October 30, 2013 6 Comments
If you can’t compete, you cheat. It’s clear the EPA is trying to shaft the coal industry. Last year the state of WV balanced their budget and had a $140 million surplus. Today 12 months later they have a $90 million deficit. The reason is lost coal tax revenues. A negative swing of $230 million in just one year!
This next year will be much worse, WV will be lucky to survive. Many experts believe the state is the next Detroit because of EPA policies.
What does the EPA do to compete with coal? They cheat. The Obama administration poured over a billion dollars into alternative fuel technology’s like solar, which gave us the Solyndra debacle. We flushed $535M of taxpayer money down the toilet and we are going to blow over a billion on wind power.
Caithness Corp.’s Shepherds Flat was awarded $1.3B from the Obama administration and $30M from the State of Oregon for wind power. This project is highly suspect. In a Politico article, it’s stated “Its developers gorged themselves on hundreds of millions of dollars from taxpayers for 45 jobs, and government officials were well aware it was over-subsidized.”
In the WSJ yesterday, “In announcing the EPA’s new carbon regulations, Administrator Gina McCarthy said that new power plants “can minimize their carbon emissions by taking advantage of modern technologies.” The fact is that the coal-based industry cannot realistically follow these rules without putting itself out of business.”
So the question I have for President Obama and the EPA is, “Why not subsidize clean coal?”
If foolish spending and subsidies for energy industries that cannot compete isn’t enough, the EPA will strangle the coal industry with new regulations. U.S. Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) vows to fight destructive policies that harm America’s economy.
Senator Manchin, a stout Obama supporter until 2012, slammed President Obama’s proposal to address climate change, which imposes unreasonable restrictions that will have disastrous consequences for not only the coal industry, but also American jobs and the economy.
“The regulations the President wants to force on coal are not feasible. And if it’s not feasible, it’s not reasonable.” Senator Manchin said, in an interview with the Washington Post. “It’s clear now that the President has declared a war on coal. It’s simply unacceptable that one of the key elements of his climate change proposal places regulations on coal that are completely impossible to meet with existing technology.
“The fact is clear: our own Energy Department reports that our country will get 37 percent of our energy from coal until 2040. Removing coal from our energy mix will have disastrous consequences for our recovering economy. These policies punish American businesses by putting them at a competitive disadvantage with our global competitors. And those competitors burn seven-eighths of the world’s coal, and they’re not going to stop using coal any time soon.
“It is only common sense to use all our domestic resources, and that includes our coal. Let’s make sure that government works as our partner, not our adversary, to create a secure and affordable energy future, and let’s invest in technology which will have the ability to burn coal with almost zero emissions.”
Obama doesn’t have to win any more elections so his views are much harsher since the 2012 election victory. Obama’s stance on coal in 2011 and the difference in 2012 are striking. The 2 most recent years are the war on coal, of course we had growth from the bottom of the recession till 2011. The debate with the liberals has been, there are more jobs in the coal industry today than there were when Obama took office. Tree huggers always use the number of jobs created from the depth of the recession and usually concentrate on job growth in 2011.Anybody who states there are more jobs in the coal industry today in spite of Obama’s EPA is truly drinking the Kool Aid.
While the Obama administration is subsidizing green energy with billions to create a few hundreds of jobs, he could help save thousands of high paying jobs in the coal industry. Again it begs the question, “Why not subsidize clean coal?”