New Coal Regulations Will Kill Jobs, Boost Energy Bills

[Mustang]

Coal's Assault on Human Health

Physicians for Social Responsibility has released a groundbreaking medical report, “Coal’s Assault on Human Health,” which takes a new look at the devastating impacts of coal on the human body. Coal combustion releases mercury, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and dozens of other substances known to be hazardous to human health. This report looks at the cumulative harm inflicted by those pollutants on three major body organ systems: the respiratory system, the cardiovascular system, and the nervous system. The report also considers coal’s contribution to global warming, and the health implications of global warming.

Download the report:
Executive Summary (pdf)
Full report (pdf)

Download by chapter:
Front Matter (pdf)
Chapter 1 Introduction (pdf)
Chapter 2 Life Cycle of Coal (pdf)
Chapter 3 Respiratory Effects (pdf)
Chapter 4 Cardiovascular Effects (pdf)
Chapter 5 Neurological Effects (pdf)
Chapter 6 Global Warming (pdf)
Chapter 7 Policy Recommendations (pdf)

Executive Summary

Coal pollutants affect all major body organ systems and contribute to four of the five leading causes of mortality in the U.S.: heart disease, cancer, stroke, and chronic lower respiratory diseases. This conclusion emerges from our reassessment of the widely recognized health threats from coal. Each step of the coal lifecycle—mining, transportation, washing, combustion, and disposing of postcombustion wastes—impacts human health. Coal combustion in particular contributes to diseases affecting large portions of the U.S. population, including asthma, lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke, compounding the major public health challenges of our time. It interferes with lung development, increases the risk of heart attacks, and compromises intellectual capacity. Oxidative stress and inflammation are indicated as possible mechanisms in the exacerbation and development of many of the diseases under review.

"Physicians for Social Responsibility"...Are you fucking kidding. Get that liberal clap trap the fuck out of here.
You stupid liberals really do think you can exist is a federally mandated plastic bubble free of all risk.
One major volcanic eruption can emit more pollution than 10,000 coal fired plants. For Christ's sake..A volcanic eruption in Iceland last year shut down air travel to and above Europe for three weeks. What the fuck is wrong with you people.
Are you that eager to have government take over your very being?

Perhaps you're too young to remember what it used to be like when corporations and manufacturing businesses didn't have much in the way of any significant legal requirements on how (or even whether) they handled toxic waste and other pollution by products. They dumped them in the rivers and lakes. Of course, that killed fish and polluted water supplies used for human consumption, as well as contaminating the food chain.

Since there was no legal requirement to deal responsibly with the waste, individual businesses could and did make an argument that requiring individual businesses to clean up their waste put them at an economic disadvantage with other companies in the same business who didn't have the same requirement. It's a good argument, but it's not a good argument to do nothing.

Aside from that, it's a public safety issue. Even to this day, some companies dump toxic waste late at night in empty fields. What are YOU going to do about it? If you found out that was happening near where you live, do you think you would have the necessary power to put an end to it? Chances are pretty good that if and when you confronted company representatives about it, they would politely tell you to mind your own business. So, what entity could you POSSIBLY turn to in order to force businesses to deal responsibly with their toxic waste? I wonder.

 

[Shadow]

Lets just see how high our electric bills go if the EPA gets its way. Companies will pass on higher costs to the consumer.

It take electricity to produce everything. Higher costs for everything you buy.

Don't forget all the low income people who will be subsidized by the taxpayers yet again. In effect we will be paying our bills and theirs as well.

Don't know about you but I can hardly wait.

Me too. See this is the liberals idea of getting the economy rolling I guess. Make it impossible for me to afford anything (clothes/food for my kids etc..). But...hey... at least the welfare crowd will still be able to go out and purchase New TV's and $100.00 tennis shoes.

 

[Shadow]

The EPA reports up to Obama. He made a campaign pledge to drive up energy costs.

It's one promise he's actually kept...to the misfortune of the many financially distressed people who will be hurt.

MERGED with existing thread.

Yes he did...he said he would intentionally bankrupt anyone starting up new coal plants. Looks like that's next on the agenda...a huge Job creator too no doubt.

 

[thereisnospoon]

you've got to love the way these stupid idiots have so much faith in China you want to see China you idiot?

Amazing Pictures, Pollution in China | ChinaHush

fucking unbelievable...And Obama was singing praises about how great China is

Link?

News Headlines
Obama – Communist China Infrastructure Is Vastly Superior To America | Flopping Aces
China’s Infrastructure That Obama Wants U.S. to Emulate is Collapsing : The Powers That Be.....
Next?

 

[Mustang]

Coal's Assault on Human Health

Physicians for Social Responsibility has released a groundbreaking medical report, “Coal’s Assault on Human Health,” which takes a new look at the devastating impacts of coal on the human body. Coal combustion releases mercury, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and dozens of other substances known to be hazardous to human health. This report looks at the cumulative harm inflicted by those pollutants on three major body organ systems: the respiratory system, the cardiovascular system, and the nervous system. The report also considers coal’s contribution to global warming, and the health implications of global warming.

Download the report:
Executive Summary (pdf)
Full report (pdf)

Download by chapter:
Front Matter (pdf)
Chapter 1 Introduction (pdf)
Chapter 2 Life Cycle of Coal (pdf)
Chapter 3 Respiratory Effects (pdf)
Chapter 4 Cardiovascular Effects (pdf)
Chapter 5 Neurological Effects (pdf)
Chapter 6 Global Warming (pdf)
Chapter 7 Policy Recommendations (pdf)

Executive Summary

Coal pollutants affect all major body organ systems and contribute to four of the five leading causes of mortality in the U.S.: heart disease, cancer, stroke, and chronic lower respiratory diseases. This conclusion emerges from our reassessment of the widely recognized health threats from coal. Each step of the coal lifecycle—mining, transportation, washing, combustion, and disposing of postcombustion wastes—impacts human health. Coal combustion in particular contributes to diseases affecting large portions of the U.S. population, including asthma, lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke, compounding the major public health challenges of our time. It interferes with lung development, increases the risk of heart attacks, and compromises intellectual capacity. Oxidative stress and inflammation are indicated as possible mechanisms in the exacerbation and development of many of the diseases under review.

"Physicians for Social Responsibility"...Are you fucking kidding. Get that liberal clap trap the fuck out of here.
You stupid liberals really do think you can exist is a federally mandated plastic bubble free of all risk.
One major volcanic eruption can emit more pollution than 10,000 coal fired plants. For Christ's sake..A volcanic eruption in Iceland last year shut down air travel to and above Europe for three weeks. What the fuck is wrong with you people.
Are you that eager to have government take over your very being?

What is the government's responsibility? To protect the citizens from all threats foreign or domestic. Coal emissions is a threat to human life and health. This not theory, it is reality.

Why are you folks on the right in TOTAL denial?

Have you ever heard of the law of the commons? It goes back to the Magna Carta before there was an EPA. BTW, the EPA was started by a Republican...Richard Nixon.

Is the American Lung Association also a 'liberal clap trap, or is it just any organization that doesn't support your ignorance and far right wing ideology?

Toxic Air: Time to Clean Up Coal-fired Power Plants _______________________________________________
Did you know that the coal-fired power plants, found across the country, emit health-threatening toxins into our air every day? Toxins like arsenic, mercury, acid gases and lead. The American Lung Association’s new report Toxic Air: The Case for Cleaning Up Coal-fired Power Plants, reveals the hazardous air pollution emitted from power plants and why now is the time to clean them up and protect ou health.

The report highlights the long list of uncontrolled pollutants from these plants including dangerous pollutants such as arsenic, mercury, dioxins, formaldehyde, acid gases and PAHs, just to name a few. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required on March 16 to issue a proposal to finally clean up these hazardous air pollutants. This comes more than twenty years after Congress added requirements to the Clean Air Act—with strong bipartisan support—that these toxic emissions must be stopped.

Hazards revealed

The Lung Association’s report reveals the real public health threat from coal-fired power plants.

>> Coal-fired power plants that sell electricity to the grid produce more hazardous air pollution in the U.S. than any other industrial pollution sources.

>> More than 400 coal-fired power plants located in 46 states across the country release more that 386,000 tons of hazardous air pollutants into the atmosphere each year.

>> Particle pollution from power plants is estimated to kill approximately 13,000 people a year.

“Power plant pollution kills people,” said Charles D. Connor, President and CEO of the American Lung Association. “It threatens the brains and nervous system of children. It can cause cancer, heart attacks and strokes.

“It’s time that we end the ‘toxic loophole’ that has allowed coal-burning power plants to operate without any federal limits on emissions of mercury, arsenic, dioxin, acid gases such as hydrogen chloride and other dangerous pollutants,” said Charles D. Connor, president and CEO of the American Lung Association.

“People living closest to these plants, especially children, seniors, pregnant women and those with chronic disease face the greatest risk, but it doesn’t stop there. Pollution from coal-fired power plants takes flight and travels far into other states—threatening public health.”

Time for EPA to act

The Clean Air Act requires that hazardous air pollutants from coal-fired power plants be controlled. Because EPA is overdue in delivering its proposal for cleaning up these plants, the agency is under a court order to propose these regulations by March 16. Without the new rules, no national standards exist to limit these pollutants from these plants.

The Lung Association report identifies modern pollution control technologies that that are currently in use in some plants, which are readily available for installation at other plants. The law sets the cleanup requirements based on actual performance facilities, but each power plant will select the specific pollution control strategies to reduce their emissions.

“The American public has waited long enough—more than two decades. We are counting on EPA to protect all Americans from the health risks imposed by these dangerous pollutants once and for all.”

More

Conservatives and their families actually benefit from big bad gov't just like the rest of us do. Seat belts, shoulder harnesses, air bags, auto crash safety tests and other automobile mandates by gov't have saved tens of thousands of lives.

Damn the Federal Gov't!

 

[thereisnospoon]

"Physicians for Social Responsibility"...Are you fucking kidding. Get that liberal clap trap the fuck out of here.
You stupid liberals really do think you can exist is a federally mandated plastic bubble free of all risk.
One major volcanic eruption can emit more pollution than 10,000 coal fired plants. For Christ's sake..A volcanic eruption in Iceland last year shut down air travel to and above Europe for three weeks. What the fuck is wrong with you people.
Are you that eager to have government take over your very being?

What is the government's responsibility? To protect the citizens from all threats foreign or domestic. Coal emissions is a threat to human life and health. This not theory, it is reality.

Why are you folks on the right in TOTAL denial?

Have you ever heard of the law of the commons? It goes back to the Magna Carta before there was an EPA. BTW, the EPA was started by a Republican...Richard Nixon.

Is the American Lung Association also a 'liberal clap trap, or is it just any organization that doesn't support your ignorance and far right wing ideology?

Toxic Air: Time to Clean Up Coal-fired Power Plants _______________________________________________
Did you know that the coal-fired power plants, found across the country, emit health-threatening toxins into our air every day? Toxins like arsenic, mercury, acid gases and lead. The American Lung Association’s new report Toxic Air: The Case for Cleaning Up Coal-fired Power Plants, reveals the hazardous air pollution emitted from power plants and why now is the time to clean them up and protect ou health.

The report highlights the long list of uncontrolled pollutants from these plants including dangerous pollutants such as arsenic, mercury, dioxins, formaldehyde, acid gases and PAHs, just to name a few. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required on March 16 to issue a proposal to finally clean up these hazardous air pollutants. This comes more than twenty years after Congress added requirements to the Clean Air Act—with strong bipartisan support—that these toxic emissions must be stopped.

Hazards revealed

The Lung Association’s report reveals the real public health threat from coal-fired power plants.

>> Coal-fired power plants that sell electricity to the grid produce more hazardous air pollution in the U.S. than any other industrial pollution sources.

>> More than 400 coal-fired power plants located in 46 states across the country release more that 386,000 tons of hazardous air pollutants into the atmosphere each year.

>> Particle pollution from power plants is estimated to kill approximately 13,000 people a year.

“Power plant pollution kills people,” said Charles D. Connor, President and CEO of the American Lung Association. “It threatens the brains and nervous system of children. It can cause cancer, heart attacks and strokes.

“It’s time that we end the ‘toxic loophole’ that has allowed coal-burning power plants to operate without any federal limits on emissions of mercury, arsenic, dioxin, acid gases such as hydrogen chloride and other dangerous pollutants,” said Charles D. Connor, president and CEO of the American Lung Association.

“People living closest to these plants, especially children, seniors, pregnant women and those with chronic disease face the greatest risk, but it doesn’t stop there. Pollution from coal-fired power plants takes flight and travels far into other states—threatening public health.”

Time for EPA to act

The Clean Air Act requires that hazardous air pollutants from coal-fired power plants be controlled. Because EPA is overdue in delivering its proposal for cleaning up these plants, the agency is under a court order to propose these regulations by March 16. Without the new rules, no national standards exist to limit these pollutants from these plants.

The Lung Association report identifies modern pollution control technologies that that are currently in use in some plants, which are readily available for installation at other plants. The law sets the cleanup requirements based on actual performance facilities, but each power plant will select the specific pollution control strategies to reduce their emissions.

“The American public has waited long enough—more than two decades. We are counting on EPA to protect all Americans from the health risks imposed by these dangerous pollutants once and for all.”

More

Conservatives and their families actually benefit from big bad gov't just like the rest of us do. Seat belts, shoulder harnesses, air bags, auto crash safety tests and other automobile mandates by gov't have saved tens of thousands of lives.

Damn the Federal Gov't!

The fact that you call yourself an avowed Lennonist/Marxist makes you an enemy of the State.
That said......You namby pamby enviro nazi's think a magic wand can solve all of your hand wringing.
This is the cleanest nation on the planet and it still isn't good enough.
You people and over simplification are Siamese twins.
Before you enact your draconian regulations and crush the economy, your job is to find an alternative that costs the same and does not produce unintended consequences. Until then, shut it.

 

[Mustang]

What is the government's responsibility? To protect the citizens from all threats foreign or domestic. Coal emissions is a threat to human life and health. This not theory, it is reality.

Why are you folks on the right in TOTAL denial?

Have you ever heard of the law of the commons? It goes back to the Magna Carta before there was an EPA. BTW, the EPA was started by a Republican...Richard Nixon.

Is the American Lung Association also a 'liberal clap trap, or is it just any organization that doesn't support your ignorance and far right wing ideology?

Toxic Air: Time to Clean Up Coal-fired Power Plants _______________________________________________
Did you know that the coal-fired power plants, found across the country, emit health-threatening toxins into our air every day? Toxins like arsenic, mercury, acid gases and lead. The American Lung Association’s new report Toxic Air: The Case for Cleaning Up Coal-fired Power Plants, reveals the hazardous air pollution emitted from power plants and why now is the time to clean them up and protect ou health.

The report highlights the long list of uncontrolled pollutants from these plants including dangerous pollutants such as arsenic, mercury, dioxins, formaldehyde, acid gases and PAHs, just to name a few. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required on March 16 to issue a proposal to finally clean up these hazardous air pollutants. This comes more than twenty years after Congress added requirements to the Clean Air Act—with strong bipartisan support—that these toxic emissions must be stopped.

Hazards revealed

The Lung Association’s report reveals the real public health threat from coal-fired power plants.

>> Coal-fired power plants that sell electricity to the grid produce more hazardous air pollution in the U.S. than any other industrial pollution sources.

>> More than 400 coal-fired power plants located in 46 states across the country release more that 386,000 tons of hazardous air pollutants into the atmosphere each year.

>> Particle pollution from power plants is estimated to kill approximately 13,000 people a year.

“Power plant pollution kills people,” said Charles D. Connor, President and CEO of the American Lung Association. “It threatens the brains and nervous system of children. It can cause cancer, heart attacks and strokes.

“It’s time that we end the ‘toxic loophole’ that has allowed coal-burning power plants to operate without any federal limits on emissions of mercury, arsenic, dioxin, acid gases such as hydrogen chloride and other dangerous pollutants,” said Charles D. Connor, president and CEO of the American Lung Association.

“People living closest to these plants, especially children, seniors, pregnant women and those with chronic disease face the greatest risk, but it doesn’t stop there. Pollution from coal-fired power plants takes flight and travels far into other states—threatening public health.”

Time for EPA to act

The Clean Air Act requires that hazardous air pollutants from coal-fired power plants be controlled. Because EPA is overdue in delivering its proposal for cleaning up these plants, the agency is under a court order to propose these regulations by March 16. Without the new rules, no national standards exist to limit these pollutants from these plants.

The Lung Association report identifies modern pollution control technologies that that are currently in use in some plants, which are readily available for installation at other plants. The law sets the cleanup requirements based on actual performance facilities, but each power plant will select the specific pollution control strategies to reduce their emissions.

“The American public has waited long enough—more than two decades. We are counting on EPA to protect all Americans from the health risks imposed by these dangerous pollutants once and for all.”

More

Conservatives and their families actually benefit from big bad gov't just like the rest of us do. Seat belts, shoulder harnesses, air bags, auto crash safety tests and other automobile mandates by gov't have saved tens of thousands of lives.

Damn the Federal Gov't!

The fact that you call yourself an avowed Lennonist/Marxist makes you an enemy of the State.
That said......You namby pamby enviro nazi's think a magic wand can solve all of your hand wringing.
This is the cleanest nation on the planet and it still isn't good enough.
You people and over simplification are Siamese twins.
Before you enact your draconian regulations and crush the economy, your job is to find an alternative that costs the same and does not produce unintended consequences. Until then, shut it.

The Marxist/Lennonist tag is a joke specifically aimed at RW extremists who see everything through the prisim of their belief that anyone who doesn't share their views right down to the very paranoid delusions that seem to drive their behavior is somehow a card-carrying communist.

That said, it's ironic that you would refer to environmentalist as Nazis since what the mainstream environmental movement does is actually stand up to very powerful business interests which behave in much the same way as Nazis with their constant lying and deception.

Which brings us to the concept of "clean coal." THERE IS NO SUCH THING!!! However, changing the way coal fired plants process and burn coal CAN reduce the amount of pollution which is released into the air.

And just in case you forgot it, we breathe the air around us every minute of every day.

 

[Bfgrn]

Conservatives and their families actually benefit from big bad gov't just like the rest of us do. Seat belts, shoulder harnesses, air bags, auto crash safety tests and other automobile mandates by gov't have saved tens of thousands of lives.

Damn the Federal Gov't!

The fact that you call yourself an avowed Lennonist/Marxist makes you an enemy of the State.
That said......You namby pamby enviro nazi's think a magic wand can solve all of your hand wringing.
This is the cleanest nation on the planet and it still isn't good enough.
You people and over simplification are Siamese twins.
Before you enact your draconian regulations and crush the economy, your job is to find an alternative that costs the same and does not produce unintended consequences. Until then, shut it.

The Marxist/Lennonist tag is a joke specifically aimed at RW extremists who see everything through the prisim of their belief that anyone who doesn't share their views right down to the very paranoid delusions that seem to drive their behavior is somehow a card-carrying communist.

That said, it's ironic that you would refer to environmentalist as Nazis since what the mainstream environmental movement does is actually stand up to very powerful business interests which behave in much the same way as Nazis with their constant lying and deception.

Which brings us to the concept of "clean coal." THERE IS NO SUCH THING!!! However, changing the way coal fired plants process and burn coal CAN reduce the amount of pollution which is released into the air.

And just in case you forgot it, we breathe the air around us every minute of every day.

The irony is so thick it would be laughable if human life was not being destroyed.

The 'Marxist/Leninist' accusations by the right can only be pure projection because:

If conservatives in America have their way, our environmental landscape will match Russia, which is an environmental nightmare.

 

[bripat9643]

http://junksciencecom.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/epa_s-clean-air-act-final.pdf

Follow the link to read the rest of the article.

Highly informative

EPA’s Clean Air Act:
Pretending air pollution is worse than it is

By Steve Milloy
March 9, 2011 I.

EPA’s Clean Air Act: Pretending air pollution is worse than it is By Steve Milloy1 March 9, 2011 I. Executive Summary The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to tighten air quality standards at considerable societal expense under the guise that new standards are necessary to protect public health. Focusing on the EPA’s proposed Clean Air Transport Rule (CATR), this analysis shows that:

America’s air is already safe to breathe and it is much better than the EPA would have the public believe; and that

The EPA relies on health studies that exaggerate harm and economic studies that understate regulatory costs in order to maintain the fiction that its ever more stringent regulations are providing meaningful public health benefits. Some of this analysis’ notable points include:

Among the 32 Midwest and Eastern states that would be covered by the CATR, the daily air quality standard for fine particulate matter (i.e., soot) was violated less than one tenth of a percent of the time (0.096%) in 2009.

According to the most recent data for ground level ozone (i.e., smog), the 8 hour ozone standard was violated only 1.3 percent of the time in the 32 CATR states.

There is no tangible scientific evidence that current air quality standards are not already more than sufficiently protective of public health. Data has been hidden from the public by the agency and by a clique of EPA funded researchers. The EPA’s scientific research has not been systematic or comprehensive despite the availability of data to the agency. Purported links between exposures to particulate matter and ground level ozone, and health effects range from the entirely hypothetical to the subclinical (i.e., temporary changes that are physiologically detectable, but not otherwise meaningful).

EPA’s economic analysis of its air quality rules is utterly fantastic. The EPA claims, for example, that the estimated $7 billion in one time costs of the EPA’s Clean Air Act CATR may produce economic benefits that equate to as much as $840 billion annually or 5.7 percent of U.S. GDP for 2009. The EPA claims that its implementation of the Clean Air Act produces monetized health benefits amounting to $1.3 trillion annually, or about 9 percent of 2009 U.S. GDP.

There is no meaningful or independent oversight of the EPA’s implementation of the Clean Air Act by Congress or the courts. Congress should amend the Clean Air Act to better manage the current state of U.S. air quality, instead of allowing the EPA to pretend that it is still 1970 and air quality is poor and emissions are unregulated. II. Introduction​

 

[bripat9643]

The irony is so thick it would be laughable if human life was not being destroyed.

No human life is being destroyed. Such claims are fantastical EPA scaremongering. There isn't a single death in this country that can legitimately be attributed to air pollution. The EPA's claims are bald-faced lies designed to justify their fascist agenda.

The 'Marxist/Leninist' accusations by the right can only be pure projection because:

If conservatives in America have their way, our environmental landscape will match Russia, which is an environmental nightmare.

How ironic since the Soviet Union was a model for the mode of government the EPA Nazis are trying to put over on America.

The bottom line is that the air is clean enough. More stringent environmental regulations will produce no detectable health benefits. They are simply an attempt by eco-Nazis in the EPA to destroy our industrial economy and our standard of living.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Conservatives and their families actually benefit from big bad gov't just like the rest of us do. Seat belts, shoulder harnesses, air bags, auto crash safety tests and other automobile mandates by gov't have saved tens of thousands of lives.

Damn the Federal Gov't!

The fact that you call yourself an avowed Lennonist/Marxist makes you an enemy of the State.
That said......You namby pamby enviro nazi's think a magic wand can solve all of your hand wringing.
This is the cleanest nation on the planet and it still isn't good enough.
You people and over simplification are Siamese twins.
Before you enact your draconian regulations and crush the economy, your job is to find an alternative that costs the same and does not produce unintended consequences. Until then, shut it.

The Marxist/Lennonist tag is a joke specifically aimed at RW extremists who see everything through the prisim of their belief that anyone who doesn't share their views right down to the very paranoid delusions that seem to drive their behavior is somehow a card-carrying communist.

That said, it's ironic that you would refer to environmentalist as Nazis since what the mainstream environmental movement does is actually stand up to very powerful business interests which behave in much the same way as Nazis with their constant lying and deception.

Which brings us to the concept of "clean coal." THERE IS NO SUCH THING!!! However, changing the way coal fired plants process and burn coal CAN reduce the amount of pollution which is released into the air.

And just in case you forgot it, we breathe the air around us every minute of every day.

there is no mainstream environmentalist movement. They are all off the deep end anti business, anti capitalism, pro big government dirt eating non bathers.
If environmentalists are interested only in a cleaner planet, why is it their every suggestion creates high costs to consumers and ignores the laws of unintended consequences.?
For example, those stupid mini fluorescent light bulbs which cost 5 times as much last half the amount of hours and if the EPA rules are followed to the letter, require a HAZMAT team to do a full containment cleanup every time one of those little bastards shatter?
Now you will flip out and spew.....
i think a good level headed environmental plan for regulations is the most equitable way to proceed.
However, theories such as Cap and Trade go much too far. C&T does NOTHING to reduce pollution. It merely allows larger polluters to pass the buck.
And of course who benefits? The federal government. C&P is a new TAX on business and if enacted, would drive energy costs out of reach of most middle income Americans.
Of course the goal of C&T is not a cleaner country. It is to produce more central control over industry and energy and create more dependency on government.
CAFE standards. Obama got the EPA to increase fuel economy standards. Ok...not a bad idea. The unintended consequences are this...States are already developing ideas to make up for the lost gas tax revenue. Three states are considering legislation to require installation of GPS tracking devices in all autos so that the states can enact and enforce "movement" taxes"....We will be taxed on miles driven and the only way this can be done is government must have the authority to track our movements..Is this the kind of word in which you wish to live? "Your papers, please?"

 

[thereisnospoon]

Coal's Assault on Human Health

Physicians for Social Responsibility has released a groundbreaking medical report, “Coal’s Assault on Human Health,” which takes a new look at the devastating impacts of coal on the human body. Coal combustion releases mercury, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and dozens of other substances known to be hazardous to human health. This report looks at the cumulative harm inflicted by those pollutants on three major body organ systems: the respiratory system, the cardiovascular system, and the nervous system. The report also considers coal’s contribution to global warming, and the health implications of global warming.

Download the report:
Executive Summary (pdf)
Full report (pdf)

Download by chapter:
Front Matter (pdf)
Chapter 1 Introduction (pdf)
Chapter 2 Life Cycle of Coal (pdf)
Chapter 3 Respiratory Effects (pdf)
Chapter 4 Cardiovascular Effects (pdf)
Chapter 5 Neurological Effects (pdf)
Chapter 6 Global Warming (pdf)
Chapter 7 Policy Recommendations (pdf)

Executive Summary

Coal pollutants affect all major body organ systems and contribute to four of the five leading causes of mortality in the U.S.: heart disease, cancer, stroke, and chronic lower respiratory diseases. This conclusion emerges from our reassessment of the widely recognized health threats from coal. Each step of the coal lifecycle—mining, transportation, washing, combustion, and disposing of postcombustion wastes—impacts human health. Coal combustion in particular contributes to diseases affecting large portions of the U.S. population, including asthma, lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke, compounding the major public health challenges of our time. It interferes with lung development, increases the risk of heart attacks, and compromises intellectual capacity. Oxidative stress and inflammation are indicated as possible mechanisms in the exacerbation and development of many of the diseases under review.

"Physicians for Social Responsibility"...Are you fucking kidding. Get that liberal clap trap the fuck out of here.
You stupid liberals really do think you can exist is a federally mandated plastic bubble free of all risk.
One major volcanic eruption can emit more pollution than 10,000 coal fired plants. For Christ's sake..A volcanic eruption in Iceland last year shut down air travel to and above Europe for three weeks. What the fuck is wrong with you people.
Are you that eager to have government take over your very being?

How does one regulate volcanoes?

Exactly my point.

 

[bripat9643]

Conservatives and their families actually benefit from big bad gov't just like the rest of us do. Seat belts, shoulder harnesses, air bags, auto crash safety tests and other automobile mandates by gov't have saved tens of thousands of lives.

Damn the Federal Gov't!

Even if your claims were true, you only named 3 things. Americans are harmed by the vast majority of regulations. The theory that because a little regulation is good, then more is better is an idea dreamed up by totalitarians. It ignores the laws of diminishing returns and increasing costs.

Eco fascists refuse to acknowledge the fact that every thing government does involves trade-offs. We are long past the point were the benefits exceed the costs, but the Eco Nazis don't care about costs. They don't care about imposing enormous financial burdens in the poor or middle-class Americans. They are the ultimate assholes.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Coal's Assault on Human Health

Physicians for Social Responsibility has released a groundbreaking medical report, “Coal’s Assault on Human Health,” which takes a new look at the devastating impacts of coal on the human body. Coal combustion releases mercury, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and dozens of other substances known to be hazardous to human health. This report looks at the cumulative harm inflicted by those pollutants on three major body organ systems: the respiratory system, the cardiovascular system, and the nervous system. The report also considers coal’s contribution to global warming, and the health implications of global warming.

Download the report:
Executive Summary (pdf)
Full report (pdf)

Download by chapter:
Front Matter (pdf)
Chapter 1 Introduction (pdf)
Chapter 2 Life Cycle of Coal (pdf)
Chapter 3 Respiratory Effects (pdf)
Chapter 4 Cardiovascular Effects (pdf)
Chapter 5 Neurological Effects (pdf)
Chapter 6 Global Warming (pdf)
Chapter 7 Policy Recommendations (pdf)

Executive Summary

Coal pollutants affect all major body organ systems and contribute to four of the five leading causes of mortality in the U.S.: heart disease, cancer, stroke, and chronic lower respiratory diseases. This conclusion emerges from our reassessment of the widely recognized health threats from coal. Each step of the coal lifecycle—mining, transportation, washing, combustion, and disposing of postcombustion wastes—impacts human health. Coal combustion in particular contributes to diseases affecting large portions of the U.S. population, including asthma, lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke, compounding the major public health challenges of our time. It interferes with lung development, increases the risk of heart attacks, and compromises intellectual capacity. Oxidative stress and inflammation are indicated as possible mechanisms in the exacerbation and development of many of the diseases under review.

"Physicians for Social Responsibility"...Are you fucking kidding. Get that liberal clap trap the fuck out of here.
You stupid liberals really do think you can exist is a federally mandated plastic bubble free of all risk.
One major volcanic eruption can emit more pollution than 10,000 coal fired plants. For Christ's sake..A volcanic eruption in Iceland last year shut down air travel to and above Europe for three weeks. What the fuck is wrong with you people.
Are you that eager to have government take over your very being?

Perhaps you're too young to remember what it used to be like when corporations and manufacturing businesses didn't have much in the way of any significant legal requirements on how (or even whether) they handled toxic waste and other pollution by products. They dumped them in the rivers and lakes. Of course, that killed fish and polluted water supplies used for human consumption, as well as contaminating the food chain.

Since there was no legal requirement to deal responsibly with the waste, individual businesses could and did make an argument that requiring individual businesses to clean up their waste put them at an economic disadvantage with other companies in the same business who didn't have the same requirement. It's a good argument, but it's not a good argument to do nothing.

Aside from that, it's a public safety issue. Even to this day, some companies dump toxic waste late at night in empty fields. What are YOU going to do about it? If you found out that was happening near where you live, do you think you would have the necessary power to put an end to it? Chances are pretty good that if and when you confronted company representatives about it, they would politely tell you to mind your own business. So, what entity could you POSSIBLY turn to in order to force businesses to deal responsibly with their toxic waste? I wonder.

Sensible environmental regulations.
That does not exist now. Today's enviro-movement is just filled with radical anti American idealogues.
We have a former Vice President who skips around the globe in a private jet, lives in a 28,000 square foot house that uses the amount of energy of 20 regular sized homes, spewing about his version of how things are as he sees them. He's a fucking hypocrite to the nth degree.
AlGore is just another Do as I say, not as I do limouzine liberal.

 

[Bfgrn]

http://junksciencecom.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/epa_s-clean-air-act-final.pdf

Follow the link to read the rest of the article.

Highly informative

EPA’s Clean Air Act:
Pretending air pollution is worse than it is

By Steve Milloy
March 9, 2011 I.

EPA’s Clean Air Act: Pretending air pollution is worse than it is By Steve Milloy1 March 9, 2011 I. Executive Summary The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to tighten air quality standards at considerable societal expense under the guise that new standards are necessary to protect public health. Focusing on the EPA’s proposed Clean Air Transport Rule (CATR), this analysis shows that:

America’s air is already safe to breathe and it is much better than the EPA would have the public believe; and that

The EPA relies on health studies that exaggerate harm and economic studies that understate regulatory costs in order to maintain the fiction that its ever more stringent regulations are providing meaningful public health benefits. Some of this analysis’ notable points include:

Among the 32 Midwest and Eastern states that would be covered by the CATR, the daily air quality standard for fine particulate matter (i.e., soot) was violated less than one tenth of a percent of the time (0.096%) in 2009.

According to the most recent data for ground level ozone (i.e., smog), the 8 hour ozone standard was violated only 1.3 percent of the time in the 32 CATR states.

There is no tangible scientific evidence that current air quality standards are not already more than sufficiently protective of public health. Data has been hidden from the public by the agency and by a clique of EPA funded researchers. The EPA’s scientific research has not been systematic or comprehensive despite the availability of data to the agency. Purported links between exposures to particulate matter and ground level ozone, and health effects range from the entirely hypothetical to the subclinical (i.e., temporary changes that are physiologically detectable, but not otherwise meaningful).

EPA’s economic analysis of its air quality rules is utterly fantastic. The EPA claims, for example, that the estimated $7 billion in one time costs of the EPA’s Clean Air Act CATR may produce economic benefits that equate to as much as $840 billion annually or 5.7 percent of U.S. GDP for 2009. The EPA claims that its implementation of the Clean Air Act produces monetized health benefits amounting to $1.3 trillion annually, or about 9 percent of 2009 U.S. GDP.

There is no meaningful or independent oversight of the EPA’s implementation of the Clean Air Act by Congress or the courts. Congress should amend the Clean Air Act to better manage the current state of U.S. air quality, instead of allowing the EPA to pretend that it is still 1970 and air quality is poor and emissions are unregulated. II. Introduction​

Steve Milloy, a paid advocate for Phillip Morris, ExxonMobil and other corporations?

Steve Milloy, the former lobbyist for major corporations and trade organizations which have poisioning or polluting problems?

Steve Milloy who criticized the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for claiming that 400,000 people die every year from alleged smoking-related illnesses, saying that studies linking smoking to heart disease are not entirely reliable. He pointed out that smokers have higher heart disease rates than non-smokers partly because smokers also tend to be people who do not exercise, have worse diets, avoid doctors and have less healthy lifestyles overall.


You know, you take the cake for THE most extreme right winger on the board. You parrot nothing but right wing extreme propaganda. There can be no rational discussion with you because you are completely brainwashed.

To claim that no deaths or illnesses occur because of ingesting coal burning emissions is complete ignorance.

 

[Mustang]

"Physicians for Social Responsibility"...Are you fucking kidding. Get that liberal clap trap the fuck out of here.
You stupid liberals really do think you can exist is a federally mandated plastic bubble free of all risk.
One major volcanic eruption can emit more pollution than 10,000 coal fired plants. For Christ's sake..A volcanic eruption in Iceland last year shut down air travel to and above Europe for three weeks. What the fuck is wrong with you people.
Are you that eager to have government take over your very being?

Perhaps you're too young to remember what it used to be like when corporations and manufacturing businesses didn't have much in the way of any significant legal requirements on how (or even whether) they handled toxic waste and other pollution by products. They dumped them in the rivers and lakes. Of course, that killed fish and polluted water supplies used for human consumption, as well as contaminating the food chain.

Since there was no legal requirement to deal responsibly with the waste, individual businesses could and did make an argument that requiring individual businesses to clean up their waste put them at an economic disadvantage with other companies in the same business who didn't have the same requirement. It's a good argument, but it's not a good argument to do nothing.

Aside from that, it's a public safety issue. Even to this day, some companies dump toxic waste late at night in empty fields. What are YOU going to do about it? If you found out that was happening near where you live, do you think you would have the necessary power to put an end to it? Chances are pretty good that if and when you confronted company representatives about it, they would politely tell you to mind your own business. So, what entity could you POSSIBLY turn to in order to force businesses to deal responsibly with their toxic waste? I wonder.

Sensible environmental regulations.
That does not exist now. Today's enviro-movement is just filled with radical anti American idealogues.
We have a former Vice President who skips around the globe in a private jet, lives in a 28,000 square foot house that uses the amount of energy of 20 regular sized homes, spewing about his version of how things are as he sees them. He's a fucking hypocrite to the nth degree.
AlGore is just another Do as I say, not as I do limouzine liberal.

I have a question. Have polluters ever accepted environmental regulations without fighting them first because they claimed that they were unnecessary or not sensible?

As far as I can recall, NO company willingly accepts regulation of their products. They don't accept pollution controls or producte liability responsiblity. Cigarette manufacturers routinely fought warning labels and disputed that their product (cigarettes) cause lung cancer or emphysema.

They fight any and ALL regulation no matter how modest.

 

[Big Fitz]

I'm glad Obama is all for helping the middle class

Coal Regs Would Kill Jobs, Boost Energy Bills


Two new EPA pollution regulations will slam the coal industry so hard that hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost, and electric rates will skyrocket 11 percent to over 23 percent, according to a new study based on government data.

Overall, the rules aimed at making the air cleaner could cost the coal-fired power plant industry $180 billion, warns a trade group.

[Check out a roundup of political cartoons on energy policy.]

“Many of these severe impacts would hit families living in states already facing serious economic challenges,” said Steve Miller, president of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. “Because of these impacts, EPA should make major changes to the proposed regulations before they are finalized,” he said.

The EPA, however, tells Whispers that the hit the industry will suffer is worth the health benefits. “EPA has taken a number of sensible steps to protect public health, while also working with industry and other stakeholders to ensure that these important Clean Air Act standards—such as the first ever national Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for coal-fired power plants—are reasonable, common-sense, and achievable,” said spokesman Brendan Gilfillan. [Read Rep. Darrell Issa: Obama's Bad Policy, Harmful Regulations Add to Gas Prices.]

What’s more, officials said that just one of the rules to cut sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions will would yield up to $290 billion in annual health and welfare benefits in 2014. They say that amounts to preventing up to 36,000 premature deaths, 26,000 hospital and emergency room visits, and 240,000 cases of aggravated asthma. “This far outweighs the estimated annual costs,” says an official on background


Coal Regs Would Kill Jobs, Boost Energy Bills - Washington Whispers (usnews.com)

If you listened to him during the campaign, that was his stated goal, to destroy the coal industry entirely.

Kinda puts the 'he doesn't really mean it' argument in the garbage disposal, doesn't it?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Perhaps you're too young to remember what it used to be like when corporations and manufacturing businesses didn't have much in the way of any significant legal requirements on how (or even whether) they handled toxic waste and other pollution by products. They dumped them in the rivers and lakes. Of course, that killed fish and polluted water supplies used for human consumption, as well as contaminating the food chain.

Since there was no legal requirement to deal responsibly with the waste, individual businesses could and did make an argument that requiring individual businesses to clean up their waste put them at an economic disadvantage with other companies in the same business who didn't have the same requirement. It's a good argument, but it's not a good argument to do nothing.

Aside from that, it's a public safety issue. Even to this day, some companies dump toxic waste late at night in empty fields. What are YOU going to do about it? If you found out that was happening near where you live, do you think you would have the necessary power to put an end to it? Chances are pretty good that if and when you confronted company representatives about it, they would politely tell you to mind your own business. So, what entity could you POSSIBLY turn to in order to force businesses to deal responsibly with their toxic waste? I wonder.

Sensible environmental regulations.
That does not exist now. Today's enviro-movement is just filled with radical anti American idealogues.
We have a former Vice President who skips around the globe in a private jet, lives in a 28,000 square foot house that uses the amount of energy of 20 regular sized homes, spewing about his version of how things are as he sees them. He's a fucking hypocrite to the nth degree.
AlGore is just another Do as I say, not as I do limouzine liberal.

I have a question. Have polluters ever accepted environmental regulations without fighting them first because they claimed that they were unnecessary or not sensible?

As far as I can recall, NO company willingly accepts regulation of their products. They don't accept pollution controls or producte liability responsiblity. Cigarette manufacturers routinely fought warning labels and disputed that their product (cigarettes) cause lung cancer or emphysema.

They fight any and ALL regulation no matter how modest.

That predisposes a conclusion that all industries would rather operate free of ANY regulation.
What fucking difference does it make? I clearly stated we need sensible environmental regulations. We have them.
The tide has turned toward radical initiatives such as Cap and Trade that do little to reduce pollution while serving a political purpose. That purpose is to curry favor with the environmental lobby.
Liberalism has always been little about substance and thickly steeped in acquisition and retention of political power.

 

[bripat9643]

Steve Milloy, a paid advocate for Phillip Morris, ExxonMobil and other corporations?

ROFL! I knew you were going to try the tired and true leftwing tactic of attacking the messenger. So what if is an advocate for these corporations? Who do you expect to pay him, the Sierra Club? The EPA?

The clique of EPA-*‐funded "scientists" who produced the justification for the EPA's attack on our economy are employees belong to a private organization called the Health Effects Institute which is 50% funded by the EPA. To date, there have been only very limited independent analyses of the PM2.5 data — all which contradict the EPA’s position11 — because the EPA’s researcher clique, with the assistance of the EPA, refuses to make the data available to the public. In 1997, the agency even refused to provide the data to the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

These are what you call credible scientists. They refuse even to allow the public to see their data, yet you have the balls to attack the independence and credibility of Steven Milloy.

Steve Milloy, the former lobbyist for major corporations and trade organizations which have poisioning or polluting problems?

What they have is an EPA problem. All your saying here is that anyone who questions the EPA isn't credible simply because he questions the EPA.

Sorry, but that dog won't hunt except for servile boot licking EPA toadies like you.

Steve Milloy who criticized the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for claiming that 400,000 people die every year from alleged smoking-related illnesses, saying that studies linking smoking to heart disease are not entirely reliable. He pointed out that smokers have higher heart disease rates than non-smokers partly because smokers also tend to be people who do not exercise, have worse diets, avoid doctors and have less healthy lifestyles overall.

That sounds like a perfectly reasonable hypothesis to me. Only a servile government shill would claim it didn't deserve to be considered.

You know, you take the cake for THE most extreme right winger on the board. You parrot nothing but right wing extreme propaganda. There can be no rational discussion with you because you are completely brainwashed.

Thanks for the complement. However, I'm not here to have a "rational discussion" with boot licking communist EPA propagandists. I'm here to debunk your propaganda.

To claim that no deaths or illnesses occur because of ingesting coal burning emissions is complete ignorance.

Really? Then produce some evidence of one. I challenge you to prove that a single person in this country has ever died from the emissions of coal burning power plants. All you need to do is find a single documented case. That should be a piece of cake if your claims are true.

 

[Big Fitz]

Coal's Assault on Human Health

Physicians for Social Responsibility has released a groundbreaking medical report, “Coal’s Assault on Human Health,” which takes a new look at the devastating impacts of coal on the human body. Coal combustion releases mercury, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and dozens of other substances known to be hazardous to human health. This report looks at the cumulative harm inflicted by those pollutants on three major body organ systems: the respiratory system, the cardiovascular system, and the nervous system. The report also considers coal’s contribution to global warming, and the health implications of global warming.

Download the report:
Executive Summary (pdf)
Full report (pdf)

Download by chapter:
Front Matter (pdf)
Chapter 1 Introduction (pdf)
Chapter 2 Life Cycle of Coal (pdf)
Chapter 3 Respiratory Effects (pdf)
Chapter 4 Cardiovascular Effects (pdf)
Chapter 5 Neurological Effects (pdf)
Chapter 6 Global Warming (pdf)
Chapter 7 Policy Recommendations (pdf)

Executive Summary

Coal pollutants affect all major body organ systems and contribute to four of the five leading causes of mortality in the U.S.: heart disease, cancer, stroke, and chronic lower respiratory diseases. This conclusion emerges from our reassessment of the widely recognized health threats from coal. Each step of the coal lifecycle—mining, transportation, washing, combustion, and disposing of postcombustion wastes—impacts human health. Coal combustion in particular contributes to diseases affecting large portions of the U.S. population, including asthma, lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke, compounding the major public health challenges of our time. It interferes with lung development, increases the risk of heart attacks, and compromises intellectual capacity. Oxidative stress and inflammation are indicated as possible mechanisms in the exacerbation and development of many of the diseases under review.

"Physicians for Social Responsibility"...Are you fucking kidding. Get that liberal clap trap the fuck out of here.
You stupid liberals really do think you can exist is a federally mandated plastic bubble free of all risk.
One major volcanic eruption can emit more pollution than 10,000 coal fired plants. For Christ's sake..A volcanic eruption in Iceland last year shut down air travel to and above Europe for three weeks. What the fuck is wrong with you people.
Are you that eager to have government take over your very being?

Perhaps you're too young to remember what it used to be like when corporations and manufacturing businesses didn't have much in the way of any significant legal requirements on how (or even whether) they handled toxic waste and other pollution by products. They dumped them in the rivers and lakes. Of course, that killed fish and polluted water supplies used for human consumption, as well as contaminating the food chain.

Since there was no legal requirement to deal responsibly with the waste, individual businesses could and did make an argument that requiring individual businesses to clean up their waste put them at an economic disadvantage with other companies in the same business who didn't have the same requirement. It's a good argument, but it's not a good argument to do nothing.

Aside from that, it's a public safety issue. Even to this day, some companies dump toxic waste late at night in empty fields. What are YOU going to do about it? If you found out that was happening near where you live, do you think you would have the necessary power to put an end to it? Chances are pretty good that if and when you confronted company representatives about it, they would politely tell you to mind your own business. So, what entity could you POSSIBLY turn to in order to force businesses to deal responsibly with their toxic waste? I wonder.

There are reasonable, and unreasonable demands for cleaner industry. I know that you used to tell what color paper they were making by the color of the river in my home town because the effluent was flushed directly into the river which loaded the area with CPBs (now cleaned and sequestered).

That being said, there needs to be a cost-effect analysis of EVERY environmental regulation to see both it's practicality and effectiveness before implementation. Too often, we are protecting the goddamn worthless darter snail at the expense of 50k jobs and billions of dollars in profits for areas that are hurting economically. I know personally that the Sierra Club is suing to prevent a bridge across the St. Croix River because of the VIEW among other worthless challenges. The truth of it is that they want control over human development, not the view. Why? Because if you suggested a tunnel, they would have similar gripes and 'reasons' in which to prevent it.

We sacrifice the quality of OUR life for that of a worthless species that really adds such an insignificant amount to the biomass it's pointless to even mention.

You cannot go back to hunter gatherer society (but with all the conveniences of modern life) as you propagandize as possible. It is anti-intelligent, and anti-human.