Federal Circuit Court rules for the EPA (percentage, world, pay)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am a registered professional geologist in three states with 22 years of field experience and project management and am an OSHA certified hazardous waste manager. What do you think?
Get ready for high energy prices being passed on to consumers to pay for these onerous EPA regulations. The courts have bought into the mad scientist's theory of man made global warming, hook, line and sinker. Two of the three judges in this case were appointed by Clinton. We need to get Obama out of office to stop these appointments.
Get ready for high energy prices being passed on to consumers to pay for these onerous EPA regulations. The courts have bought into the mad scientist's theory of man made global warming, hook, line and sinker. Two of the three judges in this case were appointed by Clinton. We need to get Obama out of office to stop these appointments.
In some instances, prices will rise. In others, it will not. My electric company is replacing a 60 year old coal-fired plant with a natural gas plant for several reasons:
1) It would cost more to refurbish the plant than it would to replace it;
2) They have run out of space to store the fly ash;
3) Natural gas is plentiful and cheaper than it has been for a very long time. It is also orders of magnitude cleaner and more efficient.
When you calculate costs, you also have to calculate the damage to the environment of the current regime. Not just in terms of greenhouse gases, but it terms of impacts to soil, surface and groundwater, and human health. Is this really the legacy we want to leave for our grandchildren?
My opinion is that the cost increase, if any, will be marginal, and well worth the benefits of switching to cleaner energy sources. I don't see the cost being much more than when the current plants were built in the first place.
Get ready for high energy prices being passed on to consumers to pay for these onerous EPA regulations. The courts have bought into the mad scientist's theory of man made global warming, hook, line and sinker. Two of the three judges in this case were appointed by Clinton. We need to get Obama out of office to stop these appointments.
I'm sure the left will blame romney since he'll be president at the time this madness hits the US.
"The market-clearing price for new 2015 capacity – almost all natural gas – was $136 per megawatt. That’s eight times higher than the price for 2012, which was just $16 per megawatt. In the mid-Atlantic area covering New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and DC the new price is $167 per megawatt. For the northern Ohio territory served by FirstEnergy, the price is a shocking $357 per megawatt."
I'm sure the left will blame romney since he'll be president at the time this madness hits the US.
"The market-clearing price for new 2015 capacity – almost all natural gas – was $136 per megawatt. That’s eight times higher than the price for 2012, which was just $16 per megawatt. In the mid-Atlantic area covering New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and DC the new price is $167 per megawatt. For the northern Ohio territory served by FirstEnergy, the price is a shocking $357 per megawatt."
The Federal Circuit Court for the District of Columbia has rule unanimously that the EPA has the right to regulate greenhouse gasses and the way they're doing it is perfectly correct. In this ruling, they rejected a challenge brought by several industries, interests groups and a lot of the states.
Petitioners, various states and industry groups, challenge all these rules, arguing that they are based on improper constructions of the CAA (Clean Air Act) and are otherwise arbitrary and capricious. But for the reasons set forth below, we conclude: 1) the Endangerment Finding and Tailpipe Rule are neither arbitrary nor capricious; 2) EPA’s interpretation of the governing CAA provisions is unambiguously correct; and 3) no petitioner has standing to challenge the Timing and Tailoring Rules. We thus dismiss for lack of jurisdiction all petitions for review of the Timing and Tailoring Rules, and deny the remainder of the petitions.
What will those four white guys and the Uncle Tom say about this one when it gets to them? Yep, they are the final word and your court is not so much if they don't agree.
For some, yes. For others, no. It's a small price to pay to mitigate many environmental issues associated with power generation, and will ultimately improve the performance and reliability of the electrical grid.
Quote:
I'm still waiting for you to answer the simple question I posed to you earlier.
The question is not what is the optimum concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. The question is can we really afford to experiment with the planet's life support system by pumping billions of tons of GHGs and many other pollutants into it year after year? And what is the cost of doing nothing versus behaving more responsibly by mitigating the impacts?
So there is no optimum temp or c02 level but we must do this and that because some say it is rising. Rising from what? Rising to what? Is it rising to where it needs to be from the little ice age? Maybe screwing around is going to do more harm than good. Problem is nobody knows but they want plenty to pay the piper pretending they do.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
