Skip to comments.EPA rules biomass power production too dirty to continue
Posted on 08/05/2010 7:48:43 AM PDT by pabianice
Per Fox, the EPA (i.e. ObamaReidPelosi) has ruled that energy from biomass (trees) is too dirty in producing too much CO2 and thus must pay huge carbon taxes or end. A bewildered biomass company CEO on camera said that he didn't understand but that such a tax would end all biomass energy production since it would be unprofitable.
It is clear that Obama's tree-humpers (see video of lunatics in forest "screaming for the trees that have no voices themselves to protest their cutting-down") have succeeded in basically ending tree cutting via another new set of lies from this administration. Folks, Obama has no intention of stopping his insane policies; he's just doubling down.
There you go again! Don't confuse us with facts...
When the Socialists are thrown out, the first agency to be abolished must be the EPA. We can get Education and Energy next.
You are right in what you say,
and I would go further to amend it a bit to say
their policy is no energy for YOU, but for them, different rules apply.
Not only do they seek to control and oppress everyone,
they want there to be a DIFFERENCE between the “elite” and the “masses”
lifestyles. They want a HUGE difference. They’re currently not happy that individuals can have a near equivalent lifestyle to theirs.
pit ANY two or more groups against each other
agitate to the point of conflict
step in with an iron fist of tyranny when conflict breaks out, because it will be welcomed.
Have you ever noticed that starvation happens mostly in Socialist countries? EVERYTHING they do is a deliberate work against survival.
The EPA is an unecessary waste of money.
People today are far more aware and educated about “real” pollution than they were in the 40s and 50s.
Yes, he was "bewildered" when he bought in to the "green" movement and tried to profit from it. What a fool for trying to suck up to the government. Serves him right.
Not only does this kill ‘methenal’production, but it opens the door to banning wood burning furnaces and, in time, fireplaces. Brave new world
>>The only “green” energy that is cost
>>effective is too dirty?
Well now we wouldn’t want the serfs staying warm... and reading the Declaration of Independence by the light of burning wood, harvested on their own property, would we?
They might get the idea they can survive without being the subjugated property of the hive’s owners.
Can’t have that - the “special” relationship must continue.
How about everyone in D.C.
While this may be true, I’ll have to see the actual EPA report to believe it.
I call a foul. Note that there is no link in the post. I dont know how this could even get posted without one.
I went to Fox News and there is nothing there about this story that I could find.
I didn’t see the story or any reference at FoxNews.com. I did find a story from yesterday that a group is claiming EPA has the woody biomass carbon neutral theory all wrong.
I’m working to develop a dead wood biomass to energy project right now, using landfilled wood chips. The wrong message from EPA could stop it in its tracks.
[Yeah, I know. This is only viable with tax credits and great power purchase rates forced on the power companies. But it’s worth a shot.]
Don’t hate me ‘cause I’m green.
The purpose is not environmentalism.
The purpose is not greening, nor reducing foreign oil.
The purpose is to choke us, as a country, until we are DEAD.
I guess he IS bewildered, since the Obama administration was supposed to be all for 'clean' energy. I guess it just isn't clean enough.
Oh, and his complaint that it would no longer be profitable shows the CEO doesn't understand that libs think the idea of profit is bad, and that he SHOULD be taxed more because he's 'stealing' from the little guy.
Bewildered and clueless. I suspect he was an Obama voter.