Has the Obama administration learned anything from losing millions of dollars in the solar energy company Solyndra? Not that much, says the Institute for Energy Research’s Dan Kish, an expert in the field. “Solyndra is just the tip of the iceberg,” Kish said. “Other companies have failed. They haven’t made as big a splash as Solyndra. Other companies are going to fail.”
With this on the horizon, the Obama administration continues it's war on coal fired electrical generators, forcing the closure of 6 more plants in Maryland, Ohio and Pennsylvania, thanks to the new draconian EPA "green house gas" emissions standards.
Its generation subsidiaries will retire six older coal-fired power plants located in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Maryland by September 1, 2012. The decision to close the plants is based on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), which were recently finalized, and other environmental regulations.But, we knew this was coming Obama said as much during that 2008 election cycle.
He said this repeatedly during the campaign.
The problem is not technical, uh, and the problem is not mastery of the legislative intricacies of Washington. The problem is, uh, can you get the American people to say, “This is really important,” and force their representatives to do the right thing? That requires mobilizing a citizenry. That requires them understanding what is at stake. Uh, and climate change is a great example.Since Mr. Obama couldn't get "Cap & Trade" through Congress in 2009-10 when he had absolute majorities in both houses, he has instead chosen to do so through the EPA, via a "regulatory back door." One in which Congress has very little control over. You can expect your electric bills to begin their upward march in the next few months.
You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.
They — you — you can already see what the arguments will be during the general election. People will say, “Ah, Obama and Al Gore, these folks, they’re going to destroy the economy, this is going to cost us eight trillion dollars,” or whatever their number is. Um, if you can’t persuade the American people that yes, there is going to be some increase in electricity rates on the front end, but that over the long term, because of combinations of more efficient energy usage, changing lightbulbs and more efficient appliance, but also technology improving how we can produce clean energy, the economy would benefit.
If we can’t make that argument persuasively enough, you — you, uh, can be Lyndon Johnson, you can be the master of Washington. You’re not going to get that done.
How's that hope and change for you?