Obama EPA Chief Gina McCarthy: ‘If we do nothing, in our grandkids’ lifetimes, temperatures could rise 10 degrees and seas could rise by four feet’
…Dem House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi: Climate ‘Science Is an Answer to Our Prayers’
…Prof. Roger Pielke Jr. on EPA climate regs: ‘Won’t influence future extreme weather or its impacts in any detectable way’ – ‘The so-called climate benefits of the regulations are essentially nil’
If implemented, they would represent a significant reduction in coal generation from about 39% of the mix to about 33%, a drop of about 15% from total 2012 coal generation (and under different scenarios it could be a bit more or less). The US economy has already seen a larger reduction in coal electricity generation — a 25% drop from 2005 to 2012 — and the economy appears to have survived intact.
However, despite this reduction, the overall change to the US electricity mix is best characterized as marginal, rather than revolutionary. This is especially the case from 2020 to 2030 where there is very little projected change in the mix.
In order to stabilize atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide at a low level (say 550 ppm or lower) requires that the carbon-free proportion of the global energy mix (not just electricity) increase from about 13% carbon free to more than 90%, regardless of how much energy the world ultimately consumes. The US in 2012 was about 13.5% carbon free. These regulations mainly switch electricity from coal to gas and thus do very little to increase the US proportion of carbon-free electricity generation.3…
U.S. Senate Minority Leader To Introduce Bill To Block Obama’s EPA Climate Plan: ‘Would require that simple but important benchmarks be met before his rules could take effect’
U.S. Senate Minority Leader To Introduce Bill To Block Obama’s Emissions Plan
http://www.thegwpf.org/u-s-senate-minority-leader-to-introduce-bill-to-block-obamas-coal-plan/
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell will introduce legislation that would require the administration to meet benchmarks before the emissions rule could take place including ensuring no jobs will be lost or that energy costs would increase.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said President Obama’s proposed power plant emissions regulation is an attempt to make “privileged elitists” feel like something is being done to fight climate change.
“The point of this whole exercise is sadly obvious: it’s not really about science or global warming at all, it’s about making privileged elitists — elitists who may not feel the pinch of a higher utility bill or the pain of a lost job – feel like they ‘did something,’ ” McConnell said on the Senate floor Tuesday.
On Monday, the Environmental Protection Agency announced a new rule that would force power plants to reduce carbon emissions by 30 percent over 15 years.
McConnell said the regulation was Obama’s latest blow in his “war on coal jobs.”
“I’m going to keep vigorously fighting against the Obama administration’s continued war on coal jobs and this extreme, anti-middle class national energy tax in particular,” McConnell said.
He said he’s introducing a bill that would require the administration to meet benchmarks before the rule could take place including ensuring no jobs will be lost or that energy costs would increase.
“I’m introducing legislation, the Coal Country Protection Act, that would push back against the president’s extreme anti-coal scheme,” McConnell said. “It would require that simple but important benchmarks be met before his rules could take effect.”
Full story…
How Obama’s Climate Plan May Affect US Midterm Elections
How Obama’s Climate Plan May Affect US Midterm Elections
http://www.thegwpf.org/how-obamas-climate-plan-may-affect-us-midterm-elections/
Three possible ways Obama’s emissions plan could impact the US Midterm elections in November.
With Monday’s big environmental news — the announcement of the EPA’s plan to cut carbon emissions by 30 percent by 2030 — U.S. politics have also been thrown a curveball. This is especially true of the Democratic Party. While the Republicans have little to do but sit back and attack the EPA’s plan, pushed by President Obama amid the GOP’s intransigence on climate issues, the Democrats have to decide whether to play offense or defense. Or, indeed, whether to tow the party line at all.
It’s an especially precarious position for Democrats because, as was the case with the Affordable Care Act, this proposed emissions cut is a solid 16 years from reaching fruition… if everything went perfectly… So, how precisely is this all going to shake out? Here are three possible ways the EPA’s move could impact Democrats come November.
1. THE DEMOCRATIC COALITION COULD SPLINTER APART
This wouldn’t be such an unusual position for the Democratic Party come election time — competing to win elections in broad, varied political climates, there are always going to be some nominees in statewide races who can’t, won’t, or don’t play ball on mainstream party policy. Texas Democratic Gov. candidate Wendy Davis stoked discord when she said she’d support a 20-week abortion ban if it didn’t come paired with the TRAP laws designed to shut down clinics contained in the bill she famously filibustered, for example.
In no area is this red/blue state divide more pronounced than on matters of the environment, and more specifically, the arm of the federal government coming in to regulate how much one can pollute. There’s maybe no better example of this than the campaign ad West Virginia Democratic Senator Joe Manchin filmed back in 2010, in which he shot the Democrats’ cap-and-trade carbon emissions bill with a rifle.
This top-down regulatory effort is likely to spur similarly defiant protests from within the party itself, weakening any impression of a unified front, and making it all the easier for Republicans to paint them as disordered and chaotic. Which is not the look they want.
2. THE REPUBLICANS COULD HAVE A SECOND THING TO TALK ABOUT
Until this point, the rallying cry for Republicans with elections looming has been a very familiar one: Obamacare …
Forget Green Hype: Europe To Subsidise Exports Of Coal-Fired Power Plants
Forget Green Hype: Europe To Subsidise Exports Of Coal-Fired Power Plants
http://www.thegwpf.org/forget-green-hype-europe-to-subsidise-exports-of-coal-fired-power-plants/
European makers of coal-fired power plants should get financial help to export the equipment, an EU policy paper seen by Reuters says, flying in the face of environmental opposition to any form of subsidy for coal.
Coal is the most polluting fossil fuel, emitting around twice as much carbon dioxide as gas when used to generate power.
As a result, the European Union is phasing out subsidies for domestic coal plants by 2018 in line with its efforts to take a global lead in the fight against climate change.
But a paper prepared by officials from the European Commission trade department says export credits, or preferential loans to help cover exports costs, should be continued for the most modern coal plant technology.
“It has to be recognised that at a global level, coal as an important source of energy production is not going to disappear immediately,” says the paper circulated among representatives of EU member states.
“The EU delegation would consider it logical to try to see how the OECD export credit community can create incentives to ensure that this continued use of coal as an energy source is at least done in the most climate-friendly way possible,” it said, referring to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
The Commission, the EU executive, does not comment on unpublished documents.
An EU diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the policy paper was informal, but had received positive reactions from “most member states”.
The diplomat added the OECD export credit group would debate the issue later this month. The Paris-based OECD was not immediately available for comment.
The size of the credits are not huge, but environmental campaigners say any financing for coal should stop.
In an April briefing paper on coal finance, the World Wildlife Fund conservation group said countries around the world provided $7 billion over the period 2007-2013 for developing coal overseas.
Of this, export credit preferential loans accounted for some $5 billion, with Germany, followed by France, being the biggest providers in Europe.
Full story…
Renewables Not Fossil Fuels Are A Threat To Energy Security Says New Report – ‘The widespread use of wind and solar energy poses a serious risk to the UK’s energy security’
Renewables Not Fossil Fuels Are A Threat To Energy Security Says New Report
http://www.thegwpf.org/renewables-not-fossil-fuels-are-a-threat-to-energy-security-says-new-report/
The widespread use of wind and solar energy poses a serious risk to the UK’s energy security and could undermine the reliability of the country’s energy supply, according to a new report from the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF).
The crisis in Ukraine and Crimea has focused the minds of policy makers on energy security. One of the key arguments for subsidies to renewable energy has been that fossil fuels are running out and the UK must become less reliant on foreign imports.
However, the GWPF report argues, supplies of unconventional oil and gas have become ever more abundant in recent years.
Far from providing energy security, the intermittent and non-dispatchable nature of renewables, such as wind and solar, mean they are unable to effectively respond to changing demand.
The report points to three factors that show the risk to UK energy security from fossil fuels are wildly overblown.
Markets provide security
Both oil and gas can be bought securely and safely on the world market. Energy markets over the years have actually proved far more stable than the changing mix of government policies intended to aid renewables. Government policy has in fact become an unreliable guide for the future of the energy mix.
The GWPF point to the cuts in government funding for solar and wind feed-in tariffs and the beginnings of taxes on the profits made by generating electricity with renewables.
Furthermore, when it comes to energy policy, as in most other arenas, government failures are often more far reaching than those of their private sector counterparts. “If the government implements an energy policy that turns out to be a mistake, all market actors are affected because the government normally forces all companies and households to comply with its policies”, says the report’s author Philipp Mueller.
Large and flexible markets are better able to absorb supply shocks and allow supply and demand to respond to the problem. The GWPF cites the example of Venezuela’s oil workers strike in 2002. US consumers were protected by freedom to import and the absence of price regulation from the physical disruption of oil supplies.
Energy embargoes fail
Fears of energy embargoes are wildly exagerated, according to the report. This is because there is no such thing as a homogeneous national oil market; there is only the global oil …
Watch Now: Warmist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Breaks Down Obama’s Carbon Rules, Blasts Koch Brothers on ‘The Ed Show’
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Breaks Down Obama’s Carbon Rules, Blasts Koch Brothers on ‘The Ed Show’
http://ecowatch.com/2014/06/03/robert-f-kennedy-jr-obama-carbon/
Watch the Waterkeeper president discuss the Koch’s “corporate kleptocracy”……