The EPA’s Clean Power Plan is dictatorial in nature, and worthy of the CCCP.
The Waxman-Markey Cap & Trade Bill, HR 2454, was rejected by the Senate, and it contained many of the same proposals that are in the administration’s Clean Power Plan (CPP).
Proposals rejected by Americans are being implemented over their objections, assuming Congress is still the representative of the people.
The purpose of HR 2454 was to establish Cap & Trade and to implement draconian rules to restrict the use of energy by Americans.
The Clean Power Plan incorporates Cap & Trade and many of the same draconian rules as HR 2454 with the intent of cutting CO2 emissions 32% below 1995 levels by 2030.
What does a 32% cut in CO2 emissions really mean for Americans?
The CPP will cut CO2 emissions to the same level as in 1975, while the population will have increased by 143 million since then.
The accompanying table shows the data. These facts are incontrovertible.
CO2 Emissions MMT
In other words, while CO2 emissions will be cut to below the levels of 1975, the population will have increased by 143 million people.
This is draconian, and a disaster for millions of Americans.
It’s difficult to assign values to how these cuts will hurt Americans, but a few observations may make the picture clear.
Those who are employed in coal mines, the coal transport industry, the utility industry, and those who support each of those jobs in the service sector will see approximately 500,000 jobs lost.
This means that 2 million Americans will be directly affected, when families are taken into consideration.
Removing a half million Americans from the work force will have a very negative effect on the economy.
While some new jobs may be created by building wind mills and solar installations, the people in the coal industry won’t be qualified for those jobs, and are likely to become part of the permanent ranks of the unemployed.
But this is only a small part of the picture, because the cost of electricity for all Americans will likely increase by at least 300%, triple that of today’s residential price.
For those who may disagree with this estimate, California’s experience may be a good way to measure reality as California has been the most aggressive state in implementing so-called clean energy programs.
In 2015, the average residential price of electricity in California was 17.5 cents per kWh, which was nearly twice the price of electricity in the half dozen states using the lowest cost methods for generating electricity, primarily coal.
This is worth repeating:
Californians, with their focus on using renewable to cut CO2 emissions, pay twice as much for electricity as do people living where electricity is generated using the lowest cost methods.
And this was before California began to spend aggressively on expensive storage.
More importantly, California has only reduced its CO2 emissions by 12% (2004 – 2012) … A far cry from the 32% reduction demanded by the CPP.
Another way to gauge electricity costs when so-called clean energy is forced on the public, is Germany.
Germany, in 2014, had reduced its CO2 emissions by only 25%, from 1990, while German citizens pay 3 to 4 times what Americans pays for electricity.
Germany’s electric utilities are on the brink of bankruptcy, because renewables eviscerate a large portion of their business. See The Duck Speaks, Part 2, for an explanation of why Germany’s electric utilities are facing bankruptcy or a government takeover.
Suggesting that Americans will pay three times more for their electricity because of the CPP is not extreme … it’s conservative.
The administration’s CPP will affect all Americans, but the poorest will be hurt the most.
Middle-class Americans will also be badly hurt by the increase in the cost of electricity.
The average American will see their cost of electricity increase by over $2,500 per year. This is money they can’t spend on food and clothing.
The poorest Americans may see their cost increase by somewhat less, but they can’t afford to spend any more than they already do on electricity, because, for them, it really does mean less food, less heating and air-conditioning and less of everything else they need to merely survive.
The 46 million Americans on food stamps will be devastated when their cost of electricity represents 10 to 15% of their total income.
The 200 to 250 million Americans in the middle class will find it more difficult to meet their daily needs.
Electricity is part of nearly everything that’s produced or manufactured, so the cost of nearly every product will increase as the result of the CPP.
Meanwhile, the rich and famous will still drive their Tesla’s, because their cost of electricity will represent less than 1% of their total income.
It’s important to remember that these regulations are being implemented by unelected bureaucrats whose only mission is to implement programs to eventually cut CO2 emissions 80%, the previously stated goal of the EPA. The devastating 32% cut by 2030 is merely their initial effort.
Cutting CO2 emissions to below 1975 levels while the population increases by 143 million, and at the same time increasing the cost of electricity by at least 300%, will destroy the average American’s standard of living, while forcing many poorer American families into a devastating living hell.
One way to describe these efforts by president Obama and the EPA has been to say they have declared war on coal.
In effect, they have really declared war on the American people.
* * * * * *
It’s easy to subscribe to articles by Donn Dears.
Go to the photo on the right side of the article where it says email subscription. Click and enter your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.
If you know people who would be interested in these articles please send them a link to the article and suggest they also subscribe.
© Power For USA, 2010 – 2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author, Donn Dears LLC, is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Power For USA with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.