Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-09-2011, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Seattle Area
3,451 posts, read 7,056,509 times
Reputation: 3614

Advertisements

Duplicate thread Obama administration's EPA regs to kill jobs and soar energy prices
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-09-2011, 09:50 AM
 
Location: Philaburbia
41,965 posts, read 75,217,462 times
Reputation: 66933
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
Has there been a mass epidemic of people choking to death during the time frame that coal has been used for energy purposes?
No ... because of EPA requirements on coal-burning power plants.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 10:32 AM
 
12,270 posts, read 11,333,807 times
Reputation: 8066
The timing of these new regulations is so poor, and so potentially damaging to our fragile American economy, I have to wonder why this administration is pushing them now. This is the sort of unpopular move by the EPA that Obama could have gotten away with the first year of his second term in office. Makes you wonder what kind of internal poll numbers they are looking at for 2012, both for Obama and the Senate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 10:35 AM
 
898 posts, read 828,061 times
Reputation: 590
The lib zombies are amazing to watch as they contort themselves to agree with anything the fool they elected does. They have no brains, no soul, and no hope.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 10:43 AM
 
326 posts, read 872,202 times
Reputation: 267
AEP Says New Air Rules May Cost Up to $8 Billion, 600 Jobs - Bloomberg
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 10:44 AM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,280,580 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by sol11 View Post
This article points out some contradiction in the Obama administration. One one hand the Obama pushes electric automobiles for transportation, and on the other cripples the very industry that will be have to provide the electricity to charge the electric automobile batteries.

.........Obama already called for a 15% reduction in demand for electricity — at the same time he and his allies want transportation to switch from gasoline to electricity. Obama never explained this particular contradiction. How does one switch tens of millions of vehicles from gasoline to electricity while not Increasing demand, let alone by cutting it 15%? And when trying to break free from a recession, the nation will need greater production in energy, not a reduction.
.........

Obama: We’ll bankrupt any new coal plants « Hot Air
Darn it, Sol, the Great and Mighty Oz-bama tried to get that Cap and Trade passed by Congress and failed. Now he has to use the EPA to break all those coal companies, etc. I love to see left leaning people talk about doing that and in so doing manage to display their ignorance about where our electric power comes from. That nasty old coal that is the generator of power in China to the tune of one new plant per week or day, whichever it is.

As for the new electric autos that are being pushed by the Great and Mighty One, maybe we need to study who owns most of the company that proposes to build most of those cars. It is Government Motors I think and they sure haven't paid back as much of their loan as Chrysler says they have.

I wonder how many of these lefties remember the Oz-bama promises of 2008. Maybe none?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 12:27 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,280,580 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kracer View Post
The unexplained contradiction that marks the Obama administration speaks to the great orator's failure as a communicator and suggests he is conducting nefarious business that requires a covert strategy.

This leads one to the conclusion that the effect of being stunned by actions that make no logical sense are coincidentally useful to deflect consideration of where Obama is trying to drag us.

Obama is a man of low moral character and nefarious intent. He has weighed his options and concluded America must suffer in order to bring them salvation.
And since he couldn't get the Congress to break those coal companies he is using the EPA and their new regulations to try to get it done. The kind of regulations they are using for this are the very things that only Congress can constitutionally do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 12:28 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,280,580 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlerain View Post
Do you prefer the other thread? If so why not just stay there and leave this one alone?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 12:30 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,280,580 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81 View Post
No ... because of EPA requirements on coal-burning power plants.
But all of these new regulations wouldn't be needed, surely, if they had any others that could keep the air clean. No, these are intended to break up the coal companies just as the Great and Mighty Oz-bama promised to do in his campaign and couldn't get the Congress to pass Cap and Trade.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 12:35 PM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,874 posts, read 26,521,399 times
Reputation: 25773
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81 View Post
No ... because of EPA requirements on coal-burning power plants.
You're saying that under current regulations, no one is choking to death from particulates. I agree.

So then, why do we need these new, expensive, job killing regulations?

There is such a thing as diminishing returns. If you can reduce 90% of the polution for X dollars, and the next 5% (or 1/18 as much) costs 10 times X dollars, we have to ask if we really need that next marginal improvement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top