Twice recently, the Supreme Court has curbed the EPA
By: Hoppy Kercheval
The Environmental Protection Agency, under President Obama's appointee, Lisa Jackson, has stretched its power to carry out an ideological mission.
Here's hoping a couple of surprising court decisions will temper the agency's zeal.
Higher electricity prices will most affect those who can least afford them
By Matt Patterson
The Washington Times
“If someone wants to build a new coal-fired power plant they can, but it will bankrupt them because they will be charged a huge sum for all the greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.”
-Candidate Barack Obama, 2008.
Well, we can’t say we weren’t warned. This week, the unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency released a set of proposed rules designed to target greenhouse gas emissions. If enacted, these rules would virtually destroy the coal industry - just as President Obama once promised he would do.
By: Pete Du Pont
Our America today is very different from the America of some years ago. Government spending is greatly increased, as is the regulation of our economy. The growing size and reach of our government is sapping our nation's strength and independence. And our current president's policies have been quite different from our leaders of some years ago.
One of the best examples of these public policy changes is the huge increase in government regulation in how we generate and use energy, with its negative impact on supply, its focus on financing new and inefficient energy industries, and the resulting higher costs.
The policy of the Obama administration has been not to increase the energy supplies that are so critical to our nation's economic health, but to limit them, to increase energy prices, and to make energy more expensive.
Eliminating tax deductions for the oil and gas industries is at the top of the President's list, which would increase the price of gasoline and home heating oil for everyone. But this fits in with the Obama administration's overall inclination to hamper domestic production, whether through slowness in granting new permits or refusal to open new areas for exploration. In fact oil, production on federal lands was flat between 2009 to 2011, while production on nonfederal lands increased almost 7%.
And it is not just petroleum. Mr. Obama's Environmental Protection Agency wants to increase regulation of coal-fueled electricity plants, which produce almost half of our electricity, so as to drive up the price of electricity and force plants to close. None of this should be surprising, for as we know, Obama's energy secretary, Steven Chu, told The Wall Street Journal in 2008 that we must "figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe."
The president admitted that his cap-and-trade energy proposals, had they come to pass, would cause energy prices to "skyrocket" and bankrupt coal companies. In the Mr. Obama's words, coal fired plants can be built, but if they are, "it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum" for emitting the greenhouse gases.
On the other hand, the current administration is throwing money at "green" energy companies, exemplified by the failed $535 million federal loan guarantee in Solyndra. Alternative energy sources do need to be developed, but it is clear that the federal government is not a wise allocator of taxpayer dollars in this effort. These sources will never be developed to the point of affordability unless the free market is allowed to sort good technologies from bad without the skewing of investment that comes from government trying to pick winners and losers. America badly needs very different national energy policies that will increase our energy supplies, reduce the cost of energy, and get America positively moving again
http://online.wsj.com/article/
By Taylor Kuykendall, Reporter
An opponent once used his willingness to work with the Environmental Protection Agency as a weakness, but West Virginia's senior House representative says he is now convinced the federal agency will not work with the state.
The EPA recently released new standards for coal-fired power plants that would restrict carbon dioxide emissions. The limits would essentially mean no new coal-fired generation will be built without technology to capture carbon dioxide.
Nick Rahall, the top Democrat on the House Transportation and Infrastructure and former head of the Natural Resources Committee, said the EPA has not been reasonable in their approach. While he has not always been in agreement with the EPA, Rahall said he thought he has long thought it would be possible to work with the EPA.
CHARLESTON (AP) — West Virginia's congressional delegation joined Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin on Wednesday in bashing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency over a plan to limit heat-trapping pollution from new power plants, calling it a job-killer for the state and its coal industry.
The rule announced Tuesday could either derail or jump-start plans for 15 new coal-fired power plants in 10 states, depending on when they start construction. Eventually, all coal-fired power plants would need to install equipment to capture half of their carbon pollution.
Tomblin said it's clear the Obama administration is trying to "end the use of coal as we know it." The proposed guidelines would eliminate jobs and drive up electricity costs in West Virginia, he said.