The President thinks his plan will “boost the economy by $43 billion to $74 billion” – he’s living in a fantasy world.
From Bloomberg (apparently one of those “read in” to tomorrow’s announcement): President Barack Obama will propose cutting greenhouse-gas emissions from the nation’s power plants by an average of 30 percent from 2005 levels by 2030, according to people briefed on the plans.
The proposal, scheduled to be unveiled by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency tomorrow morning, represents one of the boldest steps the U.S. has taken to fight global warming — and a political gamble.
Obama signaled both the importance of the rule to his legacy on environmental protection and the bruising fight ahead by joining a conference call today with congressional Democrats, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy and White House counselor John Podesta to rally support.
Obama dismissed complaints that the rule will hurt the economy by driving up electricity prices, and told the Democrats listening: “Please go on offense” to promote the plan’s benefits, said two people who were on the call, including Representative Gerry Connolly, a Virginia Democrat.
Connolly and another person on the call said the president suggested that rather than having an adverse effect on the economy — as critics say — his rule to limit carbon pollution will boost the economy by $43 billion to $74 billion.
=============================================================
See the U.S Chamber of Commerce response here:
Assessing_the_Impact_of_Potential_New_Carbon_Regulations_in_the_United_States
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Interestingly, Brad‘s quoted post above makes use of
what John Brignell refers to as “the virtual body count”. The count is
given in this line:
“they’ll prevent up to 100,000 asthma attacks and 2,100 heart attacks. ”
Now, how do they know these figures? They DON’T! These are simply
results of some computer modeling exercises. See John Brignell’s
site
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk.
“In the first year the new standards are implemented, they’ll prevent up to 100,000 asthma attacks and 2,100 heart attacks. And the numbers will only go up from there.”
If the prime intent of this plan is to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide in order to improve the health of the public, the plan is quite flawed.
Carbon dioxide is not not part of any AIR QUALITY INDEX for a good reason. It is not a pollutant as the medical profession well knows. So how can low level co2 cause asthma and heart attacks. This is pure nonsense. Deal with real pollutants like fine particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide,carbon monoxide,sulphur dioxide and total reduced sulphur compounds
Totally off topic of course but I’m just watching a documentary about illegal mining of gold in Mongolia. The people working in the mines lost all their horses and yaks during the last of three fierce winters leaving them with no other option.
The USA hasn’t seen any warming over the past 18 years.
Why accept all the crap?
Titan28 says (June 1, 2014 at 8:00 pm) “I despair“. Words fail me, so I’ll just endorse yours.
ObamaLibs believe that
Higher taxes on small business S-corp will create jobs.
Higher taxes on oil companies will lower the price of fuel.
Raising taxes while keeping loopholes will increase revenues.
Higher taxes on fuel will lower the cost of food.
Elimination of proof of identity will reduce voter fraud.
Reducing legal gun ownership will reduce the number of illegal guns.
Raising the cost of healthcare insurance will lower the cost for everyone.
Putting people into homes they cannot afford will grow the middle class.
Stimulus will create 3 million jobs.
Obamacare will create 4 million jobs and turn the economy around.
Monitoring your emails, bank and credit cards, twitters, GPS and phone calls will eliminate bad people.
They also believe that raising our electric will create jobs and boom the economy. What world are they from?
Our rate per kilowatt was 6 in Texas, 8 in N. Virginia, 8 in WV.
After three years in Ohio the rate went from 6 to 17. We have now been notified it will triple. Given I live on the computer, one light, a tv, a fridge and internet connection, our bill is $130 a month. $60 for use and the rest for transmission fees from Canada and for people who can’t afford.
My work in enviro/disaster mgt died three yrs ago. This admin is anything except enviro and everything about lies.
The one person in the household who still has a job works in R+D high temperature high energy testing and development. We are expecting that job to go away also, probably to China.
Everything this admin does benefits his friends in the middle east and china very well.
Where is this big boom Obama is bragging about to cover his failure? I demand to see the numbers.
Jason says:
June 1, 2014 at 8:31 pm
Wow…
Time to move up here to Canada? And not Ontario…
As another Canadian, don’t do it. Our “leadership” is echoing BO for possible change up here. I read this as nothing more as a cynical attempt to attract votes by BO to have an “issue” in the November mid-terms. The cost for those votes will be astronomical, in a country that already has almost insurmountable debt. This is the path that Eurozone took a number of years ago. Wind farms in particular proved to cost an inordinate amount with little return. We know where the eurozone has ended up, don’t you? Cost them a bomb!
Your president is selling you down a river, Canadians do not want to be passengers.
What a load on misinformed “crap”. And at enormous cost.
Assume for a moment that the next President is also a Democrat and that the Senate remains so.
Can the states just ignore the EPA here?
[snip – over the top -mod]
I sent the following note to an American friend a few weeks ago. Sadly, it now may be obsolete along with hope for real economic recovery – unless this latest EPA foolishness is reversed, and soon.
However, I have faith in the common sense of the American people. Dump these elitists and their nonsensical energy policies, use cheap natural gas to re-energize your manufacturing sector, and get Americans (and Canadians) back to work!
Best, Allan
___________
Cheap natural gas energy from shale fracking, in my opinion, could be the salvation of the moribund US and Canadian economies ((It would also help if there was a better understanding of the importance of energy and energy security – I suggest that the interminable delay of the Keystone XL pipeline is a grave strategic error for US national security)).
“In the wake of the American shale gas boom and the resulting cheaper power, U.S. manufacturers have been moving their work back home from overseas, and now foreign manufacturers, especially from Europe, are moving their facilities to the U.S. While prices in the U.S. power market have fallen due to cheap natural gas, prices in Europe’s power market are much higher, lifted by subsidies for renewable wind and solar power projects. While a decade ago, American manufacturing jobs were flowing to China, this year, more than 50 percent of $1 billion-plus U.S. companies with operations in China are considering moving all or part of their production back home, according to Boston Consulting Group.”
–Meagan Clark, International Business Times, 10 May 2014
We predicted the current “green energy” debacle in our paper published in 2002, as follows:
http://www.apegga.org/Members/Publications/peggs/WEB11_02/kyoto_pt.htm
[PEGG debate, reprinted at their request by several professional journals, the Globe and Mail and la Presse in translation, by Baliunas, Patterson and MacRae]
On green energy:
“The ultimate agenda of pro-Kyoto advocates is to eliminate fossil fuels, but this would result in a catastrophic shortfall in global energy supply – the wasteful, inefficient energy solutions proposed by Kyoto advocates simply cannot replace fossil fuels.”
On global warming:
“Climate science does not support the theory of catastrophic human-made global warming – the alleged warming crisis does not exist.”
There are eight such unequivocal statements in the Rebuttal section of our 2002 paper, and I suggest that all eight are now demonstrably true in those venues such as the UK and Western Europe that have fully embraced global warming mania.
We knew with confidence in 2002, based on the evidence, that global warming alarmism was technically false, extremist and wasteful.
I also wrote in an article in the Calgary Herald published on September 1, 2002, based in part on a phone conversation with Paleoclimatologist Dr. Tim Patterson:
On global cooling:
“If (as I believe) solar activity is the main driver of surface temperature rather than CO2, we should begin the next cooling period by 2020 to 2030.”
Our global cooling prediction may be a few years off – we may actually have started global cooling by now. I hope to be wrong in the global cooling prediction because humanity does poorly during global cooling periods, but our predictive track record is to date is quite good.
Best regards, Allan
My American friends,
I wrote above 12 days ago on June 4, 2014, (and several times previously):
“It would also help if there was a better understanding of the importance of energy and energy security – I suggest that the interminable delay of the Keystone XL pipeline is a grave strategic error for US national security.”
More than two years ago in January 2012 I wrote:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/22/weekly-climate-and-energy-news-roundup-38/#comment-873041
“I remain perplexed by Obama’s Keystone decision, which appears to be very much against the national interests of the USA.
The pipeline is clearly in the USA’s strategic interest. Given the Iran situation, it should have been built yesterday. Furthermore, it will create some jobs and tax revenue at no cost to the taxpayer.
The alleged environmental dangers of the pipeline appear wildly overstated.
I think overconsumption of water from the Ogallala aquifer due to corn ethanol overproduction is a much greater environmental threat. Removal of corn ethanol subsidies will not solve the problem as long as the corn ethanol mandates in gasoline remain.”
I would rather be wrong on these matters … … I dislike being correct, given the realities…
I once again respectfully suggest to my American friends that it is long past time to lay the Keystone XL pipeline.
Best, regards, Allan
Iraq Chaos Is A Wake-Up Call For The World Over Its Oil Needs
http://www.cityam.com/article/1402896667/iraq-chaos-wake-call-world-over-its-oil-needs
[Excerpt]
What will happen to Iraq? And to Iran? And to the rest of the Middle East? The uncertainty is back with a vengeance, as the terrible massacres from this weekend remind us.
The West, which no longer wants to know about Iraq after its disastrous foreign policy failures of the past decade, has been forced to pay attention again – and what it sees fills it with horror. The Isis extremist group, which is so ruthless that it has now fallen out with al-Qaeda, has grabbed chunks of the country; Iran has intervened to help the Iraqi authorities and fight the Sunni Isis.
It’s a giant, terrible mess, intimately connected with the horrors of Syria; with Tehran involved, and a power vacuum across the region, all bets are now off. The US may intervene again, perhaps by bombing Isis terrorists in Iraq as well as Syria; whether that makes any difference remains to be seen.
With the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that the policies of the past three US presidents – Bill Clinton, George W Bush and Barack Obama – all disastrously failed to contain extremism. Iraq is close to becoming a genuinely failed state, and the entire region is, once again, on the brink of catastrophe. No wonder the price of oil has risen four per cent; in the days prior to the extra US supply, the events of the past week would have had an even greater impact.
Among all of the chaos, one thing is certain: the case for allowing fracking in the UK and elsewhere has become even stronger. It may be the only way the IEA’s forecasts can possibly be met. Oil remains the world’s essential raw material; relying on Opec for our supplies is almost as short-sighted today as it was in the 1970s.