[Newt explains to Obama that you DRILL for natural gas] Newt to Obama: This is What a Drilling Platform Looks Like
Posted on 04/16/2012 12:04:41 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Not really.
"It was all I could do not to jump up and down and yell 'I told you so! I told you so!'" said Linda Webb, an outspoken opponent of Perrin Ranch. "But we were a little more restrained than that."
APS should have sued.
Where does the state get the power to tell an investor owned company how to run their business?
Sounds like an unconstitutional law to me.
Every time some legislature comes out with this crap it should be sued all the way to the USSC. The USSC should be drowning in these suits.
[”Right now, it looks like solar — photovoltaic — is the lowest-cost resource,” said Gordon Samuel, who plans future energy supplies at APS.]
Gordon needs to check out coal. He might be pleasantly surprised.
[Newt explains to Obama that you DRILL for natural gas] Newt to Obama: This is What a Drilling Platform Looks Like
Thanks for the link. First time I’ve seen this.
Hmmm - sounds like these Wind Power numbers, were, um,
.
.
.
...UNEXPECTED.
Google: “14000 wind turbines” and this is what you get!
“The US experience with wind farms has left over 14,000 wind turbines abandoned and slowly decaying, in most instances the turbines are just left as symbols of a dying Climate Religion, nowhere have the Green Environmentalists appeared to clear up their mess or even complain about the abandoned wind farms.” It’s simple, No subsides, no wind farms.
"APS should have sued. Where does the state get the power to tell an investor owned company how to run their business?"
This is now a state by state, nation-wide requirement (the Department of Energy and EPA regulations have demanded compliance].
_____________________________________
Feb 16, 2010: Texas Takes Legal Action Against Federal Government Over EPA CO2 Mandates "Gov. Rick Perry, Attorney General Greg Abbott and Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples today announced that the state is taking legal action in the U.S. Court of Appeals challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) endangerment finding for greenhouse gases.
“Texas is aggressively seeking its future in alternative energy through incentives and innovation, not mandates and overreaching regulation,” Gov. Perry said. “The EPA’s misguided plan paints a big target on the backs of Texas agriculture and energy producers and the hundreds of thousands of Texans they employ. This legal action is being taken to protect the Texas economy and the jobs that go with it, as well as defend Texas’ freedom to continue our successful environmental strategies free from federal overreach.”
The state has filed a Petition for Review with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and will also file a Petition for Reconsideration with the Environmental Protection Agency, asking the administrator to review her decision. The state’s legal action indicates EPA’s Endangerment Finding is legally unsupported because the agency outsourced its scientific assessment to the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which has been discredited by evidence of key scientists’ lack of objectivity, coordinated efforts to hide flaws in their research, attempts to keep contravening evidence out of IPCC reports and violation of freedom of information laws."......
Sept 29, 2011: Texas led more than a dozen states in suing the EPA
March 27, 2012: Texas wins latest round with EPA in federal court "AN ANTONIO (AP) — A federal appeals court scolded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday for rejecting a series of state pollution control projects in Texas that federal regulators said failed to satisfy requirements of the Clean Air Act.
The ruling from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stopped short of ordering the EPA to accept the previously rejected Texas measures. Yet the three-judge panel directed the agency to take another look at the state's regulations and issue a quick decision.
At issue are state permits that govern pollution control projects at coal plants and energy producers in Texas. The EPA must sign off on the permit standards, but Judge Jennifer Elrod condemned the agency for waiting four years before taking action. The statutory deadline is 18 months.
"Because the EPA waited until more than three years after the statutory deadline to act on Texas's submission, we order the EPA to reconsider it expeditiously," Elrod wrote.".....
B-U-M-P!
“Shocked!”
The order should have been to approve Texas’s submission. It is unreasonable to expect industry to wait until some bureaucrat decides to get off his bum and do his job before they pursue a project. If it is statutory deadline either you have met that deadline or you have not. Progress waits for no man.
It’s an amazing scam and power grab — but it keeps a lot of lawyers busy and well fed and a lot of Americans out of work and struggling (as well as the entire U.S. economy).
There removal will provide income for a lawyer someday. Perhaps years of income.
As Jimi Hendrix may have put it: “And the wind cries bankrupt…” There is money in cannibalizing parts and metal, but hopefully no money for lawyers!
My son-in-law in Denmark says that Wind Farms are being used to generate Hydrogen for cars since there are a good number of Fuel Cell cars out there.
A double loser.
I can’t believe it, but people are still pushing to get these wind farms built in the Great Lakes.
The hell it is. Look at your figures again, but this time with no subsidies, and use real-world generation figures rather than label figures.
What would happen if Texas simply ignored the EPA?
I doubt the Feds. would send in troops and I believe I read that Texas is electrical power independent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.