New Obama Clean Coal Rules Will Increase Energy Costs By 70-80%

We live in a perpetually at risk world.

Consumers need energy and workers need jobs.

We should learn from mistakes like this and move forward not go into a funk and just rail against coal.

 

Some of the worst examples of "bad coal" usage in the U.S. originated in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, etc. That's part of why we developed entire new technologies for containment and scrubbing of exhausts.

The ultimate "answer" is hydrogen fusion, which will provide limitless amounts of energy and absolutely no pollution. We can burn clean coal, scrub the emissions, and work hard on the R&D needed to bring hydrogen fusion to reality. Or, we can fart around trying to pipe and burn cow farts (methane), or "biomass", or deploying square miles of solar panels whose use in times like the eastern half of the U.S. have seen this winter put such musings into the realm of fantasy. Look... we need to be intelligent and practical for a change. We on the Right don't want pollution any more than you on the Left do. But there's a smart way to develop better energy production, and there's a stupid way....

 

I have no problem with coal whatsoever. I have a problem with environmental disasters like arsenic-contaminated spills into a river with two endangered species living in it from which people have to drink in an area where employment and population are already in decline.

 

You sound as if there is a pro environmental disaster side that you must argue against.

No one is happy to see contaminates in the water as some people seem to think.

 

No, you jumped into a conversation about the best way to address some issues like whether it was better to burn or bury trash and whether it was better or not to leave contamination in place based upon an article linked by another poster.

 

I don't see the problem. Why doesn't the obama just do what he has been doing by raising the levels allowed? Problem fixed.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011...pretending-that-radiation-is-good-for-us.html
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/04/obama-approves-epas-higher-radiation.html?m=1
http://rt.com/usa/monsanto-glyphosate-roundup-epa-483/
See it's that easy. No more environmental problems.

 

Actually 'he' did. And he's been working his entire terms to keep that promise.

And nice of you to leave out all the links I provided 'proving' that he 'did'.

Ahh but no matter, here they are again. (Even Politifact had this one right)

http://www.politifact.com/ohio/stat...oal-industry-says-obama-promised-bankrupt-co/

http://voices.yahoo.com/barack-obama-bankrupt-coal-plants-2149160.html?cat=9

http://www.infowars.com/obama-advances-plan-to-bankrupt-coal-industry-with-new-co2-limits/

 

no he didn't and if you think he did, how do you explain this?:

"…if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it, that I think is the right approach."

that explains a lot

anyone would have to completely ignore reality in order to believe what alex jones says

[video=youtube;7WkGyAqVmCk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WkGyAqVmCk[/video]

 

And when those first scrubbers were required.... the same right wingers decried their use as terrible and expensive...

I do agree that there are diminishing returns and ideally fusion is the answer to mankinds energy needs.... But in todays world where there is no such thing as a fusion reactor the best thing to do is to set pollution standards to reduce pollution and allow industry to find the best way to meet them.

The idea of "clean coal" is a marketing campaign by the coal industry to try to associate clean with coal. There is no such thing as a technological answer to what "clean coal" is and if you look, it is a set of technologies BEING DEVELOPED.... My take is just to set a standard, and if industry can create these technologies to meet it with coal, then great... but if not, then meet them with natural gas or nuclear or whatever else... But arguing against setting standards is not the way to reduce pollution.

The right argued against increased CAFE standards, but now cars are more fuel efficient. They argued against catalytic converters and taking lead out of gas. But all that terrible regulation has resulted in cars that while still sources of pollution, are far less harmfull, far more efficient, and much cleaner than they would be if all the critics had their way.

 

Wrong. And once again here are all the links proving that Senator Barack Obama did indeed make the campaign promise to Bankrupt the Coal industry.



http://www.politifact.com/ohio/stat...oal-industry-says-obama-promised-bankrupt-co/

http://voices.yahoo.com/barack-obama-bankrupt-coal-plants-2149160.html?cat=9

http://www.infowars.com/obama-advances-plan-to-bankrupt-coal-industry-with-new-co2-limits/

It's hardly my fault that you honestly 'think' if you repeat the same thing over and over and over and over and over, that every one else will fall over their selves 'believing' you.

FACT: Unlike 'you' even Politifact has this one right!

http://www.politifact.com/ohio/stat...oal-industry-says-obama-promised-bankrupt-co/

FYI Please SHOW how Politifact is 'controlled' by ALEX JONES!

 

I honestly don't remember anyone, liberal or conservative, complaining about adding electrostatic scrubbers to scrub coal plant exhaust. You didn't provide any specifics, so, I don't know when that was, who did the complaining, where it was, or anything about it. It would be helpful to the discussion to have more to go on, would it not?

Anyway, right here in Colorado, huge advances have been made by a company I referenced (with a link) earlier, called Neumann Systems Group: http://csbj.com/tag/neumann-systems-group/ .... Now, if we can scrub the exhaust effectively from these power plants, I suggest that the smart thing to do is to burn the many cubic miles of easily-accessible coal that we have in America, and press on with the research and development of hydrogen fusion power plants. If we pursue this goal diligently and intelligently, we could develop it and have the plants online in the next thirty years -- and the good news is that we've got plenty of coal to cover that stretch of time.

I, too, like the idea of "standards", but when the Obama regime arbitrarily and unilaterally dumps brand new "standards" on the coal industry and all the municipalities that have coal-fired power plants, it is reasonable to ask why this was done now, by whom, and with what motivation. You have derided the idea of "clean coal" as being nothing but a marketing stunt, even though the development of scrubber technologies punches holes in such criticism. What defense, then, is there for a pack of government bureaucrats to dump new "standards" and regs all at once, just because they felt like it...?

One last thought -- if there was ever a time when we DON'T need to burden the American economy with skyrocketing energy costs, purely on bureaucratic whim, that time is NOW!

 

According to Politifact ........It's in the video which is why you keep leaving out the links I posted proving you 'wrong'.

But then 'facts' don't seem to matter to liberals posting here ..........do they?

BTW here are all the 'LINKS' once again proving you to be 'deliberately' wrong.

http://www.politifact.com/ohio/stat...oal-industry-says-obama-promised-bankrupt-co/

http://voices.yahoo.com/barack-obama-bankrupt-coal-plants-2149160.html?cat=9

It must be 'nice' to simply say something, and 'expect' people to blindly believe you.

The sad fact is even POLITIFACT (a openly Liberal site) says you are 'wrong' and that the 'fact' that Obama promised to Bankrupt the Coal Industry is 'mostly true'.

FYI you can personally attack me all you want accusing me of posting LIES when I posted the links proving you 'wrong', but the links that I posted prove that I am not the 'liar' here.

So much for your 'erroneous' input.

Deal with it.