Category Archives for Policy
The Supreme Court dealt the EPA a substantial setback in their Monday, June 29 ruling that struck down the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard (MATS). The 5-4 decision ruled that the EPA misinterpreted the Clean Air Act in that they did not consider the costs of the emissions reductions mandated by the rule. This decision overturned an April 2014 District Court ruling that found the EPA had acted within its legal mandate. SCOTUS remanded the the regulation back to the D.C. Circuit Court, which must now reconsider the case.
Readers can click here to download the full text of the decision.
The National Journal is reporting that Gov. Mike Pence, Indiana has sent a letter to the White House openly rejecting the EPA’s “ill-conceived and poorly constructed” Clean Power Plan. Without “demonstrable” and “significant” improvements in the proposed regulation, Pence says his state “will not comply” with the rule.
Gov. Pence also goes on to note that Indiana will use any means available to block the rule’s implementation and criticizes the rule as damaging to Indiana’s economy. Pence notes that the CPP will impact system reliability, force the state to fundamentally restructure its generation system, and that it oversteps the agency’s legal and Constitutional boundaries.
A group of doctors in Congress have recently sent a letter to the EPA questioning whether the agency’s plan to mandate the reduction of the current ozone standard from 75 ppb to between 65 and 70 ppb will be worth the expected expense. In the letter, the Congressional Reps noted weaknesses in the EPA’s assumptions, arguments, and research methodologies. For example,
- There is no correlation between decreasing ozone levels and asthma rates.
[A]ccording to EPA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, asthma prevalence has increased by 15 percent since 2001, while ozone concentrations have decreased by 18 percent during the same time period.
Thanks to America’s Power for putting together this video showing the differences in spending priorities between America’s elected officials and average Americans.
This kind of situation always reminds me of the “Jelly Donut” scene in the movie Full Metal Jacket. The scene shows how a lack of thought and self-control (one recruit stealing a jelly donut from the mess hall) leads to damaging outcomes for an entire platoon of marine recruits. In the same way, short-sighted and destructive energy policies coming from a small group of self-focused ideologues in DC and various state capitals are having profound negative effects on American taxpayers and electricity users (read: the rest of the country).
Editor’s note: We welcome this guest post, discussing the “war on coal,” by Greg Walcher, author of “Smoking Them Out.”
By Greg Walcher (originally published 04/17/15 & reprinted with permission)
I attended a conference in April where a number of speakers lamented policies they call “the war on coal.” War is a harsh term, but in general they refer to the current Administration’s stated desire to wean the American economy of its dependence on coal for generating electricity. Both the White House and the EPA deny any “war on coal,” though the national media has reported significant email traffic between them and leaders of the Sierra Club’s “Beyond Coal” campaign.
A recent report by Management Information Services takes a look at the massive, statewide impacts of TVA’s planned closure of almost 3,900 MW of coal-fueled generation and expectations for further closures in the near future. The broad, widespread economic and social impacts on Tennessee’s people, their economy, industry, and productivity are frightening.
A short read of the report’s findings are that, as TVA drops coal from its generation fleet, the people of Tennessee will pay dearly.
- 20% higher electricity rates
- $7 billion reduction in gross state product
- $700 million in lost state and local government tax revenues
Interesting discussion on FOX Business channel. Tom Borelli and John Pippy, CEO of the Pennsylvania Coal Alliance discuss the “fundamental transformation” of American energy production.
I was recently interviewed by CNS News and asked for comment on the joint Sierra Club, Bloomberg media event (held on April 8th). In this event former NY mayor Michael Bloomberg and senior Sierra Club staffers, like CEO Michael Brune, exulted in their ability to pour tens of millions of dollars into misleading pressure campaigns, aimed at putting coal industry workers into unemployment lines. The gist of their recently expanded campaign is to spend Mr. Bloomberg’s $80 million, along with tens of millions of matching donations, “to shutter 50 percent of (coal) plants by 2017.”
Editor’s note: Paul Driessen’s latest article hits at the heart of the green campaigns aimed at shutting down energy production and stopping industrial activity across North America. While the proponents of these campaigns claim they have a “moral” imperative, the reality is that, if actually implemented as they are proposed, they will promote untold human suffering and misery as they cost real human lives, put millions out of work, and cost trillions in lost economic activity. As we see more of the actual outcomes of these green campaigns, we also begin to recognize their far-reaching anti-human impacts.
Current climate policies mean energy deprivation, poverty, disease and death for billions