EPA’s Killer MACT

Discussion in 'Politics' started by bripat9643, Jan 7, 2012.

  1. bripat9643
    Offline

    bripat9643 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    67,919
    Thanks Received:
    8,099
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +27,449
    Before It's News

    By Alan Caruba

    To understand how the Environmental Protection Agency operates, one must first understand that it lies all the time. Its “estimates” are bogus. Its claims of lives saved are bogus.

    It thrives on scare-mongering to a public that is science-challenged, but the science remains and the EPA must be challenged to save the nation from the loss of the energy it needs to function. It must be challenged to unleash the huge economic benefits of energy resources—coal, oil, and natural gas—that can reverse our present economic decline.

    The latest outrage is the MACT rule—an acronym for “maximum achievable control technology” intended to reduce mercury emissions and other trace gases. The rule is 1,117 pages long. Its purpose is to shut down coal-fired power plants that generate over fifty percent of all the electricity used daily in the United States of America.

    The value of the total benefits asserted by the EPA is alleged to be $6 million. Not billion, but million. The MACT rule would force 14.7 gigawatts—enough power for more than eleven million households—to be “retired” from the power grip in the 2014-15 period when the rules take effect.

    Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), the ranking member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works says, “The economic analysis of the Obama EPA’s MACT paints a bleak picture for economic recovery as it will cost $11 billion to implement, increase electricity rates for every American, and, along with the Cross-State rule, destroy nearly 1.4 million jobs.”

    MACT is all about mercury in the environment of the nation. On May 25, 2011, the Wall Street Journal published a brief opinion piece by Willie Soon, a natural scientist at Harvard, co-authored by Paul Driessen, a senior policy advisor for the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow. It was titled “The Myth of Killer Mercury.”

    Here are a few of the facts it offered.

    “Mercury has always existed naturally in the Earth’s environment. A 2009 study found mercury deposits in Antarctic ice across 650,000 years.”

    “Mercury is found in air, water, rocks, soil and trees, which absorb it from the environment.”

    There is “200,000,000 tons of mercury naturally present in seawater” that “has never posed a danger to any living thing.”

    “U.S. forest fires emit at least 44 tons (of mercury) per year; cremation of human remains discharges 26 tons; Chinese power plants eject 400 tons; and volcanoes, subsea vents, geysers and other sources spew out 9,000-10,000 additional tons per year.”

    “Since our power plants account for less than 0.5% of all the mercury in the air we breathe, eliminating every milligram of it will do nothing about the other 99.5% in our atmosphere.”

    This is the same EPA “logic” that insists on reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere when all life on Earth depends on it as plant food for all vegetation. More CO2 mean more crops for humans and livestock, healthier forests and jungles, and food for the Earth’s wildlife population.

    In a foreword to “Regulators Gone Wild: How the EPA is Ruining American Industry”, Dr. Jay Lehr, the Science Director of The Heartland Institute, wrote, “This administration is pushing an unprecedented radical environmental agenda.”

    The EPA, along with major environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, and others, have engaged for decades in a massive propaganda effort to convince Americans they are imperiled by the nation’s air and water. It is a lie. As the author of “Regulators Gone Wild”, Rich Trzupeck notes, “Though our world is actually cleaner than ever, most Americans are convinced it is dirtier.”

    “Toxicity,” wrote Trzupeck, “is a matter of dose, as sober scientists have observed since ancient times. A particular compound may kill you if you drink it, but a few parts per billion of the same compound can have no effect at all…one can find toxic air pollutants in the parts-per-billion level in human breath.”

    The EPA’s latest rule, which will no doubt be subject to lawsuits, is a killer MACT. It is not about mercury or other trace gases. It is about deliberately depriving the nation of energy which in turn means less jobs, less growth, and a third world lifestyle being imposed on Americans by the radical environmentalists inside the Obama administration.

    Remember that when you are in the election booth on November 6, 2012.
     
  2. bripat9643
    Offline

    bripat9643 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    67,919
    Thanks Received:
    8,099
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +27,449
    bump
     
  3. occupied
    Offline

    occupied Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2011
    Messages:
    16,456
    Thanks Received:
    2,251
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,767
    Mercury is a cumulative poison that our bodies have no mechanism to get rid of. Every microgram you have ever consumed is still in your body.
     
  4. bripat9643
    Offline

    bripat9643 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    67,919
    Thanks Received:
    8,099
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +27,449
    You obviously didn't read the article. American coal fired power plants contribute 0.5% to annual Mercury output into the atmosphere. The amount of Mercury already in the oceans is millions of times the the total output from all man made sources.

    The EPA's new rule won't improve anyone's health one bit, but it will cost American consumers billions of dollars every year.
     
  5. daveman
    Offline

    daveman Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    Messages:
    51,299
    Thanks Received:
    5,693
    Trophy Points:
    1,775
    Location:
    On the way to the Dark Tower.
    Ratings:
    +5,759
    The EPA is just another leftist-agenda enforcement bureau. Science and fact need not apply.
     
  6. Soggy in NOLA
    Offline

    Soggy in NOLA Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    32,850
    Thanks Received:
    4,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +11,575
    I'd cut EPA funding by 50%, at the very least.
     
  7. daveman
    Offline

    daveman Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    Messages:
    51,299
    Thanks Received:
    5,693
    Trophy Points:
    1,775
    Location:
    On the way to the Dark Tower.
    Ratings:
    +5,759
    What do you propose the replace the 50% of power generating capacity coal represents?

    Wind? Solar? Drop in the bucket -- don't make me laugh by mentioning them.

    You know who this will hurt the most? The poor and working poor.

    But you don't give a shit, do you?
     
  8. Cowman
    Offline

    Cowman Cows Have Liberal Minds

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2011
    Messages:
    4,713
    Thanks Received:
    552
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Ratings:
    +723
    Well that's off to a completely retarded start.
     
  9. occupied
    Offline

    occupied Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2011
    Messages:
    16,456
    Thanks Received:
    2,251
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,767
    Not when you want to scrap an entire agency that is the only barrier between us and the midnight toxic waste dumps of my youth. The taxpayers had to pay billions to clean up that crap, never again.
     
  10. Soggy in NOLA
    Offline

    Soggy in NOLA Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    32,850
    Thanks Received:
    4,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +11,575
    Unfortunately the EPA has become an out of control extortion racket with an agenda well beyond protecting the environment.
     

Share This Page