• 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 EPA kills power plant, 3,900 jobs in Texas

Grim17 said:
The Obama administration and environmentalists aren't real keen on natural gas either because it's still a fossil fuel.
Click to expand...

That may be so, but given a choice between NG and Coal, they'll take NG every time. Wind and Solar are great, but until intermittency is overcome we'll still non-intermittent sources. Nuclear and NG are the best choices of those sources.
 
EagleAye said:
That may be so, but given a choice between NG and Coal, they'll take NG every time. Wind and Solar are great, but until intermittency is overcome we'll still non-intermittent sources. Nuclear and NG are the best choices of those sources.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 100% that those are the best choices environmentally, but financially coal is still top dog.
 
Grim17 said:
I agree with you 100% that those are the best choices environmentally, but financially coal is still top dog.
Click to expand...

With the new filter requirements, Coal won't be any longer. These are very expensive systems, and even with them there's still a lot of pollution. In some areas, Wind is equaling or even bettering the cost per kWh of Coal and the price for wind continues to drop. Still, the intermittency issues remain for wind. There's several ways to overcome this. One is to have Wind plants in many geographical areas, each in support of the others. The wind rises and falls but not the same in all areas. The aggregate output of the plants produces a steady flow of power. But a reliable backbone should still exist and that's where NG can step in. With several different systems working in tandem, strengths of one overcoming the shortcomings of the other, new electricity can be built at a total cost comparable to a network of coal plants yet without the pollution and waste products.
 
Grim17 said:
Now I understand why Obama didn't mention jobs in his speech the other day.




Obama EPA kills power plant, 3,900 jobs in Texas | WashingtonExaminer.com
Click to expand...

or it could be the real reason which is that there is an abundance of natural gas which burns cleaner and far better than coal could ever do? But why should they lose their business for nothing when they can make up absolute BS and attack obama on their way down? Really, should we all be luddites just so some coal guys can have jobs, or perhaps can we use better, cheaper, and more efficient fuels and screw the dip****s who who are stuck in the 1800s? Sorry coal guys but you can go join the horse and carriage, and it does not matter how much you twist the truth people actually understand it isn't just because coal is dirty, it actually sucks ass compared to modern fossil fuels.

Oh, and in case you missed it, it is not obama's fault we have developed beyond the 1800's despite how the coal companies want to blame obama rather than their old and feeble fuel. grim really, do you think that coal burns good for fuel? Perhaps there is a reason we don't use coal engines or heaters anymore aside from the huge ton of soot it leaves. Why don't you help them out and study science and go make a coal burning power plant and see how it stacks up to other fossil fuels. these guys want a handout and for you to push them just a bit further down the road despite their old and broken crap. If you want to go back and live ion the 1800s i suggest you go find an amish community or something like that. Some of us actually like modern convenience like natural gas and oil over coal, and it is not because of the EPA. i know many people have a certain god like opinion on obama's abilities, but I can assure you he does not have the power to make coal suck as an energy source. It is just way beyond the guy despite how Fix noise and these coal company dolts want to portray him.

Maybe i am looking at this wrong. let us give reps what they want. We will make a law that the republicans in this country will have to use coal based products over natural gas, oil, and any other competing fuel. With all that business i am sure the coal companies will be doing much better than they are now. Then we all win. the coal company, anyone who is not a republican can enjoy modern technology, and republicans can do something they never have before and put their money where their mouth is. It would almost be like you guys actually live what you preached if we did that. What do you say, do you want to live on coal, or can you admit it sucks and you like more modern fuels?
 
The head line needs to be changed to someting like "Texas doesn't want their State totally polluted"
 
The CO2 that burning fossil fuels puts into the atmosphere is a boon to our environment.

There should be no regulations on CO2 emmisions from powerplants.
 
Deuce said:
Air pollution gives people respiratory illnesses.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but we have clean processes for that, so what's the issue?
 
Muhammed said:
Can you name a single person who has ever been proven to have developed cancer because of the radioactivity of coal ash?
Click to expand...

If I couldn't what would that prove?
 
American said:
Yeah, but we have clean processes for that, so what's the issue?
Click to expand...

....the very coal plant in question which does not comply with that "clean" process?
 
Redress said:
So you got nothing beyond a google search to a bunch of right wing editorials. Funny that...
Click to expand...

That's it Redress... It's all a bunch of right wing lies... You are really something.

You know, if all those sources were lying, including Forbes and the American Thinker, there would be just as many left wing sources screaming that it's all a big lie, but there isn't.

How about a Senate Report:

.: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :.

Now are you going to admit what we all have known for a very long time... That those new EPA regulations exist, and the will in fact kill thousands of jobs and raise electricity rates?
 
Grim17 said:
That's it Redress... It's all a bunch of right wing lies... You are really something.

You know, if all those sources were lying, including Forbes and the American Thinker, there would be just as many left wing sources screaming that it's all a big lie, but there isn't.

How about a Senate Report:

.: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :.

Now are you going to admit what we all have known for a very long time... That those new EPA regulations exist, and the will in fact kill thousands of jobs and raise electricity rates?
Click to expand...

How about you show the actual regulations. You have been desperately trying to avoid that. I even know why.
 
Here's another story for you to deny Redress:

Obama EPA Regulations Kill 15 Power Plants, 480 jobs in Georgia
9 January 2013

Georgia Power asked state regulators for permission to shut down 15 power plants yesterday, claiming new regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) make the plants too expensive to run.

The 15 coal-, oil- and natural gas-fired power plants currently produce 2,061 megawatts (MW) for Georgia energy consumers. Georgia Power plans to close 11 of the plants on the exact day the EPA’s new mercury regulations are set to take effect, April 16, 2015. Georgia Power will seek waivers from the EPA to keep four of the other plants open for a single year, and then shut those down too on April 16, 2016. It is unclear how the Georgia energy sector will make the 2 gigawatts up.

Obama EPA Regulations Kill 15 Power Plants, 480 jobs in Georgia :: Minute Men News
Click to expand...
 
Grim17 said:
What do you think that link was for?
Click to expand...

Your link was not to any regulations, but to republican senators notching. Why can't you find a link to these evil regulations?
 
Redress said:
Your link was not to any regulations, but to republican senators notching. Why can't you find a link to these evil regulations?
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight... You are denying that those regulations exist?

Really?
 
I am stating, quite clearly, that you have not shown the regulations exist.
 
winston53660 said:
The head line needs to be changed to someting like "Texas doesn't want their State totally polluted"
Click to expand...

Texas became the number one state for wind power thanks to the Bush admin. So that quip doesn't fly. It's still not enough to meet their power requirements.
 
Redress said:
I am stating, quite clearly, that you have not shown the regulations exist.
Click to expand...
You have Grim at a disadvantage, he's reading right-wing "news." Which is more than liklely funded by the billionaire Koch brothers who are heavily into coal.

What are these regulations and how do they finactually impact energy production?
 
clownboy said:
Texas became the number one state for wind power thanks to the Bush admin. So that quip doesn't fly. It's still not enough to meet their power requirements.
Click to expand...

Like I said Texans don't want a polluted state. Nor will we put up with it! BTW the wind farms out in W Texas are an amazing sight to see. Windmills as far as the eye can see!
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
I am stating, quite clearly, that you have not shown the regulations exist.
Click to expand...

Nor do I plan to...

There are plenty of sources, including a report from the United States Senate, which confirms the existence of those regulations. Even Democratic Senator Thomas Carper, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety, confirmed their existence when he was asked for his comments on Senator Inhofe's report by Marcia Yerman at the Huffington Post and said:


"After decades of delay, last December (2011), the Environmental Protection Agency finally acted to require dirty coal and oil-fired power plants to clean up their mercury and deadly air toxic emissions. By targeting our nation's largest sources of mercury, this regulation requires polluters to reduce mercury emissions by 90 percent -- which will reduce the mercury that contaminates our streams and fish and end up in our children..."​


Let me guess... Even the Democratic senator is lying too, right? Since I know this is just about giving me a hard time and you really aren't that ill informed and out of touch, why don't you just end this nonsense? If you just can't bring yourself to quit this BS and decide you want to continue being an ass by pursuing this, then I'll tell you what I'll do... I will dig up the laws for you, provided you find someone from either the EPA or the Obama administration who denies the existence of the regulations that Senator Inhofe listed in his report?

Your call...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom