Another example of the law of "Unintended Consequences having a perverse affect...

[healthmyths]

US sending polluting coal overseas
This fossil fuel trade threatens to undermine President Barack Obama's strategy for reducing the gases blamed for climate change and reveals a little-discussed side effect of countries acting alone on a global problem.
The contribution of this exported pollution to global warming is not something the administration wants to measure, or even talk about.

"This is the single biggest flaw in U.S. climate policy," said Roger Martella, the former general counsel at the Environmental Protection Agency under President George W. Bush. "Although the administration is moving forward with climate change regulations at home, we don't consider how policy decisions in the U.S. impact greenhouse gas emissions in other parts of the world."
Over the past six years, American energy companies have sent more coal than ever to other parts of the world, in some cases to places with more lax environmental standards.

The consequence: This global shell game makes the U.S. appear to be making more progress than it is on global warming. That's because it shifts some pollution — and the burden for cleaning it up — onto other countries' balance sheets
US sending polluting coal overseas

This ranks right up there with EMTALA act of 1986... yes before you idiots comment DONE UNDER REAGAN and GOP Congress... an unintended consequence being hospitals now charging sometimes 6,000% over their costs to make up for having to absorb the EMTALA patients!


unintended consequences-- "A perverse effect contrary to what was originally intended
(when an intended solution makes a problem worse)"
Unintended consequences - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yup, the far right's attacks on the admin's environment policies have back fired as the US is the most energy independent it has been in sixty years.

 

[Samson]

Yup, the far right's attacks on the admin's environment policies have back fired as the US is the most energy independent it has been in sixty years.

Or

Obama is the least competent administrator of environmental policies in the past sixty years.

 

[JakeStarkey]

or

America is more energy independent than in the last sixty years

BHO will get the credit

 

[bripat9643]

Yup, the far right's attacks on the admin's environment policies have back fired as the US is the most energy independent it has been in sixty years.

So the Administration's intent was to increase the country's dependence of foreign energy sources? Is that really what you intended to say?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

or

America is more energy independent than in the last sixty years

BHO will get the credit

Jake credits Obama for making the Sun rise in the east

 

[bripat9643]

or

America is more energy independent than in the last sixty years

BHO will get the credit

Only dick sucking drones like you give him credit, Fakey.

 

[Samson]

or

America is more energy independent than in the last sixty years

BHO will get the credit

Really.

How many oil wells did he drill?

 

[healthmyths]

or

America is more energy independent than in the last sixty years

BHO will get the credit

HOW can he be credited IF the ONE area he can control, Federal land oil/gas production HE HAS allowed to DECLINE???

In fiscal year 2010, 36 percent of our nation’s oil production took place on federal lands.

Due to Obama Administration policies, by 2013, only 23 percent of our nation’s oil production took place on federal lands.

Production on non-Federal lands, in contrast, is skyrocketing as hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling have increased production dramatically.

Likewise, natural gas production on Federal lands has been steadily declining,

while natural gas production on non-Federal lands has been steadily increasing

Looking at data farther back provides an even more dramatic indication that Obama Administration policies are hurting oil and gas production on Federal lands, while oil and gas production on non Federal lands is skyrocketing.

According to a report by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, oil production on
federal lands fell 6 percent between fiscal years 2009 and 2013 while over the same time period,
oil production increased by 61 percent on state and private lands.

As a result of these large increases in production, crude oil production on state and private lands increased by 2.1 million barrels per day over the 4 year period, an amount which is more than each of the following oil producing nations — Algeria, Libya, Qatar, or Norway– produced in 2012.
Oil and Gas Production on Federal Lands Still a Disappointment - IER

AGAIN please refute above FACTS that totally debunk your comment!

 

[The Rabbi]

or

America is more energy independent than in the last sixty years

BHO will get the credit

Jake credits Obama for making the Sun rise in the east

Is that why Jake is a Republican?

 

[Andylusion]

The idea that if we don't use coal, no one else will, is ridiculous. Coal is going to be used, by us, or someone else, it's still going to be used. Same with oil. If we don't use it, someone else will use it.

The eco-lefts are always going to be frustrated and upset, because their stated goal, is a logical impossibility. I don't care what laws you put in place, the use of so-called fossil fuels is always going to increase until the supply is used up.

 

[JakeStarkey]

or

America is more energy independent than in the last sixty years

BHO will get the credit

Jake credits Obama for making the Sun rise in the east

Is that why Jake is a Republican?

I am not part of the pretend clown posse Republicans of the extreme right.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The idea that if we don't use coal, no one else will, is ridiculous. Coal is going to be used, by us, or someone else, it's still going to be used. Same with oil. If we don't use it, someone else will use it.

The eco-lefts are always going to be frustrated and upset, because their stated goal, is a logical impossibility. I don't care what laws you put in place, the use of so-called fossil fuels is always going to increase until the supply is used up.

There will be continual growth in solar, wind, and hydro power along with refined use of petroleum. Please don't pretend that you have a clue as to what is happening, anymore than you understand the marriage equality issue. You have every right to your beliefs, but . . . you need to read more.

 

[Andylusion]

The idea that if we don't use coal, no one else will, is ridiculous. Coal is going to be used, by us, or someone else, it's still going to be used. Same with oil. If we don't use it, someone else will use it.

The eco-lefts are always going to be frustrated and upset, because their stated goal, is a logical impossibility. I don't care what laws you put in place, the use of so-called fossil fuels is always going to increase until the supply is used up.

There will be continual growth in solar, wind, and hydro power along with refined use of petroleum. Please don't pretend that you have a clue as to what is happening, anymore than you understand the marriage equality issue. You have every right to your beliefs, but . . . you need to read more.

Nothing of what you said changed, or contradicted anything I said.

Further, bringing up a completely unrelated topic, of all things 'marriage equality' on a thread about pollution, proves you have nothing to say. The only people who in the second sentence of their response, end up with not just a strawman, but a strawman not even related to the topic at hand, have proven themselves incompetent.

Where in my post, or any post thus far on this thread, has anyone claimed... or even mentioned, "solar and wind, and hydro power"?

No where. Not one post said anything about those things.

Moreover, we are not closer to being energy independent because of Obama, or the Democrats, or leftist in general.

The primary reason we are closer to being energy independent, is because of Fracking, because of Shale oil and gas, and because of the massive international corporations that have funded the research and design, and investment that allowed us access to those sources of energy.

All of which, the left has been against. The left has been attacking Fracking for ages. The left has been attacking oil and gas companies for decades.

If it were up to the leftist, we would be more dependent on imported energy than ever before in history.

But one thing, is absolutely certain, and that is, Solar and Wind, have NOTHING to do with our energy independence at all. Solar and Wind, barely make up the smallest significant fraction of energy production, and more importantly, they can not be used as a replacement for Gas/Coal/Nuclear power.

If any given city requires 20 Megawatts of power, and you have 10 Megawatts of Wind or Solar power plants, you still need a full 20 Megawatt Gas/Coal/Nuclear power plant. And you need that power plant running, and operational the entire time, because no one knows when the wind will stop blowing, or the clouds cover the sun. The moment that happens, if you do not have that Gas/Coal/Nuclear power plant running, and able to pick up the full 20 Megawatts of power, the entire city black out.

Why? Because the power grid can't run on less than full power. It's not like a flashlight where, when the power goes down, it just gets dimmer and dimmer until it goes out. Instead, a power grid running at partial power would be severely damaged, resulting in weeks of costly repairs, and weeks without power.

To prevent that, the power grid would have to be shut completely down, until full power could be restored, and that would take hours. This is exactly what happened in California with the rolling blackouts.

All Solar and Wind does, is drastically increase the cost of power, and not a whole lot more.

Here in Ohio, we have several Wind power plants across the state. For the total cost of just ONE of those 'wind farms', we could build a conventional Gas/Coal fired power plant, that would produces as much power as ALL the wind farms across Ohio combined.

In fact, we just had an embarrassing event happen just north of Columbus Ohio, near Delaware. A Toyota Dealership installed a Wind Turbine on their lot, and 2 years later, installed a new one. It came out in the paper, that the Dealership got the Wind Mill, by using a grant from the Federal Government. They purchased a $2 Million dollar turbine, and split the cost 50/50. Tax payers covered $1 Million of the cost.

The Turbine lasted just over a year, and the bearings in the generator wore out. The Turbine had a 1-year warranty. The Dealership filed with the Federal Government, which stepped in and replaced the Turbine at cost, a full $2 Million.

$4 Million dollars, $3 Million screwed the Tax payers, and how much electricity did it produce? According to the documents from the dealership, it saved them $20 Thousand in electricity bills a year. Work the math on that, and tell me how long until they break even. That's a good use of tax money, right?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Androw, I certainly can add as illustration an example of your substitution of faith for empirical data.

Nothing you wrote above contradicts my points about energy, healthmyths continuing errors, and your substitution of belief in place of knowledge.

Please stop.

 

[Andylusion]

Androw, I certainly can add as illustration an example of your substitution of faith for empirical data.

Nothing you wrote above contradicts my points about energy, healthmyths continuing errors, and your substitution of belief in place of knowledge.

Please stop.

Why should I stop, when you are the one who doesn't have a point to make? Which one of us, on a thread about energy, brought up marriage equality?

You discredited yourself. Please stop.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Androw, I certainly can add as illustration an example of your substitution of faith for empirical data.

Nothing you wrote above contradicts my points about energy, healthmyths continuing errors, and your substitution of belief in place of knowledge.

Please stop.

Why should I stop, when you are the one who doesn't have a point to make? Which one of us, on a thread about energy, brought up marriage equality?

You discredited yourself. Please stop.

As an example to show the uselessness of your thinking. You have nothing on energy and nothing on marriage equality.

When you and your far righties can talk sense, then a dialogue can begin.

 

[g5000]

The consequence: This global shell game makes the U.S. appear to be making more progress than it is on global warming. That's because it shifts some pollution — and the burden for cleaning it up — onto other countries' balance sheets

I do not follow that "logic". Whether we clean up our emissions or not, that coal was going to be sold to overseas entities. So they were going to pollute the same amount, no matter what we do here.

So if we reduce our emissions, then we are not "shifting some pollution" anywhere. We are reducing pollution, period.

 

[g5000]

As the Obama administration weans the U.S. off dirty fuels blamed for global warming, energy companies have been sending more of America's unwanted energy leftovers to other parts of the world where they could create even more pollution.

If we are selling more coal to overseas entities than we were before, that is because they are consuming more coal than before. This idea we are selling our "leftover" coal to them is idiotic. They won't buy what they aren't going to use or need.

Coal, like money or oil, is fungible. If demand for coal has risen, those entities will get it. Either from the US or somewhere else.

 

[g5000]

CHINA & INDIA ARE BUILDING 4 NEW COAL POWER PLANTS – EVERY WEEK

Global demand for coal is expected to grow to 8.9 billion tons by 2016 from 7.9 billion tons this year. China is expected to add about 160 new coal-fired plants to the 620 operating now, within four years. During that period, India will add more than 46 plants.