May 21, 2013

*Big Oil* tosses coal under the bus in favor of profits

We all know one of the few promises Obama kept in his 2008 campaign was he would bankrupt coal. We’ve all heard his words, but they should be ingrained in our minds so here is the video once more:

We all know about all the new regs from the EPA which has caused many coal plants to shut down, three in my area alone. We know about all the new coal plants which were planned years ago but plans have been scrapped because of the cost. We know about all the layoffs in the coal industry. We know the United Mine Workers did not endorse Obama for re-election. We know about all the miners in southeast Ohio who rallied in support of Romney’s pro-coal stance. We know that Murray Coal just threw up their hands and closed a mine in Ohio. We know Mike Bloomberg gave $50 million out of his own pocket to the Sierra Club in an effort to “dump coal.”  This is just the tip of the iceberg.

And we know that Obama and the Dept. of Interior is after not only coal, but natural gas and oil in favor of failed wind and solar energy. We are frustrated because Interior after the Gulf BP spill shut down the majority of drilling in federal offshore areas. We watched Shell Oil struggle to get a permit for drilling in Alaska’s Beaufort Sea and never got started this year because of equipment failure.

We were elated that cap and trade was never passed. But just as ACORN has rebranded itself and is still out there like cockroaches hiding from the daylight, so has cap and trade “rebranded itself” into a proposed “carbon tax.” From Bloomberg:

A carbon tax would force electricity producers, refiners and manufacturers to pay a fee for the greenhouse gases they emit. It is gaining interest as lawmakers and President Barack Obama pledge to simplify the corporate tax code and raise revenue to narrow the deficit. The devastation from superstorm Sandy following the wildfires and drought of this summer have also increased concern about global warming.

And guess who some of the major players are who have signed on to this proposal? None other than RoyalDutchShell, ExxonMobil and BP. And why?

The most obvious reason why big oil and gas companies would support a huge new tax on their own products is that it would kill coal first. Burning coal emits roughly twice as much carbon dioxide as producing the same amount of energy by burning natural gas. A $20 a ton of CO2 tax would roughly double the current price of coal used for producing electricity. That would provide a huge incentive for utilities to switch to natural gas. Exxon Mobil owns the world’s largest privately-owned reserves of natural gas. Shell and BP also own huge gas reserves.

Shell has it’s HQ in the Hague, BP in the UK, but even though Exxon is headquartered in the U.S. most of it’s drilling is done internationally. And it might surprise you who the “leader” is in this international effort to impose a *carbon tax*: none other than Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales:

You can scroll through all the signatories on his site, one other major player is Norway’s StatOil, and of course all the environmentalists.

“The source hit hardest is coal,” David Kreutzer, a research fellow in energy economics at the Heritage Foundation in Washington who opposes the tax, said in an interview. “The biggest substitution for coal is going to be natural gas.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) admits getting a carbon tax through Congress will be difficult, however we all know Obama’s propensity for back-door Executive Orders like amnesty and welfare DE-form.

So just like almost every other corporation, *Big Oil* is favoring “profits” over “principle.”

Crossposted at Unified Patriots and Grumpy Elder

Share

EPA’s “New Source Performance Standards” are out and it isn’t pretty

As Obama’s “War on Coal” continues to escalate we now have the new regulations from EPA we knew were coming last month when EPA Chair Lisa Jackson announced her “carbon pollution standard” for coal-fired plants.

Jackson and her band of bureaucrats have been up to their old tricks lately, primarily focusing their energy on the systematic destruction of the coal industry and the jobs, affordable power, and economic revenue it provides. Here’s the latest:

First, Daniel Simmons of the Institute for Energy Research (IER) exposes the utter lack of any logic in the EPA’s latest cap-and-tax greenhouse gas regulations that essentially outlaw building coal-fired power plants. Warning: 257 pages of bureaucratic double-speak:

If greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide “endanger public health and welfare” shouldn’t the EPA do something about it? Should the agency work to actually reduce the danger? Isn’t that the point of regulation—to reduce some of the alleged harm?

But the EPA isn’t reducing any danger here because according to the agency [page 49], “This proposed rule also will not have a direct impact on U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases under expected economic conditions.”

If global warming is a problem that the EPA needs to address, then why are they working on imposing rules that the agency admits “will not have [a] direct impact of U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases?” It’s tough to see how EPA regulation makes logical sense. Does the EPA not really care about global warming or are they working to end America’s use of coal? Does the EPA only want to increase the price of energy by making it harder to build low-cost electricity generation?

Then, former U.S. Chamber official Reed Rubinstein argues that the Obama administration’s chief first-term priority has been systematically destroying the coal industry:

Nevertheless, from its first day the Administration has waged a war of attrition in Congress, the courts and the federal regulatory arena against coal. The legislative assault collapsed when Congress rejected cap and trade, and the courts have not been kind to the Administration…

But in the regulatory sphere, where bureaucrats reign at the expense of public transparency and judicial or congressional review, the EPA has run unleashed and unchecked. Since 2008, the Administration has proposed or issued thousands of pages of regulations to burden coal-generated electric power.

Finally, the icing on the cake is a report from the New York Times which details how the EPA is fining businesses for failing to use a type of biofuel that is not commercially available:

When the companies that supply motor fuel close the books on 2011, they will pay about $6.8 million in penalties to the Treasury because they failed to mix a special type of biofuel into their gasoline and diesel as required by law.

But there was none to be had. Outside a handful of laboratories and workshops, the ingredient, cellulosic biofuel, does not exist.

Yes folks, you really can’t make this stuff up.

biofuels

Photo courtesy of New York Times.

Crossposted at Unified Patriots.

Share