Skip to main content

"Cap-and-trade legislation may have failed in Congress in 2010, but that doesn’t mean that this is the last we will hear from this economically-harmful policy."
 
"The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through the Clean Air Act has been busily proposing and finalizing nearly 200 major policy rules aimed at curbing carbon and other particulate emissions. This despite the fact that the Clean Air Act was never intended for this purpose and widespread opposition exists among the business community, citizens and states."
 
"According to some estimates, enough coal-fired power plants would close to equal about 30-70 gigawatts of electricity generated nationwide. A single gigawatt of energy can power about 750,000 homes."

----------------------------------------------------

Climate doesn’t kill people, weather does.

Last edited by Winston Niles Rumfoord
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

It's not rocket science but being able to afford life under Obama will be.

 

Proposed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations would cost AEP $6 billion to $8 billion by the end of the decade and raise electricity prices for its business customers by 10 to 35 percent or more, the utility said today.

AEP said that cumulative costs of EPA regulations have been “vastly underestimated”, and a constrained timeframe for compliance could drive actual costs even higher.

The utility outlined its plans for complying with EPA regulations including the Hazardous Air Pollutants Rule, Clean Air Transport Rule, Regional Haze Program Implementation Plans, Coal Combustion Residuals Rule and proposed Clean Water Act standards.

 

http://www.environmentalleader...inesses-rates-10-35/

Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:

The focus is on SO2 and heavy metals which are not harmless

 

Give Southern Company a tax deduction for implementation of scrubbers.    SC is the largest polluter in the coal power industry.  AlObama wins again!!!

Now you're actually talking sense.

 

This will help out more than anything in the immediate future.

 

Why don't you spread this idea around among all your greenie friends, and we can work together sensibly?

Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:

The focus is on SO2 and heavy metals which are not harmless

 

Give Southern Company a tax deduction for implementation of scrubbers.    SC is the largest polluter in the coal power industry.  AlObama wins again!!!

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Cap and trade primarily relates to CO2 emmisions.

 

SO2, NOx, and heavy metal capture has already been addressed as coal plants have drop dead dates, depending on their age, to install scubbers or scr's or else shut down.  This is nothing new.

Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:

The focus is on SO2 and heavy metals which are not harmless

 

Give Southern Company a tax deduction for implementation of scrubbers.    SC is the largest polluter in the coal power industry.  AlObama wins again!!!

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Cap and trade primarily relates to CO2 emmisions.

 

SO2, NOx, and heavy metal capture has already been addressed as coal plants have drop dead dates, depending on their age, to install scubbers or scr's or else shut down.  This is nothing new.

 

 

 

Go ahead, Ditto, post something else stupid. Guess you didn't count on Mr. Hooberbloob having actual knowledge when you were doing you copy/paste "research".

Originally Posted by interventor1212:

Wasn't anyone listening to Obama on 3 Nov 2008, when he promised, "Energy Prices Will Skyrocket Under My Cap and Trade Plan."  He's merely carrying out a campaign promise and demonstrating his disdain for the US as it is.  Wasn't anyone listening!

Nope, most weren't listening...

Originally Posted by interventor1212:

Wasn't anyone listening to Obama on 3 Nov 2008, when he promised, "Energy Prices Will Skyrocket Under My Cap and Trade Plan."  He's merely carrying out a campaign promise and demonstrating his disdain for the US as it is.  Wasn't anyone listening!


I listened, otherwise I would still be in fossil power.  At least now the overtime is abundant to be able to pay for the power I'm helping to make.

Originally Posted by Blind Melon Chit'lin:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:

The focus is on SO2 and heavy metals which are not harmless

 

Give Southern Company a tax deduction for implementation of scrubbers.    SC is the largest polluter in the coal power industry.  AlObama wins again!!!

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Cap and trade primarily relates to CO2 emmisions.

 

SO2, NOx, and heavy metal capture has already been addressed as coal plants have drop dead dates, depending on their age, to install scubbers or scr's or else shut down.  This is nothing new.

 

 

 

Go ahead, Ditto, post something else stupid. Guess you didn't count on Mr. Hooberbloob having actual knowledge when you were doing you copy/paste "research".

 

Here is a nice link for you   http://www.epa.gov/CAIR/basic.html

It has info on the Clean Air Interstate Rule which is a cap and trade program to reduce emissions of SO2 and NOX.  CO2 is not mentioned even once.   Scrubber technonogy has been around for decades but no coal plants will install them until forced by the government.  Much like catalytic convertors on cars, which radically improved urban air quality, there are no corps that act as responsible citizens and implement the use of such devices preemptively, when the choice is profit or a few dead people. 

 

Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:
Originally Posted by Blind Melon Chit'lin:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:

The focus is on SO2 and heavy metals which are not harmless

 

Give Southern Company a tax deduction for implementation of scrubbers.    SC is the largest polluter in the coal power industry.  AlObama wins again!!!

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Cap and trade primarily relates to CO2 emmisions.

 

SO2, NOx, and heavy metal capture has already been addressed as coal plants have drop dead dates, depending on their age, to install scubbers or scr's or else shut down.  This is nothing new.

 

 

 

Go ahead, Ditto, post something else stupid. Guess you didn't count on Mr. Hooberbloob having actual knowledge when you were doing you copy/paste "research".

 

Here is a nice link for you   http://www.epa.gov/CAIR/basic.html

It has info on the Clean Air Interstate Rule which is a cap and trade program to reduce emissions of SO2 and NOX.  CO2 is not mentioned even once.   Scrubber technonogy has been around for decades but no coal plants will install them until forced by the government.  Much like catalytic convertors on cars, which radically improved urban air quality, there are no corps that act as responsible citizens and implement the use of such devices preemptively, when the choice is profit or a few dead people. 

 

 

Complete rubbish ditto - Cap and trade is synonomous with CO2.  Have you been living under a rock?

 

Many, many coal plants have scrubbers to remove SO2.  NOx removal is done by SCR (selective catalytic reduction).  Many, many coal plants have SCR's as well.  TVA, for instance, has been using both technologies for decades. 

 

Both types of pollution control are very complicated and it's not something that can be simply attached to the flue gas duct work and expected to work.

 

 

Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:
Originally Posted by Blind Melon Chit'lin:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:

The focus is on SO2 and heavy metals which are not harmless

 

Give Southern Company a tax deduction for implementation of scrubbers.    SC is the largest polluter in the coal power industry.  AlObama wins again!!!

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Cap and trade primarily relates to CO2 emmisions.

 

SO2, NOx, and heavy metal capture has already been addressed as coal plants have drop dead dates, depending on their age, to install scubbers or scr's or else shut down.  This is nothing new.

 

 

 

Go ahead, Ditto, post something else stupid. Guess you didn't count on Mr. Hooberbloob having actual knowledge when you were doing you copy/paste "research".

 

Here is a nice link for you   http://www.epa.gov/CAIR/basic.html

It has info on the Clean Air Interstate Rule which is a cap and trade program to reduce emissions of SO2 and NOX.  CO2 is not mentioned even once.   Scrubber technonogy has been around for decades but no coal plants will install them until forced by the government.  Much like catalytic convertors on cars, which radically improved urban air quality, there are no corps that act as responsible citizens and implement the use of such devices preemptively, when the choice is profit or a few dead people. 

 

 

Complete rubbish ditto - Cap and trade is synonomous with CO2.  Have you been living under a rock?

 

Many, many coal plants have scrubbers to remove SO2.  NOx removal is done by SCR (selective catalytic reduction).  Many, many coal plants have SCR's as well.  TVA, for instance, has been using both technologies for decades. 

 

Both types of pollution control are very complicated and it's not something that can be simply attached to the flue gas duct work and expected to work.

 

 

 

 

See ditto, when ya' get shot down this many times it's called a "flamerino".

Clean Coal is a dirty lie. We should be running, not walking, to sources of energy that don't destroy the planet and pose a danger to those who mine the crap.

 

Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 are well above the danger level and are resulting in superheating of the planet, leading to these freak, destructive weather patterns.

 

Coal is the enemy. 

Originally Posted by The Nagel:

Nox is also in the greek pantheon of dieties....

she is the daughter of Chaos, and represents the Night, while her 1/2 siblings, the titans, are considered powers of the day...

 

 

=============================================

Ya, uh-huh.

 

It's also what your car's engine does when you let the oil level get too low


 

Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:
  Much like catalytic convertors on cars, which radically improved urban air quality, there are no corps that act as responsible citizens and implement the use of such devices preemptively, when the choice is profit or a few dead people. 

 

Why not eliminate cars and driving.  It creates more innocent "dead people" every year than anything else I can think of.  It would be pre-emptive to eliminate driving.  Where do you want to conveniently draw that line in the sand?  I'm not against proper controls and measures for anything, just find it ironic what people do consider worth the risk for "a few dead people".

Originally Posted by LE89:
Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:
  Much like catalytic convertors on cars, which radically improved urban air quality, there are no corps that act as responsible citizens and implement the use of such devices preemptively, when the choice is profit or a few dead people. 

 

Why not eliminate cars and driving.  It creates more innocent "dead people" every year than anything else I can think of.  It would be pre-emptive to eliminate driving.  Where do you want to conveniently draw that line in the sand?  I'm not against proper controls and measures for anything, just find it ironic what people do consider worth the risk for "a few dead people".

 

Thats a valid argument.  Airbags(government mandated), minimum crash protection standards(government mandated), active restraint systems(also government mandated) have reduced traffic fatalities significantly, but traffic accidents still kill about 35,000/year. 

The outlier is tobacco.  Tobacco kills 100,000+ people per year and only government intrusion is to tax it heavily.  The suit which found that smoking causes cancer and cost the tobacco companies billions, is just and added business expense and has not affected their profits.  The cost to Medicare and Medicaid on an annual basis is probably in the $50-100billion dollar range, all paid for by the taxpayer. 

 

Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:
Originally Posted by LE89:
Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:
  Much like catalytic convertors on cars, which radically improved urban air quality, there are no corps that act as responsible citizens and implement the use of such devices preemptively, when the choice is profit or a few dead people. 

 

Why not eliminate cars and driving.  It creates more innocent "dead people" every year than anything else I can think of.  It would be pre-emptive to eliminate driving.  Where do you want to conveniently draw that line in the sand?  I'm not against proper controls and measures for anything, just find it ironic what people do consider worth the risk for "a few dead people".

 

Thats a valid argument.  Airbags(government mandated), minimum crash protection standards(government mandated), active restraint systems(also government mandated) have reduced traffic fatalities significantly, but traffic accidents still kill about 35,000/year. 

The outlier is tobacco.  Tobacco kills 100,000+ people per year and only government intrusion is to tax it heavily.  The suit which found that smoking causes cancer and cost the tobacco companies billions, is just and added business expense and has not affected their profits.  The cost to Medicare and Medicaid on an annual basis is probably in the $50-100billion dollar range, all paid for by the taxpayer. 

 

The Government could also mandate a 20 mph National speed limit, bound to be safer and cut that 35,000 deaths per year to practically zero.  Maybe limit your cig purchase to one cig per day. 

Originally Posted by LE89:

 

The Government could also mandate a 20 mph National speed limit, bound to be safer and cut that 35,000 deaths per year to practically zero.  Maybe limit your cig purchase to one cig per day. 

 

People are free to implement your ideas on their own.  But, society has decided that we will have the government force corps to make our highways safer  be mandating technological advances that improve the crash-worthiness of automobiles.  

Society has also decided that people are free to kill themselves with cigs, but smoking in public will not be tolerated anymore. 

Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:
Originally Posted by LE89:

 

The Government could also mandate a 20 mph National speed limit, bound to be safer and cut that 35,000 deaths per year to practically zero.  Maybe limit your cig purchase to one cig per day. 

 

People are free to implement your ideas on their own.  But, society has decided that we will have the government force corps to make our highways safer  be mandating technological advances that improve the crash-worthiness of automobiles.  

Society has also decided that people are free to kill themselves with cigs, but smoking in public will not be tolerated anymore. 


Gov't changed speed limit from 70+ to 55 mph due to oil crisis, realized it was also safer (no kidding) and left it there for a decade or two.  Later allowed states (imagine that) to set or raise their speed limits (less safe).  I guess technological advances lowered the death quota so low we got to raise the speed limit back up 

Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:

Human beings are not very good at self-preservation, hence the need for seat belt laws.  And speed limits.  And most other government regulation. Thats why we need emission controls on powerplants. 

 

Humans do an excellent job of preserving their own well being.  The vast majority of us don't drive recklessly or behave in manner that will endanger our lives.  It's mostly that some people don't care what happens to the other guy is why we need these laws.  In other words, it's selfishness.

Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:

Human beings are not very good at self-preservation, hence the need for seat belt laws.  And speed limits.  And most other government regulation. Thats why we need emission controls on powerplants. 

 

Humans do an excellent job of preserving their own well being.  The vast majority of us don't drive recklessly or behave in manner that will endanger our lives.  It's mostly that some people don't care what happens to the other guy is why we need these laws.  In other words, it's selfishness.

With that statement , I completely agree with you. I'll give an example, people like Winston don't give a damm about other people, therefore the pollution produced by burning coal , producing acid rain (helped by the scrubbers at TVA;s biggest plants) just harms people downwind of those power plants. If Winston , or anyone else for that matter. live upwind of those plants, why would they even care if others have health problems from coal plants. Here in the Shoals, we live downwind of Colbert. Whether it is making you sick , or not, it for sure ain't good for you.

Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:

Try to find a newspaper story about a fatal auto accident that doesn't contain the following words: "wasn't wearing a seat belt".

http://www.kvia.com/news/23107005/detail.html

 

"The impact was so severe, it tore away the right side of the Mazda. Carbajal, who was wearing his seat belt, was ejected from the car. Police officials said he later died at the scene."

 

Nobody is arguing seatbelts don't save lives, but when you make a dumb statement like "try to find", I just can't help myself.  By the way, I used your magical google machine.

 

I don't collect newspapers, but it ran on ABC news, I'm sure it made a newspaper somwhere.

 

Despite the fact that I knew a lady who died in a 20mph vs. 25 mph head on car crash who was wearing her seat belt and had air bags, the air bag killed her when it crushed her throat, I use a seatbelt anyway, since the odds are better with one than without one.

Originally Posted by interventor1212:

You do understand the scrubbers remove sulfur, don't you?

If you were addressing me, I plainly said that scrubbers helped with the acid rain problem (So2). Scrubbers are NOT on all units, like Colbert, the first 9 units at Widdows Creek, 2 of the 3 units at Paradise (at least last time I was there) , Allen, and some of the units at Shawnee , and possibally some more I can't think of right now. (at least that was the case a few years ago)

Wikddows Creek is supposedly responsible for a lot of the acid rain in the Smoky Mtns. which has killed some of the trees, and scrubbers on the two big units there was to help, but that still leaves the original 9 without the scrubbers. 

Originally Posted by Winston Niles Rumfoord:

The truth is, Obama hates coal, not because he knows anything about it, but because his brainwashed green constituents hate it.

 

Let's turn all the coal-fired plants off for a day and see what they think.

 

--------

Once solar panels and wind farms are installed, you won't need them anymore.

 

Oh, you must be talking about today? Well, I'm not. It's a fool who doesn't plan for the future. Get back to me in about 10 years. I'll bet you will see much more of the Greensburg, Kansas type green energy. Then we won't need that stink that smells like Walker Country in the wintertime.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×