Posted on 12/26/2010 8:10:42 AM PST by Kaslin
It’s an extraordinary thing when an American President says he wants to “bankrupt” an American industry. And while it’s difficult to know the implications of such a thing – we may be in the process of finding out.
Back in January of 2008, presidential candidate Barack Obama sat for an interview with the editorial board of the San Francisco Chronicle newspaper. In that discussion, our future President was quizzed aggressively about his “green energy” agenda, and how he would usher in an era of “green jobs.” He was also asked how, as President, he would curtail the manufacture, sale, and consumption of more traditional energy forms that are regarded as environmentally hazardous.
Responding to these questions, a fatigued and hoarse-voiced Senator Obama stated, in part:
“Let me describe my overall policy. What I’ve said is that we would put a cap and trade system in to place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else’s out there. I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gasses that is emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market, and the ratcheted-down caps that are proposed every year. So if somebody wants to build a coal power plant, they can, it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re gonna be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted…”
From there, Mr. Obama went on to further explain that the revenues generated by “charging polluters” for their emissions, would be utilized to create wind and solar power plants. Thus, the candidate reasoned, America would begin a new era of “clean energy.”
For a variety of different reasons, these were some extraordinary remarks from a presidential candidate. For one, they presupposed that things always go according to plans, when the government is running the show. Take money away from the coal industry and give it to the “solar” and “wind” industries , so Mr. Obama reasoned, and everything would be fine – his idyllic vision of “green energy” would necessarily come to pass, simply because he said so. History shows that governmental endeavors are never this simplistic (even the fairly recent history of our government’s handling of the Gulf oil spill and Hurricane Katrina demonstrate this), but politicians of Mr. Obama’s ilk don’t like to be bound by the lessons of history.
The candidate’s remarks were also extraordinary for their callousness. People like Barack Obama who lack an adequate understanding of free market economics, often fail to understand the human dimensions of economic activity. They envision some sort of arbitrarily defined “collective good” in their policies – in this case it was Obama’s dream of “clean energy” – but they fail to understand that unless one first seeks to ensure the wellbeing of human individuals, then there will never be any “collective” wellbeing at all.
In the process, this dangerous kind of thinking reduces economic decision making down to only considering inanimate things – in this case for Mr. Obama, it was all about “coal,” “wind,” “pollution” and “dollars” -while the actual lives of people employed in the coal industry weren’t even considered.
Yet Mr. Obama’s remarks, in as much as he confidently stated that his policies would “bankrupt” the coal industry, did have real implications for real individual human lives. Why would anyone – least of all a future President of the United States – want to “bankrupt” an industry, and put people out of work? One would have thought that these remarks may have had struck a note of concern for voters in coal producing states like Pennsylvania, Colorado, Indiana or Ohio.
But now, less than two years into his presidency, some real human beings who are employed in the coal industry are suffering.
Last week in the coal mining town of Logan, West Virginia, residents there convened the first of several prayer vigils for the saving of their coal businesses. Members of the clergy joined the broader community to offer spiritual assistance as people suffer the loss of jobs, and to pray that their industry will be sustained and reinvigorated.
At least one participant in the event noted that part of the coal industry’s struggle may very well be a matter of bad public relations, and that there may very well be some people who don’t want the industry to exist. There are those, noted Jim Frye of the Logan County Chamber of Commerce, who are seeking to “severely limit our industry,” and there are also those “who would argue to destroy our industry…”
These concerns should not come as a surprise, given President Obama’s campaign pledge. Granted, his glorious “cap and trade” vision has not happened yet, but more stringent regulations on the coal industry have, with more “crack downs” from the E.P.A. are on the way in 2011. And it is a sad day in America when Americans must pray for protection from their own government.
My hometown got a few million....Some will be used to create a green roof....Which is absolutely stupid in our climate.
He made the most biased and outrageous statements I had ever heard a candidate make. And yet he was elected.
We won’t even mention the fact that about 50% of the electricity on the U.S. power grid is produced by coal. How does Prez Libtard expect that to be replaced? Solar & wind? I think not, Prez Libtard. Join the real world & pull your head out of your @ss. Wishful thinking gets us nowhere but hell.
We all know that all this wind power is really a “blow” job.
Many Americans finally get it. He either goes or the radical leftists that he leads are going to destroy everything you and I have worked for. Your 401K/IRA and other investments are going to be worthless.
At the electrical utility I work for the President said electricity is $123 per 1000 kw-hrs. Recently it was the same as DUKE, about $93 per 1000 KW-HRS. The President said they were spending $750 Million on CO2 pollution equipment and before long the rate would be $150 per 1000 KW-HRS. The utility is trying to add more Nuclear to catch DUKE but now the $$ is so expensive it will break the rate payers who already are near Chapter 11 as it is.
Anybody who thinks CO2 is a pollutant is an idiot yet Obama will make heating/cooling so expensive that before long you will be wearing winter clothes to stay warm. Forget air conditioning, you'll do without it.
It's either Obama or else our way of life is toast.
“There are those, noted Jim Frye of the Logan County Chamber of Commerce, who are seeking to ?severely limit our industry,? and there are also those ?who would argue to destroy our industry??
Yet, they voted for him. Sorry, someone is goint to have to help me. My “Give a Sh*t Meter” is in the shop this month.
Because he is a charlatan and the stupid people who fell for him voted for him.
But he was so 'clean and articulate'.
Our next platform ought to be, drill oil and nuke atoms and dig coal. Those three things would give us practically all our energy, and we could have them abundantly here at home if we’d stop with all the restrictions (Alaska, North Dakota, off shore California and Florida, oil shale, etc). Any State that goes along with the deal can take half the profits from the untapped energy sources (new oil well, new atomic plant, new coal mine, new refinery) that it allows to be exploited.
And if we are going into a mini ice age as some astrophysicists are talking about, we can have those sources on line before it gets really bad in the U.S.
We know that with existing technology wind and sun will never be cost effective, and will make no climatic difference anyway.
Too many Americans liked his Five Year Plan.
Here's my explanation of large-scale wind power projects: they are expensive high-tech toys on an institutional scale, which those institutions use to impress their friends and say, "Hey! Look at me!" A 1.5 megawatt wind turbine is the institutional equivalent of a Lamborghini Murciélago: a really cool high-tech toy that makes no financial sense whatsoever.
I can see the appeal. Literally within view of my home, my local college just erected two massive 1.65Mw wind turbines. They are cool as hell, and I actually like seeing them their towering into the sky. They are very impressive.
I wouldn't even care if these institutions were paying for their fancy toys with their own money, but no... they are literally stealing money of my and everyone else's paychecks to pay for them.
This local project cost $9 million, 60% of which came from the Federal Government through a couple of different vehicles, including the ARRA "stimulus" bill. The remaining 40% of it was paid for with state bonds.
Here's the bottom lime: from what I've read, NOT ONE PENNY to pay for these things came from private money, which means it makes absolutely no financial sense whatsoever.
The only thing green about “green energy” are the incredible subsidies that are required to make them competitive with fossil fuels:
“”Giving away gasoline to low-income people and protecting the employment of coal miners are both common government policies, but the U.S. has leaned much more heavily toward environmental protection,” says Hodge. “The $2.8 billion in U.S. tax breaks for oil and gas firms is much smaller than the $11.3 billion in tax breaks we are funneling into green energy such as wind and solar power production.””
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/26856.html
And where does Odumbo think he is going to get his tax revenues to support his socialist utopia?:
“Indeed, since 1981, when the failed windfall profits tax was first enacted, federal, state, and local governments in the U.S. have collected more in taxes from the oil industry than the industry has earned in actual profits for its shareholders. For example, after adjusting for inflation, the combined net earnings (net of taxes and expenses) for the largest petroleum companies between 1981 and 2008 totaled $1.4 trillion. By contrast, the total amount of taxes collected by U.S. governments from the oil companies topped $1.95 trillion, roughly 40 percent more than the industry’s combined profits. Tax collections exceeded company profits in 23 of the 27 years surveyed.”
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr183.pdf
Wait till the local municipalities have to start maintaining them - from $100K and up for bearings and other wear parts.. I’m betting the locals won’t like that on their tax bills..
We know that with existing technology wind and sun will never be cost effective, and will make no climatic difference anyway.
Because addressing or fixing the problem is not now or has it ever been at the heart of their agenda.
being able to tell you what form of energy you use, how much you use, how you use it and when you use it IS their agenda.
In 10 years, it will be another big, taxpayer subsidized reclamation project to tear them down and return the farmland back to production.
On a side note, a fellow told me his mother got $30,000 from a windmmill farm project in northwest Indiana just for them to walk their big crane about a thousand across her property
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.