Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 12/17/2009 7:49:08 PM PST by neverdem
Just one political assault after another.
As the drip, drip, drip of these news stories continues, I see fewer and fewer Democrats in Congress in 2011. The question is, what will replace them.
Let the EPA try. A good excuse to abolish them when we take over.
Cap & tax is “market based”? They all seem to be using the same phrasebook, straight from George Soros.
What kind of “market” are we talking about here? The Marxist-Leninist market?
That is not likely in my opinion. Congress could however, quickly remove CO2 and GHG's from the EPA's authority under the CAA.
That is a more plausible outcome if the fit hits the shan. Unfortunately, I expect that lititgation on the issue will be the likely route which will give the administration cover to say "we are doing something" and Congress the cover to say "it is working through the system" without pushing either to take responsibility and fix the problems it will cause.
Businesses and the economy are likely to suffer from the regulatory uncertainty, but not as much as regulation by the EPA under the CAA.
I believe EPA is counting on litigation forestall implementation actually. If they weren't - they wouldn't be trying to twist the CAA with their "tailoring rule" which so obviously disregards the specific language in the CAA that it is laughable and I'm not even a lawyer.
Carbon dioxide is the primary component that is the basis of all plant life and without it the entire food chain for all life would end. The Earth has had continuous fluctuations in the levels of CO2 though out its history. We are in a time of plentiful CO2 which is a good thing for plant life and the growing of food.
If the Chicken Littles wanted to do something with CO2, they would use it in the production of Algae Oil, which locks in CO2 for the production of fuel. Any fossil fueled electrical plant could put its CO2 output directly into the production of algae oil.
Sheeee-it! If I were a blue dog dem, I would just say “Go ahead and regulate, you don’t need my vote or anyone else’s”
Why pass a suicidal law when the administration can just impose it by fiat.
In other words, call their bluff.
later
They are intentionally using the (successful) cap and trade approach designed for acid rain as a basis for assuming that cap and tax for CO2 will work the same. They are playing with the facts in a big way...
The first method for reducing SO2 under the CAA acid rain requirements was to switch to lower sulfur western coals. This certainly benefited western coal producers and coal transportation services (rail).
The second method was to install flue gas desulfurization systems. Not cheap technology, but not magical technology either. These have been getting better and better over time, and to the chagron of EPA and environmentalists that just want to kill coal - the result is that the CAA requirements (including acid rain) have made it more feasible to fire higher sulfur eastern coals once again. I'm sure it pisses them off mightely that technology has made it possible to once again the other half of our vast coal reserves, but that's the way the ball bounces.
They are attempting to fight this with EPA/DOJ suits against power plants, but the technology to remove SO2 appears to be winning (though they are getting plenty of pounds of flesh in the process.).
CO2 control is a different beast all together. As with SO2 there are two parts - collection and disposal. Flue gas desulfurization waste can easily be put in a landfill, and where feasible can be used to replace gypsum in the manufacturing of wallboard or even for ag-lime.
With CO2 the issues are different - first the disposal. Even after you capture CO2 disposal is an isssue. Unlike the SO2 which is bound in solid FGD waste it remains a gas making it much harder to safely "put" somewhere. Pumping it into aquifers, or other places underground and under the sea seem to be the best ideas (geological storage). Unfortunately, nobody knows how long it will stay there, who would take responsibility for a CO2 "belch" that suffocates a few thousand people, or whether our ground water will be turned into carbon acid.
This half of the equation - sequestration - is the radical's fall back point for killing coal. Even if technology and economics make carbon capture feasible - they have the nuclear option of attacking sequestration. Don't get me wrong - they are all for spending the money to study this now - but once their other methods for killing the use of coal stop producing results they will switch gears and run with this without hesitation. It's not about the environment - it's about knocking us down a notch or ten and reducing our standard of living.
Carbon capture is the other aspect. Combining the need to selectively grab CO2 gas from a flue gas stream, condense it to make a liquid so that it can effectively be transported from point a to point sequestration, you get a huge energy penalty.
Huge in terms of 10% - 25%, minimum. That means that every coal plant will need to expend 10% - 25% of it's output just to capture CO2 and prepare it for sequestration.
On the very low end - that means that for every 10 plants that do this - another one needs to be built just to maintain the current supply of electricity and associated supply margins.
Cap and trade might be applicable where the technology and feasibilty exists as it did with the acid rain program. For CO2 it is a whole different ballgame...
I thought City Journal above that sort of glaring editorial error, in the subtitle no less.
There is something a LOT more disturbing here. The Administration is making it clear that if the Congress doesn’t give them what they want, they’ll just take it.
It’s not the first thing the Obama cabinent has done. The FCC imposed “Net Neutrality” a few weeks ago going around Congress.
This is one of the scary reasons why the election next fall might not matter: the Administration will just do whatever it wants too anyway regardless of what Congress does.
Ahh, but it isn't a way to kill wood as a source of energy. Just turn it to charcoal and use it as a soil amendment. It is in fact an effective "nutrient sponge" that could reduce fertilizer requirements significantly.
It's high time we found a way to finance restructuring our disastrously overstocked National Forests anyway.
On the bright side - the success of environmental lawsuits has not gone without notice. I believe their tactics and methods have been well studied and evaluated. Raising a toast to lawyers turing the worm and using the enviros tactics against them and EPA.
Grabbing the popcorn for the show - all the while exhaling an EPA designated dangerous pollutant with every breath...
This just in:
The EPA has declared that CO2 has been determined to be so hazardous to people’s health, that an emergency regulation will go into effect starting 12-18-09 until further notice. Science has proven that CO2 causes massive global warming which must stop now in order to save the planet. Since all humans exhale CO2 which is greatly contributing to the problem, this emergency regulation is absolutely necessary to preserve life as we know it.
Therefore, all males are henceforth ordered not to exhale on even numbered days of the month, and all females are henceforth ordered not to exhale on odd numbered days of the month. We know that this will be a difficult change in everyone’s daily habits, but we sincerely hope that we have acted in time to save Planet Earth.
Remember, no sacrifice is too great in order to save the planet and this is such a small inconvenience to anyone that full co-operation will be expected. Penalty for non-compliance will be execution and forfeiture of the decedent’s entire estate.
Due to the complexity of managing this problem and dealing with the ongoing world economic crisis as well as the burdens of government, certain goverment leaders, officials and selected others will be exempt from this regulation.
From the EPA, we hope that all of you have fun on your holidays. We know that WE will, (now).
/satire
Slow down and think about this a bit. If we burned the carbon neutral forests the right wing militias would have nowhere to secretly train.
Jeesh - at a minimu we need to save the tree bark for food when the enviros finally get those evil genetically modified grains banned and we finally have the opportunity to reduce crop yields by 50%.
What were you thinking?
;)
Of course, the 'carbon footprint' caused by construction will be far in excess of anything put out by current operations which use the economy of scale to be more efficient, but the administration, the ecowhackos, and the greenies don't care about that.
The other side of the coin is the 'coin'--the anticipated revenues which can be skimmed, siphoned, and grant-awarded to the FOO (friends of obama).
The looting of America continues...
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.