• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama administration to announce controversial emissions cap on power plants

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
96,055
Reaction score
33,368
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Obama administration to announce controversial emissions cap on power plants | Fox News

The Obama administration is set to announce a rule Monday to limit carbon emissions in thousands of fossil-fuel burning plants across the country, a cornerstone of President Obama’s climate-change agenda and his first-term promise to reduce such emissions by 17 percent by 2020. The Environmental Protection Agency will ask existing plants to cut pollution by 30 percent by 2030, according to people familiar with the proposal who shared the details with The Associated Press.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce argues that the rule will kill jobs and close power plants across the country. The group is releasing a study that finds the rule will result in the loss of 224,000 jobs every year through 2030 and impose $50 billion in annual costs.
He's been talking about the war on coal for some time, now it's going into affect.
 
225k jobs lost :shock:..... cut 30% emissions by 2030. :roll: Stretching out that decade thought process huh? One thing is for certain.....we will have to flip over anything Obama touched once we take the Presidency in 2016. Anything he touched and removing all who are associated to him.
 
Additional action on cutting emissions is long overdue.

The proposed changes are very flexible. It allows states to use a variety of methods to reach the caps, such as putting in renewables, using NG, and setting up interstate cap-and-trade systems. It will reduce other pollutants, which will obviously improve health. Coal plants will have years before needing to retire; given how many of them are pushing 50 years of age, and how inefficient they are, I find it hard to see how that's such an awful thing.

While I do not take the EPA's job numbers at face value, the same goes for the US Chamber of Commerce, which has long been a tool of the Republican Party. It certainly does not strike terror into my heart.

Maybe we'll get a bunch of these... ;)

 
How long until the do-over begins. Can't wait for this turd to be out so we can hit the reset button.

Never give a 15-year-old the keys to a Porsche.
 
Obama administration to announce controversial emissions cap on power plants | Fox News


He's been talking about the war on coal for some time, now it's going into affect.

I just read this morning that even Dr. Julio Friedmann, the deputy assistant secretary for clean coal at the Department of Energy, has said Obama's rules will cause electricity costs to rise 70 to 80 percent.

Obama to Slam Power Plants with More Regulations

This is a real concern for me. Here in Ohio we get our electricity from coal and our electric bills are already high. Looks like future cruises and travel plans will be put on hold to pay the electric bill. First it was the increase in premiums for health care thanks to Obamacare that cut into extra cash designated for fun tickets and now it looks like utilities are going to take the rest of it. Thanks Obama for robbing me of my joy in retirement.
 
`
Lemme guess, another conservative outrage is just around the corner.

For now, this is only a proposal. The EPA will spend the next year gathering comments from electric utilities, environmentalists, and anyone else who cares to weigh in. It will then issue a final regulation that takes effect in June 2015. States will then have until June 30, 2016 to draw up plans to implement the rule. - Source
 
Doesn't Congress get to rule on this new proposal, or are they too busy sniping at each other to even debate it?
 
Doesn't Congress get to rule on this new proposal, or are they too busy sniping at each other to even debate it?
Not if they've effectively transferred that authority to the executive branch. Oftentimes when crafting legislation, they identify very general goals and give authority to a committee or agency to work out the specifics.
 
Not if they've effectively transferred that authority to the executive branch. Oftentimes when crafting legislation, they identify very general goals and give authority to a committee or agency to work out the specifics.

That does seem to be the way it's going, give more and more power to the executive branch. Congress already abdicated the power to declare war, and now seem willing to allow the president the power to impose regulations that will cost the nation trillions over time. That's just not how the Constitution set up the balance of powers.
 
`
Lemme guess, another conservative outrage is just around the corner.

For now, this is only a proposal. The EPA will spend the next year gathering comments from electric utilities, environmentalists, and anyone else who cares to weigh in. It will then issue a final regulation that takes effect in June 2015. States will then have until June 30, 2016 to draw up plans to implement the rule. - Source

Do you not have any concept what it entails to re-tool an industry with every friggin regulation that is forced upon it? Do you realize how expensive it becomes for that industry to comply which results in major increases to their consumers? Do you have any idea how long it takes to complete such requirements? A fargin year will not be enough time to comply. And conveniently by design they have made the implementation date 4 months before the country has a chance to vote those jerks out of office. The idea that these "proposed" radical regulations can be forced on industry/people without even taking it before Congress is disgusting. The idea that an unsettled science and an EPA full of members of the Church of the Enviromentalists have such power over us all needs to be addressed as soon as that bozo is out of office.
 
Last edited:
Additional action on cutting emissions is long overdue.

The proposed changes are very flexible. It allows states to use a variety of methods to reach the caps, such as putting in renewables, using NG, and setting up interstate cap-and-trade systems. It will reduce other pollutants, which will obviously improve health. Coal plants will have years before needing to retire; given how many of them are pushing 50 years of age, and how inefficient they are, I find it hard to see how that's such an awful thing.

While I do not take the EPA's job numbers at face value, the same goes for the US Chamber of Commerce, which has long been a tool of the Republican Party. It certainly does not strike terror into my heart.

Maybe we'll get a bunch of these... ;)




It's sad how many people buy into that sales pitch for solar roadways.
 
Run fer yer lives!!! Its gunna kill jerbs its gunna kill murica!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Run fer yer lives!!! Its gunna kill jerbs its gunna kill murica!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hahaha killing jobs is funny. Hahaha.
 
`
Lemme guess, another conservative outrage is just around the corner.

For now, this is only a proposal. The EPA will spend the next year gathering comments from electric utilities, environmentalists, and anyone else who cares to weigh in. It will then issue a final regulation that takes effect in June 2015. States will then have until June 30, 2016 to draw up plans to implement the rule. - Source

No doubt they'll be backing way off for the final version. :roll:
 
That does seem to be the way it's going, give more and more power to the executive branch....
The balance of powers rarely tips entirely in one direction. It is usually a back-and-forth.

E.g. it is well within the powers of Congress to pass laws that override these types of executive actions. They just need the votes. Or, if the executive action was genuinely unconstitutional, the SCOTUS could shoot it down.

And yeah, this pretty much is how the Constitution is set up.
 
Does anyone really believe that this proposal will save the environment?

Anyone, anyone???

One thing it will accomplish will cause a lot of people to hurt financially. Especially at a time in our history when more people have given up on looking for work and are on government assistance. Which means that those who are still working will be required to pay more to cover the utilities of those who are not working or are considered below poverty and entitled to assistance for such things. The less money people have to spend the more anemic the economy will become.
 
Does anyone really believe that this proposal will save the environment?

Anyone, anyone???

Scientists recommend this. It's a step in the right direction. We need to do everything we can to curb Co2 emissions.
 
this is absolutely the wrong way to do it. the right way to do it is to publicly and privately expand our grid with renewables and nuclear, and then shut down the coal plants. then, we do a NASA-style moonshot to replace oil. Obama's plan amounts to a regressive tax on the poor, and NG prices will shoot up, as well. probably bought and paid for by T. Boone Pickens.
 
this is absolutely the wrong way to do it. the right way to do it is to publicly and privately expand our grid with renewables and nuclear, and then shut down the coal plants. then, we do a NASA-style moonshot to replace oil. Obama's plan amounts to a regressive tax on the poor, and NG prices will shoot up, as well. probably bought and paid for by T. Boone Pickens.

That won't satisfy the environazis whose goals is to destroy these industries, not take reasonble steps that assure the grid's maintenance and growth through the introduction of proven technologies.
 
this is absolutely the wrong way to do it. the right way to do it is to publicly and privately expand our grid with renewables and nuclear, and then shut down the coal plants. then, we do a NASA-style moonshot to replace oil. Obama's plan amounts to a regressive tax on the poor, and NG prices will shoot up, as well. probably bought and paid for by T. Boone Pickens.

What Obama is doing is basically the only thing that is politically feasible and its going to be another "scandal" or outrage. If we could make things happen however we want of course things would be done differently.
 
Scientists recommend this. It's a step in the right direction. We need to do everything we can to curb Co2 emissions.

Yes scientists funded by governments whose vision is to desire a mechanism that will bring about world redistribution of wealth.
 
That won't satisfy the environazis whose goals is to destroy these industries, not take reasonble steps that assure the grid's maintenance and growth through the introduction of proven technologies.

The goal is to save the ecosystems of the world. We could care less about your precious fossil fuel industries that spend millions every year convincing people like you the end of the world is near if their profits are threatened.
 
Back
Top Bottom