More today on Obama’s coal war from Money Morning, Consumer Energy Alliance and American Energy Alliance

Strangling the US Economy by Executive Order

Money Morning by Martin Hutchison.  Last Tuesday, President Obama announced his "Action Plan on Climate Change."

One of main "actions" is to kill a core piece of the US energy sector.
 
Among other things, he promised to use the Environmental Protection Agency regulation of carbon emissions to phase the U.S. out of coal fired power, even for existing stations.
 
…environmentalists praised this move as a bold step against global warming.
 
Unfortunately, they’re not very good at the economics of this.
 
So, I ran the numbers. And what I found was infuriating but not surprising: Regulations like this are the principal things slowing U.S. economic growth.
 
Do the Math
 
In the first four months of 2013, according to the Energy Information Administration, the cost per million BTU of power station coal was $2.35, while that for natural gas was $4.43 (other fuels were more expensive).
 
If the 11.9 quadrillion BTU generated by coal-fired stations in 2012 is exchanged for gas, the next cheapest alternative, the cost increase would be $2.08 x 11.9 billion, or $25 billion — every year.
 
That’s the cost of just one regulation, which the EPA imposes with a flick of its wrist, so to speak.

CEA Responds to the President’s Michael Whatley, Consumer Energy AllianceClimate Action Plan:

In response to President Obama’s “Climate Action Plan," CEA Executive Vice President Michael Whatley (NGP Photo) released a statement, highlighting electricity concerns. The plan seeks to advance the Administration’s goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the range of 17 percent below 2005 levels while also requiring and encouraging greater resiliency programs to account for the effects of climate change domestically and encouraging other countries to pursue similar efforts. The President’s 21-page plan is organized into three categories: Cutting Carbon Pollution, Preparing for Impacts of Climate Change, and Leading International Efforts to Address Climate Change. A complete summary of the plan prepared Consumer Energy Alliance’s Vice President of Policy, Natalie Joubert, can be viewed here.

You knew this already, but everything is not as the President would say it seems. The Institute for Energy Research (6/27/13) reports: “The newly released ‘President’s Climate Action Plan’ is aptly named, for ‘planning’ is the traditional term that socialists used when trying to centrally run the economy. Indeed, the president’s plan dabbles in: emissions of hydro fluorocarbons and methane; forest growth; promotion of so-called clean energy; task forces at the state, local and tribal levels; building integrity; resilience in health care; conserving land and water resources; insurance leadership; launching a ‘climate data initiative’; mobilizing ‘climate finance’; and a host of other items. Beyond the audacity and hubris of such a plan, is the fact that it relies on dubious economics. Even taking the peer-reviewed mainstream literature at face value, much of the action plan document is unjustifiable.”

 See, pretty much everyone wants a market-based approach to climate change. So do we. Except our preferred "market-based approach" is economic growth. The Wall Street Journal (6/27/13) reports: “President Obama unveiled his vast new anticarbon-energy agenda this week, which he plans to impose by executive fiat. Crucial to pulling off this exercise is a decision the federal bureaucracy made last month to change the way it accounts for carbon emissions—a decision that received almost no media attention. In late May the Administration slipped this mickey into a new rule about efficiency standards for microwaves, significantly raising what it calls the "social cost of carbon." Team Obama made no public notice and invited no comment on this change that will further tilt rule-making against products and industries that use carbon energy.”

 

 

It turns out the President supports a market-based approach to climate change. Still not quite sure what that means. National Public Radio (6/28/13) reports: “Climate change seems like this complicated problem with a million pieces. But Henry Jacoby, an economist at MIT’s business school, says there’s really just one thing you need to do to solve the problem: Tax carbon emissions. ‘If you let the economists write the legislation,’ Jacoby says, ‘it could be quite simple.’ He says he could fit the whole bill on one page. Basically, Jacoby would tax fossil fuels in proportion to the amount of carbon they release. That would make coal, oil and natural gas more expensive. That’s it; that’s the whole plan.”
Associated Press by Josh Letterman.  At the core of Obama’s plan are new controls on new and existing power plants that emit carbon dioxide, heat-trapping gases blamed for global warming. The program is intended to boost renewable energy production on federal lands, increase efficiency standards and prepare communities to deal with higher temperatures. None of the measures in Obama’s plan requires congressional action.

Beyond Chron by Peter Dreier.  Twice in the last week, President Barack Obama referred to divestment — the controversial strategy to bring about social change by pressuring corporations to behave more responsibly. On Tuesday, Obama mentioned divestment during a major speech at Georgetown University outlining his plan to address climate change. And on Thursday, at a press conference in Senegal, Obama recalled his involvement during college in the anti-apartheid movement, which relied heavily on divestment to push companies to boycott South Africa until it dismantled its racist system. ….  "I’m here to enlist your generation’s help in keeping the United States of America a global leader in the fight against climate change," Obama told the Georgetown students, announcing his proposal to cut pollution from power plants, expand renewable energy development on public lands, and support climate-resilient investments. Noting that big corporations will resist calls to reduce their unhealthy practices, Obama urged the students to "Convince those in power to reduce our carbon pollution. Push your own communities to adopt smarter practices. Invest. Divest. Remind folks there’s no contradiction between a sound environment and strong economic growth.  (Publisher’s note: we listened to the speech wherein Obama told of plans to invite African students to the US to continue the discussion on Climate Change and leadership issues.  Obama has applied ‘community organizing’ tools that propelled him from Chicago to Washington, to the current global warming issue that has the prospect of diverting attention from Administration scandals to "shiny environmental objects".  We believe African students, anticipating a free trip to the States, will buy the subterfuge; will Americans?  -DH)