Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama’s EPA Cues $130 Billion Race to Cut Pollution by 2015

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-11 11:18 PM
Original message
Obama’s EPA Cues $130 Billion Race to Cut Pollution by 2015
Obama’s EPA Cues $130 Billion Race to Cut Pollution by 2015



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.
Why do they have to race each other? Simple. Cap and trade is a sort of a plutocrats’ sack race:

In January, all electricity plants that emit pollutants (solar and wind electricity won’t be affected) must begin trading emissions among themselves under the EPA ozone trading rule. The electricity plants that outcompete the dirty ones will be the beneficiaries.


Source: Clean Technica (http://s.tt/13hj9)
http://cleantechnica.com/2011/09/17/obamas-epa-cues-130-billion-race-to-cut-pollution-by-2015/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+IM-cleantechnica+(CleanTechnica)&utm_content=FaceBook


From the comments:

Bob_Wallace1 hour ago

We'll be hearing some squealing about the $130 billion and how America can't afford that sort of expense to clean up our grid. Let's put it in perspective...

Americans spend $27 billion each year on pizza.

Annually, Americans spend about $88.8 billion on tobacco products and another $97 billion on alcohol.

Each year we spend $313 billion for treatment of tobacco and alcohol related medical problems.

People in the US spend about $64 billion on illegal drugs.

Americans also spend $586.5 billion a year on gambling.

Americans spend about $450 billion a year on entertainment.


Source: Clean Technica (http://s.tt/13hj9)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-11 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Great news! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backwoodsbob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-11 11:35 PM
Response to Original message
2. if this goes through I will lose my job
and you won't hear one word of complaint from me.

My only thought on this...lets steer some of those green jobs to central appalachia where the coal jobs are going to be lost
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-11 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Those will be large sites of cleanup, won't they? With crews hired to clean
and hopefully restore those sites to ones that are not dangerous?

Then that land might be sold for OTHER businesses to use. Businesses who will need to hire employees?

All that takes time, though. I suspect it will hit an area hard for a few years. And new businesses may not come it at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-11 06:54 AM
Response to Original message
3. Nice piece, and fantastic comment scrounging!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-11 07:16 AM
Response to Original message
4. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alc Donating Member (649 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-11 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
5. possibly, but there are other possibilities
* green energy doesn't provide the 20% lost from coal - factories move overseas of face brown outs here

* green energy costs significantly more - factories move overseas for cost

* green energy doesn't succeed - EPA drops the requirements in order to keep factories here and looks like an overreaching, out-of-touch, agency and is attacked as an enemy of industry.


Green energy jobs have rarely come through as planned. If jobs are the main priority now, it isn't a good idea to hope that "this time will be different". "Jobs" is not everyone's main priority, which is part of the problem. The administration is approaching everything as "top priority" which leads to not making much progress on anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jamieque Donating Member (101 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-11 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Well...
That was before I figured out how to eliminate pollution completely from coal fire and oil fueled devices. There is also the fact I have figured out multiple ways to maximize the efficience of our current green energy supplies. Before you ask how let me just say that many of my ideas are quite simple to impliment because most of them use current off the shelf technologies that would be used in new and different ways then they are currently being used.

Imagine a world of no pollution, cheap unlimited energy and no more hunger or jobless issues. Yes, my ideas are THAT big. No, I am not kidding or making that up. The only problem is getting my ideas into the hands of the right people who will use them correctly. I think one great breakthrough will come from being able to recycle nuclear waste instead of just burying it like we have always done.

I am already working on a proposal for the president to read as well as few select other people I have been gathering info on. Let's hope I am successful because if I am then our pollution problem worldwide will be history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 04:42 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC