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

[Soul Crusher]

$5 A Gallon For Gas? It Could Happen In 2012
January 2, 2012 11:59 PM


http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/01/02/analysts-say-we-could-see-5-a-gallon-for-gas-in-2012


$5 A Gallon?, Gas prices, Gas Prices Increasing, Iran, Iran Gas Prices, Pumpwatch BALTIMORE (WJZ) — Five dollars a gallon for gas? Analysts say it could happen this year.

Monique Griego has more on why gas prices could soon explode.

Just this weekend, the president signed new sanctions against the country of Iran. Now, Iran is firing back with a threat that could send gas prices higher than ever.

Prices at the pump already have drivers in pain.

“I can barely afford it now,” said one driver.


“Three dollars a gallon…I mean, five dollars gets you what, a gallon and a half?” said another.

But if Iran follows through on a threat to shut down one of the world’s most important oil routes, analysts say prices here could skyrocket by summer.

“If it gets to $5, that would be hurting the pockets very bad,” said Paul Rozanski, Severna Park.

Threats of five dollars a gallon has Rozanski reconsidering his ride.

“I just like the SUV because of the wintertime, but definitely in the summertime, get another car. Get a Prius or something,” he said.

In just the past week, gas prices have gone up nearly seven cents and there is no sign of them coming down any time soon.

According to AAA, the average for a gallon of regular is $3.25, compared to $3.07 this time last year.

“Iran’s saber-rattling. I think that could have an impact,” said Pete Horrigan.

Horrigan, who’s with the Mid-Atlantic Petroleum Distributors’ Association, says he won’t go as far as five dollars a gallon, but does expect prices to go up.

“We certainly have enough issues going on in the world and in this country that it could certainly be higher,” he said. “We’ve been fortunate in this country because in European countries, they’ve been paying a lot more than that for a long time.”

Many drivers are now hoping that good fortune holds out.

The U.S. penalties against Iran don’t take effect for six months and even then, the president can waive them for national security reasons.

The European Union is also considering new oil sanctions against Iran.

 

[Soul Crusher]

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

Latin oil supplies for U.S. start to dry up
The Washington Times ^ | 2 Jan 2012 | Patrice Hill
Posted on January 3, 2012 6:32:38 PM EST by mandaladon

The political and environmental debates swirling around the proposed $7 billion Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to Texas miss a crucial point, energy analysts say: The Canadian oil is needed to replace fast-dwindling production from two other major suppliers of oil Mexico and Venezuela.

The United States remains the largest consumer of oil in the world, requiring more than 8 million barrels a day of fuel imports to feed its appetite, with nearly half of that coming from oil-rich neighbors in Latin America as recently as 2005.

But oil production south of the border has fallen off dramatically, and Canadian crude in recent years quietly overtook imports from Mexico, Venezuela and even Saudi Arabia to become the most important outside source of oil for the U.S.

The trend toward replacing unstable sources of oil in Latin America and the Middle East with reliable and friendly sources in Canada was heartily welcomed in political circles until the pipeline controversy broke out last year. After trying to delay a decision until after the presidential election, the White House agreed in a compromise with congressional Republicans to determine within the next two months whether to proceed with the pipeline.

Because nearly all of Canada’s production will come from the Alberta tar sands served by the Keystone pipeline, energy analysts say, the pipeline extension will be needed to ensure that promising trend continues and that the U.S. does not go back to relying inordinately on unstable and hostile suppliers. “As traditional supplies of heavy crude from countries such as Mexico and Venezuela decline, Canadian oil sands become more important,” said Lucian Pugliaresi, an analyst with the Energy Policy Research Foundation Inc. Canada ships about 2.5 million barrels a day of crude to the U.S., more than twice as much as Mexico and Venezuela combined.

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

[Soul Crusher]

Oil industry: 'Huge political consequences' if pipeline rejected
By Andrew Restuccia    - 01/04/12 01:16 PM ET
A top oil industry official delivered a clear warning to President Obama Wednesday: approve the Keystone XL pipeline or face “huge political consequences.”

American Petroleum Institute President Jack Gerard urged Obama to quickly approve the pipeline, which would carry oil sands crude from Alberta, Canada, to refineries along the Gulf Coast.

A payroll tax cut package signed into law by Obama last month includes a GOP-backed provision requiring the president to make a final decision on the pipeline within 60 days.

“I think it would be a huge mistake on the part of the president of the United States to deny the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline,” Gerard said during the powerful oil industry trade association’s annual “State of American Energy” event Wednesday.
“Clearly, the Keystone XL pipeline is in the national interest. A determination to decide anything less than that I believe will have huge political consequences.”

Gerard’s comments Wednesday marked the latest attempt by proponents of the pipeline to pressure Obama to approve the project.

Republicans, who secured inclusion of the Keystone provision in the broader payroll tax cut extension package, are also turning up the political heat on Obama to greenlight the project.

House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans unveiled a countdown clock Wednesday that keeps track of the number of days since the president signed the bill requiring a speedy Keystone verdict.

The push by Republicans and the oil industry highlights the increasingly aggressive messaging war over the pipeline, which poses huge political risks – and potential rewards – for both the GOP and the White House.

Obama risks backlash from key union supporters if he rejects the project, but faces the ire of environmental groups if he approves it.

Republicans, meanwhile, stand to score a political victory if Obama OKs the pipeline. But their successful effort to force a decision could backfire if the president rejects the pipeline and pins blame on the GOP for rushing the review.

Obama administration and White House officials have said that the 60-day timeline could force them to reject the project because the State Department will not have enough time to conduct the necessary reviews. The administration announced earlier this year that it would delay a final decision on the pipeline until after the 2012 election in order to review alternative pipeline routes.

Environmental groups – who vehemently oppose the project, citing concerns about oil spills and greenhouse gas emissions – have said Obama has no choice but to reject the pipeline under the GOP-backed Keystone measure.





Obama is banging the war drums w Iran and is going to reject the pipeline in order to get us over 5 dollars a gallon.   

[Soul Crusher]

While Increased Regulations Shut Down Coal Plants, Energy Costs Skyrocket
Capitol Confidential ^ | 1/5/2011 | Tom Gantert



As Michigan’s coal industry has been decimated in part by increased federal environmental regulations, some experts are concerned energy bills will skyrocket.

Consumers Energy announced it was canceling its plans for a clean coal plant near Bay City. Consumers Energy also announced it didn’t anticipate operating its seven coal-fired plants past January 2015.

At the same time it’s shutting down coal plants, Consumers Energy proposed hiking its electric-rates by $147 million this year. The Michigan Public Service Commission limited the increase to $118 million.

Michigan’s coal-burning power plants supplied 60 percent of the electricity used in the state, according to a Michigan Public Service Commission, Department of Labor and Economic Growth 2008 study.

And USA Today recently reported that electric bills have skyrocketed nationwide in the last five years.

Daniel Simmons, spokesman for the Washington, D.C. non-profit Institute for Energy Research (IER), said their research has Michigan losing significant electrical capacity as a result of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations. Simmons said if all the plants projected to close in Michigan were operating at full capacity, for one hour they'd produce 1.5 gigawatts of electricity.

“Closing these older coal-fired power plants will further increase the price of electricity as utilities build new power plants and pass on the costs to electricity consumers,” Simmons wrote in an e-mail. “This means higher electricity prices for Michiganders and the higher prices will make it even more difficult for businesses and manufacturers in Michigan.”

Meanwhile, experts predict large offshore wind turbines could be built in the Great Lakes as quickly as three years.

But offshore wind costs $243 per megawatt hour while coal cost range from $94 to $136 per megawatt hour, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Russ Harding, the environmental analyst for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, said experts are concerned natural gas prices will also increase. Harding said natural gas will be needed to replace the loss of coal production because wind and solar are not dependable forms of energy.

“It takes huge quantities of natural gas to replace coal electrical generation,” Harding said.

A Sierra Club official applauded Consumer Energy’s decision to shut down coal plants in a letter-to-the-editor.

Laurie Tata, a member of the Michigan Sierra Club Political Committee, wrote that “clean, renewable energy sources are our future.” The Sierra Club files a lawsuit against every coal plant in America seeking a permit.

Consumers Energy Spokesman Jeff Holyfield didn’t reply to an e-mail seeking comment. The Sierra Club’s Michigan Director Anne Woiwode didn’t respond to an e-mail seeking comment.

According to an EPA report, U.S. air quality has greatly improved by significant measures since 1970. According to the IER, "Since 1990, nationwide air quality has improved significantly for the six common air pollutants. These six pollutants are ground-level ozone, particle pollution (PM2.5 and PM10), lead, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), and sulfur dioxide (SO2)."



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

[Soul Crusher]

EPA’s Killer MACT
Beforeitsnews.com ^ | Jan 5, 2012 | Emerging Corruption



To understand how the Environmental Protection Agency operates, one must first understand that it lies all the time. Its “estimates” are bogus. Its claims of lives saved are bogus.

It thrives on scare-mongering to a public that is science-challenged, but the science remains and the EPA must be challenged to save the nation from the loss of the energy it needs to function. It must be challenged to unleash the huge economic benefits of energy resources—coal, oil, and natural gas—that can reverse our present economic decline.

The latest outrage is the MACT rule—an acronym for “maximum achievable control technology” intended to reduce mercury emissions and other trace gases. The rule is 1,117 pages long. Its purpose is to shut down coal-fired power plants that generate over fifty percent of all the electricity used daily in the United States of America.

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

[Soul Crusher]

 Print      Close
Senators warn new EPA rules would raise gas prices
By&guy
Published January 13, 2012 | FoxNews.com


ADVERTISEMENT
Senators from both sides of the aisle are warning that looming EPA regulations on gasoline could impose billions of dollars in additional costs on the industry and end up adding up to 25 cents to every gallon of gas. 

The senators, in a letter this week to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, urged the agency to back off the yet-to-be-released regulations. Though the EPA has not yet issued any proposal, they claimed the agency is planning to call for a new requirement to reduce the sulfur content in gasoline. 

Citing the nearly $3.40-a-gallon average price of gas and the state of the economy, the senators said "now is not the time for new regulations that will raise the price of fuel even further." 

They said it would be "expensive" for companies to meet the sulfur targets and cited a study that found it could add up to $17 billion in industry-wide, up-front expenses, in addition to another $13 billion in annual operating costs. 

This could in turn add between 12 and 25 cents to an average gallon of gasoline "depending on the stringency of the proposed rule," they wrote. 

"If the EPA does not proceed carefully with its regulations, the nationwide price of fuel could increase to the further detriment of consumers and businesses," the senators warned. 

The lawmakers on the letter were: Sens. James Inhofe, R-Okla.; Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska; John Barrasso, R-Wyo.; Mary Landrieu, D-La.; David Vitter, R-La.; and Mark Begich, D-Alaska. 

The EPA did not comment on the senators' complaints. 

Asked Friday for a response to the concerns, the EPA said: "EPA is still in the process of developing the proposal." 

An EPA official said publicly in November that the agency was developing the so-called "Tier 3" standards proposal during a House subcommittee hearing. 

Margo Oge, director of the EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality, told lawmakers that the proposal would help the country meet its "clean air goals." 

"Motor vehicles and their fuel are an important source of compounds that form air pollution," she said. 

Oge said reducing sulfur in gasoline would make emission control technology more effective, and "the end result would be cleaner air." 

If the EPA formally issues the proposal, it would probably take more than a year for the agency to review public comments and finalize any plan. 

A Senate Republican aide said the authority to tighten the sulfur standards comes from the Clean Air Act but noted that EPA has the discretion to either impose the standards or not. 

The current sulfur standard is 30 parts per million in gasoline -- that's down from a prior standard of 300 parts per million. The new proposal could bring the standard down to 10 parts per million, according to the senators who wrote to Jackson 

The aide said there was a "bigger benefit" when the standard dropped from 300 to 30 parts per million. But squeezing that down to 10 parts per million, the aide said, might not offer as much bang for the buck. 

"They're extraordinarily expensive relative to the last round of sulfur reductions," the aide told FoxNews.com.

 Print      Close
URL
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/13/senators-warn-new-epa-rules-would-raise-







Great job Obama.   BTW - please tell me how this helps the little guy you Obama turds? 

[Soul Crusher]

Up Next… Obama’s New Energy Regulations Will Put 32 Coal Plants Out of Business
Posted by Jim Hoft on Wednesday, January 18, 2012, 10:39 PM




The Obama Administration killed the Keystone Pipeline project today.

Up next is the coal industry.

New EPA regulations will force 32 coal plants to close their doors putting hundreds of Americans out of work.

The latest move by the EPA will force new regulations on 26 states. The new rules will kill thousands of jobs, cost billions of dollars and increase electricity rates for every family.

New EPA rules will force Western coal-fired power plants to install haze-reducing pollution-control equipment at a cost of $1.6 billion a year. Pictured is the Dave Johnston Power Plant in Glenrock, Wyoming. (IBD)

The AP reported:

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.

No lights will go dark. But the Environmental Protection 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 rules take effect. One rule curbs air pollution in states downwind from dirty power plants. Another sets first standards for mercury and other toxic pollutants from smokestacks.

The effect is greatest in the Midwest and in coal belt states such as Virginia and West Virginia, where dozens of units are likely to shut down.

Take Giles County, where American Electric Power’s Glen Lyn plant is located, and where 44 jobs are on the line.

County Administrator Chris McKlarney worries about the $600,000 tax-revenue hit his $40 million budget will take. But that’s just one concern involving a plant and workers whose community contribution is “hard to quantify.”

“They’ve done so much donation-wise for local causes … And they’re really good people working there,” he said. “They’re coaches in Little League sports, involved in the Parent-Teacher Organization — you lose those kind of people, it’s tough.”

And they’re good jobs — stable, well-paying positions with good benefits in places where such things can be hard to find.

The Obama Administration’s new energy regulations will shut down about 8% of all U.S. generating capacity or the equivalent of wiping out all power generation for Florida and Mississippi.

Marathon Pundit says the new regulations are cold-blooded.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/01/up-next-obamas-new-energy-regulations-will-put-32-coal-plants-out-of-business













Great damn job obamabots!!!!   Killing off the nation one step at a time. 

[Soul Crusher]

Its a tough time for hundreds of coal miners across southwest Virginia.
That's because they're getting pink slips from A & G Coal, which is owned by Southern Coal Company.
Mark Whooten is a spokesman for Southern Coal. He told News 5 who made the decision. "These layoffs are a decision by our corporate headquarters. They are market driven due to metallurgical coal market fluctuating violently at the present time."
The company wouldn't tell us how many jobs they have cut, but we do know its sizeable according to the manager of the local employment office, Gary Hale. "On Monday we saw approximately about 92 folks that visited the office."
Workers can turn to the employment office's Resource Center, where they can simultaneously file for their unemployment while beginning the search for a new job.
I spoke with several miners today.
None wanted to go on camera for fear of not being re-hired, when the company begins hiring again.

While the company calls them temporary layoffs, one miner spoke to us by phone and told us no one gave him any firm idea how long it might last. "The superintendent that gave the layoff, he said it could be 2 to 3, 4 weeks, maybe months, maybe longer."

All the company could tell us was that the workers would be hired back as son as the market for metallurgical coal bounces back.

Certainly not soon enough for hundreds of miners and their families.
EmailPrint


Copyright 2012 WCYB. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

[Soul Crusher]

Chevron's Genesis platform is shown in the Gulf of Mexico. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer)
A Louisiana economic development group says federal permitting for deep-water drilling continues to fall well below levels prior to the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill, causing area businesses to lay off workers and relocate away from the Gulf Coast.

In a report released last week, the Greater New Orleans, Inc. economic alliance studied the rate of federal permitting for offshore activity since the moratorium on deep-water drilling was lifted in October 2010.

The group found that federal regulators have approved about three deep-water drilling permits per month since the moratorium ended, down from six permit approvals per month prior to the spill.

The Deepwater Horizon rig explosion in April 2010 killed 11 people and unleashed the largest offshore oil spill in U.S. history. In its wake, the feds clamped down on offshore oil activity, instituting a six-month moratorium on deep-water drilling.

The study found that permit approval took an average 109 days in 2011, compared to 61 days during the five years prior. The percentage of drilling plans approved fell to 34 percent in 2011, from an average 73 percent.

In the group’s survey of 99 companies, 49 percent said they had laid off workers in response to the moratorium, including engineers, office staff, riggers and captains. About 38 percent said they reduced employee hours or salaries. The average annual revenue for the responding companies fell from $136.5 million before the spill to $104.5 million today.

Of the respondents, 46 percent said they had moved all or part of their operations away from the Gulf of Mexico as a result of the moratorium.

However, the report noted that businesses negatively affected by the moratorium were more likely to respond to the survey, possibly causing skewed results.

Across Louisiana, the oil and gas extraction industry didn’t shed workers, remaining at about 8,500 employees before and after the moratorium, according to the report. The number of workers in supporting industries rose 6 percent, from 37,718 immediately before the oil spill to 39,840 after the moratorium was lifted.

The study attributed the employment growth to greater onshore oil drilling in the state’s shale gas areas.

“Several survey respondents mentioned hiring new workers for shale work,” the report noted. “The Haynesville Shale activity in North Louisiana may have mitigated some of the employment decreases resulting from decreased activity in the Gulf of Mexico.”

Greater New Orleans, Inc. is an economic development alliance that promotes the interests of businesses in New Orleans’ 10-parish area.

[Soul Crusher]

Average U.S. gas prices hover at record-high levels (but Obama still won't approve a pipeline)
LA Times ^ | 2/7/2012 | By Ronald D. White
Posted on February 7, 2012 6:42:07 AM EST by tobyhill

Last month turned out to be the most expensive January ever at U.S. gasoline pumps, boosted by growing economic strength.

January is typically a month of falling gasoline prices because fuel demand falters in the slower travel weeks that follow the year-end holidays.

In January, retail gasoline prices averaged $3.37 a gallon, according to the Oil Price Information Service, a private fuel information service. That compared with the previous record average for the month of $3.095 a gallon, set last year. In 2010, January gasoline prices averaged just $2.71 a gallon.

The new record meant more pain in Americans' budgets. A typical household, burning about 50 gallons of gasoline a month, paid about $168.50 for that fuel in January, or $33 more than in January 2010.

An economic pickup is behind some of the price appreciation, analysts said.

Increased demand for oil has helped increase crude prices, leaving the U.S. benchmark grade hovering around $100 a barrel in January, up $10 to $15 from year-earlier prices. At the same time, worldwide thirst for diesel, the fuel of industry, has caused U.S. refiners to export large amounts of diesel and therefore to produce less gasoline for U.S. motorists.

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





No drilling. 

No refineries.

No pipeline.   

No approval of leases.   

Devalue the dollar.   



Bingo - ghetto POFSPOTUS gets his wish.

[Soul Crusher]

Thanks Barack… 3 West Virginia Coal Plants to Close
Gateway Pundit ^ | February 11,2012 | Jim Hoft


http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/02/thanks-barack-3-west-virginia-coal-plants-to-close



Three West Virginia coal plants just announced they will close this year. Metro News reported:

Ohio based FirstEnergy Corporation announces it will close three coal fired power plants in West Virginia by this fall. The closings come directly from the impact of new federal EPA regulations.

The plants to close are Albright Power Station, Willow Island Power Station, and the Rivesville Power Station. The company says 105 employees will be directly impacted.

The three plants produce 660 megawatts and about 3-percent of FirstEnergy’s total generation. In recent years, the plants served as “peaking facilities” and generated power during times of peak demand for power.

The plants operated under subsidiary Monongahela Power. Mon Power recently finished a study of unscrubbed coal fired plants in the system to determine the potential impact of the most recent environmental regulations from EPA. Company officials determined the EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) made it unfeasible to retrofit or continue operating the three plants.

“The high cost to implement MATS and other environmental rules is the reason these Mon Power plants are being retired,” said James R. Haney, regional president of Mon Power and president of West Virginia Operations for FirstEnergy.


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

[Soul Crusher]

[ Invalid YouTube link ]

[Soul Crusher]

FirstEnergy closing 6 coal-fired power plants

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_162-57366909/firstenergy-closing-6-coal-fired-power-plants



The new standards are designed to reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic pollution from coal- and oil-fired power plants. An Associated Press survey found that the changes were likely to bring the mothballing of dozens of units in the Midwest and in the coal belt — Kentucky, West Virginia and Virginia.

The Obama administration was under court order to issue a new rule, after a court threw out an attempt by the Bush administration to exempt power plants from controls for toxic air pollution.

FirstEnergy said its decision would directly affect 529 employees. Some of them could end up transferring to other FirstEnergy facilities and work sites, while others could take advantage of a retirement benefit being offered to employees 55 years and older, the company said.

[Soul Crusher]

Obama Proposes Nearly $90 Billion in Tax Hikes on Energy Producers
ATR ^ | 2012-02-13 | Christopher Prandoni


Obama Energy Tax Proposals


The President’s FY 2013 budget contains billions in tax increase on energy production and consumption. These taxes will result in higher prices at the pump, increased utility bills, and fewer American jobs as companies flee the U.S. and companies cannot recover their investments. Below is a breakdown of energy taxes Obama put forth in his 2013-2022 budget:

[HTML Chart was over 300 words so I could not carry it over.]

ATR Recommendations
Congress should reject these new tax increases and move to rapidly increase access to domestic energy resources in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, part of the Rocky Mountains, the Atlantic and Pacific Outer Continental Shelves, and ANWR. Increased access would:

Create 1 million direct and indirect jobs by 2018 and over 1.4 million by 2030
Bring an additional 1.27 million barrels of oil equivalents per day online by 2015 and 10.4 million barrels per day by 2030
Raise over $800 billion in cumulative government revenue by 2030
Read more: http://www.atr.org/obama-proposes-nearly-billion-tax-hikes-a6729#ixzz1mNgDQtEi


(Excerpt) Read more at atr.org ...

[Soul Crusher]

Obama Winning His War on Coal
February 12, 2012
The Intelligencer / Wheeling News-Register



http://www.news-register.net/page/content.detail/id/565679/Obama-Winning-His-War-on-Coal.html



 
Time may already have run out for Americans to defeat President Barack Obama in his war against the coal industry. Many utility companies already have run up the white flag.

Before millions of people even knew about the war on coal, decisions were made that will send their utility bills skyrocketing. Some of those choices are irreversible.

A few weeks ago it was revealed at least 32 coal-fired power plants in 12 states, including West Virginia and Ohio, would be closed so utility companies could comply with the Obama administration's air pollution regulations. On the list was the Kammer Plant near Moundsville.

Last week FirstEnergy announced it would close three West Virginia power plants later this year, along with six in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Maryland, for the same reason.

Environmental Protection Agency officials are pressing utilities to replace 25 percent of their coal-fired generating capacity by 2014. That may not be possible, but it is an indication Obama's EPA is attempting to wreck the coal industry before anyone can stop it.

A few days ago, American Electric Power President and Chief Executive Officer Nick Akins said complying with EPA mandates will drive power costs up by at least 10-25 percent. AEP serves 5.3 million customers in 11 states.

On the heels of all that came a disturbing report from the North American Electric Reliability Corp., which works to ensure the nation's power grid is fed by enough generating plants to avoid interruptions in service. EPA regulations "are shown to be the number one risk to reliability over the next one to five years," the NAERC reported.

It may already be too late to save some coal-fired power plants. Clearly, time is short to prevent a crisis - and that is not too strong a word. Members of Congress, led by courageous West Virginians such as Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. and U.S. Rep. David McKinley, R-W.Va., have fought the good fight on the issue for many months. It's time for other lawmakers to stand up for their constituents and join in the fight.

[Soul Crusher]

Auto dealers warn fuel efficiency proposal will price out millions of buyers
Fox News ^ | 2/15/2012 | Judson Berger
Posted on February 15, 2012 8:45:21 PM EST by tobyhill

American auto dealers are pushing back on proposed fuel economy rules that, they claim, would price out millions of buyers from the new-car market, potentially jeopardizing the environmental benefits of the program and the resurgent auto industry itself.

Throughout the Obama administration's campaign to jack up fuel efficiency, officials claimed that for consumers, the upgrades would pay for themselves. Sure, buyers would pay more for a new vehicle off the lot, but they'd make up that cost in fuel savings in just a few years.

But the changes from two sets of fuel efficiency standards could add $3,000 to the price of a new car by 2025. And the National Automobile Dealers Association argues that if buyers can't qualify for a loan up front, the rest is fantasy. Cash-strapped buyers instead will go for gas-guzzling used cars or put off buying another car altogether, leaving the fuel-efficient marvels parked in the lots of auto dealers across the country.

"Where's the environmental savings ... if you can't get the older cars off of the road?" NADA spokesman Bailey Wood said.

The NADA estimates that by 2025, 6.8 million drivers will no longer qualify for a new-car loan if the proposed fuel efficiency standards go into effect.

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

[Soul Crusher]

API Warns Of Upcoming 'tsunami' Of EPA Regulations For Refineries
Oil and Gas Online ^ | February 15, 2012
Posted on February 16, 2012 5:12:08 PM EST by Oldeconomybuyer

The American Petroleum Institute Director of Regulatory and Scientific Affairs Howard Feldman warned of a "veritable tsunami" of new EPA air regulations for refineries that could "put some refineries out of business, diminish U.S. fuel manufacturing capacity, and increase our reliance on imported fuels" recently in a conference call with reporters:

"The president himself has called on federal agencies to take into account the impact of regulations on jobs and the economy," Feldman said. "EPA should follow through by ensuring that their regulatory proposals are necessary, practical, and fair."

Four U.S. refineries closed last year, according to Feldman. He said that significant new compliance costs on top of what existing regulations have imposed would make a difficult operating environment for refineries even more challenging.

"Given that the Clean Air Act was simply not designed to address greenhouse gases, if EPA is going to proceed, it is critical that the process be open and transparent," Feldman said.

Feldman said that step III of EPA's tailoring rule is not needed at this time and should be pulled back. He also called for EPA to accommodate gas-burning facilities and make allowances for refineries located on islands in its upcoming BoilerMACT rule.

He called on EPA not issue a Tier 3 vehicle emission proposal before there is "a full airing of the impacts, costs and benefits of further reductions of sulfur and vapor pressure in gasoline."

New Tier 3 requirements could boost the cost of making gasoline by up to 25 cents per gallon, close up to seven U.S. refineries, and actually increase carbon dioxide emissions, according to a study by Baker and O'Brien.

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

[Soul Crusher]

Skip to comments.

Obama Likes High Gasoline Prices, But Won't Admit It
IBD Editorial ^ | February 16, 2012
Posted on February 16, 2012 8:55:33 PM EST by Kaslin

Energy Policy: If gasoline prices so far are any indication, the pain at the pump will be severe this year. But if you think President Obama cares, you're wrong. If anything, he's secretly cheering it on.

Already, average pump prices have topped $3.50 a gallon, leading some experts to think they could reach an all-time high of $5 by the summer.

So what's Obama's response? He treats it like a badge of honor, saying this week that "gas prices are on the rise again because as the economy strengthens, global demand for oil increases."

But what else can he say?

During his presidential campaign, Obama admitted he didn't have a problem with sky-high gasoline prices, he just "would have preferred a gradual adjustment."

His choice for energy secretary, Steven Chu, certainly doesn't mind them. Before joining the administration he said that "somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe."

And last year, Chu claimed "the price of gasoline over the long haul should be expected to go up."

At the same time, Obama has repeatedly feigned an inability to do anything about oil prices. Last April, he said: "I'm just going to be honest with you. There's not much we can do next week or two weeks from now."

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

[Soul Crusher]

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

GenOn to shut 7 U.S. Mid-Atlantic coal power plants
Reuters ^ | 2/29/12 | Scott DiSavino
Posted on March 1, 2012 1:22:23 AM EST by Nachum

U.S. power generator GenOn Energy Inc on Wednesday said it would deactivate 3,140 megawatts of mostly coal-fired generating capacity in Pennsylvania, Ohio and New Jersey by 2015 due to more stringent federal environmental regulations. Over the past few years, energy companies have announced the shutdown or planned retirement of more than 30,000 megawatts (MW) of coal-fired generation due to proposed more stringent federal environmental regulations, weak power market conditions and record switching from coal to natural gas-fired generators as gas prices hold near 10-year lows.

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

[Soul Crusher]

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

It's Happening: 5 Coal-Fired Power Plants Shutting Down
Townhall.com ^ | March 1, 2012 | Erika Johnson
Posted on March 1, 2012 9:58:13 PM EST by Kaslin

At the close of 2012, the EPA dictated a politically calculated--oops, I mean, for the sake of the public welfare, issued a--huge new stack of emissions regulations aiming to force coal-fired power plant operators to choose between installing pollution control equipment, switching to cleaner natural gas, or shutting down their plants. Which is good, because in 2008, President Obama did promise to bankrupt the coal industry... so, that's at least one promise he's kept, right?

Edison International (EIX) plans to shut down at least two aging coal-fired power plants in what could be a growing wave of retirements as low natural-gas and electricity prices and stricter pollution rules make many of these facilities unprofitable.

Edison will shut down its two Chicago coal-fired power plants -- one this year and one by 2014 -- rather than install pollution-control equipment to comply with state pollution limits, the company said. Edison said it also would likely shut down a third coal plant in Waukegan, Ill., and possibly others. ...

Companies are increasingly announcing plans to shut down aging coal plants as the cost of installing pollution-control equipment can exceed the value of the plant.

The Sierra Club estimates that these regulations are preventing a lot of premature deaths (I'm not sure how they think they know that), but Sen. Pat Toomey is not pleased:

But Sen. Pat Toomey, a Republican, said that as many as 315 people could lose their jobs.

"I am dismayed by the news that hundreds of Pennsylvanians will lose their jobs because of this impending wave of federal regulations. While I fully support sensible, existing power plant regulations to protect our air, the cumulative effect of these new rules, which are some of the costliest in the EPA's history, is overwhelming."

And while the Obama administration can certainly hope and dream that the ensuing energy vacuum will be filled by the bounteous sources of wind, solar, and other greenie endeavors, you can bet that more 'necessarily skyrocketing' electricity prices are what's for dinner.

[Soul Crusher]

Utilities announce closure of 10 aging power plants in Midwest, East
The Washington Post ^
Posted on March 3, 2012 2:31:59 AM EST by matt04

Two utility companies announced the closure of 10 aging U.S. power plants Wednesday, a move environmental groups hailed as a major victory even as critics warned it could raise the price of electricity.

Pedro Pizarro, president of Midwest Generation’s parent company, Edison Mission Group, issued a statement saying that in light of environmental rules being phased in over the next three years, “unfortunately, conditions in the wholesale power market simply do not give us a path for continuing to invest in further retrofits at these two facilities.”

...

GenOn Energy, meanwhile, cited the same reason as it announced it will deactivate eight power plants — seven fired by coal and one by natural gas — between June 2012 and May 2015.

In its announcement, GenOn outlined a schedule for closing 3,140 megawatts of generation capacity in Ohio, Pennsylvania and New Jersey “because forecasted returns on investments necessary to comply with environmental regulations are insufficient.”

...

The closing of the Fisk and Crawford plants, in operation since 1968 and 1958, respectively, marks a major win for anti-coal activists and their allies in elected office. Last week, Emanuel warned Midwest Generation that it had a week to broker a deal on curbing pollution from the plants or face the prospect of a city council ordinance that would force the company to shut them down within two years.

Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, called the closures “a giant leap in our work to move America beyond coal.”

“This agreement means a cleaner, healthier environment for the communities around these coal plants,” said NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous. “For too long, Fisk and Crawford have been literally choking some of Chicago’s most diverse neighborhoods, and some of its poorest.”

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

[Soul Crusher]

Coal hurting Obama’s chances in swing states (They need jobs too, you know)
Hotair ^ | 03/07/2012 | Jazz Shaw


Posted on Wednesday, March 07, 2012 1:20:00 PM by SeekAndFind

Hot Air Memo to GOP:

Dear Republicans,

When you finish up letting the Democrats lead you around by the nose over things like which radio show host said what about who and where to buy the cheapest birth control pills, you might want to stop by some of the Rust Belt swing states and ask the folks there how things are going. In particular, check in with them in terms of how much it will be costing each voter this summer to keep the lights turned on and whether or not the workers at a number of coal fired power plants know where to go file for unemployment.

Best Regards,

Jazz

As gasoline prices continue to rise and keep the heat on President Obama’s energy policies, critics also are accusing the president of shifting support away from the coal industry, a major source of fuel and jobs in several battleground states, including Colorado, Michigan and Ohio.

Lawmakers on both sides of the partisan aisle say Obama administration environmental regulations aimed at cutting greenhouse gas emissionsare poised to hit jobs and consumers harder than the Keystone XL decision at the same time the president seems to have abandoned his stated support for the coal industry and clean-coal technology…

In late February, a bipartisan group of 219 members of Congress led by Reps. Ed Whitfield, Kentucky Republican, and John Barrow, Georgia Democrat, sent a letter to the Office of Management and Budget calling for a stop to the EPA’s greenhouse gas rule-making.

“Affordable, reliable electricity is critical to keeping and growing jobs in the United States, and such a standard will likely drive up energy prices and threaten domestic jobs,” they wrote. “Forcing a transition to commercially unproven technologies could send thousands of jobs overseas and raise electricity rates on families and seniors at a time when the nation can least afford it.”

We’re talking about an estimated 180,000 jobs between direct power plant employment and related support industry activity. We’re also looking at a hit to the power grid amounting to 12% of the electricity we generate. As those plants go offline, something is going to have to take up the slack, and even three new nuclear power plants won’t manage it. (Not to mention they won’t be on line for at least four years, if not longer.)

I know this may seem like dry, boring stuff to some of you busy people in Washington, DC. It’s just not one of those sexy, exciting topics that get you face time on the Sunday morning shows. But if you want to impress the people in some of the most critical states in the fall battle, try keeping them employed and stopping their utility bills from going through the roof. What a novel idea, eh?

[Soul Crusher]

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

Enviros Whack 100 Coal-Fired Plants
Townhall.com ^ | March 11, 2012 | Marita Noon
Posted on March 11, 2012 11:44:29 AM EDT by Kaslin

While we are all squawking about high gasoline prices, there is an energy misdirection going on.

Sabre rattling by Iran has security specialists sitting on the edge of their seats and speculators seeing the resulting reduced-fuel future. Short of a quick military strike that would squelch Iran’s threats, there is little that America can do to stem the rise of the global commodity costs—though history tells us an announcement of increased drilling in the US would have a positive impact.

While we are all looking at gas prices, there is another dramatic energy price increase going on that is totally optional; one that is within the President’s power to completely reverse.

Coal-fueled electricity generation is the lowest cost. Yet, due to cost-increasing regulations, coal-fueled power plants are being shut down at an alarming rate—killing jobs, raising rates, and putting the reliability of the electrical grid at risk.

Environmental groups are cheering, while local governments are left to grapple with the lost tax revenue. On February 29, Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, penned a post celebrating the 100th closure of a coal-fueled power plant: Chicago’s Crawford plant. He also boasts that the group’s efforts have prevented 166 new coal-fueled power plants.

The closure of two units at the Salem Harbor Station in Massachusetts could halve the plant’s workforce. Salem Harbor Station is also the city’s biggest taxpayer. Mayor Kim Driscoll addressed the problem of the loss of the $4.75 million tax bill: “It's a big chunk of change when you're looking at we still have the same number of kids in school, we still have the same number of calls for police and fire, we have the same number of parks and resources that need to be maintained and kept up.”

In Chamois, Mo., jobs at the power plant are “the best thing going.” Mayor Jim Wright doesn’t want to see the Central Electric Power Plant shut down. He says: “Coal’s coal. If you are going to dig it up and ship it to China, you might as well burn it right here.”

Power plants throughout the country are being closed because of onerous regulations being mandated by the EPA. The North American Electric Reliability Corporation and power plant operators are pressing the Obama administration to give companies more time to comply with the rules to avoid shutting down too many power plants at one time. The regulations and the timeline to meet them make it uneconomic to upgrade the older units. 

In response to EPA regulations proposed in October, Arizona Public Service Company announced in November that it would close three of the five units at the Four Corners Generating Station in Farmington, NM. Mark Schiavoni, senior vice president of Fossil Generation, said: “These rules would present a major economic challenge for continued operation.”

Across the highway is the San Juan Generating Station where the EPA’s plans to reduce emissions and increase visibility is threatening more closures. Not only are the EPA regulations aggressive, they are also invasive. The New Mexico Environment Department has a plan that will meet the EPA requirements of the Clean Air Act at a cost of $77 million. But the EPA wants a specific technology that will cost the ratepayers ten times more! The EPA’s plan will likely force the closure of the two older units at the San Juan Generating Station.

The Public Utility Company of New Mexico (PNM) is part owner of the San Juan plant. PNM and the State of New Mexico are appealing the EPA’s decision. They contend that the EPA did not properly consider the state plan proposing the alternative technology that would cost less but achieve similar improvements. They’ve asked the EPA to put a hold on the decision, and they’ve filed a stay that would delay implementation of the regulations while the court considers the appeals. PNM could have to spend millions on planning and design when the more-costly regulation could be ruled against in favor of the lower-cost option.

On March 2, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver denied the request to put the new regulations on hold while the appeal is being considered. The EPA could have granted the stay, but they are not interested in cooperation. The San Juan plant will likely go the way of the Four Corners plant across the highway. Unit closures at both plants will cut more than half of the current generation and hundreds of jobs. The rate payers will shoulder the costs. Environmental groups are pleased with the court’s decision.

The units that could be retired early, due to the regulations, have not yet been fully depreciated. I picture negotiations taking place between the key players—the Public Regulatory Commission, the environmentalists, and PNM—in a smoke-filled room (note: the ratepayers will not have a seat at the table). PNM could agree to bulldoze the units—which the environmentalist want—but it will cost. PNM will need to offset the cost of early retirement through rate increases.

Environmental groups say that cost claims are “hype”—though they admit that the retrofits required by the EPA will result in rate increases. They believe the consumers have been “getting a free ride because the cost of electricity from these plants is artificially low.” Additionally they believe that costs will be less than predicted. Not likely. How often do government projects come in under budget?

As the President did with the ozone rules in September, he could instruct EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to allow more time or to approve the state’s plan. He could delay the implementation of all of the aggressive regulations for a few years—at least until the economy improves. Many of the coal-fueled units in question are fifty-plus years old.  They’ve already had scrubbers and other pollution reduction retrofits. They are running far cleaner than the original designs. Allowing them to operate for another few years—or for the rest of their useful lives—will not greatly impact long-term emission reductions, but it could provide significant benefits to the economy.

With the Administration’s permission, the environmentalists have a stranglehold on American energy policy. They are not apt to delay implementation. The EPA is pushing these regulations now because if President Obama does not get reelected, the Republican president will delay indefinitely or repeal the regulations altogether. This is their moment.

Unlike oil, electricity is not a global commodity. It is used close to the generation source. Electricity is as essential to a robust American economy as is oil/gasoline. Yet, while we are in the midst of the worst economic crisis of our lifetime, the Administration has made choices that will have an immediate impact on electricity prices. The one, two punch of high gas prices and increasing electricity costs are likely to knock out the struggling economy.

[Soul Crusher]

The Town EPA Says Must Close

"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


http://thedailyaccount.com/The-Town-EPA-Says-Must-Close.html

For once President Barack Obama has kept a campaign promise.

The town of Craig, CO with a population of 10,000 is dependent on the energy business that powers over 50 percent of Craig, Colorado’s economy, and makes the small town, which is home to one of the largest coal-fired power plants in the nation, a microcosm of the fight over green energy mandates versus traditional fuel sources. Craig Station is a key base load resource providing a total of 655 megawatts of relatively low-cost, reliable generation. Operated by Tri-State, approximately 300 people work at the 1,311-megawatt plant. The onslaught of federal and state regulations on coal energy is causing this town economic hardship. Many do not realize that policy has direct consequences on individual lives

The Local Craig industries are dependent on the coal plant, having stayed afloat through the recession because of the growing need for energy. Alternative energy companies aim to capitalize on that growing energy market, and renewable energy mandates from the state government help the green energy industry’s case by forcing companies to diversify the sources they produce their power from.

The coal plant in Craig complies with strict environmental regulations set by both the state and federal environmental protection agencies. Water vapor from the plant passes through a scrubbing system that removes 90 percent of chemicals and another filter washes out 99 percent of the ash. Nevertheless, despite a record of EPA compliance, the Craig power plant might be negatively impacted by renewable energy mandates that Colorado and nineteen other state legislatures have adopted — state law mandates that 30 percent of energy generated in the state comes from renewable sources by 2020. That is a problem for Craig, where coal is by far the greatest employer.

This mandate was established by left wing, tree-hugging bureaucrats without any thought to doable technology. We are well aware renewable energy (Wind & Solar) are a long way away from being reliable not to mention expensive. The EPA mandate makes no sense on many levels, but the bureaucrat’s ideology blinds them.

                                                   Let’s take a look at Craig Colorado

 
 

With a growing demand for energy, and the assumption the mandates will stay in force, leaves us with two very serious problems. First, since renewable energy is unreliable we could incur intermittent power disruptions or blackouts. Second, the cost is going to necessarily skyrocket. Both of these need not happen.

Thirty two coal-fired power plants in a dozen states will be forced to shut down because of the new federal air pollution regulations and the renewable energy mandates. This will amount to 33 Gigawatts taken off line with an estimated job loss of 150,000 per year from 2012 to 2020.



As you saw from the video, the job loss has already started. It has started in Craig Colorado and will spread throughout the country. This is especially disturbing in light of the high unemployment in the United States. This is horrible policy. Unfortunately this administration is plowing forward, common sense be damned. This administration, which gave the nod to the EPA, doesn’t care about the people in Craig or you.

Other countries have pursued alternative energy policies with little success. Three European examples should make Americans think twice about renewable energy mandates: Denmark maintains the highest energy prices in Europe, where the price of electricity is “three times that of the U.S;” Germany isn’t far behind, as “renewable subsidies in Europe were lavish and now they are being rolled back because they are not sustainable;” and Spain represents the greatest model for concern, as IER found “that for every green job created, the economy lost 2.2 jobs as an opportunity cost.”


Frank and Kerrie Moe of Craig, Colorado are two small business owners fighting for economic survival because new federal and state regulations on energy production and electricity generation have threatened the livelihood of the entire community they live in.

The twist to this story is that Frank and Kerrie Moe do not work in the energy business. Do You?

[Soul Crusher]

Judge hits EPA for axing coal permit
By: Erica Martinson
March 23, 2012 05:41 PM EDT

A federal judge slammed an Obama administration gambit to revoke mountaintop mining permits Friday, saying the EPA invented authority where there was none.

“EPA resorts to magical thinking” to justify nullifying permits issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for Arch Coal Inc.’s Mingo Logan mine in West Virginia, wrote U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson in Washington, D.C.

Berman Jackson said the EPA’s effort to revoke permits already issued by the Army Corps lacked the backing of any statutory provision or regulation. “It posits a scenario involving the automatic self-destruction of a written permit issued by an entirely separate federal agency after years of study and consideration,” the opinion says.

“Poof! Not only is this nonrevocation revocation logistically complicated,” the ruling said, but it also robs industry of the only way they can possibly measure compliance with the Clean Water Act — a permit.

EPA ignored the effect that granting itself the right to revoke Army Corps permits could cause uncertainty and financial harm to industries dependent on capital credit for projects involving waterways.

“EPA brushed these objections away by characterizing them as hyperbole,” the judge wrote. “Even if the gloomy prophesies are somewhat overstated,” the concerns are real, she said.

Berman called the EPA’s interpretation of the Clean Water Act — which she separately lambasts for being poorly written — “illogical and impractical.”

Arch Coal spokeswoman Kim Link said the company is happy with the ruling. “We’re pleased the district court has ruled in our favor — confirming that our Spruce No. 1 permit remains valid,” Link said.

Environmental groups were dismayed with the ruling.

“We are deeply disappointed and concerned about the effect of today’s court ruling because mountaintop removal mining has already caused widespread and extreme destruction to the mountains, waters, and communities of Appalachia,” said a coalition of environmental groups in a statement Friday. “The Spruce No. 1 Mine permit, in particular, was one of the largest mountaintop removal permits ever proposed in Appalachia, and it is located in an area of West Virginia that has already been devastated by several large mountaintop removal mines.”

“We urge the EPA to appeal today’s ruling and continue to exercise its full authority under the Clean Water Act to protect waterways and communities,” the environmentalists said.

EPA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

This article first appeared on POLITICO Pro at 5:37 p.m. on March 23, 2012.