EPA: Environmental Protection Agency

[American_Jihad]

Analysis: U.S. industry sees carbon-capture as legal chink in EPA rules

By Valerie Volcovici
WASHINGTON | Fri Sep 20, 2013

(Reuters) - Faced with the Obama administration's new crackdown on power plant emissions, the coal and electric utility industry is honing a legal strategy it believes could derail the measures.

New rules governing the construction of fossil fuel power plants, unveiled by the Environmental Protection Agency on Friday, have closed one of the largest legal loopholes of the initial regulations put forward in 2012, by providing separate standards for gas- and coal-fired plants.

Now, opponents have another tactic in mind: challenging the idea that carbon capture and storage (CCS), a decades-old but commercially tenuous technology that will be a requisite for any company building a new coal-fired power plant, is a viable solution to curbing greenhouse gases.

Under the Clean Air Act, the basis for the newly proposed rule, the EPA is required to set pollution standards using the "best system of emission reduction" with technology that has been "adequately demonstrated."

That language is likely to sit at the core of any lawsuit that could be filed by industry lawyers at the end of what could be a months-long rulemaking process.

"They tried one approach that is legally flawed," said Jeff Holmstead, a lawyer representing coal industry groups for Bracewell & Giuliani, referring to the EPA. "They are doing something else that can be struck down in court."

The requirement to implement carbon CCS technology "does not in our view comport with the requirements of New Source Performance Standards under the Clean Air Act," the American Public Power Association, a group that represents electric utilities, said in a statement.

...

The Waxman-Markey bill, which would have created an economy-wide carbon cap-and-trade system, would have set aside a certain portion of emission permits to fund CCS. The bill passed the House in 2009 but a companion died in the Senate in 2010.

"It's as if they intentionally burned down their house and then complain about being homeless," said Daniel Weiss, director of climate strategy at the liberal Center for American Progress.

Analysis: U.S. industry sees carbon-capture as legal chink in EPA rules | Reuters

 

[daveman]

Mammy, in light of American_Jihad's links showing the EPA is unquestionably a liberal organization, do you want to alter your position, or will you bitterly cling to your reality-denying claims?

[MENTION=39072]mamooth[/MENTION]:

You have a question to answer.

 

[Old Rocks]

Coal for generation of power will be dead in my lifetime. You can cry and scream about it all that you want, cry for the buggy whip manufacturers. The burning of coal poisons the environment, and, when all costs are factored in, is one of the most expensive ways of generating electricity. Wind and solar continue to decrease in cost, same for geothermal.

As the battery technology goes forward, and we get grid scale batteries, there will be no need for coal generation at all.

 

[PMZ]

You Can Love Nature and Still Hate the Tyranny of Environmental Regulations

Throughout the world, most reductions in pollution have been achieved because of capitalism, not government control.

John Stossel | April 3, 2013

Environmental activists and politicians would like you to think that we must love their regulations -- or hate trees and animals.

I love trees and animals.

But you can love nature and still hate the tyranny that environmental regulations bring.

The Environmental Protection Agency just announced it will boost gas prices ("only" a penny, although industry says 6 to 9 cents) to make another minuscule improvement to air quality.

In New York City, my mayor wants to ban Styrofoam cups, saying, "I think it's something we can do without."

Congress already dictates the design of our cars, toilets and light bulbs.

...

But government didn't stop there. Government never stops. Now that the air is cleaner, government spends even more than it spent to clean the air to subsidize feeble methods of energy production, like windmills and solar panels. Activists want even more spending. A few years back, the Center for American Progress announced they were upset that "Germany, Spain and China Are Seizing the Energy Opportunity ... the United States Risks Getting Left Behind."

In this case, we're better off "left behind." After spending billions, those European governments made no breakthroughs, and now they're cutting back.

...

You Can Love Nature and Still Hate the Tyranny of Environmental Regulations - Reason.com

''Throughout the world, most reductions in pollution have been achieved because of capitalism, not government control.

Begs the question, why would any company operating under the one rule of business, make more money regardless of the cost to others, ever spend a nickle on reducing damage to our environment?

The answer, of course, is that they wouldn't.

All environmental progress is caused by our representatives in government requiring business to operate within the will of the people.

 

[mamooth]

Mammy, in light of American_Jihad's links showing the EPA is unquestionably a liberal organization, do you want to alter your position, or will you bitterly cling to your reality-denying claims?

mamooth
You have a question to answer.

Dave, you have my wanger to lick. No one is ever obligated to respond to your kook conspiracy questions, other than to laugh at them.

The more applicable question is why you fell for so hard for AJ's 'tard propaganda. What happened to your brain to make you so susceptible to awful logic and idiot conspiracy theories?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

These days, EPA tends to stand for "Every Polluter's Advocate".

So, if you observe someone calling the EPA "liberal", just smile and twirl a finger around your ear and walk away from the cultist.

Fair and Balanced, from the other extreme end of the spectrum.

 

[PMZ]

Mammy, in light of American_Jihad's links showing the EPA is unquestionably a liberal organization, do you want to alter your position, or will you bitterly cling to your reality-denying claims?

[MENTION=39072]mamooth[/MENTION]:

You have a question to answer.

All organizations that advance civilization are liberal.

 

[American_Jihad]

What is clean coal technology?​

by Sarah Dowdey

...

Clean coal technology seeks to reduce harsh environmental effects by using multiple technologies to clean coal and contain its emissions.

Coal is a fossil fuel composed primarily of carbons and hydrocarbons. Its ingredients help make plastics, tar and fertilizers. A coal derivative, a solidified carbon called coke, melts iron ore and reduces it to create steel. But most coal -- 92 percent of the U.S. supply -- goes into power production [source: Energy Information Administration]. Electric companies and businesses with power plants burn coal to make the steam that turns turbines and generates electricity.

When coal burns, it releases carbon dioxide and other emissions in flue gas, the billowing clouds you see pouring out of smoke stacks. Some clean coal technologies purify the coal before it burns. One type of coal preparation, coal washing, removes unwanted minerals by mixing crushed coal with a liquid and allowing the impurities to separate and settle.

Other systems control the coal burn to minimize emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulates. Wet scrubbers, or flue gas desulfurization systems, remove sulfur dioxide, a major cause of acid rain, by spraying flue gas with limestone and water. The mixture reacts with the sulfur dioxide to form synthetic gypsum, a component of drywall.

Low-NOx (nitrogen oxide) burners
...
Gasification
...

Where do the emissions go?

Carbon capture and storage
...
Flue-gas separation

...

HowStuffWorks "What is clean coal technology?"

---> https://www.google.com/search?sourc...=1T4GGLL_enUS324US325&q=clean+coal+technology

 

[Abraham3]

What is clean coal technology?​

by Sarah Dowdey

...

Clean coal technology seeks to reduce harsh environmental effects by using multiple technologies to clean coal and contain its emissions.

Coal is a fossil fuel composed primarily of carbons and hydrocarbons. Its ingredients help make plastics, tar and fertilizers. A coal derivative, a solidified carbon called coke, melts iron ore and reduces it to create steel. But most coal -- 92 percent of the U.S. supply -- goes into power production [source: Energy Information Administration]. Electric companies and businesses with power plants burn coal to make the steam that turns turbines and generates electricity.

When coal burns, it releases carbon dioxide and other emissions in flue gas, the billowing clouds you see pouring out of smoke stacks. Some clean coal technologies purify the coal before it burns. One type of coal preparation, coal washing, removes unwanted minerals by mixing crushed coal with a liquid and allowing the impurities to separate and settle.

Other systems control the coal burn to minimize emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulates. Wet scrubbers, or flue gas desulfurization systems, remove sulfur dioxide, a major cause of acid rain, by spraying flue gas with limestone and water. The mixture reacts with the sulfur dioxide to form synthetic gypsum, a component of drywall.

Low-NOx (nitrogen oxide) burners
...
Gasification
...

Where do the emissions go?

Carbon capture and storage
...
Flue-gas separation

...

HowStuffWorks "What is clean coal technology?"

---> https://www.google.com/search?sourc...=1T4GGLL_enUS324US325&q=clean+coal+technology

Lovely post. What did it have to do with the thread topic? And why are you symbolically threatening the reader with a gun? Are you worried about the size of your genitals? I'm sure they're fine. Put the rifle down. Down a trash chute. Try facing life with just your own two hands and that hatrack you're sporting. It'll make a man outta ya.

 

[daveman]

Mammy, in light of American_Jihad's links showing the EPA is unquestionably a liberal organization, do you want to alter your position, or will you bitterly cling to your reality-denying claims?

mamooth
You have a question to answer.

Dave, you have my wanger to lick. No one is ever obligated to respond to your kook conspiracy questions, other than to laugh at them.

The more applicable question is why you fell for so hard for AJ's 'tard propaganda. What happened to your brain to make you so susceptible to awful logic and idiot conspiracy theories?

Do you hear a dull thud when your stupid statements collide with reality?

 

[daveman]

Mammy, in light of American_Jihad's links showing the EPA is unquestionably a liberal organization, do you want to alter your position, or will you bitterly cling to your reality-denying claims?

[MENTION=39072]mamooth[/MENTION]:

You have a question to answer.

All organizations that advance civilization are liberal.

Still stuck on stupid, I see.

 

[daveman]

Lovely post. What did it have to do with the thread topic? And why are you symbolically threatening the reader with a gun? Are you worried about the size of your genitals? I'm sure they're fine. Put the rifle down. Down a trash chute. Try facing life with just your own two hands and that hatrack you're sporting. It'll make a man outta ya.

Try facing life without the government making all your decisions for you.

 

[American_Jihad]

What is clean coal technology?​

by Sarah Dowdey

...

Clean coal technology seeks to reduce harsh environmental effects by using multiple technologies to clean coal and contain its emissions.

Coal is a fossil fuel composed primarily of carbons and hydrocarbons. Its ingredients help make plastics, tar and fertilizers. A coal derivative, a solidified carbon called coke, melts iron ore and reduces it to create steel. But most coal -- 92 percent of the U.S. supply -- goes into power production [source: Energy Information Administration]. Electric companies and businesses with power plants burn coal to make the steam that turns turbines and generates electricity.

When coal burns, it releases carbon dioxide and other emissions in flue gas, the billowing clouds you see pouring out of smoke stacks. Some clean coal technologies purify the coal before it burns. One type of coal preparation, coal washing, removes unwanted minerals by mixing crushed coal with a liquid and allowing the impurities to separate and settle.

Other systems control the coal burn to minimize emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulates. Wet scrubbers, or flue gas desulfurization systems, remove sulfur dioxide, a major cause of acid rain, by spraying flue gas with limestone and water. The mixture reacts with the sulfur dioxide to form synthetic gypsum, a component of drywall.

Low-NOx (nitrogen oxide) burners
...
Gasification
...

Where do the emissions go?

Carbon capture and storage
...
Flue-gas separation

...

HowStuffWorks "What is clean coal technology?"

---> https://www.google.com/search?sourc...=1T4GGLL_enUS324US325&q=clean+coal+technology

Lovely post. What did it have to do with the thread topic? And why are you symbolically threatening the reader with a gun? Are you worried about the size of your genitals? I'm sure they're fine. Put the rifle down. Down a trash chute. Try facing life with just your own two hands and that hatrack you're sporting. It'll make a man outta ya.

Abraham3, you don't have to post yo age in the user name, fool. The post is a response to a couple of yo cockbite buddies talking about coal, scroll back and look. My thread, I'll post what "I Want" and you can post what you want, you have my permission...

 

[bripat9643]

Mammy, in light of American_Jihad's links showing the EPA is unquestionably a liberal organization, do you want to alter your position, or will you bitterly cling to your reality-denying claims?

[MENTION=39072]mamooth[/MENTION]:

You have a question to answer.

All organizations that advance civilization are liberal.

Precisely the opposite is the case. The institution of private property is solely responsible for advancing civilization, and liberalism, as you conceive it, has been the enemy of property owners since time immemorial.

 

[Abraham3]

Precisely the opposite is the case. The institution of private property is solely responsible for advancing civilization, and liberalism, as you conceive it, has been the enemy of property owners since time immemorial.

HAHAHAAAHAAAAAAHAaaaahaaahaahahahahaha...

 

[PMZ]

[MENTION=39072]mamooth[/MENTION]:

You have a question to answer.

All organizations that advance civilization are liberal.

Precisely the opposite is the case. The institution of private property is solely responsible for advancing civilization, and liberalism, as you conceive it, has been the enemy of property owners since time immemorial.

What the hell is ''The institution of private property''?

 

[daveman]

All organizations that advance civilization are liberal.

Precisely the opposite is the case. The institution of private property is solely responsible for advancing civilization, and liberalism, as you conceive it, has been the enemy of property owners since time immemorial.

What the hell is ''The institution of private property''?

It's something progressives can't comprehend.

 

[bripat9643]

All organizations that advance civilization are liberal.

Precisely the opposite is the case. The institution of private property is solely responsible for advancing civilization, and liberalism, as you conceive it, has been the enemy of property owners since time immemorial.

What the hell is ''The institution of private property''?

Open a book on economics. Perhaps you'll figure it out.

 

[bripat9643]

Precisely the opposite is the case. The institution of private property is solely responsible for advancing civilization, and liberalism, as you conceive it, has been the enemy of property owners since time immemorial.

HAHAHAAAHAAAAAAHAaaaahaaahaahahahahaha...

What are you laughing at? Are you going to claim you support private property?

 

[Abraham3]

Precisely the opposite is the case. The institution of private property is solely responsible for advancing civilization, and liberalism, as you conceive it, has been the enemy of property owners since time immemorial.

HAHAHAAAHAAAAAAHAaaaahaaahaahahahahaha...

What are you laughing at? Are you going to claim you support private property?

I am laughing at both of your contentions. That would be because they are both quite laughable. Let's try that education thing again:

CIVILIZATION:
Civilization or civilisation generally refers to polities which combine three basic institutions: a ceremonial centre (a formal gathering place for social and cultural activities), a system of writing, and a city. The term is used to contrast with other types of communities including hunter-gatherers, nomadic pastoralists and tribal villages. Civilizations have more densely populated settlements, characterized by a ruling elite, and subordinate urban and rural populations, which, by the division of labour, engage in intensive agriculture, mining, small-scale manufacture and trade. Civilization concentrates power, extending man's control over both nature, and over other human beings.[1]
The emergence of civilization is generally associated with the final stages of the Neolithic Revolution, a slow cumulative process occurring independently over many locations between 10,000 and 3,000 BCE, culminating in the relatively rapid process of state formation, a political development associated with the appearance of a governing elite. This neolithic technology and lifestyle was established first in the Middle east (for example at Göbekli Tepe, from about 9,130 BCE), and Yangtze and later Yellow river basin in China (for example the Pengtoushan culture from 7,500 BCE), and later spread. But similar "revolutions" also began independently from 9,000 years ago in such places as Mesoamerica at the Balsas River[2] and in Papua New Guinea. This revolution consisted in the development of the domestication of plants and animals and the development of new sedentary lifestyles which allowed economies of scale and productive surpluses.
Towards the end of the Neolithic period, various Bronze Age civilizations begin to rise in various "cradles" from around 3300 BCE. Civilizations, as defined above, also developed in Pre-Columbian Americas and much later in Africa. The Bronze Age collapse was followed by the Iron Age around 1200 BCE. A major technological and cultural transition to modernity began approximately 1500 CE in western Europe, and from this beginning new approaches to science and law spread rapidly around the world.[3]
Assessments of what level of civilization a polity has reached are based on comparisons of the relative importance of agricultural as opposed to trade or manufacturing capacities, the territorial extensions of its power, the complexity of its division of labor, and the carrying capacity of its urban centres. Secondary elements include a developed transportation system, writing, standardized measurement, currency, contractual and tort-based legal systems, art, architecture, mathematics, scientific understanding, metallurgy, political structures, and organized religion.
Traditionally, polities that managed to achieve notable military, ideological and economic power defined themselves as "civilized" as opposed to other societies or human grouping which lay outside their sphere of influence, calling the latter barbarians, savages, and primitives. while in a modern-day context, "civilized people" have been contrasted with indigenous people or tribal societies. Use of the word "civilized" is often controversial because it could imply superiority or inferiority. There is a controversial tendency to use the term in a less strict way, to mean approximately the same thing as "culture" and therefore, the term can more broadly refer to any important and clearly defined human society.[4] Still, even when used in this second sense, the word is often restricted to apply only to societies that have a certain set of characteristics, especially the founding of cities.

Note, Paddy ol boy, that the word "property" makes not a single appearance.

LIBERALISM:
Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis)[1] is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality.[2][3] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property.[4][5][6][7][8]
Liberalism first became a distinct political movement during the Age of Enlightenment, when it became popular among philosophers and economists in the Western world. Liberalism rejected the notions, common at the time, of hereditary privilege, state religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings. The 17th century philosopher John Locke is often credited with founding liberalism as a distinct philosophical tradition. Locke argued that each man has a natural right to life, liberty and property[9] and according to the social contract, governments must not violate these rights. Liberals opposed traditional conservatism and sought to replace absolutism in government with representative democracy and the rule of law.
The revolutionaries of the American Revolution, segments of the French Revolution, and other liberal revolutionaries from that time used liberal philosophy to justify the armed overthrow of what they saw as tyrannical rule. The nineteenth century saw liberal governments established in nations across Europe, Spanish America, and North America.[10] In this period, the dominant ideological opponent of liberalism was classical conservatism.
During the twentieth century, liberal ideas spread even further, as liberal democracies found themselves on the winning side in both world wars. Liberalism also survived major ideological challenges from new opponents, such as fascism and communism. In Europe and North America, there was also the rise of social liberalism,[11][12] which is related with social democracy in Europe. As such, the meaning of the word "liberalism" began to diverge in different parts of the world. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "In the United States, liberalism is associated with the welfare-state policies of the New Deal program of the Democratic administration of Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt, whereas in Europe it is more commonly associated with a commitment to limited government and laissez-faire economic policies."[13] Consequently in America, the ideas of individualism and laissez-faire economics previously associated with classical liberalism, became the basis for the emerging school of libertarian thought.[14]
Today, liberal political parties remain a political force with varying degrees of power and influence on all inhabited continents.

Note here Paddy, that support for private property is listed as one of the fundamental and defining properties of liberalism.

You're OH for TWO.

You really need to crack a book or two before opening that yap of yours.