United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: This is why the economy is not recovering
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/wa ... d-kill-jobs-boost-energy-bills
Published: Jun 9, 2011
Author: Paul Bedard
Post Date: 2011-06-09 14:58:06 by no gnu taxes
Keywords: None
Views: 18639
Comments: 43
Two new EPA pollution regulations will slam the coal industry so hard that hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost, and electric rates will skyrocket 11 percent to over 23 percent, according to a new study based on government data. Overall, the rules aimed at making the air cleaner could cost the coal-fired power plant industry $180 billion, warns a trade group. [Check out a roundup of political cartoons on energy policy.] “Many of these severe impacts would hit families living in states already facing serious economic challenges,” said Steve Miller, president of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. “Because of these impacts, EPA should make major changes to the proposed regulations before they are finalized,” he said. The EPA, however, tells Whispers that the hit the industry will suffer is worth the health benefits. “EPA has taken a number of sensible steps to protect public health, while also working with industry and other stakeholders to ensure that these important Clean Air Act standards—such as the first ever national Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for coal-fired power plants—are reasonable, common-sense, and achievable,” said spokesman Brendan Gilfillan. [Read Rep. Darrell Issa: Obama's Bad Policy, Harmful Regulations Add to Gas Prices.] What’s more, officials said that just one of the rules to cut sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions will would yield up to $290 billion in annual health and welfare benefits in 2014. They say that amounts to preventing up to 36,000 premature deaths, 26,000 hospital and emergency room visits, and 240,000 cases of aggravated asthma. “This far outweighs the estimated annual costs,” says an official on background. [Check out political cartoons on the economy.] Still, the EPA did note that the two new antipollution rules are “pending” and that the agency has “accepted and are considering feedback” from the industry. The industry says the costs and potential to lose four jobs for every new clean energy job created isn’t worth the rules, especially in a job-starved economy. [See a slide show of the best cities to find a job.] Referring to the analysis of the EPA regulations from National Economic Research Associates, Miller said they would be the most expensive rules ever imposed on power plants. Coal-fired energy plants currently fuel about half of the nation’s energy supply.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 24.
#1. To: no gnu taxes (#0)
(Edited)
Fuckers want to be able to breathe? And the economy has recovered from the Bush Reecession even though the GOP is working hard to stop it...
Air quality is better than it has just about ever been? Bush Reecession Oh the one that tax cuts caused? When unemployment was less than every single month under Kenyanesian economics.
You put credibility in some envirowhacko website that makes bullshit statements like that? The Air is Getting Cleaner: But the Media are Nowhere to be Seen On Wednesday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) quietly released their annual report on air quality trends. You would never know it from picking up a newspaper or reading news websites, but the report contains great news. Air quality in the United States has dramatically improved and, according to all indicators, it will continue to improve. The report can be summed up with this graphic from EPA: GDP, vehicle miles traveled, population, and energy consumption have all increased since 1990. But despite the fact that more people are using more energy to produce more goods and services, air pollution emissions have decreased. EPA reports that air quality has improved for the six main air pollutants: Since 1990, nationwide air quality has improved significantly for the six common air pollutants. These six pollutants are ground-level ozone, particle pollution (PM2.5 and PM10), lead, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), and sulfur dioxide (SO2). Nationally, air pollution was lower in 2008 than in 1990 for: * 8-hour ozone, by 14 percent * annual PM2.5 (since 2000), by 19 percent * PM10 , by 31 percent * Lead, by 78 percent * NO2 , by 35 percent * 8-hour CO, by 68 percent * annual SO2 , by 59 percent The below graphic, from EPA’s website, (but not in the actual air trends report) shows air quality trends since 1970. These trends are even more dramatic than the 1990 to 2008 numbers. The Bad News: the Press Does Not Seem Interested in Telling the American People Our Air Quality has Dramatically Increased This is good news that air quality continues to improve and even more so because the American people do not know it. According to a 2004 poll from the Foundation for Clean Air Progress, only 29 percent of people thought that “America’s air quality is better than . . . it was in 1970.” One reason that the American people do not know this is because the press does not report on it. So far not one major newspaper has written a story about the good news in this air trends report—there’s nothing from the Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, or any of the other major news outlets. The only story we could find is from E&E News (a subscription-based environment and energy news service) and even then it was the 12th story in their afternoon publication. It’s tough for the American people to lean to the truth about air quality when the media does not report the good news. Our Air is Getting Cleaner Today we can breathe easier knowing that our air is much cleaner than in the past. Even though the media is not reporting this good news to the American people, our air quality has substantially improved and will continue to improve. The data shows the truth.
Strawman, Everyone knows that the air quality HAS gotten better. Everyone also knows that what has been done has been over the objections of people like you. And nothing you posted refutes what I posted.
You posted unsubstantiated junk from a whacko site with an obvious bias against the US. Everyone knows that the air quality HAS gotten better. Then what are you arguing about? Comparing the level of industry and transportation to air quality, I'd say we have the best air quality in the world, and it is overall quite healthy. Destroying the energy industry isn't going yo accomplish a damn thing except worsen the Obana depression. It is insane wackos who are calling for this
You've laid no foundation for that claim. I'd say we have the best air quality in the world, and it is overall quite healthy. And I'd say that you're out of your fucking mind. And we both know that out of the two of us, I'm correct and you're not.
There was no foundation for your website's claim other than "wave your hand" claims based on vague criteria. What is the average level of SO2 in Switzerland? CO? PM? Ozone? Compare that to the US overall. I'd say we have the best air quality in the world, and it is overall quite healthy. And I'd say that you're out of your fucking mind. I work in the industry, dumbass, on the regulatory side. You have not made the first case for you position here.
There is a link to the study and methodology at the bottom of the page.
Really? Won't you explain it? Because the only link to the bottom of the page I get is a Reuters link with results of "page not found." And tell me in your own words how yow know it's true. The United States, dragged down by poor scores on greenhouse gas emissions and the impact of air pollution on ecosystems Can't you see what you are looking at? Find me the criticisms of Mexico or China? Probably there, but token.
I'm not going to teach you how to use the internet, dickweed. If you can't click links it's not my problem. What you should do, if you believe this site to be in error, is to post some contrary information instead of promoting, of all things, YOUR career as an "industry regulator". You should get on your knees and blow Boofer every day, Paddy. Without him, YOU are the biggest joke on the world wide web.
#28. To: war (#24)
What you should do, if you believe this site to be in error, is to post some contrary information instead of promoting, of all things, YOUR career as an "industry regulator". There is no link. It's certainly not showing on my screen at the site. What you should do, if you believe this site to be in error, is to post some contrary information instead of promoting, of all things, YOUR career as an "industry regulator". There is nothing to refute. It's just vague bogus criteria weighted towards climate climate change. It's just stuff they made up. You should get on your knees and blow Boofer every day, Paddy. Without him, YOU are the biggest joke on the world wide web. Vile invective? That's all you've got? Biggest joke? Projecting, are you?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: war (#1)
Fuckers want to be able to breathe?
#4. To: no gnu taxes (#2)
Air quality is better than it has just about ever been?
#5. To: war (#4)
The United States, dragged down by poor scores on greenhouse gas emissions and the impact of air pollution on ecosystems
#10. To: no gnu taxes (#5)
#15. To: war (#10)
And nothing you posted refutes what I posted.
#17. To: no gnu taxes (#15)
You posted unsubstantiated junk from a whacko site with an obvious bias against the US.
#18. To: war (#17)
You've laid no foundation for that claim.
#20. To: no gnu taxes (#18)
(Edited)
There was no foundation for your website's claim other than "wave your hand" claims based on vague criteria.
#23. To: war (#20)
(Edited)
Thwere is a link to the study and methodology at the bottom of the page.
#24. To: no gnu taxes (#23)
(Edited)
Replies to Comment # 24. If you can't click links it's not my problem.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 24.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]