 annually (more if electricity is used for heating replacing gas because electricity then greener) annually to electricity bills, apparently the “middle classes” wouldn’t notice and the government (middle classes again but not mentioned) could help those in fuel poverty.
Despite referring to coal as old Sooty it was admitted that Europe would have had very serious problems in electricity supply last winter without it (even France was importing power!)
The US, nay, the World, will get another 4 years of this dangerously incompetent man.
We so desperately need a strong willed person who can purge our institutions of the huggy kissy econut infestation. Perhaps a Ronald Reagan mark 2
Elections are coming, so you guys know what to do.
The ‘dirty coal’ meme was all about implanting in the public mind that so called carbon pollution is the same as the soot and other pollutants that come from burning coal in home hearths and stoves, which only a few million Chinese peasants still do.
The reality is that wood is a much more polluting fuel than coal, because a much higher proportion is burned in domestic stoves. Whereas almost all coal is burned in power stations.
I don’t whether I should be disturbed or amused that the EPA buys into the patent nonsense of ‘dirty coal’.
Note the basis of the ‘dirty coal’ meme is that electricity from coal produces more CO2.
RACookPE1978 says:
May 11, 2012 at 12:23 am
Well, heavier cars will save lives …….
Not if you’re hit by one.
Staggering! We have warmist alarmists in our UK government, but none of these equate to the position of President of the USA. The man seems completely stupid.
I listened to his 2008 promise. But, like most sensible people, thought he would learn how stupid it was when he actually walked into the White House.
The solution is simple as dirt (ahem…): If we put our minds together, we might come up with a Rube Goldberg procedure that is even more costly, ineffective, unworkable, counterproductive and requires gargantuan bureaucratic overheads, not to mention violating several scores of natural laws and every ounce of amassed economic experience. If you hand that to them, no one will ever mention Clean Coal again.
bsk~ good on you for 20% more efficient! That will save on the $3-4 in federal taxes added to each gallon of gas…
Which is why the energy sector is a good investment whenever the market catches up with the spin and the QE’s of Bernanke. Either way one plays it. For example, look at the price charts for uranium now that everyone seems to be afraid the ocean will flood every nuke power plant on the planet. If you’re a religious sort, pray that methane is not “anti-fracked” to oblivion by the EPA.
ryt, heavier cars will save lives …….
Baa Humbug says:
May 11, 2012 at 12:46 am
The US, nay, the World, will get another 4 years of this dangerously incompetent man.
We so desperately need a strong willed person who can purge our institutions of the huggy kissy econut infestation. Perhaps a Ronald Reagan mark 2.
=====================
Ronald Reagan mark 2 may happen. Take a very close look at Virgil Goode. virgilgoode2012@gmail.com
Actually, living in what used, pre-Thatcher, to be a major coal producing area, I rather like “dirty coal”. But I hate the dirty lies that have replaced it.
Determined to destroy the last vestiges of the US economy ,it’s completely insane.
Obama stupid? I think not
US has about a quarter of the world’s coal reserves
US is the second largest producer of coal
Can a Democrat president ever be elected by taking an anti-coal stance? Given that many in the coal industry are Democrat voters, I would doubt he is doing much behind the scenes to get rid of coal.
I guess this is a good example of the difference between what someone will *say* to get votes versus what someone will *do* when running a country.
P.S.
How come realclimate is not under the Tools section?
Someone should tell them that “fuel efficiency” is not a source of power.