Obama keeping promise to bankrupt the coal industry and skyrocket energy costs

[Soul Crusher]

EPA regs force closure of Texas energy facilities, eliminate 500 jobs
The Daily Caller ^ | 09/12/2011 | Matthew Boyle



Texas energy company Luminant announced on Monday new burdensome Environmental Protection Agency regulations are forcing it to close several facilities, which will result in about 500 job losses.

The company will be idling — stopping the usage of — two energy generating units. It will also cease extracting lignite from three different Texas mines.

The EPA regulation Luminant cites as too burdensome is the new Cross-State Air Pollution rule, which requires Texas power generators to make “dramatic reductions” in emissions beginning on January 1, 2012.


(Excerpt) Read more at thedc.com ...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 


HOW CAN THIS DISGUSTING COMMUNIST WRETCH CLAME TO BE FOR MORE JOBS WHEN HE IS SPENDING EVERY WAKING MOMENT DESTROYING THEM? 

[Soul Crusher]

Helen Whalen Cohen  
EPA To Shut Down 20% of Coal Plants in 2012
9/24/2011 | Email Helen Whalen Cohen | All Posts By Blogger

  Sign-Up

This article is a few days old, but it is worth a mention nonetheless. Susan Kraemer at CleanTechnica can barely contain her excitement at the prospect of environmental regulations. In an article titled "Obama's EPA Cues 130 Billion Race to Cut Pollution By 2015", she reports that the EPA will shut down 20 percent of coal plants through the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule. She acknowledges the cost of these regulations ($130 billion), but insists that this is actually good for the economy.

How, pray tell, does $130 billion in regulatory expenses transform into a $130 billion boon?

Because it will push coal plants out of the way and free up energy production for green technology, of course!

 

The EPA will shut down an estimated 20% of the nation’s coal plants through the ground-level ozone rule (the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) ) through cap and trade that is about to be implemented in January 2012. Opponents of the Obama administration’s “over-reaching” EPA say these are costly regulations. Financial analysts estimate that the cost of this rule will be $130 billion by 2015. But if that figure is correct, that’s good news for the US economy.
 
Because there is another way of looking at that $130 billion “expense”. One industry’s expense is another industry’s sales bonanza. For the coal industry’s balance sheet, it is an expense, but think about who is going to perform this $130 billion cleanup – fairies? Hardly. This is a job for real American industries.
 
In the most depressed economy since the Great Depression, a slew of US companies will be selling the clean energy solutions (and adding employees to manufacture them) as coal companies must begin a race to have the least polluting coal plants.
Source: Clean Technica (http://s.tt/

Real American industries? Like Solyndra? Given all the green scandals that are coming to light, now might not be the best time to advocate these types of solutions. The kicker, though, comes in the last paragraph of the article:

A hand-full of coal industry plutocrats are simply not able to inject $130 billion into the US economy just taking cruise trips around the Mediterranean or whatever it is that they do with the profits that they don’t spend cleaning up.

If the concern is that coal plants don't put enough money into the economy, then what's going to happen once there are fewer of them? My guess is that we will be left on the hook for more large loans to green technology companies that eventually go bankrupt, and other goodies that could only come about when people like Kraemer decide they know best how companies should spend their profits.

[Soul Crusher]

New EPA regulations will cause 183,000 jobs to be lost - study
Pennenergy ^ | 9/23/2011 | staff
Posted on September 26, 2011 6:55:29 AM EDT by tobyhill

Source: American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity

As the U.S. House of Representatives prepares to vote on the TRAIN Act, the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, released a comprehensive analysis conducted by National Economic Research Associates (NERA) showing that several of EPA’s new and proposed regulations would lead to 183,000 lost jobs per year and significant increases in the price of electricity and natural gas.

“America’s coal-fueled electric industry has invested nearly $100 billion, so far, to achieve impressive reductions in air pollution. Now is the wrong time for EPA to blindly push ahead without even pausing long enough to understand how all of these rules could hurt American jobs and consumers,” said Steve Miller, president and CEO of ACCCE.

The analysis, done on behalf of ACCCE by NERA, relies on state-of-the-art modeling tools, as well as government data for almost all of its assumptions. NERA’s analysis projects that EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule and proposed Maximum Achievable Control Technology, coal combustion residuals, and cooling water intake requirements for power plants would, over the 2012-2020 period:

•Cost the power industry $21 billion per year; •Cause an average loss of 183,000 jobs per year; •Increase electricity costs by double digits in many regions of the U.S.; •Cost consumers over $50 billion more for natural gas; and •Reduce the disposable income of the average American family by $270 a year.

(Excerpt) Read more at pennenergy.com ...




Rot in hell Obama. 

[Soul Crusher]

EPA objects to 19 surface ooal Permits
The Hazard Herald ^ | 10/04/2011 | Cris Ritchie



The federal Environmental Protection Agency last week objected to 19 permits for surface coal mines in Kentucky, objections that some say could have a negative impact on the state’s economy.

Read more: Hazard Herald (KY) - EPA objects to 19 surface coal permits at LINK!


(Excerpt) Read more at hazard-herald.com ...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Soul Crusher]

Electric Bills About To Spike
The Daily Beast ^ | October 5, 2011 | Laura Coloruso



(Utilities across the country need more money for grid updates and pollution controls, and are passing the huge bill on to consumers. Laura Colarusso on why electricity bills are rising.)

Already weary of high gas prices and 9.1 percent unemployment, many Americans are about to get another kick in the wallet thanks to large increases in their electricity bills.

From Alaska to Georgia and Wyoming to Florida, utilities are seeking permission to pass on hundreds of millions of dollars in new charges to customers to help upgrade aging infrastructure and build new or retrofitted power plants that comply with tougher environmental regulations, a Daily Beast review of regulatory filings has found.

The influx of requests, many still pending before state regulators, has left energy experts convinced that electricity prices will be on the rise for the foreseeable future as the industry struggles to modernize its aging infrastructure.

“They desperately need to upgrade,” says Bill Richardson, the former New Mexico governor and Clinton-era energy secretary who once famously called America a superpower with a Third World power grid. “You’re seeing rate hikes everywhere because this is a widespread, national problem.”

The pending rate hikes are bad news for poor and elderly Americans on tight budgets, as Congress and the White House begin making cuts to programs that help people cope with their utility bills. One program in particular, the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, was slashed during the budget negotiations earlier this year, and is slated for even deeper reductions this fall.

During the budget battle, Congress cut $500 million from the program to bring this year’s total to $4.7 billion, down from a high of $5.1 billion in 2010. For next year, the Obama administration requested only $2.6 billion, leaving states with roughly half the assistance they’ve had in the past. The White House rationale relies on the assumption that energy prices will decline, but regulatory filings have indicated the opposite trend is in store.

In the latest round of budget negotiations, House Republicans have suggested adding $822 million on top of Obama’s request for next year, but the gap could still result in rationing.

Already this summer, Illinois cut back on its energy-assistance grants, forcing seniors and poor families to forego air conditioning during the sizzling August heat. And governors of cold-weather states such as Michigan’s Rick Synder and Maine’s Paul LePage—both Republicans—are fighting the drop in funding, warning that people could freeze. Northeastern Democrats are equally concerned by the president’s proposed cuts.

“During these tough economic times, it is critical that we both fully fund LIHEAP and ensure that states have timely access to the funding they need,” Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-CT, says. “These changes could prevent states from being able to respond quickly to severe cold weather and leave the most vulnerable Americans out in the cold.”

The Beast’s review of regulatory filings found at least 16 utilities covering 6.1 million customers are seeking rate hikes of 5 percent or more. Almost half of those want increases of 10 percent or more.

And several more utilities already have received approval for large increases.

For instance, close to three million customers in parts of Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio, and West Virginia that get their electricity from American Electric Power have seen their rates increase between 48 and 88 percent over the last few years. Those rates are expected to rise an additional 10 to 35 percent in the next three years. The reason? AEP officials are quick to blame environmental regulations that they say are going to cost the company $8 billion in compliance and upgrades.

AEP, which operates in 11 states, says it is raising rates because it needs the cash to upgrade its infrastructure. The company plans to retire five coal plants—which amount to 6,000 megawatts of generation— and build at least two natural gas plants by the end of this decade.

“None of this is cheap,” says Mike Morris, AEP’s chief executive officer. Morris predicts that rolling brownouts also could loom on the horizon because the current system can’t keep up with demand, which is expected to grow by 44 percent by 2035.

Electricity rates were static for most of the 1990s and early 2000s. According to the Energy Information Administration, the average residential customer saw his or her bill increase just seven-tenths of a cent per kilowatt between 1998 and 2004. Between 2005 and 2010, the average price spiked about 2.5 cents and then flattened out over last year as natural gas prices dropped, EIA says.

Dozens of factors affect rate increases, but one of the biggest is that much of the transmission system was built at a time when the radio was still the main form of entertainment. The power grid simply can’t keep up with modern demand as more people use more appliances, computers, and gadgets.

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

Come on Team Traitor - defend this shit.   

Don't need to defend it.  Coal is a pollutant, causes health problems including cancer, and destroys the land along with making us more dependent on other countries.  We need to move to solar and wind technology along with biodiesel to preserve our enviroment and reduce our dependence on other countries

[Soul Crusher]

Don't need to defend it.  Coal is a pollutant, causes health problems including cancer, and destroys the land along with making us more dependent on other countries.  We need to move to solar and wind technology along with biodiesel to preserve our enviroment and reduce our dependence on other countries

LMFAO  - poverty and destitution is a worse pollutant to most people. 

But then again - your goal , LIKE I HAVE SAID OF COMMUNIST ENVIRO FREAKS, is to have everyone in tents and under candles.   

[Soul Crusher]

Report: EPA regs will shut down 28 GW of energy production
Hot Air ^ | October 8,2011 | Jazz Shaw
Posted on October 8, 2011 4:10:09 PM EDT by Hojczyk

Currently, EPA is leading the Obama administration’s assault on coal with a number of new regulations. Two of the most important are the “transport rule” and the “toxics rule” (Utility MACT). Combined, these regulations will systematically reduce access to affordable and reliable energy. According to our report:

EPA Regulations Will Close At Least 28 GW of Generating Capacity

EPA modeling and power-plant operator announcements show that EPA regulations will close at least 28 gigawatts (GW) of American generating capacity, the equivalent of closing every power plant in the state of North Carolina or Indiana. Also, 28 GW is 8.9 percent of our total coal generating capacity.

Current Retirements Almost Twice As High As EPA Predicted

EPA’s power plant-level modeling projected that Agency regulations would close 14.5 GW of generating capacity. That number rises to 28 GW when including additional announced retirements related to EPA rules, almost twice the amount EPA projected. Moreover, this number will grow as plant operators continue to release their EPA compliance plans.

Announced and Projected Retirements Higher Than Worst Case Scenarios

Analysis by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the entity in charge of grid reliability, projected that EPA’s Transport Rule and Toxics Rule would close 20 GW of generating capacity. This list indicates that at least 28 GW will retire. EPA’s Transport Rule and Toxics Rule push U.S. energy security past the NERC worst case scenario.

Lest you think this is a problem mostly being faced by Texas, think again. Is your home state on this list?

(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...

[Soul Crusher]

IER Identifies Coal Fired Power Plants Likely to Close as Result of EPA RegulationsCoal
Institute for Energy Research ^ | October 7, 2011
Posted on October 8, 2011 6:45:47 PM EDT by george76

So if somebody wants to build a coal-fired plant they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them…

– Barack Obama speaking to San Francisco Chronicle, January 2008

The United States has the world’s largest coal resources. In fact we have 50 percent more coal than Russia, the country with the next largest reserves. But coal use in the United States is under assault.

Before becoming President, Barak Obama promised to bankrupt coal companies. As President, he has tried various strategies to force Americans to use less coal. After failing to pass a national energy tax (cap-and-trade), the President vowed to continue his attack on coal stating, there is “more than one way to skin a cat.”

Currently, EPA is leading the Obama administration’s assault on coal with a number of new regulations. Two of the most important are the “transport rule” and the “toxics rule” (Utility MACT). Combined, these regulations will systematically reduce access to affordable and reliable energy

(Excerpt) Read more at instituteforenergyresear ch.org ...

[Soul Crusher]

EPA to Implement New Coal-Killing Rules 13 Days Before FERC Hearing on Their Potential Effects
Big Government ^ | 10-21-11 | Dan Riehl
Posted on October 21, 2011 7:06:05 AM EDT by afraidfortherepublic

Some called it a gaffe when current Vice President Joe Biden was caught on video saying, “No Coal Plants Here in America,” during the 2008 campaign. Now, thanks to a bit of curious timing, the Obama administration may be a step closer to achieving that very thing, destroying up to 1.4 million jobs in the progress. The move will also lead to a significant increase in energy prices; however, it may be too late to do anything about all that by the time the information comes to light. And yet some think Wall Street, not Washington, is the problem.

Here’s the issue–one part of it, anyway. Connect the dots, beginning with this Federal Energy Regulatory Commission item.

FERC has scheduled a hearing next month to discuss the reliability of the power grid, particularly in regards to concerns stemming from new EPA regulations. Critics of the EPA have made reliability a central theme of their attack on new pollution regulations for power plants and pressed FERC to evaluate their concerns. The hearing is set for November 29.

That sounds good, until one realizes that the EPA intends to put some of said new regulations in effect, over the objections of many states, before their likely impact is discussed more broadly.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said on Tuesday it was committed to finalizing a standard on mercury emissions by November 16 after 25 states urged a court to force the agency to delay the rule. “EPA is committed to completing the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards — the first-ever national standards for mercury, arsenic and other toxic air pollution from power plants,” the EPA said in a release.

The issue may be best summed up in a letter from Senator Inhofe to the EPA. Add it up – fewer jobs, higher electric bills for the middle class and bigger government with more bad-for-business regulations. But it’s not even news, because everyone is focused on Wall Street. Wow! I wonder who thought that one up? Community organizers-in-chief work in mysterious ways, or so I’ve heard.

“Today in Congress there is bipartisan concern that the Obama EPA’s Utility MACT rule will result in a significant number of plant closures, increase electricity rates for every American, and, along with the transport rule, destroy nearly 1.4 million jobs,” Senator Inhofe said. “Now we have learned that EPA has failed to collaborate with FERC to consider how Utility MACT will affect electric reliability. In fact, FERC Commissioner Moeller went as far as to say that ‘the Commission has not acted or studied or provided assistance to any agency, including EPA.’

[Soul Crusher]

Obama set to kill off coal industry?
UPI ^ | Oct. 27, 2011 | UPI

Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2011 1:33:56 PM by Qbert

WASHINGTON, Oct. 27 (UPI) -- The proposed merger of two federal agencies managing public land and mining is part of a White House effort to wipe out the U.S. coal industry, a critic said.

U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar called for the merger of the Bureau of Land Management and the Office of Surface Mining.

U.S. Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources, said he had "serious" concerns about the decision to "suddenly and dramatically" change management of coal mines and BLM lands by U.S. President Barack Obama's administration.

"The Obama administration has not made secret its desire to put an end to America's coal mining industry and this appears to be one more step in that direction," Hastings said.

Hastings said BLM and OSM have separate duties. OSM oversees surface coal mining regulations while BLM manages more than 245 million acres primarily in 12 Western states, including Alaska.


(Excerpt) Read more at upi.com ...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Soul Crusher]

U.S. Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources, said he had "serious" concerns about the decision to "suddenly and dramatically" change management of coal mines and BLM lands by U.S. President Barack Obama's administration.

"The Obama administration has not made secret its desire to put an end to America's coal mining industry and this appears to be one more step in that direction," Hastings said.



________________________ ___________


Plainly obvious to anyone paying any attention to what this communist neo-terrorist sleeper cell marxist ghetto thug parasite POTUS is doing. 

[Soul Crusher]

Obama's Gold rush of Solar Subsidies (Skyrocketing electric rates as promised)
NYT ^ | November 12, 2011 | Eric Lipton




The project is also a marvel in another, less obvious way: Taxpayers and ratepayers are providing subsidies worth almost as much as the entire $1.6 billion cost of the project. Similar subsidy packages have been given to 15 other solar- and wind-power electric plants since 2009.

The government support — which includes loan guarantees, cash grants and contracts that require electric customers to pay higher rates — largely eliminated the risk to the private investors and almost guaranteed them large profits for years to come. The beneficiaries include financial firms like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, conglomerates like General Electric, utilities like Exelon and NRG — even Google.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...

[Skip8282]

Obama's Gold rush of Solar Subsidies (Skyrocketing electric rates as promised)
NYT ^ | November 12, 2011 | Eric Lipton




The project is also a marvel in another, less obvious way: Taxpayers and ratepayers are providing subsidies worth almost as much as the entire $1.6 billion cost of the project. Similar subsidy packages have been given to 15 other solar- and wind-power electric plants since 2009.

The government support — which includes loan guarantees, cash grants and contracts that require electric customers to pay higher rates — largely eliminated the risk to the private investors and almost guaranteed them large profits for years to come. The beneficiaries include financial firms like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, conglomerates like General Electric, utilities like Exelon and NRG — even Google.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...

You gotta wonder if there is any end in sight.

[Soul Crusher]

November 18, 2011 10:54am
0 Comments

 Obama USDA delays shale drilling, up to 200k jobs

by Joel Gehrke Commentary Staff Writer


President Obama's United States Department of Agriculture has delayed shale gas drilling in Ohio for up to six months by cancelling a mineral lease auction for Wayne National Forest (WNF). The move was taken in deference to environmentalists, on the pretext of studying the effects of hydraulic fracturing.

“Conditions have changed since the 2006 Forest Plan was developed," announced WNF Supervisor Anne Carey on Tuesday. "The technology used in the Utica & Marcellus Shale formations need to be studied to see if potential effects to the surface are significantly different than those identified in the Forest Plan." The study will take up to six months to complete. The WNF study reportedly "will focus solely on how it could affect forest land," the significance of hydraulic fracturing to united proponents of the delay, "and not how it could affect groundwater."

Speaking of the WNF gas drilling, one environmentalist group spokesman suggested that moving forward with drilling "could turn the Ohio Valley into Ozone Alley,"  even though Wayne National Forest already has nearly 1300 oil and gas wells in operation.

The Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program (OOGEEP) recently estimated that drilling in the Utica shale, which is affected by the suspension of the mineral lease auctions, would produce up 204,500 jobs by 2015.

"The President’s plan is to simply say ‘no’ to new energy production," House Natural Resources Committee chairman Doc Hastings, R-Wash, said to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar during a hearing pertaining to hydraulic fracturing. "It’s a plan that is sending American jobs overseas, forfeiting new revenue, and denying access to American energy that would lessen our dependence on hostile Middle Eastern oil."

Salazar denied that suggestion, noting the sales of mineral leases over the last two years, but he also affirmed environmentalist concerns. "The increasing use of hydraulic fracturing has raised a number of concerns about the potential impacts on water quality and availability, particularly with respect to the chemical composition of fracturing fluids and the methods used."



http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/obama-usda-delays-shale-drilling-200k-jobs

[Soul Crusher]

Obama's EPA is killing the economy with costly rules
By: Examiner Editorial | 11/26/11 8:05 PM


Anybody who wonders why the U.S. economy continues to stagger along with 9 percent unemployment and an anemic 2 percent quarterly growth rate need look no further than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Under President Obama's hand-picked administrator, Lisa Jackson, EPA is hog-tying the economy with dozens of proposed major new rules. One of them, which is aimed at coal-fired power plants that generate electricity, will add at least $18 billion in compliance costs by 2020. As Kathleen White of the Texas Public Policy Center told the House Energy and Commerce Committee earlier this year, "never in its 40-year history has EPA promulgated -- at the same time -- so many costly new regulatory dictates. The rules on track to go into effect in the next three years could cost more than $1 trillion and result in hundreds of thousands of jobs lost."

It's not just the raft of new rules that is killing economic growth, however. Jackson and her EPA minions have been purposefully slow-walking the agency's already hideously complex process for approving permits in a crucial sector of the energy industry. Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., asked the EPA inspector general to review the agency's permitting process for surface mining permit applications in the Appalachian region over the last two years. The EPA IG found that of the 185 permit applications it identified, only 56, or less than one-third of the total, had been approved. Almost half of the 185 required at least 731 days for EPA to complete its evaluations. That compares with the 144 days EPA claims is its average evaluation period for all mining permit applications. At least a third of the 185 were simply withdrawn from consideration, presumably because the applicants despaired of ever getting a response from EPA.

The IG report confirmed Inhofe's prior suspicion that EPA has been "systematically slowing the pace of permit evaluations in Appalachia. Even more troubling is that as our nation works to find ways to cut our national debt, EPA has increased its budget and staff to evaluate these permits. Instead of spending more and more taxpayer dollars to wage this war on affordable energy, the Obama-EPA should be processing and approving these permits to spur job creation, especially in areas such as the Appalachia that have significant employment needs. Equally important is the potential domestic energy production that these permits would provide."

Because 40 percent of the electricity that Americans depend on daily is generated by power plants fueled by coal -- much of which comes from Appalachia -- sluggardly permit processing by EPA should concern everybody. And let's not forget that Jackson works for a president who before he was elected promised that his environmental policies would "necessarily cause electricity prices to skyrocket."



Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/2011/11/obamas-epa-killing-economy-costly-rules#ixzz1ewC9FJQ0







and the Obamabots are still in the dark why the economy still sucks.   

[Soul Crusher]

Badly-Needed Alaskan Oil Is Kept From Market By Obama Decision
Investor's Business Daily ^ | November 30, 2001 | IBD staff



Energy Policy: The same administration that says we can and should get oil from the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska is blocking a bridge needed to get it to market on environmental grounds.

In his May 14 weekly radio address, President Obama called for annual lease sales in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPRA), not necessarily out of any conviction that increased domestic energy supply is good for prices and national security, but basically to perpetuate the myth that the oil companies refuse to drill in leased or leasable areas.

While he restricts oil production in the Gulf of Mexico and in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas off the north coast of Alaska, and imposes outright moratoriums on federal lands and off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, Obama wants the appearance, if not the reality, of supporting domestic energy production from fossil fuels.

The NPRA, 23 million acres of North Slope wilderness, was established in 1923 by President Harding to ensure a reserve of oil for the U.S. Navy.

Obama has cited it as an example of areas where the oil companies could drill but are reluctant to, knowing full well his administration has walled off preferred areas offshore and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska.


(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...

[Soul Crusher]

Taking Aim At Oil And Gas (Aim of Obama tax is NOT to raise money)
The Albuquerque Journal ^ | November 28, 2011 | Winthrop Quigley



In the ocean of federal budgetary red ink, the tax breaks enjoyed by oil companies and targeted for elimination by the Obama administration are a ripple.

The Congressional Budget Office projects the federal government will spend $973 billion more in 2012 than it takes in. President Barack Obama earlier this year proposed increasing oil industry taxes by $3.5 billion in 2012, 0.4 percent of the total deficit.

The administration’s goal is not to raise money. According to congressional testimony by the Treasury Department, eliminating some preferential tax treatment for oil companies will divert investment from a 20th-century to a 21st-century energy economy.

Carol Mayo Cochran, an Albuquerque-based certified public accountant, says the administration’s plan will indeed divert investment away from oil production, but it will be the small independent oil and natural gas producers based in places like Farmington, Hobbs and Artesia that pay the biggest price. That’s because the tax-advantaged partnerships that such companies use to raise capital for exploration and production will become riskier and less profitable.

The Exxon-Mobils of the world will hardly notice the changes, said Cochran, a principal at REDW LLC.


(Excerpt) Read more at abqjournal.com ...

[Soul Crusher]

Free Republic
Browse · Search   Pings · Mail   News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.

Will The EPA Choke Oil Shale Production
Investor's Business Daily ^ | December 1, 2011 | IBD staff
Posted on December 1, 2011 8:20:19 PM EST by raptor22

New Energy: The latest salvo in the administration's war on energy may be new rules and permits to regulate a process to get oil and gas from porous rock, sacrificing jobs and economic growth while under review.

There are a few areas of the U.S. that are booming. Two of these are in North Dakota and Pennsylvania, states that sit atop two massive shale rock formations, the Bakken and the Marcellus.

Extraction of oil and natural gas from these formations have created jobs and economic growth in the midst of a stagnant and parched economy.

The oil and gas is extracted from this porous rock by a process called hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking."

The process involves the injection under high pressure of fluids, mainly water with a few chemical additives, to fracture the porous shale rock and allow the release and extraction of the oil and gas trapped inside the porous rock. Environmentalists contend these chemical additives contaminate groundwater supplies.

The fluid used in the process is 99.5% sand and water. There are other chemicals ranging from the citric acid found in soda to benzene, which are used to reduce friction and fight microbes.

Shale formations in which fracking is used are thousands of feet deep. Drinking water aquifers are generally only a hundred feet deep. There's solid rock between them.

Yet the Environmental Protection Agency, bowing to environmentalists' pressure and faithful to the administration mantra that fossil fuels are harmful and obsolete, is preparing to nip this economic boom in the bud by regulating it to death.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...

[Soul Crusher]

Obama threatens veto if pipeline decision is added to payroll tax cut
By Ben Geman - 12/07/11 03:52 PM ET    



President Obama has warned Republicans he'll veto an extension of the payroll tax if it includes a measure forcing quick approval of the Keystone oil sands pipeline.

“Any effort to try to tie Keystone to the payroll tax cut I will reject,” Obama told reporters Wednesday after meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper at the White House.


 

Obama said he would not accept a payroll tax holiday bill if Republicans add “extraneous” provisions, including a measure that would force quick approval of the controversial Keystone pipeline that would run from Canada to the southern U.S.

House Republicans pushing for approval of the pipeline to bring crude from Alberta’s oil sands projects to Gulf Coast refineries have discussed linking it to extension of the tax holiday. The payroll tax cut extension is a Democratic and White House priority.

The Obama administration recently punted a final permitting decision on the controversial project until after the 2012 election as the State Department continues analyzing TransCanada Corp’s proposed pipeline.

Republicans in the House and Senate, who call the delay a political decision to appease Obama’s environmental base, are pushing bills that would mandate a much faster decision.

Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), said Republicans welcome a showdown over the pipeline.

“If President Obama threatens to veto it over a provision that creates American jobs, that’s a fight we’re ready to have,” he said.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More from The Hill's E2 Wire blog:
♦ Gore 'sorry' Gingrich repudiates Pelosi ad
♦ Sen. Boxer: Climate change deniers ‘endangering humankind’
♦ Huntsman: GOP field should 'recognize science for what it is'
♦ GOP asks EPA to prove it isn’t inflating greenhouse gas figures
♦ White House threatens to veto Republican farm-dust bill



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


But Obama said extension of the payroll tax cut is something that Republicans in both chambers should support on the merits, arguing it should not be held “hostage.”

“If the payroll tax cut is attached to a whole bunch of extraneous issues . . . than it is not something that I am going to accept,” Obama said.

“I don’t expect to have to veto it because I expect they are going to have enough sense over on Capitol Hill to do the people’s business and not try and load it up with a bunch of politics,” Obama said.


The State Department announced last month that it is analyzing revised routes for the pipeline that would move it away from the ecologically sensitive Sand Hills region of Nebraska, a process that is not slated to be complete until 2013.

Senate Republicans unveiled a measure last week that would require State to make a decision within 60 days on a permit for the project, which has been under review for several years.

House Republicans, meanwhile, are promoting new legislation that would hand the permitting decision to the independent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. It’s crafted in a way that significantly limits FERC’s discretion to reject the project.

The pipeline is tricky political terrain for the White House.

Environmental groups bitterly oppose the project due to greenhouse gas emissions and other concerns, while a number of labor unions – another key part of Obama's political base – back the project.

It’s also a source of tension with the Canadian government, which backs the project. But Harper, speaking after his meeting with Obama that focused on border and trade issues, downplayed friction with Obama over the pipeline.

“He has an open mind as to what the final decision may or may not be,” Harper said.

Obama on Wednesday rejected GOP claims that he delayed the final decision for political reasons, noting that both Democrats and Republicans have expressed concerns with the project.

Obama has said the final State Department decision will balance an array of environmental and economic considerations.

“It is my job as president of the United States to make sure that a process is followed that examines all the options, looks at all the consequences before a decision is made,” Obama said

Updated at 4:38 p.m.


Source:
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/197901-obama-would-reject-gop-bid-to-tie-payroll-tax-cut-bill-to-keystone-pipeline-decision

[Soul Crusher]

AP IMPACT: EPA rules threaten older power plants
Associated Press ^ | Dec 19, 2011, 7:47 AM EST | DINA CAPPIELLO



WASHINGTON (AP) -- More than 32 mostly coal-fired power plants in a dozen states will be forced to shut down and an additional 36 might have to close because of new federal air pollution regulations, according to an Associated Press survey.

Together, those plants - some of the oldest and dirtiest in the country - produce enough electricity for more than 22 million households, the AP survey found. But their demise probably won't cause homes to go dark.

The fallout will be most acute for the towns where power plant smokestacks long have cast a shadow. Tax revenues and jobs will be lost, and investments in new power plants and pollution controls probably will raise electric bills.

The survey, based on interviews with 55 power plant operators and on the Environmental Protection Agency's own prediction of power plant retirements, rebuts claims by critics of the regulations and some electric power producers.

They have predicted the EPA rules will kill coal as a power source and force blackouts, basing their argument on estimates from energy analysts, congressional offices, government regulators, unions and interest groups. Many of those studies inflate the number of plants retiring by counting those shutting down for reasons other than the two EPA rules.

The AP surveyed electricity-generating companies about what they plan to do and the effects on power supply and jobs. It was the first survey of its kind.

The estimate also was based in part on EPA computer models that predict which fossil-fuel generating units are likely to be retired early to comply with the rules, and which were likely to be retired anyway.

The agency has estimated that 14.7 gigawatts, enough power for more than 11 million households, will be retired from the power grid in the 2014-15 period when the two new rules...


(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...











Awesome job Obama - BTW - F U to every dirtbag voting for this commie leech again.   

[Soul Crusher]

Power Plant Closures Due to Environmental Regulations to Take Toll on Towns
Fox News ^ | 12/20/11



Power Plant Closures Due to Environmental Regulations to Take Toll on Towns
Published December 20, 2011 | Associated Press


For more than 90 years, the coal-fired power plant in Glen Lyn, Va., has been churning out electricity and contributing to local prosperity. Of late, it has generated nearly a quarter of the revenue for the $1 million budget of the town.


Yet when the plant ultimately shuts down to comply with new federal air pollution regulations by the end of 2014, says Town Manager Howard Spencer, so too might the community of 200.


"If the town lost all of that revenue," he says, "we would struggle to even continue to be incorporated."


An Associated Press analysis has found that more than 32 mostly coal-fired power plants in a dozen states will be forced to close because of the new, more stringent regulations. Another 36 plants are at risk of closing.


(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Soul Crusher]

Higher electricity bills, cleaner air under new rules (EPA again runs amuck)
MSNBC ^ | 12/21/2011 | msnbc



After a two-month delay, the Obama administration was expected Wednesday to unveil new rules for coal-fired power plants that mean costly investments passed on to consumers, but also health benefits.

A "significant Clean Air Act announcement" was set for 2 p.m. ET by the Environmental Protection Agency. Both environmentalists and industry were gearing up for the final say on rules covering mercury and other toxic emissions from power plants fueled by coal.

Power plant operators who have trouble meeting a three-year deadline for compliance will be given some flexibility under a deal struck between the White House and the EPA, the Washington Post reported last Friday.

Citing EPA estimates, the Washington Post said the rules will cost utilities $10.6 billion by 2016 to install special control equipment known as "scrubbers."


(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...

[Soul Crusher]

Obama Sides with Whackos over Workers- Kills Another 3000 Jobs
Townhall.com ^ | December 22, 2011 | John Ransom



The EPA went last-minute Christmas shopping for votes this year to stick in their boss’, um… ballot-box shaped stocking. Once he realized his economic plans wouldn’t create jobs, Obama has been like an employment Typhoid Mary, killing jobs wherever he can in order to boost support from his whack-job supporters in the hopes for some votes, any votes.   

In a desperate bid to win back support of the enviro-whackos who have been critical of the Obama administration, the EPA issued a final ruling on MACT standards that will shutter up to 60 coal-fired power plants, costing an estimated 3000 jobs in the plants alone.

Merry Christmas!

A typical coal-fired plant employs an average of 54 workers.


The move was blasted by Congressman John Sullivan, Vice Chairman of the House Energy and Power Subcommittee as the “EPA gone rogue.”

“Utility Mact is the most expensive rule EPA has ever written for power plants – its going to layoff American workers,” said Sullivan, “could shut down over 60 power plants all together and raise the price families pay to heat their homes this winter.  EPA has gone rouge – they are catering to radical left wing environmentalists instead of presenting a workable plan that protects the environment as well as American jobs.”

EPA said that by shutting down the plants, they’ll be preventing 17,000 deaths per year caused by polar bear cannibals, er, strike that…by pollution…yeah… pollution. Of course they provide little-to-no data to support the claim. Indeed, in one place the EPA revises the number downward to 4,200-11,000 global warming, er,...pollution deaths. With the many global crises going on, it’s hard to keep track of which crisis the Democrats are saving us from on any given day.   


The EPA trotted out the new death statistics in the spring after meeting opposition to the new MACT standards by those silly people who would like to keep their jobs and the rest of us who’d like to pay reasonable prices for electricity, presumably so that we can all keep our Chevy Volts going- 33 miles between a 12 hour charge!. You know? When we aren’t driving our Nat Gas powered Pelosi-mobiles.

Previously the EPA had argued hard for poor visibility as the driving force behind the new regulations. But that argument ran into a buzz saw of opposition called common sense, aka, the House Energy and Power Subcommittee.

Scott Segal, director of the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, told Power Engineering Magazine that the rule will cost more than just jobs and coal generation.

"It will increase the cost of power, undermining the international competitiveness of almost two dozen manufacturing industries," Segal said.

The Wall Street Journal estimates that the scheme will cost the industry $10 billion, which of course will be passed along to consumers.

Of course the consumers won’t be hit the worst. It’s the employees who are being told just a few days before Christmas that they will have to find new jobs, who are the ones that will pay for Obama’s electioneering.


But Obama’s already made it clear that if he has to pick between workers and his far-left base, he’s going with his base- at least until he can turn on them again; you know, like he did with Hispanics, Blacks, Unions and once-upon-a-time enviro-whackos?

Terry O’Sullivan, General President of LIUNA – the Laborers’ International Union of North America has recently blasted Obama for double dealing against American jobs on behalf of the enviro-whackos like he did on the Keystone Oil Pipeline. O’Sullivan represents pipefitters and others who would be employed on the Keystone project. 

“Environmentalists formed a circle around the White House and within days the Obama Administration chose to inflict a potentially fatal delay to a project that is not just a pipeline,” said O’Sullivan when Obama punted on the pipeline project to side with whackos over workers, “but is a lifeline for thousands of desperate working men and women. The Administration chose to support environmentalists over jobs – job-killers win, American workers lose. Environmental groups from the Natural Resources Defense Council to the Sierra Club may be dancing in the streets, having delayed and possibly stopped yet another project that would put men and women back to work. While they celebrate, pipeline workers will continue to lose their homes and livelihoods.”


Merry Christmas, Mr. Obama. You should be proud.

Still, the whack-job left remains skeptical of Obama largely because they have yet to see him confiscate your home, my home and all other homes with up-to-date mortgages. Remember: This is a group of people who think recycling is dropping “trou” in Zucotti Park. 

OWS groups have been “occupying” both Obama’s Iowa campaign headquarters and the headquarters of the Democrat National Committee to protest Obama’s sellout to Wall Street. 

While protests from the hard left continue, expect Obama to show he’s not a sellout by selling out to the radicals over American workers who not only install indoor plumbing for a living, but also know how to use it.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Soul Crusher]

Obama is achieving his goal of higher energy costs
By: Examiner Editorial | 12/21/11 8:05 PM

.
Damian Dovarganes/AP file



CNBC reported earlier this week that the typical American family will spend the largest portion ever of its budget — 8.4 percent — on gasoline this year. With 14 million Americans either out of work or underemployed, a lot of folks aren't buying Christmas gifts or celebrating with a little holiday cheer this year. As Washington Examiner columnist John Stossel makes clear elsewhere in today's edition, a major reason for the continued high and underemployment is found in the massive economic uncertainties that will result if the U.S. Supreme Court allows Obamacare to go forward. Businesses aren't replacing current workers or adding new ones in great part because they simply cannot know how much doing so would cost them until the future of Obamacare is decided. This is a textbook case of the unintended consequences that inevitably accompany grand Big Government programs.

But there is another factor behind the economic stagnation produced by President Obama's policies -- soaring energy costs -- that hurt all Americans, not just those without jobs or who are trapped in lower-paying positions. As CNBC reported earlier this week, the typical American family will spend the largest portion ever of its budget -- 8.4 percent -- on gasoline this year. Economists expect the average price of a gallon of gas to be $3.53, a 76-cent increase over 2010.

Growing world demand for gas caused by economic expansion in China and India only partially explains this increase. Obama's environmental and energy policies are also a key reason why prices are constantly heading higher. The American oil and gas industry is producing record domestic yields these days, thanks to the vastly increased efficiency made possible by technological advances like horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing.

That ought to be good news because increased supply normally means lower prices. But the energy industry's ability to process oil into gasoline is greatly handicapped by environmental regulations that are so stringent that it's been nearly four decades since a new refinery was built in this country. Plus, existing refineries face a complicated web of government-mandated blends of gas with additives like ethanol that are designed to reduce emissions and that vary by geographical region and seasons of the year. That means refineries frequently must stop producing one blend to change to production of a different one.

Add to these factors the dramatic decrease in the number of new drilling permits issued by the government under Obama, longer waiting times for those that are issued, and the president's success in barring expansion of oil and gas exploration and production to federal lands known to be rich in untapped resources. The result is constant upward pressure on the price consumers must pay at the pump.

Not only is the cost paid by families every time they fill up at the local gas station, the economy takes a hit as well. James Hamilton, an economics professor at the University of California at San Diego, who studies energy prices, told CNBC that high gasoline prices reduce economic growth by about 0.5 percent for the year. In a $14 trillion economy, half a percent is a big deal, especially when growth is about 2 percent a year. And we haven't even mentioned Solyndra.



Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/2011/12/obama-achieving-his-goal-higher-energy-costs/2024001#disqus_thread#ixzz1hH8qL6CO