« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

The EPA Must Be Stopped, and I’m Not Talking About Light Bulbs

There’s been a lot of talk these days about light bulbs.  The Hill is reporting on how it’s shedding light on the “new Republican party,” one that is so “out of touch with the mainstream” because it only listens to it’s “extremist elements.”  The New York Times has declared victory for the green movement, while some in the blogosphere have taken to referring to the bulb issue as a “fatal conceit,” referring to the White House’s fulfillment of Hayek’s description.

The issue has taken hold in the press as to be about light bulbs, which of course reasonable people know is an unfair characterization of a complicated issue.  The real issue is obviously freedom.  Freedom to make choices, no matter how insignificant they may seem.  The light bulb situation is an example of that debate, but I’m starting to believe it is becoming a distraction.  You don’t even have to travel far from the realm of light bulbs to see that our overly regulated lives are about to be far more restricted and the impact will be devestating.

Recently, the EPA released it’s Clean Air Transit Rule (CATR) under the name “The Cross Air Pollution Rule.”  This essentially requires states that have power plants to redue emissions they produce which are carried downwind to neighboring states.  CATR is widely expected to result in massive closures or temporary shutdowns of electric plants.

Via Mineweb.com:

“The EPA is ignoring the cumulative economic damage new regulations will cause,” said Steve Miller, CEO of the coalition. “America’s coal-fuelled electric industry has been doing its part for the environment and the economy, but our industry needs adequate time to install clean coal technologies to comply with new regulations.”

Kathleen White at National Review calls the regulation an “economy killer.”

EPA’s hazy precautionary analysis is its justification for destroying the lignite-mining industry in Texas — jettisoning 11 percent of the state’s electric generation, destroying more than 2,500 jobs directly and some 10,000 more indirectly in the lignite-mining industry, and forfeiting $2.4 billion in annual expenditures by the lignite-coal industry – the tax base for many Texas communities. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) told EPA that the new rule could destroy the jobs of 1,500 IBEW members working at six power plants in Texas.

The House is working on a stop to this with an appropriations bill that would cut EPA funding and delay the implementation of these rules, but of course there is an effort by the Congressional Democrats to dismantle the bill citing “environmental concerns.”

But CATR is far from the only concern to find it’s way out of the EPA.  The NAT GAS Act (New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions) would give loopholes subsidies tax credits to natural gas vehicle producers and consumers.  It’s the old adage from Ronald Reagan: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.  I’m sure that no harm could possibly come from yet more subsidization of methods of energy that can’t compete directly against oil.  After all, it’s worked out so well in the past.

If you think the EPA is done finding ways beyond your light bulb to mess up the economy and infringe on your freedom, you are mistaken.  In it’s never ending quest to destroy all market based affordable fuel sources, the EPA is following the commands of the Commander in Chief in an attempt to bankrupt the coal industry.

Via Jazz Shaw at Hot Air:

Even though cap and trade went down in flames through legal routes, as The American Legislative Exchange reports, the commission has been using extra-legislative procedures, cloaked under the guise of the Clean Air Act, to to effectively declare war on the American coal industry.

What kind of extra legislative measures?  Well rather than instituting realistic measure that might help ensure sensible coal production standards, the administration wants to use the proposed MACT (Utility Maximum Achievable Control Technology) rules.

According to the Bi-partisan Policy Center, MACT is:

a “rule [that] requires coal and oil-fired power plants to reduce emissions of mercury, other metallic toxics, acid gases, and organic air toxics.”

According to Congressman John Sullivan (R) Vice Chair of the sub-committee on Energy & Power:

“The Utility MACT rule has the potential to be one of the most expensive and burdensome regulations the EPA has ever put forward – its going to directly impact 24% of our nation’s electricity generation resulting in higher energy bills for American families and businesses”, added Sullivan.  “Utility MACT and the final transport rule are great examples of the EPA doing too much too fast with no regard for the economic consequences of their regulatory agenda.”

And just in case one might claim that my documented doubts about climate change, and my penchant for disliking anything this president does, are having an effect on my objectivity, a new independent study just released last month proves that proposed acts like CATR and MACT will absolutely cost American jobs.  The common response from Democrats is “yes but it will create green jobs!!”  Yes, Democrat predictions of job creation has worked out so well so far.

Besides, the effects are already rearing their ugly heads.

Power giant Liminant filed an 8-k with the SEC last night, basically saying that the reductions the EPA (outlined in CATR) has mandated in 6 months are not possible and will result in both paper losses immediately on the value of their SO2 trading allowances.  But more importantly, they’ve indicated that they may have to shut down plants in order to comply with the 47% reduction of SO2 emissions the EPA has mandated in a 6 month time period (Jan 1, 2012 effective date).  That timeline is simply not achievable.  Luminant’s owner has said the same publicly, acknowledging that they may have to “mothball” some of their operations to comply.

While there are some reasons to be optimistic that the good fight is still being had, one thing has become abundantly clear: this administration and it’s green dreams are not interested in our little light bulb tiff.  For them, it’s just a distraction from what’s really going on.  And what’s really going on is that the EPA is back-dooring cap-n-trade.  The administration is bypassing the Congress.  Our economy, our jobs, our way of lives are truly under attack.

The EPA must be stopped.

COMMENTS

  • renny

    of all the alphabets: EPA, FCC, FDA, CDC, ABC, XYZ, and maybe some relief can be found there.

    Otherwise, you have to elect a Rep. pres. and Rep. Senate and get rid of the socialist warmist greenist whackos to stop the EPA.

    • zzpat

      I must be in the minority here but I like clean air and water. What do you guys breathe and drink? Whatever it is, it’s not working.

      • http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

        …if they’re inefficient? If consumers choose to buy them over CFLs for reasons other than efficiency then why isn’t that their choice?

        My Chevy Tahoe is less efficient than your Prius. When will it be banned and I forced to buy a Prius?

        You won’t be here long peddling tired Lefty nostrums.

        • GregInFla

          So why does the left hate it so much. If the energy exploration industry was opened up (against the EPA’s wishes), there would be plenty of jobs. As long as the left pursues the energy-hating policies, I know that getting people off of unemployment is the LEAST of its interests.

      • joetexan

        Which is why we don’t like CFLs.

        I currently breathe clean air, drink clean water, and still have plenty of electricity. So basically the new EPA rules will leave us with the same air, the same water, and less electricity. Liberals won’t be happy until we are all living in mud huts burning cattle dung for warmth and cooking. Hmmm…kind of like Barack Obama’s half brother.

  • zzpat

    The House tried to undo a law that gradually phases out energy-inefficient light bulbs. The House failed to pass it. The leadership didn’t have the votes to even do something this small and some think they have what it takes to do something as big as the debt ceiling?

    The gop has ceased to be a viable political party. It can’t do anything constructive. Until it proves otherwise, all the attempts to make them look relevant won’t do anything because they aren’t relevant. Again, they can’t do anything…they’ve made themselves irrelevant.

    • lmiller25

      The BULB Act got 233 votes when it was voted on Monday, which is more than a simple majority. It was voted on under suspension of the rules, which needs around 290 votes. If and when it’s brought up again as an amendment or through the Rules Committee, it can pass the House.

    • mutantone

      perhaps they saw what the mercury content was in these new bulbs and figured out what happens when they break or disposed of?

      • astrolite

        Until I loaned it to an environmentalist, I had a college textbook entitled “Mercury” very interesting, written before mercury became an excuse, It exposes the truth before it was not politically correct. Mercury was used for medicine for several hundred years, The miners in Spain can rub a copper penny in their fingers and it becomes silvery, BUT… their children are NOT deformed! And they havn’t ANY disease problems, It seems that mercury is only toxic in it’s methyl form. In the past when we tried to use it as an agricultural poison—— any contact with ANY metal, neutralized it, and the bugs thrived!!! Even sunlight neutralized it. Incidently…..archeologists testing fish fossils in Fla, found the same level of mercury as currently. So….I guess that we all died out millions of years ago!!!

    • gunslingr45

      this troll out here.

      It?s not the size of the Stalin, but the motion of the Marx?

  • msctex

    . . .in some innocuous bit of legislation concerning other matters, is a bit of language prohibiting garbage collectors from suing GE. It HAS to exist, in some form or fashion somewhere, because it is only a matter of time before these little dirty bombs do some innocent person serious damage.

    Find this, and make them explain it in public.

  • alexlincoln2

    that there are people who think that CO2 is a pollutant of combustion, when in fact it is the result of combustion. CO is the unwanted pollutant, as are Sulfur dioxide and trioxide. These are impurities that can be cleansed from the coal, thus the term clean coal.

  • 1stRichard

    CFL lights are not compatible with most energy saving devices such as motion detection switches and such. This will force higher energy consumption. There are so called dimmable CFL but do not have the range at lower settings as incandescent. This will force higher energy consumption. Most florescent lights have a bad power factor and this increases the cost of electricity. Then on to how poisons CFL lights are, for some children they could be deadly. However, I do agree CFL lights have their suitable uses but do not fit every situation. It is simply stupid to consider CFL lights should be universally mandated and wrong. There must be more here.

    The ultimate goal is to go all ?green?, we want to change our cars to run on electricity (our government has already spent billions for a car battery) but to do this we need something green, wind and/or solar power. This seems to be a simple conversion, 746 watts equals one horsepower, and an average car is about 200 horsepower (some much more) or 149,200 watts. There are some 254,400,000 cars in the US or equivalent to 37,956,480,000,000 watts. Forgoing the math on conversion and transmission loss, and all the others factors how close is this lower horsepower come to equaling wind and/or solar power. Wind turbines run from 25,000 to 2,500,000 watts, using the middle number of that is 1,262,500. That would mean we need 30,064,539 windmills to equal the power output in our cars. There are 3,794,083 square miles (including water) in the US or a windmill planted every 8 miles, which is why the middle number is more realistic so we may have a chance of planting one of these in your back yard. Next, add in the service to households, there are about 130,000,000 households in the US, mostly with 100 amp service (with others having 200 or more amp service) or 12,000 watts each or over 1,560,000,000,000 watts total. Again, the lower number chosen for an example. Now we are up to 39,516,480,000,000 watts or 31,300,182 windmills or a windmill placed almost every tenth of a mile. The good news is that if we use the larger windmills they would only have to be placed every 6 miles but the bad news is the much larger sector, our industry and jobs also needs power. For photovoltaic solar panels, 125 square feet equals about 100 watts sunny day idealistically, realistically they only work half the day, we do have a cloudy day or two and have a large conversion loss going from DC to AC, thus more realistically 50 watts. To produce the 39,516,480,000,000 watts service we have now we would need 3,543,646 square miles of solar panels out of the 3,794,083 square miles (including water) in the US. Again, this does not include our industry and jobs but there is good news, the government is only trying to mandate some of our energy to come from renewable resources such as wind and/or solar power for starters. The next step would be to add in our industry and jobs but there is simply no more space with wind and/or solar power, this proposed green economy would not fit. We have some choices to be made here on this path to green and they include extreme rationing of power and/or eliminating or industries and jobs. Steps such as simply changing a light bulb or other self imposed rationing cannot solve this problem, there is not enough there to make a difference. Is there an overall conspiracy to put us back to the stone age to make this green dream fit no mater what the cost, it is starting to look that way, what say you?

    • kliff

      truly are in charge of the asylum. When a physical impossibility doesn’t affect the way you think……and we continue to elect idiots who support these idiots.

    • astrolite

      Simply apply Ocam’s razor. Eliminate all of the solutions that don’t fit…..the result is what you have LEFT..which, by the way is the description of the environmentalists. The communists published their plan to convert America in 1938, Again in 1960 a Fla senator had it put in the congressional record. Read the Sierra Club insider, see if it doesn’t remind you of something????

    • rattlerjake

      to factor in that there are only certain areas in this country with sufficient and consistent wind to power wind generators. Plus there are numerous other factors, to include obstacles, required hights (they would have to can all city and county codes), etc.

  • http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

    The Left demands that we reduce our energy consumption yet are absolutely silent on the issue of illegal immigration. I wrote the Sierra Club about this issue last year and the response was that they support population efforts on a global scale (abortion funding) and didn’t concern themselves with US immigration policy. Of course not, if they did then it would be Lefty civil war as the Eco-Marxists went to war against the open borders crowd. Better for them to duck the issue than to cause a rift in the coalition of uber special interest groups that is the Collectivist Left. Cowards.

    • rattlerjake

      Politicians are all about keeping their high paying jobs at the expense of the taxpayer. They will not do anything to prevent obtaining more voters, such as curbing immigation. Forcing the light bulb issue is a minor event to most Americans; they sit on their azzes until the law is enacted, then bitch when they have to do it, instead of preventing it from becoming law.

  • GregInFla

    I saw somewhere that Texas is on its own power grid. If so can they tell the EPA to go stuff themselves and generate their own power as they please? If so, I am sure Gov. Perry would enjoy doing just that.

  • ag8tor

    to this situation is to eliminate the EPA all together. It has overstepped it’s bounds so much in the “O” administration that it is hardly just an environmental protection group. This single government entity is responsible for more problems for the American taxpayer than any other. Add to the fact that it is run by an assortment of evironazis, left -wing loons and tree huggers is it any wonder that it is a joke. If you doubt their power, ask the next elected official you meet about how much the EPA lobbyists have offered for their votes. It’s not just Dems and libs that are being wined and dined either. We would not be paying $4.00/gal for gas right now if the EPA didn’t exist. The restrictions they have placed on oil & gas exploration, research and production are mind boggling. Ask the folks on the Gulf what they think about the EPA. You won’t get a very positive response. This agency of all the bloated beauracrcies in DC needs to be the first to go when conervatives re-gain control.

    • http://www.twitter.com/AWG9_yoyo yoyo

      If the EPA is canx’ed (oh, one can DREAM), the DOE would pick up right where they had left off.

      What? Get rid of the DOE (nice to see someone else dreaming also!)? Then the Dept of Interior would pick up the ball and run with it.

      I am all for consolidating and canning non-constitutional departments (see my previous comments here from May of last year: http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2010/05/27/and-now-a-little-screaming-from-steny-hoyer/#comment-35671), but the real true way to fix this, ag8tor, is to FLUSH the Administrative Branch and all the bureaucrats they ushered in.

      Once THAT is done, THEN we can start axing the non-constitutional departments with a double-bladed axe.

    • rattlerjake

      But, the IRS needs to be the first to go! FAIRTAX!!!!!!

  • rattlerjake

    This is no different than when the government in their infinite wisdom made us all switch to digital tv. Evey household that could not afford cable or satellite was forced to buy the little black boxes or new tvs. Those that were unable to do so now are prevented from viewing. Of course the government’s answer was to pass out tax paid coupons which expired before you could use them, or free tax payer paid cable to the lowlifes that are sucking up entitlements. Now it’s florescent light bulbs, that are supposed to last for years, but from my experience have no longer life than incandescents. The freedom to make choices is being taken away from us, and we are being forced to use what a politician thinks best. Well, I’ve seen what this country has become because of politicians and their better thinking and it sucks. I am devoted to CFLs with incandescents, I collect all the incandescents I can and go to public places and swiitch them with the CFLs to show my protest. Who cares if they use a little more electricity, the lighting is better and the cost is much lower over the life of the bulb. Want to ave money and electricity, turn off the lights when you are not in the room.

    • rattlerjake

      Lets turn off all the power to Washington, we’d save enough to buy everyone a new tv, and all the light bulbs they need for life , and probably new cars! We could probably pay off the debt!!!!!

      Besides, politicians are barely half lit anyways.

  • rattlerjake

    I should have wrote, “I am devoted to replacing CFLs with incandesents…” and ,”Want to save money…”

    We are the consumer, and it is our choice to decide which is best for our needs. If this continues it won’t be long before we are forced to by government brand (which of course will be made in China).

  • e_rowe

    We should actively push for conservatives not to support anyone who doesn’t support that.

    I know Ron Paul does.

    Who else?

  • http://www.periodictablet.com superamerican

    There is no good fight. This is the Second Civil War of the United States of America. The Right needs to understand that. It needs to fight tooth and nail every inch of every foot of every person. The Left will do or say anything to win. The Right is polite, minding their manners and giving benefit to the Left which rips and tears the very fabric of this country
    .

    GET REAL.

    Fight to win like the Left does. Eat its heart out, that’s what the Left has done to the Right and to America.

    If is a fight to the death of one party of the United States of America.

  • Pingback: hier