Obama’s “Carbon” Plan: Killing Jobs, Costing Americans Money

I’m still not that concerned with Obama’s climate change plan: there is a low probability that it will actually be implemented. There will be too many lawsuits filed and fought. Republican led states, and perhaps energy states with Democrat leadership, will blow the regulations off. A GOP president starting in 2017 will roll the regs back to zero. And if the Democrats get blown out in 2014, much as happened in Australia in 2012 and 2013 to Labor, which was solely due to their climate change policies, Democrats will be squeamish as Obama’s final term winds down. That said, how bad would Obama’s plan be?

(CFACT) Supported by nothing but assumptions, faulty computer models and outright falsifications of what is actually happening on our planet, President Obama, his Environmental Protection Agency and their allies have issued more economy-crushing rules that they say will prevent dangerous manmade climate change.

Under the latest EPA regulatory onslaught (645 pages of new rules, released June 2), by 2030 states must slash carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired electricity generating plants by 30% below 2005 levels.

The new rules supposedly give states “flexibility” in deciding how to meet the mandates. However, many will have little choice but to impose costly cap-tax-and-trade regimes like the ones Congress has wisely and repeatedly refused to enact. Others will be forced to close perfectly good, highly reliable coal-fueled power plants that currently provide affordable electricity for millions of families, factories, hospitals, schools and businesses. The adverse impacts will be enormous.

The rules will further hobble a U.S. economy that actually shrank by 1% during the first quarter of 2014, following a pathetic 1.9% total annual growth in 2013. They are on top of $1.9 trillion per year (one-eighth of our total economy) that businesses and families already pay to comply with federal rules.

A U.S. Chamber of Commerce study calculates that the new regulations will cost our economy another $51 billion annually, result in 224,000 more lost jobs every year, and cost every American household $3,400 per year in higher prices for energy, food and other necessities. Poor, middle class and minority families – and those already dependent on unemployment and welfare – will be impacted worst. Those in a dozen states that depend on coal to generate 30-95% of their electricity will be hit especially hard.

Replacing coal with cleaner alternatives is a worthy goal. And not because of CO2, but actual pollutants. But, there has to be a viable energy source to replace it with, to avoid disruption and high costs. Obama’s plan doesn’t bother with that.

Millions of Americans will endure lower quality of life and be unable to heat or cool their homes properly, pay their rent or mortgage, or save for college and retirement. They will suffer from greater stress, worse sleep deprivation, higher incidences of depression and alcohol, drug, spousal and child abuse, and more heart attacks and strokes. As Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) points out, “A lot of people on the lower end of the socio-economic spectrum are going to die.” EPA ignores all of this.

Of course they do. And, of course, neither Obama nor EPA head Gina McCarthy are willing to reduce their own “carbon footprints”.

It also ignores the fact that, based to the agency’s own data, shutting down every coal-fired power plant in the USA would reduce the alleged increase in global temperatures by a mere 0.05 degrees F by 2100!

So, essentially, this would have zero effect on the climate, while destroying the economy, killing jobs, and killing citizens.

Contrary to model predictions and assertions by the White House, average global temperatures have not risen in almost 18 years. We have now gone over eight years without a category 3-5 hurricane hitting the United States – the longest such period in over a century. Tornadoes are at a multi-decade low. Droughts are no more frequent or intense than since 1900. There were fewer than half as many forest fires last year as during the 1960s and 1970s. Sea levels rose just eight inches over the last 130 years and are currently rising at barely seven inches per century. There’s still ice on Lake Superior – in June!

Of course, Warmists like Obama will tell us this will happen in the future, despite a 95% failure of climate models. And let’s jump into my Normal Meme: if Warmists were so darned concerned, they would start by taking measures within their own lives to reduce, and even eradicate, their own “carbon footprints”. Yet, they don’t. That should tell you all you need to know about their belief sets.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

5 Responses to “Obama’s “Carbon” Plan: Killing Jobs, Costing Americans Money”

  1. John says:

    A GOP president in 2017? Really?

  2. Jeffery says:

    I told you guys the other day that even the ultra-conservative Chamber of Commerce couldn’t find a serious downside to Obama’s EPA plan to limit carbon emissions.

    And you and the CFACT extremists still act as if it does. Here are the numbers from the ultra conservative Chamber of Commerce, unspun:

    $51 billion in constant dollars per year through 2030. That’s a big number! The CBO projects the average annual US GDP from 2014-2030 to be $21.5 trillion. So we can have a real reduction in CO2 emissions for 0.051/21.5 x 100% = 0.2% of GDP.

    Their numbers on employment are less reliable. But even if we accept their unsubstantiated hypothesis that some 220,000 fewer jobs will be generated each year, that’s not many in a nation of 150,000,000 workers. And remember, the policy will reduce CO2 emissions.

    And Teach types, breathlessly, risibly: “So, essentially, this would have zero effect on the climate, while destroying the economy, killing jobs, and killing citizens.” lmfao… Talk about your gloom and doom.

    Note too that just after Obama announced his courageous plan, China announced that they too were looking CO2 limits. Sometimes, a President has to be brave and lead.

  3. Better_Be_Gumballs says:

    First off, the CoC is not ultra-conservative or even conservative. But thanks again for being J again. You fail to surprise with your ignorance.

    Republican led states, and perhaps energy states with Democrat leadership, will blow the regulations off. A GOP president starting in 2017 will roll the regs back to zero.

    Thanks for using “democrat” instead of democratic, the lazy man’s use of the term.

    Also, you have more faith in Republicans than I do. I don’t see them rolling anything back. Very few regs or taxes are ever rolled back. The regs keep growing and growing. And, really?! ZERO regs? Crying socialists will never let that happen.

    A U.S. Chamber of Commerce study calculates that the new regulations will cost our economy another $51 billion annually, result in 224,000 more lost jobs every year, and cost every American household $3,400 per year in higher prices for energy, food and other necessities. Poor, middle class and minority families – and those already dependent on unemployment and welfare – will be impacted worst. Those in a dozen states that depend on coal to generate 30-95% of their electricity will be hit especially hard.

    Yeah, that sounds like they are in love with this new EPA plan. They love to see business go out of business, people losing jobs, and people going without heat or air conditioning due to the ever rising cost of energy, food, medicine, fuel, clothing, etc.

    This EPA plan hypes up the CO2, but the primary problem with Coal is the particulates and sulfur dioxide emissions. CO2 is a nonexistent problem. But then, Obama and EPA just dont really care.

  4. Jeffery says:

    Gumballs,

    The Chamber’s externally funded critique was based on their own faulty intel – their data was based on a 40% reduction in CO2 emissions, not the actual proposal from the EPA. Their absolute, very worst case scenario, which they overexaggerated, is a 0.2% drag on the economy or as Teach typed: destroying the economy!!

    Particulates and sulfur dioxide emissions are solvable with current technologies, and have been much reduced, BECAUSE OF REGULATIONS! CO2 pollution is the problem the EPA is addressing. Do you remember when conservatives opposed regulation of particulates and sulfates from coal plants? Yeah, me too. Good times.

    Conservatives are always wrong. Why? Because they oppose sound ideas from the liberals just because they come from liberals. Conservatives oppose equal rights and opportunities for all, environmental regulations, safety regulations, the FDA, the SEC, the EPA, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the ACA, financial market regulation, political contribution regulation…

  5. jl says:

    “China announce that they were looking at CO2 limits.” No, they are not. “Conservatives are always wrong.” How could that be, when we always slap you around? But anyway, thanks for not over-generalizing. As said before, kudos to your debate teacher.

Bad Behavior has blocked 9994 access attempts in the last 7 days.