The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan overstates its benefits and underestimates its costs, according to a new study.
Climate Depot: ‘Falsely sold as impactful’ – ‘All U.S. annual emissions will be offset by 3 weeks of Chinese emissions.’ Powerful testimony. Watch now.
The poll lends credence to arguments suggesting that most Americans do not consider global warming a pressing issue, despite campaigns by environmentalists, such as California billionaire Tom Steyer, to foist concerns of global warming into the election’s spotlight.
As European nations come to grips with the exorbitant costs of energy subsidies and over-reliance on "green" energy (and build new coal-fired power plants to offset those costs and address the intermittent nature of wind and solar energy), the U.S. has been heading in the opposite direction -- President Obama's onerous Clean Power Plan. Thankfully, the plan is held up in court, as the world is beginning to recognize the enormous costs of complying with the non-binding Paris Climate Agreement. The question remains, though, whether America will go the way of California, which already has electricity prices 40% above the national average and the highest retail gasoline prices in the U.S.?
The President's Clean Power Plan will impose heavy burdens on poor and middle-class Americans -- raising their energy costs to as much as 75% of their after-tax income (and an average of 20% for those with incomes under $50,000). Even worse, the EPA admits these rules will have little impact on climate -- but will vastly increase government's control over individual human behavior.
Arkansas is fed up with how the Obama administration has gone about imposing sweeping environmental regulations in the state, and so it has become the 19th state to stop working on President Barack Obama’s signature global warming rule.
After months of debate and public comments, President Obama’s controversial Clean Power Plan (CPP) was issued in August 2015 and published in the Federal Register on October 23, 2015. But that is hardly the end of the story. Instead the saga is just beginning—with the ending to be written sometime in 2017 and the outcome highly dependent on who resides in the White House. The CPP is the newest set of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations that the Atlantic states “anchors the Obama administration’s climate-change policy. It seeks to guide local utilities away from coal-fired electricity generation, and toward renewable energy and natural gas”—with a goal [...]
The Supreme Court blocked Obama's dirty "clean power plan." CFACT doesn't label EPA's energy regulations "dirty," lightly. "Dirty" is the right word for the trick they tried to pull.
The Clean Power Plan will harm human health and welfare, wildlife and environmental quality, but will do nothing to prevent climate change, “dangerous” or otherwise. The Environmental Protection Agency needs to scrap its plan to implement its Clean Power Plan, and any “model rules” developed under the Plan.
EPA has made a lot of power grabs of dubious legality over the last year, from forcing unpopular regulations through over the objections of Congress to illegally using social media to promote Obama’s policies. So without further ado, here are the top 5 EPA attempts to grab power through quasi-legal means.
Assuming the increasingly dubious position that the UN's climate models have some validity, should we truly hamstring America's prosperity and competitive position to make a meaningless one hundredth degree reduction in world temperature?
Information obtained by the Energy & Environment Legal Institute (EE Legal) through state and federal Freedom of Information Act public record requests reveal a richly funded and closely coordinated network including the White House, governors-in-hiding, and “Green energy” subsidy seekers to advance the Obama Administration’s Clean Power Plan. The full report, titled “Public Interests & Public Office,” was prepared by EE Legal Senior Legal Fellow Christopher Horner, also a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, was released in August. The report chronicles how governors anxious to receive funding from “major environmental donors” — principally billionaire Tom Steyer — yet fearful [...]
CFACT Senior Policy Advisor Paul Driessen makes a strong case for reining in the Environmental Protection Agency to protect the future of American prosperity. For example, the EPA's new Clean Power Plan may triple or even quadruple electricity rates in states now heavily dependent on coal for electricity generation. Sue and settle, junk science, and even deceptive or fraudulent practices by EPA employees must be curtailed.
Obama's "Clean Power Plan" will hammer everything we make, grow, ship, eat and do. It will impair our livelihoods, living standards, liberties and life spans.
The Obama Environmental Protection Agency and environmental activists frequently claim that climate change will disproportionately affect poor and minority communities. In their view, this justifies unprecedented environmental regulations, like EPA's pending “Clean Power Plan” (CPP) to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fueled power plants 30% by 2030. But what effect will the regulation itself have on poor and minority communities?