EPA and radical environmentalists
work to take America back to the 20th Century—B.C. by
Rebekah Rast
As if a war on America’s coal industry wasn’t enough, it
turns out natural gas isn’t a friend to the environment either — or nuclear,
hydro and in some cases wind power.
What’s left? Solar? But then there’s the uncertainty
of how to properly dispose of solar panels if they break or
lose their power because of the chemical process used to make them.
What, if any, energy sources does this country have left
that are deemed environmentally fit for today’s strict “green” standards?
How has America found itself in a place where its critical energy sources are
in jeopardy?
It is as if today’s radical environmentalists would like to
see America as it was in the 20thCentury — B.C.
With allies to this extreme environmental movement
strategically placed throughout this administration, in the White House and in
radical “green” groups throughout the nation, it is no wonder Americans are
being regulated back to a time before humans existed. The sad part is
this reckless agenda is moving full-steam ahead, taking jobs, livelihoods and
America’s prosperity along with it.
For example, as video
evidence proves Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official Al Armendariz
saying in 2010 he would “crucify” oil and gas companies to send
a message, it is no secret that the coal industry has been under countless
attacks.
One particularly egregious act by the EPA against the coal
industry is its rules on mercury emissions. The EPA has found mercury to
be a harmful and threatening element to the well being of humans and all blame
for the emissions of it appear to have landed on coal power plants. It is
important to note that U.S. power
plants account for less than 0.5 percent of all the mercury in the air
Americans breathe. Virtually all of the other 99.5 percent of
mercury in the environment comes from natural occurrences like forest fires,
volcanoes, subsea vents, geysers and other sources, including food.
But now, in order to eliminate this 0.5 percent of mercury
emitted from U.S. power plants, utility companies either go out of business or
have to spend billions of dollars just to attempt to meet these new
standards. Knowing that thousands of jobs would be at risk as a result of
this new regulation, and that coal is an integral part of America’s energy
supply, U.S. Sen. Jim
Inhofe (R-Okla.) will place a resolution on the floor of the Senate that
will require an up or down vote on whether or not to allow this EPA regulation
to go into effect.
“Mercury is a natural part of the Earth’s environment yet
the EPA in its infinite wisdom has decided to target the relatively low amount
of mercury that is emitted by coal-fired plants in the U.S.,” says Bill Wilson,
president of Americans for Limited Government (ALG). “These regulations require
these power plants to be retrofitted with new technologies that will cost tens
of billions of dollars to implement, while failing to prevent more than 99
percent of mercury from being emitted into the environment. It is hard to find
a costlier regulation that would achieve so little.”
Sen. Inhofe hopes to bring his resolution, S.J. Res. 37, to
the Senate floor after Memorial Day and pull out a win for the coal industry.
But even if enough members support rolling back the EPA on
this standard, the coal industry still has numerous battles to fight as the EPA
and “green” groups continue on with their mission to rid America of its use of
coal.
Staying true to form, another EPA guideline attacks the
mountaintop mining of coal. The Clean Water
Act requires streams to be kept cleaner and to a higher standard than that of
tap water. Even EPA
Administrator Lisa Jackson said of the new guidelines, “the goal is
a standard so strict that few, if any, permits would be issued for valley
fills.”
Furthermore, the coal industry has also been punished for
Carbon Dioxide emissions—yes, that same element that is critical to life. The
EPA proposes that new fossil‐fuel‐fired power
plants meet an output‐based
standard of 1,000 pounds of CO2 per megawatt‐hour (lb CO2/MWh gross). Most natural gas power plants
built since 2005 already meet this new standard. And lending a “helpful”
hand to coal power plants, the EPA suggests new technology such as carbon
capture and storage (CCS) to rein in their emissions. The problem is this
technology is prohibitively expensive and will likely result in the shutting
down of coal plants across the nation.
It is from all these radical EPA regulations that the coal
industry is at risk of falling prey to the “green” agenda. Now that
attacks on coal are across the board, extreme environmental groups turn their
heads to another critical fossil fuel to America’s energy source—natural gas.
Take for example the methods used by radical environmental
group Sierra Club and you will begin to understand the manipulation and
coerciveness of this “green” agenda. Sierra Club crawled into bed with
Chesapeake Energy—a natural gas giant—and collected $26
million dollars to fight coal plants. Once progress was made
on that front and lawsuits and regulations abounded against the coal industry,
Sierra Club decided natural gas wasn’t environmentally friendly either. And if
that’s not enough, radical agendas like those of the Sierra Club are often
rewarded with taxpayer dollars. You see, taxpayer
dollars are rewarded to those groups who successfully challenge the EPA,
which creates a lot of incentive for “green” groups to push the regulations of
the EPA even further.
Now taking all this into consideration, pretend for a moment
the EPA and radical environmentalists succeed in shutting down America’s
domestic supply of fossil fuels. Just to give you an idea, coal,
petroleum (oil), and natural gas together meet around 84 percent of U.S. energy
demand.
What substitute would compensate for this loss?
Renewable energies?
Data from the
Institute of Energy Research (IER) states that about 8 percent
of all energy consumed in the United States in 2010 was from renewable sources:
hydropower, biomass wood, biomass waste, biomass biofuels and wind.
Eight percent will not even come close to meeting the energy
demands of America, yet alone become a substitute for fossil fuels. Yet
even with this knowledge environmental groups and the EPA continue to rally
against America’s proven and reliable energy sources.
Without fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas, America
will be left with no source of reliable and cost-effective energy. Even
precious solar panels and wind turbines require other sources of energy to be
built.
And if you’re thinking worst-case scenario that at least
humans could attempt an energy-less America by using a wood-burning fire for
survival, you’d be wrong because that too emits way too much pollution and
would require too many trees — these same radical environmental groups would
contest. America better start preparing for 20th Century,
B.C., if it is forced to continue along this path.
Source: Rebekah Rast
is a contributing editor to Americans for Limited Government (ALG)
andNetRightDaily.com. You can follow her on twitter at @RebekahRast.
Read more at NetRightDaily.com: http://netrightdaily.com/2012/05/epa-and-radical-environmentalists-work-to-take-america-back-to-the-20th-century-b-c/#ixzz1uUszcB9O
Comments:
The problem with solar is that it costs 5 times more to
generate electricity with solar than it does with coal or nuclear. Solar costs 10 cents per kwh and coal and nuclear
cost 2 cents per kwh. Our problem is that the EPA and Public Service
Commission can pretend that they represent us…right.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody
GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment