Search This Blog

De Omnibus Dubitandum - Lux Veritas

Showing posts with label Eliminate EPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eliminate EPA. Show all posts

Friday, May 3, 2024

The Biden Administration Ever More Delusional On Energy

@ Manhattan Contrarian

Three and a half years into the Biden Administration, and to an ordinary citizen on the ground it might seem like not that much has changed as to energy. Despite hundreds of government actions and initiative in an all-of-government regulatory onslaught to transform the energy economy, the important things have been remarkable stable. Production of oil and gas are actually up, and prices increases have been relatively modest — far less than one might have anticipated from the extreme regulatory hostility to production. The percentage of what is called “primary energy” (that is, energy for everything, not just electricity) coming from fossil fuels has remained nearly unchanged. EIA data here for 2022 (latest I can find) show about 79% of U.S. primary energy from fossil fuels, barely changed since Biden took office, and indeed very stable for decades.

Perhaps this situation of stable energy production and consumption results because it reflects what markets and consumers want and need to satisfy their demand for energy. So do you think that the hyperactive regulators might just relax and let the consumers have what they want?

Unfortunately, that is not how this works. Even as the energy producers and consumers have figured out endless workarounds to avoid the fossil fuel suppression that the Bidenauts attempt to impose, the little regulatory tyrants have been busy preparing new bouts of punitive restrictions. Last week saw a round of some of the most sweeping regulatory edicts yet. The regulators really plan to put the people in their place this time.

In the new round, the regulators have gotten farther and farther away from anything realistic, anything consistent with the laws of physics or thermodynamics, anything that might actually work. We are now well into the world of fantasy and delusion.

On last Thursday (April 25), the Administration, via the EPA, announced a suite of no fewer than four final rules “to Reduce Pollution from Fossil Fuel-Fired Power Plants.” Essentially, this is the replacement for the Obama Administration’s so-called “Clean Power Plan,” that ordered a complete re-do of the electricity generation system to gradually shutter fossil fuel plants and replace them with unworkable “renewables.” That Plan got struck down by the Supreme Court in June 2022 for being far beyond anything the EPA was authorized to do under its statutes.

So here is the new Rule covering the comparable subject. The title is “New Source Performance Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from New, Modified, and Reconstructed Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units; Emission Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Existing Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units; and Repeal of the Affordable Clean Energy Rule.” The document is 1020 pages long because, hey, we’re the EPA, and anything worth doing around here deserves a Rule of at least a thousand pages.

And how does this new Rule achieve the goal of reducing “greenhouse gas emissions”? You could probably spend all week trying to read the thing without ever figuring that out. EPA’s press release makes the following claim:

“EPA’s final Clean Air Act standards for existing coal-fired and new natural gas-fired power plants limit the amount of carbon pollution covered sources can emit, based on proven and cost-effective control technologies that can be applied directly to power plants.”

And what is the “proven and cost-effective control mechanism” they are talking about? The AP summarizes it here in a few words:

Coal-fired power plants would be forced to capture smokestack emissions or shut down under a rule issued Thursday by the Environmental Protection Agency.

It’s the “capture of smokestack emissions” — otherwise known as carbon capture and storage, or CCS. I had a post last August at the time this Rule had been proposed and comments were being received. In my August post I highlighted some of the comments, including those from the states of Ohio and West Virginia. Those comments made mincemeat of any possible claim that CCS technology was either “proven” or “cost-effective.” Not only has it never been proven, but it’s impossible for it ever to work economically. There are many long quotes from comments in that post. Here are just a few.

From the Ohio comment, page 4:

A study of 263 carbon-capture-and-sequestration projects undertaken between 1995 and 2018 found that the majority failed and 78% of the largest projects were cancelled or put on hold.  After the study was published in May 2021, the only other coal plant with a carbon-capture-and-sequestration attachment in the world, Petra Nova, shuttered after facing 367 outages in its three years of operation. . . . [T]his [SaskPower] facility is the world’s only [remaining] operating commercial carbon capture facility at a coal-fired power plant.   And it has never achieved its maximum capacity.  It also battled significant technical issues throughout 2021—to the point that the plant idled the equipment for weeks at a time.  As a result, the plant achieved less than 37% carbon capture that year despite having an official target of 90% . . . . 

From the West Virginia comment, pages 24 - 25:

Take efficiency to start. CCS units run on power, too. An owner can get that power from the plant itself. But this approach makes the plant less efficient by increasing its “parasitic load”—and CCS more than triples combustion turbines’ normal parasitic load. . . . This is the cause the Wyoming study analyzed that showed installing CCS technology would devastate plants’ heat rates and lower net plant efficiency by 36%.

There is endless more of same. The fact is that CCS technology is neither “proven” nor “cost-effective.” It is nowhere after 30 years of trying because it cannot be done economically. It cannot be done economically because it is, in effect, a war against the Second Law of Thermodynamics. To capture more and more of the CO2 from the plant takes more and more of the plant’s output of energy, until in the limiting case you use all the energy of the plant and still some small amount of the CO2 escapes. The whole idea of CCS is to avoid having the disorder of the universe increase by the method of putting sufficient energy into trying. Won’t ever work. See also, perpetual motion machines.

Well, the sensible comments have all been rejected and EPA has just gone ahead and done what it was always planning to do, which is to order up something that can’t ever work economically and can only result in forcing the closure of an energy system that works without any idea of something realistic to replace it.

The deadlines for this start around 2030. Most likely between now and then either the Supreme Court will strike this down, or we’ll get a Republican administration that will sweep it all away. In the meantime we have completely ignorant and tyrannical regulators ordering up an energy system that can’t possibly work and heedless of the enormous destruction that they will likely cause if not stopped.

And that’s only part of what these fools were up to last week on the energy front. Here from Wednesday (April 24) is a “Fact Sheet” issued by the White House on another totally delusional effort: 

“Biden-⁠Harris Administration Sets First-Ever National Goal of Zero-Emissions Freight Sector, Announces Nearly $1.5 Billion to Support Transition to Zero-Emission Heavy-duty Vehicles.”

I’ve got some news for them: the freight transportation sector (trucks and railroads) is not going to convert to electricity any time soon. At least this announcement was not a regulation mandating the conversion, but only the supposed setting of a “national goal,” with no idea of how it could possibly be achieved or at what cost. The $1.5 billion mentioned is an irrelevant rounding error of a figure that maybe could buy 10,000 new electric trucks (in a sector with at least 3 million existing non-electric ones), and the 10,000 trucks would be mostly useless for the purposes in question.

These people become more and more detached from reality with each passing day. They seem to have no idea how much damage they are doing, and they don’t care a bit. Somehow they have convinced themselves that they are “saving the planet,” when if they could do even a little arithmetic they would know that their efforts cannot possibly move the needle on that effort. It’s just another week in the Biden Administration energy clown show.

Friday, September 28, 2012

The EPA Human Testing Saga Continues

Posted by Steve Milloy on Junkscience.com
Our story is currently (Friday afternoon) the lead story at the NBC affiliate, WNCN (NBC-176) in Raleigh, NC. Video on TV at 6 & 7 pm ET.
Pay no attention to the contradiction behind the curtain. Continue reading
The American Tradition Institute has filed last night an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) against EPA’s ongoing human testing program. Continue reading
“A federal lawsuit filed last Friday makes shocking allegations that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency engaged in human experimentation that violated its own scientific and ethical standards — not to mention federal law and the Nuremberg Code.” [Washington Examiner]

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Dethrone the EPA

By Robert Zubrin

The choice: Prosperity through liberty, or depression through strangulation.

The current presidential campaign hinges on jobs and the economy. Yet most of the debate has centered on peripheral issues such as the Bush tax cut, when there is a Tyrannosaurus in the room that is being virtually ignored. That monster is the EPA.

The EPA is today the primary enemy of economic growth in the United States, and through it the world. The damage that it has done, is doing, and threatens to do in the future is immense. Virtually since its birth in 1970, the agency has committed one atrocity after another. As one of its first acts after coming into existence, the EPA banned the vital pesticide DDT. (This was done is direct defiance of the investigatory court findings of federal judge Edmund Sweeney, which showed that DDT was not a danger to humans or wildlife.) As a result, large regions of Africa and Asia were given over to malaria-spreading mosquitoes, killing tens of millions of people and aborting economic development.

From 1859 to 1971, the U.S. oil industry grew virtually continuously, in the process serving mightily to drive our economy and win our wars. But that growth was stopped dead in 1971, and sent into decline thereafter as the advent of the EPA and the accompanying National Environmental Policy Act made it increasingly difficult to drill.....Read More


Court challenge to EPA secrecy
By Mark Tapscott

A potential landmark government transparency court case took shape today as a conservative think tank filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency seeking copies of all emails concerning official policies sent by one of its regional administrators using his private email address. The suit was filed by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which bills itself as "dedicated to advancing the principles of limited government, free enterprise, and individual liberty." ‘EPA has also stonewalled CEI's administrative appeal, refusing to provide a response and make its arguments on the record for CEI to challenge. --- Competitive Enterprise Institute. In its suit, CEI said EPA had denied the think tank's request for all emails sent to or by region eight administrator James Martin and the Environmental Defense Fund, including those using his official and any private emails. Prior to joining EPA, Martin was an attorney for the EDF.... If the federal court agrees with CEI and orders EPA officials to produce emails to and from Martin's private email acccount, it could pave the way for suits against all federal departments and agencies in which there is evidence or suspicion outside of government that officials have used private email accounts, or government email accounts known to exist by only by a few individuals.

###

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

MILLOY: Time to leash Obama’s EPA

Budget cutting isn’t enough — GOP must stop outlaw agency now.

By Steve Milloy

December 13, 2011, Washington Times

Will House Republicans squander an entire year of effort to rein in the Environmental Protection Agency?

Since the 112th Congress began, House Republicans have talked tough about EPA overregulation. They’ve held a multitude of hearings. They’ve passed a number of bills to rein in EPA regulatory excesses, from the TRAIN Act imposing cost-benefit analysis on the agency to the REINS Act requiring congressional approval of regulatory actions costing more than $100 million to votes blocking the EPA from over-regulating coal-fired power plants, industrial boilers and farm dust.

They’ve even sliced a modest amount off the EPA’s operating budget.
But none of these measures have stopped or slowed down the eco-fundamentalist EPA from its campaign to destroy the fossil fuel industry and gain control over the entire American economy.

Sure, President Obama delayed the EPA from further tightening the ground-level ozone standard, but that was a result of pressure from a broad coalition of businesses, political advisers and the looming 2012 elections, not necessarily because of the House GOP.

So here we are in the last throes of the first session of the 112th Congress, and House Republicans have little to show except effort. As Winston Churchill said, “Sometimes doing your best is not good enough. Sometimes you must do what is required.”

Fortunately, there is still time.

Among other legislation, Congress is looking to pass an appropriations bill this week, and then go home for the Christmas recess. A bill must pass, which means that Democrats must vote up or down on the bill, and President Obama must sign or veto it. No passes allowed – unless House Republicans allow it.

The House GOP has three options: First, they could allow Democrats to get off scot-free by passing an appropriations bill that does nothing but reduce EPA’s funding. As the Obama EPA has shrugged off earlier budget cuts, there is no reason to give congressional Democrats a free pass.

Next, the House GOP could skirt the issue by doing what it has in the past to avoid a showdown with Democrats – pass a continuing resolution to fund the federal government for another month or so, thereby putting off the battle until the 2012 election year. Sometimes procrastination is good political strategy, but not when the American economy is withering on the vine.

Finally, the House could accomplish what it has worked hard to do all year: Take a firm stand to rein in the job-killing EPA.

Beyond hampering economic recovery and growth, the EPA is actually for the first time in history threatening electricity reliability – so much so that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency responsible for electricity transmission and reliability – is concerned about this.

What this means is next summer, when there’s a heat wave that requires the electric-utility industry to operate at peak capacity, there is a likelihood that Obama EPA actions to put coal-fired power plants out of business will reduce the availability of air conditioning.

Even the EPA recognizes on its website and in its literature that the No. 1 way to avoid death and sickness during a heat wave is air conditioning. That point was driven home during the 2003 heat wave in Europe, which killed more than 50,000 persons.

The point here is the House GOP has some pretty compelling political arguments for drawing a line in the sand on the EPA.

Aside from jobs and the economy, Senate Democrats like Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Robert P. Casey Jr. of Pennsylvania, Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, and Joe Manchin III of West Virginia – all of whom are up for re-election in 2012 – might not want to roll the dice on whether there will be a killer heat wave next summer.

The fight to rein in the EPA now will be ugly. It may run into Christmas. The left-wing media, green groups, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Mr. Obama will falsely attack Republicans as picking polluters over asthmatic children. Their New York Times poll ratings will fall.

Nevertheless, House GOP members were elected to a huge majority in 2010 in order to take such difficult stands.

Steve Milloy publishes JunkScience.com and is author of “Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them” (Regnery, 2009).

I would like to thank Steve for allowing me to republish his work. RK

###